Obama’s biggest Lie. NO, not, “You can keep your Plan.” “ISIS is not Islamist!” Sayeth, Roger Simon, and I think it’s indisputable.
‘Words have meaning.’ Except when Obama speaks them. He has squandered his credibility. The Washington Post this morning confirms that both his recent big decisions, deferring his unilateral (Executive Acts) immigration (amnesty for millions) until after the midterm elections; and the ‘war’ on ISIS/L, were “coerced” by White House and Cabinet staff. As Obama’s Plan on ISIS is drawing no enthusiasm among allies, Democrats or Republicans, WaPo’s use of “mutiny” may not be farfetched. Developing.
After months of Obama either poo-pooing ISIS as a Junior Varsity or ignoring the threat completely (I don’t have a Plan,) he delivers a speech (text here) to the nation in prime time on Wednesday. It’s notable in a number of ways: it’s short, less than 15 minutes. He actually seemed to elicit emotion: “We will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counterterrorism strategy.” ISIL is his favored moniker, but only initials; he refuses to use the word Islamic, although he did say that ISIL calls itself the ‘Islamic State,’ but asserts that ISIL is not Islamic and denies they are a state.. ISIS/L demands adherence to Sharia Law under penalty of death of its troops and subjects. If that’s not Islamic, nothing is.
In other ways, the speech was typical Obama: incoherent at times, illogical, and too often, factually wrong. I’ve picked out some illustrative points:
“America will lead a broad coalition to roll back this terrorist threat.” As of this evening, the Coalition consists of the Iraqi army, for better or worse; the Kurdish Peshmerga, good fighters; and the Syrian Free Army, the so-called non-al Qaeda forces battling Assad, to be trained in Saudi Arabia and equipped by the US. Remember that for 3 years, Obama has refused to arm the SFA to assist in overthrowing Assad. There are currently no other boots of other countries signed on and the signals from the Arab League are discouraging. Saudi Arabia has tried unsuccessfully to get Obama involved in Syria for 3 years. They don’t trust him. More on this below.
“In Syria, we have ramped up our military assistance to the Syrian opposition.” Ramped up” means we’ve been providing “military assistance?” What, since when and under what aegis? Not Congressional; not Obama unitlaterally.
“This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us, while supporting partners on the front lines, is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years.” Yemen and Somalia are both failed states and taking out a few bad guys in that context is not even close to a success.
Toward the end, he had to throw in the faux accomplishments, such as, ”
“And it is America that is helping Muslim communities around the world not just in the fight against terrorism, but in the fight for opportunity, and tolerance, and a more hopeful future.” Oh? He must mean Libya and Egypt.
Obama’s biggest problems, however, are 1. that nobody but his domestic cult followers believe him and they’re anti war: he’s lost all credibility, and, 2. he doesn’t have the will, doesn’t believe in in the mission, so the first setback may have him turning tail. These characteristics are incompatible with leadership.
‘Words have meaning,’ it’s been said by many. Explain this sequence of Obama in a single session following a speech during a NATO meeting in Estonia;
- “The bottom line is this: Our objective is clear and that is to degrade and destroy ISIL so it is no longer a threat.”
- “Our objective is to make sure they aren’t an ongoing threat to the region”
- “We know that if we are joined by the international community, we can continue to shrink ISIL’s sphere of influence, its effectiveness, its military capability to the point where it is a manageable problem.”
It’s common knowledge that Obama’s lies, statements that don’t rise to the level of blarny have destroyed his credibility, but which of the statements, above represent his thinking, his position, or should all of the divergent positions be tossed to the winds because nothing he says is credible?
Only in the Obama Administration do they avoid calling a spade a spade. When Major Hassan, who had been communicating with Anwar al Awlaki, an American jihadist operating out of Yemen, barged into the Soldier Readiness Processing Center, at For Hood in November, 2009, TX, shouting, “Allah akbar,”shooting 13 dead and wounding 30 more, did they call it “workforce violence,” rather than what it was, a terrorist act, later citing a technical reason relating to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Now, Obama calls a streaming of Russian tanks and other armored vehicles and other heavy weapons into southeastern Ukraine a mere “continuation of what’s been taking place for months,” rather than what it is, an invasion of a sovereign country. Forget that the ‘Separatists’ have been encouraged, supplied and assisted by Russian operatives, be they military or former KGB agents, when the adjacent country rolls columns of tanks and other heavy armor over a border, it’s an invasion. is this the worst of Obama’s faults in dealing with foreign affairs? No, but, when one can’t/doesn’t acknowledge the enemy as the enemy, it is impossible to defeat it. Does he want to? Seemingly not, although it calls into question whether he cares about the security of the US, the primary duty or the government, of which the President, as Commander in Chief, has primary responsibility.
