Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Foreign Policy, Freedom, History, Iran, Islam, Middle East, Military, National Security, Politics, Progressives, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Daniel Greenfield, The Iran Deal, The Islamic Revolution, The Supreme Leader
Last year Iran was selling gasoline for less than 50 cents a gallon. This year a desperate regime hiked prices up to over a dollar. Meanwhile, Iranians pay about a tenth of what Americans do for electricity.
Unlike Japan, Iran does not need nuclear power. It is already sitting on a mountain of gas and oil.
Iran blew between $100 billion to $500 billion on its nuclear program. The Bushehr reactor alone cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $11 billion making it one of the most expensive in the world.
This wasn’t done to cut power bills. Iran didn’t take its economy to the edge for a peaceful nuclear program. It built the Fordow fortified underground nuclear reactor that even Obama admitted was not part of a peaceful nuclear program, it built the underground Natanz enrichment facility whose construction at one point consumed all the cement in the country, because the nuclear program mattered more than anything else as a fulfillment of the Islamic Revolution’s purpose.
Iran did not do all this so that its citizens could pay 0.003 cents less for a kilowatt hour of electricity.
It built its nuclear program on the words of the Ayatollah Khomeini, “Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled or incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world.”
Iran’s constitution states that its military is an “ideological army” built to fulfill “the ideological mission of jihad in Allah’s way; that is, extending the sovereignty of Allah’s law throughout the world.”
It quotes the Koranic verse urging Muslims to “strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah”.
Article 3 of Iran’s Constitution calls for a foreign policy based on “unsparing support” to terrorists around the world. Article 11, the ISIS clause, demands the political unity of the Islamic world.
Iran is not just a country. It is the Islamic Revolution, the Shiite ISIS, a perpetual revolution to destroy the non-Muslim world and unite the Muslim world. Over half of Iran’s urban population lives below the poverty line and its regime sacrificed 100,000 child soldiers as human shields in the Iran-Iraq War.
Iran did not spend all that money just to build a peaceful civilian nuclear program to benefit its people. And yet the nuclear deal depends on the myth that its nuclear program is peaceful.
Obama insisted, “This deal is not contingent on Iran changing its behavior.” But if Iran isn’t changing its behavior, if it isn’t changing its priorities or its values, then there is no deal.
If Iran hasn’t changed its behavior, then the nuclear deal is just another way for it to get the bomb.
If Iran were really serious about abandoning a drive for nuclear weapons, it would have shut down its nuclear program. Not because America or Europe demanded it, but because it made no economic sense. For a fraction of the money it spent on its nuclear ambitions, it could have overhauled its decaying electrical grid and actually cut costs. But this isn’t about electricity, it’s about nuclear bombs.
The peaceful nuclear program is a hoax. The deal accepts the hoax. It assumes that Iran wants a peaceful nuclear program. It even undertakes to improve and protect Iran’s “peaceful” nuclear technology.
The reasoning behind the nuclear deal is false. It’s so blatantly false that the falseness has been written into the deal. The agreement punts on the military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program and creates a complicated and easily subverted mechanism for inspecting suspicious programs in Iranian military sites.
It builds in so many loopholes and delays, separate agreements and distractions, because it doesn’t really want to know. The inspections were built to help Iran cheat and give Obama plausible deniability.
With or without the agreement, Iran is on the road to a nuclear bomb. Sanctions closed some doors and opened others. The agreement opens some doors and closes others. It’s a tactical difference that moves the crisis from one stalemate to another. Nothing has been resolved. The underlying strategy is Iran’s.
Iran decided that the best way to conduct this stage of its nuclear weapons program was by getting technical assistance and sanctions relief from the West. This agreement doesn’t even pretend to resolve the problem of Iran’s nuclear weapons. Instead its best case scenario assumes that years from now Iran won’t want a nuclear bomb. So that’s why we’ll be helping Iran move along the path to building one.
It’s like teaching a terrorist to use TNT for mining purposes if he promises not to kill anyone.
But this agreement exists because the West refuses to come to terms with what Islam is. Successful negotiations depend on understanding what the other side wants. Celebratory media coverage talks about finding “common ground” with Iran. But what common ground is there with a regime that believes that America is the “Great Satan” and its number one enemy?
What common ground can there be with people who literally believe that you are the devil?
When Iranian leaders chant, “Death to America”, we are told that they are pandering to the hardliners. The possibility that they really believe it can’t be discussed because then the nuclear deal falls apart.
