World politics« Previous Entries Next Entries »
While it may feel good to say that the answer to ISIS and similar fanatical terrorist groups is just ignoring them, or trying to keep them preoccupied, it is hardly an effective plan. Perhaps if President Obama and his Administration could spend as much energy and focus on restricting the territorial growth of ISIS, and on encouraging real action against Boko Haram as opposed to hashtags slogans, then there could be time and opportunity to address the other factors they are promoting.
In fact, there is essentially only one nation that has better relations with the US via the Obama Administration than in 2008 when the US was actively involved in 2 internationally and domestically unpopular wars. That nation is Cuba, and it only gained improvement mere weeks ago.
Worse yet, when the American public is treated as little more than a lab rat, to confirm the failure of “social justice” experiments in Europe, the result is not just a temporary loss in tax revenue but the long-term loss of quality of life for every citizen.
Who benefits from our new diplomatic relations with Cuba? Raul Castro and the powerbase of that regime. That’s it. That is not enough for me, and I don’t think it is enough for most Americans either.
Why the US would pursue such a divergent path, beyond the political partisan benefit, is unclear. What is clear is the lesson that an immigration policy that is not well thought out will result in a burden to the system that will outlast and outweigh the political benefit in the long-term.
“At this moment, no country has been ask to put boots on the ground…” – Secretary Kerry. “…airstrikes alone, can backfire on us and actually strengthen our foes’ credibility.” – Retired Marine Gen. Mattis. Khorasan Group “…is focused on trying to build bombs capable of being sneaked onto airliners…” Bob Orr. And finally “”…the Obama Administration would like us to do the right thing in as chaotic and confused a way as possible.” – Jon Stewart
So the plan is to arm Syrian anti-Assad rebels to fight another group of anti-Assad rebels that were previously armed by the US. And without any nation’s ground troops present, it essentially relies on the honor code that this next batch of armed rebels won’t turn around and be a threat next. How well has that plan worked so far?
If Middle East nations are only willing to provide lip service to the US-led coalition, and the most ardent allies of America are not willing to have troops put a foot on the ground, how is ISIS supposed to be thwarted?
Definitely not a speech to make terrorists around the world any more concerned than they were even a day ago. But America has a big stick, and we may or may not actually use it. So ISIS better be scared.
With the advent of the current growing crisis in Iraq, the past several years of the Obama Administration’s international policy agenda has be put into question. Thus whatever the legacy will be of the Obama presidency, without swift action to enact a coherent international policy – especially in the Middle East – that legacy will surely rank akin to that of President Jimmy Carter.« Previous Entries Next Entries »