But they want a president who will make ISIS afraid of us:
President Obama has seemed increasingly ill-suited to the recent shift in the public’s mood. He suggested at a press conference in Turkey that all his critics offer in the fight against ISIS is tough talk. What he seems to be missing is the majority of Americans who want not only tougher talk but tougher actions to follow. Instead, President Obama keeps offering a measured, slow-and-steady approach that many military experts and even supporters of his administration say is failing and insufficient.
It’s not just the President’s actions that don’t suit the current mood, it’s also his bloodless tone. It was noted by many observers that the only time he seemed truly upset when speaking about the bloodbath in Paris was when discussing Republicans. That’s a fight the President’s emotions seem to be engaged in, the one with ISIS terrorists is one he has been downplaying from the beginning.
Recall that two years ago the President was referring to ISIS as the JV team. And in a major address on ISIS last September he suggested ISIS was only an imminent threat to the region. More recently he claimed that threat was contained. The President always seems to be a day late and a dollar short when it comes to dealing with ISIS.
Going to have to wait at least a year for that, barring some Democrats in the Senate growing some testicles.
And then there’s this: Trumps plan may be dumb, but Obama’s laid-back do-nothing plan is even dumber. The most surprising thing about that one is the source.
This is related (Rudy G in yesterday’s WSJ): Call Islamic Terrorism by Its Name:
I had a different view of using the term Mafia. It reflected the truth. The Mafia existed, and denying what people oppressed by those criminals knew to be true only gave the Mafia more power.
This is irritating to me though (Jim uses it all the time) (emphasis mine):
Yes, it is essential to emphasize to the public the distinction between Islam and Islamic terrorists. That education has been in progress in the U.S. at least since 9/11. I recall that during my last press briefing on that horrific day, I urged New Yorkers not use the barbaric attacks to attach group blame—for doing so would mirror the sort of thinking that inspired the terrorists.
Sorry Rudy, that’s just wrong. The “thinking” that inspires these people has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with how muslims are viewed by non-muslims. It has to do with how certain muslims view THE WORLD. Period. Had the entire planet joined a giant group Coca-cola commercial focused on loving all our fellow humans who identify as muslim in 2000, 9/11 WOULD STILL HAVE OCCURRED. The San Bernadino killers were not inspired by discrimination against muslims. They were inspired by a viewpoint of Islamic teaching that has two distinct characteristics:
1) Islam is the only true religion.
2) If you die in so-called jihad, you will be rewarded after death.
So-called “tolerance” is just not part of it. One can argue “we should be tolerant; maybe individuals who are disposed to commit acts of terror will become less likely to do so by virtue of osmosis” if you want (personally I think that’s idiotic), but to argue that intolerance is any aspect of motivation for these acts is wrong.
The San Bernadino killers were not inspired by discrimination against muslims. They were inspired by a viewpoint of Islamic teaching…
Anti-muslim discrimination makes that teaching more credible and persuasive. Extremists tell potential followers that they and their religion are despised in the West, and that Muslims’ only hope lies in winning a violent final confrontation between Islam and the West. Conveniently for them, there is no shortage of Western voices arguing that the West’s only hope is winning such a confrontation.
Muslims’ only hope lies in winning a violent final confrontation between Islam and the West.
What exactly is the “hope” you are referring to? Are you suggesting the message is “the non-islam world hates you, your only hope for not being hated is to destroy those who hate you in violent jihad”??
That’s a display of stupidity that’s impressive even for you.
“Anti-muslim discrimination makes that teaching more credible and persuasive.”
So Christians should start engaging in violence when they are offended by Democrats? Lol, no and we wouldn’t accept that of any other group. You want to make a special exception for Muslims and blame anything but their own beliefs for their actions as a defense mechanism to avoid reality.
“Extremists tell potential followers that they and their religion are despised in the West”
They tell people all kinds of things true or untrue. Your views on Islam mean nothing to them. You think a group of people who think ISIS are Jewish or CIA are going to suddenly go to rationally evaluate the beliefs of Americans?
Don’t speak of the devil Jim least you attract his attention.
ISIS and jihad are the new global warming for Democrats. Just like too much/little or just the right amount of rain/snow/sunshine are all used as evidence of impending climate apocalypse, Democrats say everything is just what ISIS wants. And its ridiculous because most of the Democrats I have spoken to, know nothing about various Islamic militant groups, Islamic beliefs, or even the history of Islam.
Jim, blaming non-Muslims for ISIS and jihad is just what ISIS wants. See how easy it is? It is possible to identify what ISIS wants but you have to use rational thought and not just say that anything Democrats don’t like is helping ISIS. The problem here is that you place an outsized emphasis on the West and remove agency from people who engage in jihad. Blaming the USA is just a crappy defense mechanism to avoid the reality of what motivates groups like ISIS.
Here is a perfect example of how stupid this thinking from Democrats is. http://www.vox.com/2015/12/6/9857270/obama-speech-address-transcript-san-bernardino-isis
We should not be drawn once more into a long and costly ground war in Iraq or Syria. That’s what groups like ISIL want. They know they can’t defeat us on the battlefield.
We can’t use the military because ISIS will be defeated and that is just what they want.
Frustrated? Yes.
Angry? Yes.
Afraid of Muslims? No.
Afraid of what this President is doing to the Constitution & America? Yes.
Talk is the only thing in Obama’s toolbox — naturally, to him everything looks like a lecture opportunity.
And yet the Diplomat in chief sucks at diplomacy because diplomacy is more than just running your mouth. Everyone nods their head when Obama says ISIS must be ideologically defeated but then no one asks about our ideological war against them. There is an ideological war being waged by this administration against the USA though and should we be surprised when so many Democrat views are the same as ISIS?