American Elephants


The Painful Work Of Crafting A Winning Message! by The Elephant's Child

Obama is having a hard time developing a message. 1.) “We know that if we are joined by the international community, we can continue to shrink ISIL’s sphere of influence, its effectiveness, its finances, its military capabilities to the point where it is a manageable problem.”

And 2.) “So the bottom line is this: Our objective is clear, and that is to degrade and destroy ISIL so that it’s no longer a threat not just to Iraq but also the region and to the United States.”

Sphere of influence? Manageable problem? In his statement on Sotloff’s murder, Obama said the killers “make the absurd claim that they kill in the name of religion , but it was Steven, his friends say, who deeply loved the Islamic world.” Absurd?

Obama said: “[W]hat we’ve got to do is make sure that we are organizing the Arab world, the Middle East, the Muslim world, along with the international community to isolate this cancer.” Who are the “international community” and what does “organizing the Arab world” mean?

This is all so confused. It’s a morass of misunderstandings, political correctness, multiculturalism, ignorance and plain old leftist theology. ISIS has changed their name several times, always beginning with the word “Islamic” — the latest iteration is the Islamic State. They are restoring the Islamic Caliphate, and they are not killing in the name of religion? Of course they are.

You noticed the vast demonstrations across the world by Muslims rising up to denounce the beheadings that ISIS claimed to be doing in the name of Islam, didn’t you? The Moslem religion has a sector of it that is intent on returning to the 7th century, is extraordinarily violent, intolerant, and viciously cruel. The part that is the “Religion of Peace” needs to figure out how to deal with the 7th century part. And this is what Obama speaks of “organizing”?

The Left was so busy hating George W. Bush and therefore hating the War in Iraq, that they never managed to gain any understanding of why we were there, what we accomplished and what we didn’t accomplish and why. They didn’t learn anything about Iraq, or about the people and most of what they did learn wasn’t true.

Obama blamed America for the rise of ISIS. At the American Legion’s National Convention last month, he said the answer for ISIS “evolving terrorist threat: is not for America to “occupy” countries and end up “feeding extremism.” “The answer in not to send in large scale military deployments that over stretch our military, and lead for us occupying countries for a long period of time and end up feeding extremism.” That didn’t go over particularly well with the Legionnaires. It’s gobbledygook.

You can see what a mess his view of Iraq is. He probably thinks his greatest accomplishment was getting us out of Iraq, and the faster the better.  With the press telling us constantly about the “war-weary” American people, he undoubtedly thought he was doing just the thing that would make him popular, but you don’t want to put too much faith in the American media, nor in polls. Obama has known about the rise of ISIS for over a year, but been uninterested in the briefings. When he got the troops out and downsized our military, he thought he was done. He doesn’t know how to do war.

Yet he has watched ISIS grow exponentially, gain wealth unimaginable from capturing Iraq’s banks and businesses and from capturing the oil fields, and gain high quality military equipment from what fleeing Iraqi troops left behind. Now they have captured an airfield in Syria, to round out the supply of helicopters, tanks and trucks. We are told that America is conducting “targeted air strikes” but further information tells us “we destroyed a couple of trucks.” Not quite what I thought targeted air strikes meant.

All the leftist claptrap of the past 40 years, the multiculturalism, the political correctness, the invented rights, cultural relativism, views of the other, not only color our views of a different culture, but prevent understanding  and make “organizing” the Middle East a little difficult. So it is not surprising that Obama cannot come up with a strategy or see the situation clearly. At least Joe Biden was a little clearer—he recommended Bombing ISIS back into the Stone Age.

At a ceremony today to appoint Texas Lawyer Shaarik Zafar to be special representative to Muslim communities, Secretary of State John Kerry said it was the United States’ “Biblical responsibility” to ” confront climate change,’ which included protecting “vulnerable Muslim majority countries.

Kerry said Scripture, in particular the Book of Genesis, make clear it is our “duty” to protect the planet and we should look at Muslim countries “with a sense of stewardship of earth,” adding, “That responsibility comes from God.”