For Europe, the nuclear agreement is about ending an unprofitable standoff and doing business with Iran. For Obama, it’s about rewriting history by befriending another enemy of the United States. But for Iran’s Supreme Leader, it’s about pursuing a holy war against the enemies of his flavor of Islam.
The Supreme Leader of Iran already made it clear that the war will continue until America is destroyed. That may be the only common ground he has with Obama. Both America and Iran are governed by fanatics who believe that America is the source of all evil. Both believe that it needs to be destroyed.
Carter made the Islamic Revolution possible. Obama is enabling its nuclear revolution.
Today Tehran and Washington D.C. are united by a deep distrust of America, distaste for the West and a violent hatred of Israel. This deal is the product of that mutually incomprehensible unity. It is not meant to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb. It is meant to stop America and Israel from stopping it.
Both Obama and the Supreme Leader of Iran have a compelling vision of the world as it should be and don’t care about the consequences because they are convinced that the absolute good of their ideology makes a bad outcome inconceivable.
“O Allah, for your satisfaction, we sacrificed the offspring of Islam and the revolution,” a despairing Ayatollah Khomeini wrote after the disastrous Iran-Iraq War cost the lives of three-quarters of a million Iranians. The letter quoted the need for “atomic weapons” and evicting America from the Persian Gulf.
Four years earlier, its current Supreme Leader had told officials that Khomeini had reactivated Iran’s nuclear program, vowing that it would prepare “for the emergence of Imam Mehdi.”
The Islamic Revolution’s nuclear program was never peaceful. It was a murderous fanatic’s vision for destroying the enemies of his ideology, rooted in war, restarted in a conflict in which he used children to detonate land mines, and meant for mass murder on a terrible scale.
The nuclear agreement has holes big enough to drive trucks through, but its biggest hole is the refusal of its supporters to acknowledge the history, ideology and agenda of Iran’s murderous tyrants. Like so many previous efforts at appeasement, the agreement assumes that Islam is a religion of peace.
The ideology and history of Iran’s Islamic Revolution tells us that it is an empire of blood.
The agreement asks us to choose between two possibilities. Either Iran has spent a huge fortune and nearly gone to war to slightly lower its already low electricity rates or it wants a nuclear bomb.
The deal assumes that Iran wants lower electricity rates. Iran’s constitution tells us that it wants Jihad. And unlike Obama, Iran’s leaders can be trusted to live up to their Constitution.
Filed under: Freedom, Iran, Iraq, Military, National Security, Police, Syria, Terrorism, Women | Tags: Angela Merkel, Murmansk - Russia, Yazidi "Force of the Sun Ladies"
But they are refugees — we owe them empathy and compassion, we have to help them, don’t we? German Chancellor Angela Merkel saw the desperate bombed out cities and towns in Syria on television, and invited the refugees to come to Germany, because they needed more workers, and owed them compassion. The politicos seem to line up with Chancellor Merkel, but the people are not so sure.
During the New Years celebration in Cologne, Germany at least a thousand North African refugees groped women, there were allegations of two rapes, and the mayor of the city requested that women monitor their “code of conduct.” (Look what she was wearing, she was asking for it) The authorities are dedicated to tolerance, which trumps both survival and personal safety.
In Russia, 51 Muslim refugees expelled from Norway go to a nightclub in Murmansk, grope and molest women, and wake up in the hospital. Russians don’t have all that much tolerance when it comes to sexual assault on local women, in the manner that women were attacked in Cologne. A group of Russian men took them aside to teach them a lesson. and gave them a beating they would remember. Police arrived to break up the fight, but threw a few punches at the refugees before arresting 33 of them. Eighteen were in such bloody condition they had to be taken to the hospital.
The police decided not to file a report, but they did confirm that there was a “mass brawl involving refugees.”
There were various reports about from where the Muslim Refugees were expelled. some said Cologne, others said they were expelled from Norway for “bad behavior.” What seems to be fairly universal is the tolerance expressed and enforced in Western Europe. Herbert London described the situation:
Much of the chaos Germany now endures was predictable. After all, many Muslim men treat woman as inferior, mere objects for their sexual delectation. The Koran endorses the proposition that a woman has half the rights of a man in any legal proceeding. Nonetheless, the compassion crusade goes on.
