This is indeed scary. I love this president, but Islam is not a "religion of peace", they aim for the total annihilation of non-Muslims, and hate America and want to destroy us.
Never forget 9-11!
The story of the woman who spoke Arabic and was able to hear the Imam and the other men is especially chilling.
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'nice doggy' until you can find a rock." -- Will Rogers
Only a fool tells his enemy he want to kill him.
A) they cannot defeat us; if we the People truly thought Islam was at war with us, BUFFs would soon thereafter turn their wahhabi dens into glass skating rinks. Just look at our history - in the Spanish-American war, we thought the Maine was sabotaged by the Spanish; the public was all for war. Ditto Pearl Harbor - sucker punch broke the honor code, and overnight a country that was strongly isolationist started lining up at the recruiting booths. Moral of this truth: if we the People comprehensively and in practical terms completely decide that "they're all enemies", there will be nothing to save them - murderous vermin and victims-formerly-filling-Saddamite-Mass-Graves alike;
B) If (A) above were to happen, innocents - including the silent portion of the PROP who truly want to reform their canon - would die. IOW, no chance for reformation, no chance for PROP to grow up, just lots of dead bodies;
C) Ergo, the TROP formulation can be viewed not as naivete on our part, but an ironic way of warning the timid among our enemies that if they don't start acting like a real TROP, they will be eradicated. Sort of "I call you TROP even though you're not, but you really, really oughta consider living up to this characterization. Or Else..."
The formulation rides to our sense of fair play and honor, as well as giving a chance to the possibility of an actual reformation (this, btw, is what I think the progress in Iraq with elections, Lebanon, calls for election in Egypt, Libya giving up the WMD, etc., represents -- iow, it's working) within islam. It also - for the time being, at least - prevents the power of true democracy from manifesting itself in a popular rage within our citizenry (just think about how the very same libs shortly after 9-11 were calling for blood... and multiply that by 100) from overcoming moderation and sending us into "total war" mode.
Controversial points for and against the above; one side can say that such policy is a dalliance that only means more Americans die for not getting this done ruthlessly and quickly. Another side (the correct one, imho) sees that mass death from total war is not "yet" needed - A Clausewitzian judgement, indeed, but with a twist on his famous "War is the conduct of policy by another means"... simply replace "conduct" with "failure" above.