At the upcoming NATO meeting this week, where discussions will invariably focus on more sanctions, none of which has influenced Putin a ‘smidgeon’ to alter his aggression, much less withdraw his forces. There seems no chance that Obama will either recommend military push-back or support it, although, without it, there seems no chance Putin will change course. Ukraine today, one of more of the Baltics tomorrow, or, perhaps Moldova in between. We’ve seen it before; a replay 80 years later seems more and more likely. It’s called War! Obama’s only use for the word is to end them, ala Neville Chamberlainism, not win them.
thudbits has been down for almost 2 weeks due to technical problems, which, apparently, are resolved. Thanks for your patience.
Bashar al Assad is Laying a Deadly Ambush for Obama in Syria. Fred Hof,* the author of the linked column, lays out a likely avoidance strategy, but as Dr. Krauthammer and other TV pundits have warned, fighting ISIS within a collaborative coalition is delicate and complicated,’ far more so than so many other endeavors which Obama has bungles so badly, foreign and domestic.
As of noon, PDT, Obama hasn’t even authorized air strikes in Syria, only aerial surveillance. As the the above pundits have asserted, including SecDef Hagel and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Martin Dempsey, testified last week (before somewhat backpedaling the following day,) and joined later by Gen Keane, retired General and Vice Chair JC and other military pundits, ISIS can only be obliterated by massive air strikes in both Iraq and Syria and coordinated boots on the ground, primarily allies, led by the Kurd Peshmerga and the Iraqi armies, both of which will have to be supplied and trained by the US, with supporting assistance by other allies within and outside the region, especially the Saudis. This effort require expert, strategic and committed leadership, none of which Obama has demonstrated, to date.
Prime Minister Cameron demonstrates Leadership, so sorely lacking in the US. Our President can’t even acknowledge that ISIL is a threat to any outside of the Levant, because it doesn’t fit his narrative or the ideology of his base. From Day 1 back in January, 2009, everything he considers is always for political reasons, never for the country. Think about it. If one is not a loyal Democrat, he’s not your President. That is and has been very scary.
The EPA is preparing to issue the most expensive regulation in the history of our nation: increasing the allowable amount of ozone in the low level atmosphere. The EPA estimates its cost of compliance at $90 Billion annually, but the NERA Economic Consulting’s study for the National Association of Manufacturing estimates the cost of compliance at $270 Billion, annually, Nowhere in the linked article is there a word about benefits; are there any that are beyond imaginary? Has a Cost-benefit analysis been done? Of course not. First item on the GOP agenda when it controls the Senate in January is to abolish the EPA and its suicidal regulatory powers and replace it with a sane and efficient regulatory body, which the EPA, itself, says, would be staffed by less than 7% of its current 16,000 employees.
Retrieving growth for our struggling economy, overburdened by regulations, taxes and swamping the country with illegals as our deficit and unfunded trillions of debt would stand no chance if such a cataclysmic regulation were ever enacted.
With Recep Erdogan’s first direct election, there’s no chance of his retreat from becoming an autocratic islamist state, friendly to Russia, Hamas and others of that ilk, and hostile to Israel and the West. NATO should not wait for further directly offensive acts such as leading an assault on Israel’s blockade of GAza; it should move to have NATO expel it and let it fester. There’s no climate for a Hillarious reset as tried with Russia: kissing with the bad guys is an invitation to a shiv in the back.
The Republican party is disparagingly called the party of old white men, because, apparently there are few women, no minorities and all elected are old. the fact that none of that is true never is considered an obstacle to a liberal. Let’s face it, both parties have too many oldsters who have been around too long, presenting a screaming endorsement for Term Limits. Joe Biden and John McCain are too prominent ones but two of too many. Look at this snapshot of a few new candidates for the GOP House and Senate.
I don’t see an oldster among them. And these are just some of them. One notable and favorite of mine who was edged by a whisker 2 years ago is Martha McSally in AZ2nd (Pima and Cochise counties.) Martha is a retired USAF Colonel and was the first female fighter pilot to fly in combat, in addition to being a Wing Commander. Those are credentials with translatable meaning.