Common sense would suggest that those who cannot assimilate should never be allowed in and those whose behavior violates German law should be thrown out. But that isn’t the conversation in political councils; it is the conversation on the street. The authorities generally stand with Merkel.
We are suffering from the same tolerance delusion here. The president recoils from calling anyone a “terrorist” — they are “extremists,” but then so is anyone in this country who has a concealed carry permit or holds up a Gadsden flag, or resides in one of those odd states like Texas or Oklahoma or Idaho. It’s all very strange, and requires careful use of language.
In Erbil, Iraq, “some 2.000 Yazidi women who were captured in the brutal August 2014 attack on their mountain stronghold — have escaped and taken up arms against their former tormentors.They witnessed the slaughter of their families on Mount Sinjar and then were forced into sexual slavery.” They call themselves the ‘Force of the Sun Ladies’ and are ready to fight for vengeance. They have been trained and are ready to fight alongside the Kurdish Peshmerga forces. They range in age from 17 to 37 and there are 500 more waiting to be trained.
The Ladies are reportedly killing about ten ISIS fighters every day.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Democrat Corruption, Energy, Environment, Foreign Policy, Freedom, Intelligence, Iran, Military, National Security, Politics, Progressivism, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Big Money for Climate, Climate Change & the Military, Not Much for the Military
This is the time of year when President Obama has to come up with his 2017 budget request. Reports have said that the president is planning to ask Congress for billions and billions more to spend on controlling the uncontrollable natural warming and cooling of the earth.
In his weekly address on Saturday, Obama repeated once again his belief that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time, which he has said repeatedly, at least 22 times, insisting that it ranks higher on the danger list than terrorism, which he plans to defeat with windmills. Last week he proposed a $10 a barrel tax on oil production, since the price of gas at the pump has dropped and you probably won’t notice if it goes right back up.
His formal request is for $5.2 billion for Department of Energy Green programs — like all the ones that have already gone bankrupt like Solyndra. $1.8 billion would go to making green energy storage more economical. DOE would also get $880 million to make green transportation more affordable and push green fuels. The big drop in the price of gasoline is playing hob with the sales of electric cars, which aren’t all that green anyway if you consider where they get the electricity from.
The EPA’s budget is supposed to get a 50% increase, while 20 states are asking the Supreme Court to challenge their climate rule, which the states say “would cause “irreparable harm” were it allowed to be implemented.”
The National Science Foundation would get $512 million to study green energy. and the USDA would get $105 million for “competitive and intramural research funding to support development of bio-based energy sources that range from sustainable and economical forest systems and farm products to increased production of biofuels.”Even HUD gets more money to get more low-carbon energy into residential homes.
Biofuels don’t work, ethanol should be banned, and Obama wants to put more wood products or anything at all that could replace fossil fuels into your gas tanks. He believes that carbon dioxide is a pollutant (which it isn’t) that it is the cause of the tiny rise in the temperature of the Earth over the last century (it isn’t). We need more CO2 in the atmosphere, because it is a natural fertilizer for plants and is greening the world.
The EPA has released a finding that aircraft (except for Air Force One) carbon emissions contribute to climate change. This will be coordinated with “the International Civil-Aviation Organization, a branch of the United Nations, which is drafting a global standard for airline carbon emissions.”
And terrorism? The bigger threat to America’s security is that the military has not made climate change its number one priority.” A new Pentagon directive says that climate change must be a part of all Defense Department “programs, plans and policies.”
A huge new defense climate bureaucracy is being born after years of defense cutbacks. Our Army is the smallest since 1940. The Navy is the smallest since 1915. Willful stupidity. Obama’s former CIA deputy director Mike Morell told PBS’s Charlie Rose “We didn’t go after oil wells…that ISIS controls, because we didn’t want to do environmental damage.” ISIS just cut their fighter’s salaries in half, because of the drop in the price of the oil that supports their activities.
In the meantime, North Korea just conducted a test of a three stage Taepodong that could potentially carry a nuclear weapon to the U.S. just a month after they said they had detonated a hydrogen bomb. Iran is working on a “Mysterious new installation that’s tied to its nuclear weapons program.” Iran is using North Korea to develop their nuclear program and are cooperating on their missile program. North Korea calls it a “satellite launch” which doesn’t fool anybody but Obama.
