Things to consider for tonights POTUS speech on ISIS. First and foremost we need to keep in mind that for President Obama foreign policy is always subservient to domestic politics, i.e. elections. So his speech might be tailored more along those lines than about a substantial strategy speech. It will be interesting to see which terms he uses ISIS, IS, or ISIL. It will also be interesting to note the rhetorical balance he will need trying to distance himself from his own previous statements and what he will say tonight. That said, President Obama may not be able to form the coalition of the willing to fight ISIS he wants and to have a comprehensive strategy for the Middle East BECAUSE: 1. He doesnt have the skills Bush 41 and Bush 43 had, and because he mocked the very concept of formations of coalitions of the willing (a UN principle, by the way). 2. He is not trusted by world leaders to lead that coalition or to see it through for the long haul. a. He left Eastern Europe hanging without the missile defense shield. b. Abandoned the American ally of Iraq. c. Is announcing to do the same to Afghanistan by announcing withdrawal dates. d. He miscalculated in Syria, drawing lines in the sand, and siding with al-Qaeda against Assad. And failed even to get the U.S (his own country) to get behind his pin prick planned attacks on Assad. e. Fails to see ISIS as a military problem and thinks it is a manageable crime wave. And fails to call the Islamic threat for what it is. Islamic terrorism is not even listed as a national threat in the Homeland Defense protocol. 3. He supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt who was supporting Hamas, a jihadist Islamist movement, against a secularist state. In fact, he has gone against secularist regimes in the region in favor of Islamist groups or movements. He has been morally vague in favor of Israel, another secular regime. And everywhere he has done so he has created a vacuum for Islamists to fill. However, he has left Iran, an Islamist theocracy untouched and failed to support the secularists marching in the streets. 4. He announced to the world that his administration had no strategy for the problem, much less a long-term strategy for the region. He seriously hurt what credibility he had. The latest poll found that just 32 percent of voters approve of his handling of foreign affairs, which is a new low for the president. But I have question. Whatever happened to going to the UN and the Security Council? Whatever happened to not doing anything unless approved by the UN? Or Congress? Looking at the contradictions in this speech we can see how his foreign policy is always subservient to domestic politics, i.e. elections. He wants to have it both ways: to take a jab at Bush and take credit for this moment of success. We leave Iraq with a representative government that was elected by its people. How in the world did that happen if it wasnt because of Bushs decision (backed by both parties) to take Saddam out??? One can see he doesnt even feel what he means and is just reading what was written for the teleprompter. We are building a new partnerships between our nations (the U.S. and Iraq) and then leaves them hanging. He must count on knowing that a majority or a great number of Americans do not remember these things. But the rest of the world does, especially world leaders. And we are ending a war not with a final battle but with a march toward home. This is an extraordinary achievement!!!! This is an extraordinary achievement he opposed it since day one!!!!! Unless he is talking about his retreat. https://youtube/watch?v=MKSb2ukQxvY
Posted on: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 15:10:27 +0000