Wake Up, Mr. President

Wake Up, Mr. President - WSJ

Here’s the article if the access link is restricted to WSJ subscribers:

Updated Nov. 15, 2015 7:29 p.m. ET

President Obama on Sunday promised to “redouble” U.S. efforts against Islamic State, which shows he isn’t deaf to the political impact of Friday’s murderous assault in Paris. But why should anyone believe him? After years of dismissing the rising terror threat, Mr. Obama needs an epiphany if he doesn’t want to be remembered as the President who allowed radical Islam to spread and prosper.

“It is an act of war that was waged by a terrorist army, a jihadist army, by Daesh [the Arab name for Islamic State], against France,” said French President François Hollande on Saturday, in words that met the moment. Contrast that to Mr. Obama, who on Friday morning told ABC News that “we have contained” Islamic State. Some are saying Mr. Obama is guilty of bad timing, but the truth is worse: The remark is what he believes, or at least what he has wanted Americans to believe.

***
The Paris massacre should mark the end of that self-deception. Jimmy Carter shed his illusions about the Soviet Union after its invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, and Mr. Obama needs a comparable rendezvous with reality. This will be harder for Mr. Obama, a man of great ideological vanity, but perhaps the prospect of defeat for his party in 2016 will force him to see the world more clearly.

For seven years Mr. Obama has used the unpopularity of the Iraq war as a shield for his retreat from anti-terror leadership and the Middle East. His periodic drone strikes and his most notable security success, the Osama bin Laden raid, obscured the jihadist danger growing in the wake of America’s departure from Iraq and abdication in Syria.

Mr. Obama also deposed Moammar Gadhafi in Libya but then did almost nothing to help Libyans restore order. Americans saw a glimpse of the gathering storm in the terror attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, but the White House blamed it on an obscure video.

Now Americans can see clearly the spreading infection from Islamic State and a resurgent al Qaeda. It isn’t merely a regional threat, as Mr. Obama once claimed. Its offshoots have spread into North Africa across the Middle East to Afghanistan. The civil war in Syria has spawned a refugee crisis that has descended on Europe and may have provided cover for at least one of the Paris jihadists.

Islamic State also isn’t the “jayvee” terror team, as Mr. Obama once claimed. Western intelligence believes its sympathizers in Sinai took down a Russian airliner. Its bombs explode day after day against civilian targets, this past week in Beirut and a Christian convent in Iraq.

The Paris attack is in some ways even more alarming than 9/11. Airplane hijackings have largely been stopped through enhanced security. Paris suggests that Islamic State has embarked on a strategy of urban unconventional warfare wherever it is able across the West. And it is far harder to track and prevent suicidal jihadists with assault rifles and grenades who want to blow up a restaurant district or concert hall.

France has been the target three times this year, counting the attack on a train foiled by three Americans, but America’s day is coming. In May FBI Director James Comey said there are “thousands” inside the U.S. who are absorbing Islamic State propaganda on the Internet.

The question now is what America’s President is going to do to prevent more Paris-like carnage, including attacks on U.S. soil. He can start by taking the political restraints off the U.S. military’s campaign against Islamic State. Turkey and the Sunni Arabs haven’t committed more to the fight because they don’t believe Mr. Obama is committed. France launched air strikes against the Islamic State stronghold of Raqqa on Sunday, but the U.S. should have been hitting those targets long ago.

Mr. Obama should order the Pentagon to roll back Islamic State from all of its territory in Iraq and Syria as rapidly as possible, which means months not years. Kurds and Sunni Arabs will provide most of the fighters if the U.S. supplies the firepower, intelligence and political leadership.

This ought to include taking up the Turks and Jordan on their desire for safe zones in Syria to protect Sunnis who are fighting the Bashar Assad regime but aren’t radical jihadists. Iran and Russia will not stand in the way of a determined U.S.-led coalition that includes France and the Sunni Arabs.

A similar policy reversal will be needed at home. From his refusal to speak clearly about the Islamist nature of the threat to his looming decision to close Guantanamo, Mr. Obama’s every instinct has been to suggest that America will be safer if we stop provoking jihadists and treat them as common criminals. Paris shows how mistaken that is.

Mr. Obama would send an important signal if he’d declare that Guantanamo will not be closed on his watch and that U.S. surveillance will increase at home and abroad. It’s hard to know how much Mr. Obama has impaired U.S. intelligence collection since the Snowden theft, but the President should repair the damage because any terror attack will be his responsibility.