Investors says: “Closer to home, there have been at least 81 major terrorist threats against the U .S. since 9/11, the most recent just last month, according to the Heritage Foundation.” The administration tries to palm off their passivity with the term “strategic patience.” Obama has always hidden behind a carefully constructed web of clever words. Sometimes it works.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Foreign Policy, Intelligence, Iran, Islam, Law, National Security, Politics, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Jason Rezaian, Marine Amir Hekmati, Saeed Abedini
A deal that freed five Americans from Iranian jails at a cost of $1.7 billion in U.S. funds comes with a claim in Tehran that the transaction was a ransom payment. The U.S. Treasury Department wired the money to Iran about the same time that the radical theocracy in Iran allowed three American prisoners to leave Tehran on a Swiss air force plane. The prisoner swap also meant freedom for two other Americans held in Iran, and the U.S. freed seven Iranians who had been charged or convicted of crimes in this country.
The $1.7 billion financial settlement concluded a 35-year legal battle that concerned a purchase of U.S. arms by Iran’s last monarch Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi that were never delivered because of the Iranian revolution in 1979 when the Shah was deposed.
The White House claimed that the settlement was good for American taxpayers because the U.S. was likely to lose in the arbitration at The Hague, and could have been liable for billions more if the case had dragged on.
The release of hostages came at the same time as the implementation of the nuclear agreement with Iran that lifted the international economic sanctions in exchange for Iran ending its nuclear program. They supposedly filled the heavy-water reactor core with concrete, but if the IAEA inspectors actually got to inspect the concrete, I haven’t seen any confirmation. Earlier, there was some talk that inspectors would not be admitted to any Iranian facilities, and they’d just have to take Iran’s word for it. The Wall Street Journal reported:
A senior Iranian military official has publicly stated that the clearing of the $1.7 billion was a key factor in Tehran’s decision to release the imprisoned Americans, most of whom were charged with espionage.
“Taking this much money back was in return for the release of the American spies and doesn’t have to do with the [nuclear] talks,” said Gen. Mohammad Reza-Naghdi, commander of Iran’s powerful Basij militia, in state media on Wednesday. “The way to take our rights back from the arrogants [Americans] is to become powerful, and we must grow stronger and stronger every day.”
Jason Rezaian’s release got the most attention because he was a Washing Post journalist. The others were Marine veteran Amir Hekmati who had just about given up after four years in prison and Christian pastor Saeed Abedini. The fourth was Nosratollah Khosravi-Roodsari. A recently detained student. Matthew Trevithick was separately released. It’s high time we had them all home.
The most important part of the deal was Iran’s claim that the money returned was a ransom — which implies that Iran’s bad behavior, falsely accusing American citizens of Iranian background of espionage, and imprisoning them gets a big ransom from the “arrogants”. When you reward bad behavior you get more of it. President Obama does not seem to understand much about strategy, ransoms, or rewarding bad behavior, which he has been doing a lot of.
Obama’s release of terrorists from Guantanamo, which is part of his unfortunate obsession with closing the detention facility, plays into this deal. Mr. Obama seems to believe that terrorists use Gitmo as a recruiting tool. This was once true some years ago, but no longer is. And Mr. Obama seems to value “world opinion” which he misconstrues, as favoring his end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and an Americas retreat to isolationism as a positive agenda.
Expect all of the released terrorists to return to the war against America and Americans, as so many of those previously released already have. The nations to which we turn them over don’t do a very good job of keeping track of them. These remaining detainees are considered the “worst of the worst,” committed to killing Americans. It is against the law to bring them to this country, but Obama is looking for a way around that.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Democrat Corruption, Election 2016, Foreign Policy, Intelligence, Iran, Military, National Security, Politics, Progressivism, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: 10 US Sailors Captured, The American Thinker, Violation of International Law
— “Barry and the Pirates” by William Levinson.
It is particularly telling that Barack Obama spent part of his State of the Union speech telling us that the state of our Union is strong while Iranian pirates seized two U.S. Navy vessels and then, as pointed out by Rick Moran, violated the Geneva Conventions by publishing a photo of the captured sailors on their knees with their hands on their heads.
The Iranian action was both piracy and an intentional act of war against the United States. If the boats strayed into Iranian waters due to navigational or mechanical problems, Iran was obliged under international law to render them assistance. “Accidents in international air or sea traffic, even those involving military vessels, generally require nations to assist the victims and keep hands off the stricken planes or ships, the experts said.” Note also that “Iranian officials searched [the boats] for advanced technology and sensitive communications.” …
— “The most plausible explanation for the 10 riverine sailors captured by Iran” by Thomas H. Lipscomb
No, they are part of a Rivierine Squadron based in San Diego. Further they are support crews for SEAL missions from the US Navy and highly trained. The Iranians probably mistook “Riverine” for “Marine” in doing the story.
