Monday, January 4, 2010

Obama At A Cross Roads

President Obama's policy on terrorism is teetering on the precipice of ridiculous. His best effort at concocting a kinder and gentler method for dealing with a rabid dog called Al-Qaeda has taken major hits over the past several months. The naivete that led to declaring, that the war on terror was over, or at least re-named,   before this last terrorist attack on Christmas day, has been called out and repudiated by the American people, and in so many words, by Obama himself. His last several public statements have included a walk back from the man caused disaster language, and into a more credible phrasing of the problem at hand. The problem is, does the actions of his administration constitute a walk back, or is he simply trying to present a tough guy tongue, with a limp wrist fist?

Apparently two of the top Al-Qaeda operatives in Yemen, were former Gitmo detainees, released during the Bush administration. With this revelation the Obama administration doesn't seem to be re-thinking sending back more to that hot spot. His administration is signaling that the transfer will continue  without a hitch. Is he trying to make good on a campaign promise, and initiative signed his first day in office, without regard for the protection of the American people? The Yemeni Government cannot and will not keep these detainees detained. Every terrorist imprisoned for the Cole bombing has either been released or escaped from Yemeni custody. What does he think these detainees do when repatriated to their home country and leave government custody? Sign up for unemployment, or flip burgers at a fast food joint? Yemen is not America. They do only what they know to do. They return to the battlefield of jihad, where they know the Saudi and Egyptian rich, will continue to support their efforts at damaging the west. They are paid mercenaries with a religious cause, and that is the most dangerous of all. 

The administration's sycophants continue their Sunday show rhetoric, declaring Gitmo is the biggest recruiting tool Al-Qaeda has. Excuse me, but the best recruiting tool for Jihad is effective and successful acts of terror. The Fort Hood attack along with the recent Christmas day attack will bring in far more recruits in a week than Guantanamo has in eight years. Especially when you consider that we've just closed our embassy in Yemen, and terrorism is the number one topic in the land. We can only fairly say that, even though the terrorist failed to bring down the Delta airliner, Al-Qaeda has won the last several battles in this war, and has this administration rocking back on its heels. That hand of kindness has been slapped back in their face, and the messiah's insistence that his brown face and outreach to the Arab world, would cool the hatred is about as naive and narcissistic as assuming that one chosen man can tame a rabid dog. There is no reasoning with them. There is no understanding that will cool their hatred. There is no arbiter of fairness that will quiet their rage.

Another confusing policy, that not only seems unwise, but hypocritical is the insistence to try the latest terrorist in federal court with full constitutional rights, instead of naming him an enemy combatant and putting him through a military tribunal, where interrogations are all the rage. The assistant for home land security  intimated on The Sunday Shows that they would extract information from the pantie bomber by entering into some sort of plea agreement, now that he's lawyered up and not talking. Is that really the way to deal with ruthless killers?

Drone attacks have increased greatly during the Obama administration, which I applaud. But, isn't it a bit hypocritical to fire upon, and toast, suspected terrorists, and I stress the word suspected, while at the same time we're giving constitutional rights and defense attorneys to those caught in the very act of terrorism. How does that reflect well upon our values as a society? shouldn't the same safe guards that justify a high altitude drone attack be used on a captured Al-Qaeda operative, including enhanced interrogations. So, are we saying it's fine and dandy to blow them to dust particles from on high, without due process, but a little head dunking is not consistent with our values?

The American people are watching. There's a renewed uneasiness in the land. Is this president up to the challenge? Can we trust that his actions will catch up with his new found verbiage? George W. Bush shunned world wide opinion to keep his constitutional oath to protect the American people. Can this president forgo the coveted adoration from the outside world, and rebellion of his liberal base to do the same. I for one, as a skeptic, am praying I'm wrong. 
Read: Sarah Weighs In On Terror My new blog...Con-Men-4-Palin



  1. When did Obama declare the war on terrorism over? Could you provide a quote of him stating that? No. You. Can't.

    You and your fellow travelers are a bigger threat to this country than the corporatists, our corrupt national and state governments, and the Islamic terrorists put together. You're on a permanent vacation from reality. The above comment couldn't be more apt!


  2. As far as I can tell the "attack" on Christmas was an attempt i.e. it failed. Obama is blamed for that attack because he hired Napolitano. Let me put this in words you will understand. Blaming Obama for this attempted attack is like blaming the CEO of FORD for poor sales because a foreman at CHEVY hired his brother to work on the line. Apples and Oranges. You sir picked a bad day to stop sniffing glue.