***
The Paris massacre means that the terror debate will also move to the forefront of the presidential campaign. In Saturday night’s Democratic debate, Hillary Clinton tried to edge away from Mr. Obama’s policies by saying that Islamic State must be “defeated” not merely “contained.” But her policy prescriptions are still to lead from behind, and she was an architect of the Libyan debacle.

As for the Republicans, Rand Paul’s already small chance at the nomination has now vanished. Whatever his contributions on economics, his libertarian foreign-policy instincts are too similar to President Obama’s. GOP voters will increasingly look to sort the other candidates by their experience and judgment, not merely tough talk. The election should be a referendum on keeping America safe.

 

Yeah, it would send a message. Something along the lines of "I refused to take the necessary steps to close the concentration camp my predecessor opened" and "All of that unconstitutional domestic surveillance, that made everyone really mad when they found out about it, is how I'm going to roll as well."

 

I just don't understand the Administration. After the Vietnam war, the UN opened the refugee camps in Malaysia, Thailand, Hong Kong, and the Philippines for the Vietnamese war victims before they could land their life in the United States, Canada, Australia, and others. They had to go through the process include learning new cultures, language, and etc. Why the current Administration does not do that for the Syrian refugees, instead sending directly to the contry? That process takes years; therefore, it is easy to eliminated infiltrated ISIL/ISIS members.

I think the Obama administration is weak on Terrorism. He removed the troops from Iraq based on his first campaign promise despite senior Military personnel informed him that Iraq government is not ready. Sometimes, I feel that Obama has contribution to build ISIS.

 

It's Bush's fault.

1. My cat died, it's Bush's fault.
2. My girlfriend/husband/wife/etc left me, it's Bush's fault.
3. Global warming, it's Bush's fault.
4. Military is mean and strong, it's Bush's fault.
5. War, war, war everywhere, it's Bush's fault.
6. My boss does not like me, it's Bush's fault.
7. I lost my job, it's Bush's fault.
8. I have ED and need Viagra, it's Bush's fault.
9. The wholesome Islamic boys and ISIS do not like Guantanamo, it's Bush's fault.

Liberals are delusional. I hear Cuba and North Korea (both atheist countries btw, no pesky religions to deal with) so a liberal paradise, are awesome this time of year. Bill Maher said it best, we are seeing the "pu@#yfication of America." Liberals point of view is "oh no, lets not offend Islam" But is OK to piss on crosses, or throw human excrement on pictures of Jesus, this is called "art" and we have freedom of speech. I dare liberals draw a simple picture of Mohammad and see what would happen? The nice boys at Guantanamo would love to talk to you and :AR15firing::AR15firing::AR15firing::AR15firing::AR15firing::AR15firing: or chop your head off, you pick. I say they want to go to heaven and meet their 72 virgins, well lets help them reach their goal.

 

Terrorist detainees can be exploited as a supplemental resource tool for jihadists’ recruitment purposes. Conversely, wherever they’re physically being held is of little consequence as to recruiting strategy /outcomes or jihadists’ ideology.

 

Don't be silly. We don't need to attribute things Bush had no control over to Bush to make him look bad. Here, look:

The Patriot Act: Bush's Fault
The War in Iraq: Bush's fault
Guantanamo Bay: Bush's Fault
A rise in sub-prime mortgages when government regulation promotes lending money to people who absolutely cannot afford it: Bush's fault
The propaganda spin on Jessica Lynch: Bush's fault
The propaganda spin on 9/11: Bush's fault
Lying about WMDs in Iraq: Bush's fault
The prosecution of two border patrol agents for shooting at an armed drug dealer: Bush's fault
The prosecution of a Texas Sheriff Deputy for having the audacity to discharge his firearm at a van driven by a human trafficker who was trying to run him over during a traffic stop: Bush's fault

No need to blame him for the dog poop on my shoes. He's done plenty to sully his own name. We can make a similar list for Obama, Clinton or Reagan. Politicians sucking is a bipartisan initiative.

No, the delusional people are the ones who think that everything in the world can be distilled down to "liberals versus conservatives." And that delusion sadly affects people on both sides of the aisle.

You lost liberties with the passage of the Patriot Act. That isn't a "liberal v. conservative" issue, that's an American issue.

To be fair, no one pissed on a crucifix. The crucifix was submerged in a jar of piss. And yes, that is protected as freedom of expression. Guess what? Drawing offensive pictures of Mohammed is also a protected activity (that's why it isn't illegal).