So that explains several things. Why the captured sailors were so much more fit than the average sailor these days, and how a woman could be among them. While not special ops personnel directly engaged, they have to be extraordinarily fit and well-trained, as indeed these sailors appear to be. …
— “Calling BS on the official story of the Iranian capture of two US riverine boats” by Thomas H. Lifson
Flash! A former Navy SEAL, Matt Bracken, just blew up what I have been calling “a pack of lies from the US and Iran” on what the hell happened that got our boats captured and taken to the Farsi Islands.
Remember: the single most dangerous area in all the Persian Gulf is a small group of Islands in almost the middle of the heavily traveled shipping lanes that is a major naval base for Iran and the HQ of the radical IRG for special operations of their own against all the countries abutting the Gulf. A top Marine told me our two boats were special ops boats with crews that delivered our own SEALS… the direct rivals of the IRG on Farsi. …
— “10 US sailors held by Iran confirmed freed” by Rick Moran
The U.S. claims one of the small Riverine Command Boats experienced mechanical difficulties, strayed off course, and then disappeared from radar. The Iranian Revolutionary Guards captured the boats and took the sailors prisoner, accusing them of “snooping” and demanding an apology from the U.S. government.
Initially, the Iranians said they would release the sailors and their boats at dawn Iran time. But after an “investigation” that confirmed the navigational problems, the sailors were let go mid-afternoon Iran time. …
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Domestic Policy, Intelligence, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Military, National Security, Progressivism, The United States | Tags: Defense Sec. Ash Carter, Special Operations, Targeting Forces
Headline: The Washington Post: “Elite U.S. targeting force has arrived in Iraq to fight the Islamic State”
FORT CAMPBELL, Ky. – An elite U.S. Special Operations targeting force has arrived in Iraq and will carry out operations against the Islamic State, part of a broader effort in 2016 to strike at the militants and that also includes U.S. Special Operations troops in Syria, Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter said Wednesday.
The targeting force is now in place and is prepared to work with Iraqis to begin going after militant fighters and commanders, “killing or capturing them wherever we find them,” Carter said, speaking to about 200 soldiers at the home of the Army’s 101st Airborne Division, which is expected to deploy about 500 soldiers next month to Iraq and Kuwait as part of the campaign against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL.
Is it standard military procedure now to announce everything we are doing or going to do in advance? Or is this Obama, stung by the response to his State of the Union everything is dandy speech trying to show that he’s not either a weak doormat, and does too send needed troops, but can’t manage to do anything without bragging about it first? Seems odd. But then Obama has had a habit of always telling the enemy what we’re going to do, then tacking on restrictive rules of engagement to make sure nobody gets hurt so that he cannot be blamed. But what do I know, I’m just a civilian worrier.
The training the U.S. soldiers will provide to both the Iraqi army and Kurdish peshmerga forces will prove critical, with the peshmerga approaching Mosul from the north and Iraqi troops coming from the south in a “pincer movement,” Carter predicted. Some analysts, however, say that communications between regular Iraqi forces and the Kurds need to improve significantly before any kind of joint operation can be undertaken.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economy, Foreign Policy, Iran, Islam, National Security, Politics, Progressivism, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: President Barack Obama, The Legacy, The Vision of the Far Left
“Perhaps no post-World War II president (and maybe none before) has justified his executive overreach by openly contending he was working around the lawmaking branch of government because it had refused to do what he desired. Whether a court finds his actions constitutional or not, it’s an argument that stands, at the very least, against the spirit of American governance. Today many liberals call this leadership.”
……………………………………. —David Harsanyi at Reason
President Obama’s final ‘State of the Union’ speech is coming up on Tuesday. He has reportedly sent members of his cabinet out about the country to create enthusiasm. Tidbits are being released off and on to tantalize. There will be an empty chair in Michelle’s box to symbolize all the missing victims of mass shootings. According to Gallup, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has a 58 percent favorability rating, while only 35 percent hold an unfavorable opinion. Obama’s approval rate, also from Gallup, is only 47 percent, but it ticked up a little while he was on vacation. Congress has acted on gun control, just not in the way Obama wanted. The Senate rejected legislation in 2013 to expand background checks for gun purchases and to ban certain weapons and ammunition.
Perhaps the most destructive legacy of the Obama administration may be the idea that if Congress fails to act the President must do something himself. Obama has never quite understood the separation of powers nor the fact that Congress more fully represents all of the people that he, as president, does. Our democracy, run solely by the president, is deeply approved by the Left — until there is a Republican president.
Obama has had his team working on the State of the Union speech for two months. He wants no legislative agenda to set himself up for failure in front of a GOP Congress. He wants to talk once again about “Who we are as Americans,” something he has never managed to figure out and which he inserts interminably into every speech.
Mr. Obama has a marvelous ability to see in his history only that which he finds positive. He adds up the numbers of jobs created each month, without considering how many are part-time or second jobs, how many jobs were lost, and completely neglects the 94,446,000 Americans of working age who have given up looking for work. He does not understand that in flooding the job market with foreign competition he has done great damage to the hopes of American workers. Now he plans to award work permits to 100,000 foreigners to work here to compete with Americans for jobs. How is it that he can add all that up and see a positive result for the people?
He sees the non-binding agreement in Paris on Climate Change as a great accomplishment, but it will accomplish nothing, nothing at all. It will not reduce global temperatures more than 1.2º C. or 2.2º F— roughly the difference between 10:00 a.m. and noon on an ordinary spring day. The Iran Deal that he has worked so hard to accomplish, while giving in to Iran on every point, assures that we will be attacked with nuclear weapons here at home. It is the most unbelievable betrayal of American security in history.
Michael Grunwald, a senior staff writer for Politico Magazine, has written a long slobbering paean to the wonderfulness and success and accomplishments of the Obama administration over the past 7 years. If you can bear it, do read the whole thing. It is hard to believe that one man, completely unprepared for the presidency, could make such a mess of things, or that one reporter could possibly have such a rosy view of catastrophe.
Well, America the bad. A reactionary force standing in the way of the noble leftist aspiration. Social Justice. Income inequality. Black Lives Matter.
Here’s a remarkable example. In Philadelphia, a convert to Islam, appeared in Muslim garb, Proclaimed he was doing the shooting of a policeman in the name of Allah. said he had pledged his allegiance the the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). During a press conference Friday afternoon, Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney stated that he believes the shooting of a Philadelphia police officer has “nothing to do with being a Muslim,” despite the suspect saying that he did it in the name of Islam. So you get headlines like this: “Police probe man’s claim of shooting cop in Islam’s name.”
The pressure to deny reality must be really extreme. Goes right along with Obama calling the shooting at Fort Hood “workplace violence.” They are living in an alternate reality.
Matthew Continetti summed it up a bit in a piece called “The Lamest Duck:”
We have entered a most dangerous period of the Obama presidency. It’s not just that every rogue actor from Kim and Putin and Castro to Maduro and Khamenei and Xi knows he has one last year to behave badly without fear of reprisal. It’s that the president and his team are isolated, aloof, detached from reality.
They think a climate deal is a rebuke to terrorism. They think the response to jihad in San Bernardino is to ‘close the gun-show loophole.’ They think a new communications strategy will convince the public that the war against ISIS is going well. I don’t question Obama’s sincerity. I question his sanity.
What actually results from a given policy seems no longer to matter to him. Take guns—he’d sure like to. His executive order does little more than reiterate current law. It wouldn’t have stopped the killing at Sandy Hook elementary or in San Bernardino. Indeed, the most important consequence of Obama’s fight with the NRA has been record gun sales and a windfall for gun manufacturer shareholders. At least when Hillary Clinton takes on an industry, its stock goes down. Obama can’t even get that right.
From an essay at Commentary by Abe Greenwald:
But Obama has not been blindsided; he has chosen policies that have emboldened ISIS and has rejected other options at every turn. In fact, his words in Turkey were patently false. Obama doesn’t need an introduction to those who would have done things differently; he knows them well. They include two of his secretaries of defense, his former under secretary of defense, his former secretary of state, his former head of the CIA, his former Army chief of staff, the last commanding general of forces in Iraq, his former ambassador to Syria, his former deputy national-security adviser, and, yes, even his former joint chiefs chairman—among others.
“The Nation He Built,” by Michael Grunewald
“Hating the West, Inc.” by Victor Davis Hanson
“Iran’s Ballistic Missiles Are Actually a Huge Problem,” by Emily Landau, Shimon Stein
“On His Watch,” by Abe Greenwald