Are we about to exceed our quota of denial about how safe we are, thanks to America’s newest terror attack? Barack Obama’s statement that he confronts the threat of terrorism every morning1 isn’t quite the same as proving he did something about it. We can’t fault him for trying to deflect some of our worry away from the bureaucrats he charges with protecting us, but he doesn’t deserve any credit for limiting our options by shielding the religion chiefly responsible for terror.
National Security and Foreign Affairs
No, the world does not want to live in peace and harmony. That’s not how it works. People, communities, and nations are all scrabbling for whatever they can get. Some are responsible about it. Some are not. We just experienced the consequences of tolerating those who aren’t. Once the spurious arguments over gun control are out of the way, Americans are going to get comfortable blaming what happened in California on radicalization, a catchall that avoids the truth: this is simply another take on radical Muslim public policy we have seen elsewhere, transplanted to America.
Humanity should not have been shocked by the attacks in Paris. There was nothing outrageous about what happened, even though the one-time leader of the free world chose to cast it that way.1 When America’s leadership decided long ago to publicly deny the direction Islam was so obviously taking, what did that portend for the civilized world?
The wait is finally over. Beginning today, the world community can see how Iran intends to honor the deal it cut with the West. Hopefully, those who negotiated the terms appreciate the humor in the news of Iran’s new ICBM test and North Korea’s laughable request for a peace treaty.1 Kim Jong-un may be crazy, but he’s paying attention.
Too many on Capitol Hill are still afraid to admit what is so horribly wrong with John Kerry’s Iran deal. The forced urgency is suspicious enough, considering that we have worried about Iran’s nuclear ambitions for decades, a lot longer than the 10-year compliance window being offered. The same sanctions are already in place that Obama plans to use if Iran violates the agreement.
When we point fingers at Obama’s failure to come up with a strategy to deal with ISIS we shouldn’t be thinking about the best tactics for killing radicals. Killing radicals is easy. We have already proved that. The real problem and one we will never have a foolproof strategy for is how to kill their beliefs.
When the allied coalition landed in Normandy on D-Day the casualties were appalling, but the West had made a decision. Germany had to be stopped. Violent aggression was intolerable and we ended it. Can we say the same thing about Muslims in the Middle East, North Africa, and elsewhere? Do they have the courage to die by the thousands to put an end to Islamic aggression that threatens the world, or do they prefer to play games that have a very different payoff and will never put a stop to the bloodshed?
It is easy to blame Obama’s deplorably bad leadership for the global deterioration of U.S. foreign policy, but the truth is he is only partially responsible for the mess we are in. That doesn’t mean he hasn’t made long-standing threats worse. His dangerous, single-minded determination to change America’s role from the leader in world affairs to a community member has hurt us.