In either situation, however, you cannot act surprised when an extremist (Christian or Muslim) shows up at your door to hurt you because you desecrated something sacred to them.

OK, and if you submerge a crucifix in urine, you'll get bombarded with death threats just like Andres Serrano did. Clearly, people are willing to take that risk. But if a Christian extremist were to kill Mr. Serrano, are you honestly going to say that you wouldn't, in any possible manner, say something to the effect of "Well, he shouldn't have done something with the sole purpose to offend?"

I'd have to call bull on that. The manner of your present rhetoric (and your overuse of AK firing emojis) tells me that you would likely take a stance toward his hypothetical death similar to the indifference many feel toward people who get killed for purposely desecrating Mohammed.

There are a lot of things that kill you in the world. Cancer can come out of left field and take you down without a symptom until it's too late to do anything about it. Brain aneurysm? Those can linger for decades until one day you die on the toilet.

The most preventable death, to me at least, is being killed because you specifically set out to offend a religion which has (even if only a minority) extremists in their number (like Christianity and Islam).

But, the appeal to common sense and objective thinking destroys your "us v. them" attitude and is therefore unappealing, I'm sure.

 

Recognizing your points: Even so, such would require repealing current law Steve (e.g., Military Commissions Act of 2006; amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009—strips the right of habeas corpus, and basically strips the right of due process, for detainees determined to be foreign enemy combatants). E.g., “No American citizen captured anywhere, or any person caught in the US, is imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay” re Civil Rights Resources: Constitutional Due Process for Enemy Combatants under the Military Commissions Act of 2006 - LawInfo

 

U.S. Military tribunal process re https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tribunals_in_the_United_States: Inquisitorial system (investigating the facts of the case) vs adversarial system (focuses on the issue of the law and procedure and act as a referee in the contest between the defense and the prosecutor. Juries decide on the matter of fact)… re https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisitorial_system

 

Yup, I'm frothing at the mouth all right, it is from this cold beer that I'm drinking right now. :banana::cool2:

 

He he he, gracias amigo. I'll save one for you.:banana:

 

I appreciate the President's caution and reticence about miring us in yet another Middle East land war. Perhaps re-thinking that whole issue is in order.

As for the Syrian refugees, the bluster about them here by GOP politicians is misplaced. Refugees to the U.S. go through the most rigorous screening process anywhere. And note, the Paris attacks weren't done by refugees. They were carried out by citizens of France and Belgium. In the U.S., we've admitted more than 750,000 refugees since 9/11. Zero terrorist attacks from them. The only thing that comes close: the Boston Marathon bombing. But those people had been in the U.S. for a very long time--they were radicalized here. And that's the same situation in Europe. It's not terrorists posting as refugees and sneaking in that pose a serious threat. It's each country's own citizenry. If we're interested in enhancing safety here by keeping people out, we'd be safer to ban EU passport holders. (An absurd idea, of course.)

Between Mexicans, ebola, and Syrians, it's a wonder we're not all dead. (No, it isn't.)

Oh, and more people died in the U.S. from gun violence in the 7 days after the Paris attacks than died IN the Paris attacks. We seem to be okay with that, though..

 

Well, the Paris attack was clearly caused by gun control and the routine mass shootings in the US are caused by the same. If we just let felons and the mentally ill have guns everything would be OK.

We could hand them out at school. Training? Nah, we'll just let the kids watch some old movies to get a feel for it. Everything that needs to be known about gun safety can absolutely be taught by Dirty Harry.

After all, a research group funded by gun manufacturers says that Australia is essentially being destroyed from within by uncontrolled gun violence that simply cannot be stopped by a "good guy" with a gun because no good guys have guns anymore. Honestly, I'm amazed that the roving bands of Mad Max style bandits haven't completely enveloped our friends down under yet. Or maybe they have and all of these images of happy, healthy (and not shot) people coming from there are just propaganda ploys.

Because, at the end of the day, if everyone has healthcare and education then Satan has won and we will become exactly like North Korea.

 

I also find it interesting that more than 2,000 people on the terrorist watch list have purchased firearms legally. There has been legislation proposed to close that loophole, but Congressional leaders won't allow it to be brought up for a vote.

 

You want the government to be able to arbitrarily decide if the Constitution applies to you? I certainly don't.

There is no question that in places where citizens have access to guns with reasonable standards (mandatory training, no convicted felons, no mental illness), violent crime drops. The number one thing that criminals fear is their victim being armed.

http://www.hoplofobia.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Armed-Resistance-to-Crime.pdf