Posted on 09/05/2014 4:33:41 PM PDT by Kaslin
resident Obama, in the past, has demonstrated a way with written words, and he's done so again, this time in a joint op-ed with UK Prime Minister David Cameron for the London Times published on the eve of this week's NATO meeting in Wales. Promising that "we will not be cowed" by ISIS, the Islamist group that has beheaded two American journalists, the president and prime minister declared: "Those who want to adopt an isolationist approach misunderstand the nature of security in the 21st century. Developments in other parts of the world, particularly in Iraq and Syria, threaten our security at home."
But the question is whether Obama has the will to live up to those words --even on his own, if our allies, including his co-author, will not join us. But to do so, the president would have to possess characteristics he's shown he lacks over the past five and a half years: an interest in and understanding of foreign policy, the humility to know what he doesn't know and the leadership to forgo partisanship in the national interest.
The crisis that ISIS poses is different from the one we faced with al-Qaida and most of the other Islamists in the war on terror. ISIS now controls territory and has sophisticated weapons, and if it holds the territory it has captured, it will become, de facto, what it likes to call itself: the Islamic State. Its soldiers wear uniforms and fight under a flag. They are more than terrorists; they are an army. ISIS has an ideology that it seeks to impose throughout the Middle East and ultimately beyond that region, as far as its resources and ability to recruit soldiers will allow. It is, according to published reports, already making inroads on the Indian subcontinent.
ISIS has killed Americans, but it has yet to launch an attack on our soil. Does anyone doubt it will try? After 9/11, does anyone believe it might not succeed? The group has declared war on America. But does Obama have the guts to go to war against ISIS?
There is much he can do militarily without a formal declaration of war, which requires Congress to act and would elevate ISIS. (ISIS is a threat, but it isn't Imperial Japan or Nazi Germany.) But he should have Congress' backing for sustained military action, as President Bush did when he sent troops into Iraq in 2003.
Whatever one thinks of whether it made the right decision, Congress did authorize the president to use force in Iraq in 2002 and did so with bipartisan support. Yet it is hard to imagine Obama risking the ire of some in his own party, much less making the necessary overtures to Republicans to do something similar against ISIS. I hope I am wrong.
Obama has taken some steps against ISIS, namely bombing strikes in Iraq. But he must do more. It is not enough to try to contain ISIS. It is not enough -- though it is a necessary step -- to arm and train others to fight ISIS. It surely is not the right thing to do to give Iran a nuclear deal in the hopes that Iran will do something to stop ISIS.
Perhaps ISIS will be a wake-up call for this president. Perhaps he will do the right thing. He should be pressing our allies as hard as he can to join the fight. But he has wasted so much capital that it makes the task harder than it should be.
He came into office with the highest goodwill and expectations of our European allies. For goodness' sake, the man won the Nobel Peace Prize barely nine months into office (not that the list of past dubious winners inspires much confidence in the judgment of the Norwegian Nobel Committee). It will take hard work to round up a coalition of the willing. Does Obama have it in him to even try? Will he make his case to Congress and the American people? He needs both if he is to succeed.
Obama is writing and saying some of the right things. Now let's see what he will actually do.
Crickets...
Win? Obama only wants to make them manageable. He doesn’t want to win
Possibly, if he wasn’t on their side. It’s like we had an American version of Vidkun Quisling in the White House during the 1930’s and 40’s.
“resident Obama”
I don’t know if that was intentional, but it’s accurate.
The only way he/we can prevail is if he steps back and totally lets our military do their thing , on their own terms , without his attempts to direct them or limit them in any way . If he places zero ROEs upon them , if he orders them to “ attack these people and bring us total victory “ ; They will .
If Obama wishes to have anything of a legacy other than an inept coward , he had better do exactly this .
only if they agree to his proposal for a winner take all round of golf with their leader . . .
Obama can’t even win the battle in his own brain.
He caved to the followers of Islam decades ago. Today he is essentially a devote to ISIS/ISIL by default.
His limited bombings and supply drops are meant to pacify those demanding action. He knows these measures won’t stop ISIS/ISIL, and yet he’ll never admit to it until it has won all that it wants to.
It will have been Bush’s fault.
It’s a trick question ... right? Our Muslim president, a Muslim advisor/controller, a Muslim CIA director, and a horde of Progressive “hate America” acolytes ... no chance.
Obama can't win a fight against a clam.
What’s inferesting is keeping it from the air is what Billary Clinton did too.
To win, one has to be in the game.
The answer is yes, but that is the wrong question. Does he WANT to win the fight against ISIS? That is the real question, and I am not convinced the answer is yes.
NO!
Obama is conflicted about ordering infidel white Christian pilots to bomb dark skinned barbaric Muslim jihadists.
Don’t bother Obama with problems - he’s working on his bucket list.
Depends on what time Tee time is.
Obummer will do nothing that is not in his own self interest.
The only ones Obama wins battles against are Republicans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.