Members of Congress are a lot clearer, or at least the members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Ed Royce (R-CA) and Eliot Engel (D-NY) said they are on the same page. “This is exactly the reason why we have to go after ISIS, why we cannot just let them wreak havoc there. They are killers. They are Brutal,” Rep Engel said.
“Target them and target the terrorist training camps where they’re bringing thousands of fighters from around the world,” said Royce. “Those camps and the munitions should be targeted as well.”

Obama’s inability to come up with a strategy is causing dismay on both sides of the aisle, and members of Congress are quite ready to speak out, both to urge action from the president and to stake out their own positions for the upcoming election.



Endangering America With Politically Correct Language by The Elephant's Child

The most important post today came from Victor Davis Hanson. who wrote about “The Obama Borg: How ‘man-caused disasters” replaced Islamist terrorism in the Obama lexicon.”

In Star Trek lore, the Borg was a collective of servile drone operatives that sought to assimilate other species into its ‘hive mind.’

Something akin to that creepy groupthink arose when the Obama administration took power and sought to reformulate the so-called war on terror. Almost immediately, Obama operatives suggested that radical Islamists were no more likely than any other group to commit acts of terrorism. In fact, the very idea of terrorism — not to mention a war against it — was supposedly a Bush-administration construct unfairly aimed at Muslims.

Obama apparently sincerely believed that there was no intrinsic connection between Islamism and terror; or, if there was, Islamic radicalism was no more dangerous than right-wing or supposedly Christian-inspired terror. Or if Islamic radicalism did arise, it might be mitigated by multicultural sympathy and outreach, mostly by contextualizing the violence as an inevitable result of prior Western culpability.

If you remember, Obama came into office proudly extolling his years in a Muslim Country (before he was ten years old) as giving him a deep understanding of that part of the world. He called the War in Iraq  “a dumb war,” and set about making nice with Muslim countries and changing the vocabulary of the American government. Terrorism became “man caused disasters,” the war on terror became “the politics of fear.”

The dreadful shooting at Fort Hood became “workplace violence”and the increasing radicalism of Major Hasan and his correspondence with the radical imam Anwar al-Awlaki was brushed aside for fear of being labeled Islamophobic. Even though he yelled “Allahu Akbar!” as he killed twelve soldiers, one civilian and wounded more than 30 others. Army Chief of Staff George Casey stated “Our diversity, not only in our Army, but in our country is a strength. And as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.” Thirteen lives snuffed out and thirty wounded and that is less important than “our diversity.”

What kind of orders must have been issued? Political correctness reigns, and to fail to respect “our diversity” can be a career-ending error. In Afghanistan, our soldiers who were assigned the task of training Afghan troops and police, were forbidden to have magazines in their weapons to show their trust for the trainees. That resulted in a lot of dead American soldiers when jihadists turned their weapons on the trainers.

Dr. Hanson enumerates cases of those who served in the Bush administration who have been drawn into the hive and now speak in only preferred terms.

Jihadism, violent extremism, radical Islam is a part of the vast Muslim religion.  The abuses of strict adherence to sharia law, honor killings, abuse of women are all part of the vast Muslim religion. Yet the West twists themselves into pretzels to avoid giving offense. Muslims are quick to accuse the West of “Islamophobia,” because they fear to speak out against the “violent extremists?” I don’t know, but it would seem that the problem must be settled within Islam. I don’t think it can be solved from outside.

Daniel Pipes, president of the Middle East Forum, delivered a paper on “Denying Islam’s Role in Terror: Explaining the Denial” at the Institute for Counter-Terrorism in Herzliya, Israel, and it is well worth your time. It is a complicated problem, but the refusal to name the enemy, to recognize terrorism where it exists, leaves us open to errors like the refusal to monitor Tammerlan Tsarnaev even when warned of his extremism by the Russians.

Today, Mr. Obama has announced that it’s time to close Guantanamo. He cannot grasp the reason why the worst of the terrorists should not be in this country in our domestic justice system. Guantanamo is about as close to a resort as any prisoners experience anywhere in the world, and the prisoners are better treated, but Obama’s view of Islam is fixed in concrete, and he does not change his mind. The creepy groupthink the Obama administration has used to reformulate the war on terror is a real problem, and the failure to understand the violent part of the Religion of Peace will do damage to our country.




Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 6,733 other followers

%d bloggers like this: