THERE IS A PATTERN IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION’S HANDLING OF IS The Obama administration played the dominant role in ousting long-time American ally, Hosni Mubarek, in Egypt, and helped bring to power the Muslim Brotherhood, the parent organization of all the radical Islamic groups on the planet, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Queda, ISIS, and Boko Haram. It was a startling development, given that Mubarek had been the most reliable ally the U.S. had in the Arab world. His ouster, at the behest of the Obama administration, was a stunning development. When the Obama administration next focused its sights on Moammar Khadafy’s Libyan regime, another government that posed no threat to the United States, a pattern was beginning to emerge. Secular governments, which posed no threat to the United States, were being overthrown, and replaced with Muslim regimes that did pose a threat to the United States. This fact was reinforced by the atrocity that took place in Benghazi, when four Americans were killed, one a United States ambassador, after the American consulate was overrun. Reports surfaced that American forces, that could have responded to the attack, in a timely manner, were told to stand down. In addition, the Obama administration pulled American troops out of Iraq, in what some in the military felt was an action that was taken prematurely, potentially undermining gains that had been made to create political stability in the Iraqi State. What is now clear is that this decision by the administration, led, directly, to the heightened danger presently posed by ISIS, a group of radical Muslims which is even more brutal than its fanatical cohort group, Al Queda, in its application of Islamic doctrine. It is difficult to see how ISIS could have risen to such prominence, as a fighting force in the “Middle East, without the implementation of Obama’s foreign policy in the “Middle East.” The Obama administration’s treatment of Arab leaders, who posed no threat to the United States, coupled with Obama’s open hostility to Israel, which was, traditionally, this country’s strongest ally, in the “Middle East,” not only served to announce that a realignment was taking place in the “Middle East,” but signaled that there was a fundamental shift in America’s political will to confront Islamic extremism. Given that there has never been peace through weakness, in the history of the world, it is not surprising that we are witnessing a metastasizing of Islamic extremism. This weakness, actually cowardice, can be seen in America’s, as well as the West’s, refusal to even identify the nature of the problem with which it is confronted. This open trepidation was most notable in Obama’s prepared speech before the nation several weeks ago, in which he spent time uselessly, telling the nation that ISIS is not an Islamic organization. It is a theme, which has since been picked up by John Kerry, and Charles Hagel, as if there is really nothing to see here, Obama saying, in fact, that ISIS is a junior varsity group. If it is, it is playing on the varsity team’s turf, in both Iraq, and Syria, and has amassed forces estimated to be in the vicinity of 35,000 to 40,000 of these JV members, all of whom seem to have access to varsity machine guns. While the American people were being told, more or less, not to take ISIS too seriously, it appears that the Obama regime was doing what it does best, talking out of both sides of its mouth. In an article this morning, for example, it was stated that “The United States and Arab allies launched strikes from the air and sea against Islamic State militants in Syria on Tuesday, opening a new front in the battle against the brutal jihadist group.” Does that sound like the group that has been described by Obama, Kerry, and Hagel? Do you know of a single non-Muslim “brutal jihadist group” practicing jihad on the planet? Me either! So, since we can’t all get along, can we at least get real? I’ll start the process of “realness” by pointing out how unreal this statement is, that appeared in the article, alluded to above: “The Pentagon said that Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates had joined Washington in carrying out the raids.” [Please read that statement again.] Who’s the daddy here? It’s the same people who are telling us about the lack of statehood of a group, which has no Islamic standing. Just imagine that, folks, it’s a return back to the days Franklin Roosevelt, we have nothing to fear but fear itself. Well, times have changed just a tad, so, as it turns out, maybe we should also fear ISIS, and while we are at it, we might consider the Obama administration as an existential threat that should be feared, and, in this age of multiculturalism, let’s include Congress in the mix, or, as I would like to frame it, in the mishaps of the American government, which continues to amaze, for all the wrong reasons. There’s more, which is to say more nonsense, and here it is, again from the news article, so please continue sitting, in case you faint from being exposed to more hot air: Using a mix of fighter, bomber, remotely piloted aircraft and Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles the coalition conducted 14 strikes against IS targets in Syria.” Just who are these allies with this kind of bombing capability, you ask? Please hold on, while I tell you, like, right now, as a matter of fact. The recent military super powers are Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, the United Arab Emirate, and sponsor of 15 of the 19 hijackers on 911, Saudi Arabia, all allies, for sure, and now super powers, to boot. One has to wonder why these nations, according to the article, joined the United States, and didn’t just go up there, in the wild blue yonder, by themselves, given all of this new-found firepower. The article continued, “The operation ‘destroyed or damaged’ multiple targets in the jihadists northern stronghold of Raqa [IN Syria] and near the border with Iraq, including IS fighter positions, training compounds, command centres and armed vehicles.” Syria President Bashar Al-Assad, another Arab ruler, who poses no threat to the United States, as a secular leader, affiliated with the Shiites, has not been allowed to participate in the fight against ISIS, as part of the allied opposition, although one of the group’s strongholds is in his country, fighting to topple Assad’s government. This piece of the puzzle is made clear by the following statement, in the article: “The fact that the five Arab nations joining the strikes are Sunni-ruled will also be of crucial symbolic importance in the fight against the Sunni extremists of IS.” There is definitely a pattern here...
Posted on: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 06:04:05 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015