Share This Article with a Friend!

What Obama Won’t Say About ISIS Tonight

Obama plays golf while ISIS kills
Tonight (Wednesday, September 10, 2014) President Obama will deliver a rare primetime television address to the Nation. The announced purpose is for Obama to spell out his plan to combat “militants” from the Islamic State.
These would be the same “militants” toward whom Obama said during an August 29 White House press briefing “We don’t have a strategy yet” to bipartisan, indeed, almost universal condemnation.
Since making that remark Obama has been taking fire from Capitol Hill, from the foreign policy and national security establishment, and most interestingly from Senator Rand Paul who delivered what we consider to be the most telling criticism of all when he said “A reasonable degree of foresight should be a prerequisite for holding high office. So should basic hindsight. This administration has neither… But the same is true of hawkish members of my own party.”
And the lack of a “reasonable degree of foresight” and “basic hindsight” are what has been lacking in our strategy to defeat militant Islam since its latest iteration came on the world stage in the late 1980s.
As Iraq and Syria have spiraled into a Sunni verses Shiite Muslim religious war political correctness run amuck has blinded the western news media and the policy makers in the Obama administration to the fact that there are no “good guys” in this Muslim on Muslim war.
Both sides are Islamic supremacists who will turn their guns and roadside bombs on the West once they have finished off the other side.
The blood thirsty ISIS political movement that is fighting to establish a new radical Islamist “Caliphate” in Syria, Iraq and beyond is Sunni in origin. The Islamic State has already established a radical form of Islamist government based on Sharia law in the territory it controls and begun the persecution of Christians.
But those who think the alternative of making common cause with Iran and its Shiite allies in Iraq is a better alternative should consider exactly who they are joining as de facto “allies.”
Despite its pledge to support Iraq's stabilization, Iran trained, funded, and provided guidance to Iraqi Shia militant groups, according to a recent report by Obama’s own State Department.
Iran’s principle political and religious ally in Iraq, and make no mistake in the Muslim world the two are inextricably linked, is Muqtada al-Sadr. Al Sadar is a radical Shia cleric who leads the Mahdi Army militia and who looks to the Islamist government of Iran for inspiration and funding.
Would we really be more “secure” with governments modeled on Iran installed in Syria and Iraq?
Back in 2004 the UK Telegraph reported an Iraqi policeman saying, "We are all volunteers in the Mahdi Army now… At my police station, the policemen and the Mahdi Army stand side by side. Of course I will fight the Americans if they come here." So much for the idea that 250 US “advisors” are going to prop-up the current government of Iraq or stiffen the spines of the Iraqi security forces.  
In areas of Iraq that Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mahadi Army once controlled, such as Najaf and Diwaniya, opponents were assassinated and Sharia courts were established. The Sharia courts were run by judges sent from the Shite religious capital of Najaf and punishments such as 80 lashes for stealing and drinking alcohol were carried out by court police. Dancing was prohibited as was singing and even reciting nursery rhymes.
Between the Shite radical Islamists such as the Mahadi Army in Iraq and the ayatollahs in Iran and the Sunni radical Islamists of ISIS there are no “good guys.”
When Obama made his infamous “no strategy comment” he also said, “We need to make sure that we’ve got clear plans, that we’re developing them. At that point, I will consult with Congress and make sure that their voices are heard,” Obama said. “But there’s no point in me asking for action on the part of Congress before I know exactly what it is that is going to be required for us to get the job done.”

Obama’s policy makers like President George W. Bush’s before them have failed to grasp the real lesson we should have learned from the rise of the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan. The enemy is not a nation state or a government, but the idea of Islamic supremacy deeply ingrained in Muslim culture.
Unless American policy makers recognize and tell the American people that this is not just a war against various terrorist movements that seek to control governments, but a war of ideas between radical Islam and the western ideals of tolerance and freedom of thought, speech and religion the battles occurring in Iraq today will be refought in our own streets tomorrow.

The "defense gap" that Republicans held over Democrats for years has reemerged as significant factor in the fast approaching 2014 elections. The problem that Obama will address tonight is his political problem going into the midterm elections, not the political, military and cultural problem presented by ISIS and the rise of the Islamic State.
Obama is never going to say that because it completely turns on its head the foreign policy he announced at the beginning of his presidency and the whole myth of Islam as a “religion of peace” that the Washington foreign policy and national security establishments have been feeding Americans for over 25 years. Until the United States has a President who is prepared to exercise "basic hindsight" and addresses the political, military and cultural battles radical Islam presents, any strategy is bound to fail.

Share this

Obama and ISIS

Not many people are talking about this, but it's a big deal. Have you been noticing that the lugnuts in this administration are calling this gang of terrorists ISIL instead of ISIS? ISIL is used intentionally, and in a subtle way, to say in effect, that they to not recognize the legitimacy of Israel. The Mainstream media is downplaying it, saying only that this regime does not like the association of Syria (the last letter in ISIS), with their failed policy in Syria. So they use the ISIL acronym instead, with the L standing for Levant. Then the mainstream have-truths the meaning of Levant, saying it only includes Syria and Lebanon. But in reality, Levant includes all the lands along the eastern Mediterranean coast, which includes most of Israel. This is code for the Islamists, stating that this regime is on their side. And it's being swept under the rug by the corrupt propagandist media we have.