  3. Nobody blamed Obama for the attack...What is unsettling his his approach to terrorism and his insistence to treat the terrorists like they deserve and are entitled to constitutional rights

  4. Your entire intro to your above piece implies that Obama's "limp wrist fist" is a danger to America and subsequently invites more attacks; the logic chain from there to direct blame is short and sweet. While we're at it do you have ANY proof,(studies etc.) that Guantanamo has caused/will cause less terrorism than the attempted attack in Detroit? Your logic is questionable at best that a successful terrorist attack will recruit more terrorists than a failed Guantanamo. Failure in a terrorist attack is not a deterrent, no more so than the death penalty in Victorian England. Crime and Terrorism will with us until the root causes are treated. As I see it the only way to end terrorism and war is a complete global homogenization of culture. Either that or when China has had enough squabbling, and decides to quit selling the extremely important rare earth metals needed in nearly all modern products from medicine to computers. (Or mobilizes her 20 million young men who lack brides in China)
    Just one more thing, this is not a "war on Terror"; it is a police action much like Viet Nam, there has been no formal declaration of war.

  5. P.S. Thank you for taking the time to reply.

  6. You're welcome. But, your assumption that Gitmo is a failed policy is flawed. Doesn't the fact that every detainee that has remained in Gitmo, has by definition not engaged in any terror since their imprisonment. Just because the rest of the world doesn't agree with our Gitmo policy, doesn't necessarily translate into a failure. One other thing, of all the terrorist attempts since 9/11 one third of those have been tried in 2009. To me that does show that the terrorists sense weakness and one of those weaknesses is this administrations determination to close Gitmo,Along with trying KSM in New York federal court, and giving miranda rights to terrorists. I also fault the Bush administration for releasing back to Yemen. He is anarticle about over on third of all terrorist plots have transpired in 2009...

  7. One last thing. Most Americans do believe this is a war and should be engaged as one. I don't believe there is any way to appease Islamic Terrorism. Their perverted form of justice is to destroy all who don't agree with their world view, and no amount of understanding or compromise will change that. I do enjoy the debate, and thank you for your comments...

  8. OK, the old I'm not crazy everyone else is argument.(you know how that goes) Gitmo is summer camp compared to a lvl 6 super max, and that is where they are headed. So how would the possibility of a life time spent in a super max embolden anyone? The Gitmo closing argument is a straw man. As to Miranda rights for terrorists yes and no. If they are caught in the US then yes of course Mirandize. If they are captured in a war zone, no. "When in Rome do as the Romans, when elsewhere do as they do elsewhere".

    As to "Most Americans" believing this is a war, and should be engaged as one, yes very much like a war but one not authorized by Congress so by definition it is not a War. You also have to remember that most Americans believe in Creationism and that Iraq was behind 9/11. That said I do not believe that there is a way to appease Islamic Terrorists either, our navy was formed to combat the Barbary pirates in 1804-5. Your comment about their "perverted form of Justice" needs a mirror, western Christianity has long striven for the same goal but interject the name Jesus in place of Allah. I agree that they need to be combated but, using military force is the least effective method,(though most favored by the US). Raising people out of ignorance and poverty works better and faster. It took 20 years to beat the Tamil Tigers militarily, how long to take on a global network?

    Thank you again, debate is good thing (honest debate without all of the shouting).

  9. Excuse me but Christianity doesn't demand adherence or death by execution. The problem I have with your analysis is that you're blaming America and its values for the terrorists rage and hatred. As far as the supermax argument goes, why would you want to transfer them here, when Gitmo is a state of the art facility. Obama's decision is to close Gitmo so they're releasing many of these guys back to their home countries. Obama has released 7 or 8 back to Yemen in the last couple months.... We know what happened when Bush did that. Obama's goal is a political decision, not a national security decision. Thank goodness, he has decided not to send any more back to Yemen for the time being...I'm sure that decision is based on the political realities that he's facing now...About a declared war, how do you declare war on a world wide jihad. They are not a country, and the supreme court has ruled they can be treated as enemy combatants, where ever they're caught. They do not deserve constitutional rights, and why is it ok to attack them from drones without due process, but military tribunals are not warranted when they'recaught red handed...

  10. Have you forgotten the Crusades? Witch trials? The pogroms of Europe? Please don't forget Pope Pious XII who's complacency aided Hitler's Holocaust.
    I am not blaming Americas values (which seem a bit low at the moment though), America's tendencies to kill anything that moves maybe. Our values (at least the ones the country was founded on excluding the slavery bit) are pretty good; there are notable exceptions such as rampant greed and the anti intellectualism but those are more modern. It has to be said that there have been many things about how this war has been fought that could insight hatred,abu ghraib, drones, and Xe's mercenaries (they are paid to fight, they are mercenaries).
    How about Gitmo? As far as I know there is nothing that was built in 1898 that is State of the Art today. No matter what you do the foundation is old. I am pressing for a prison built in Death Valley,CA. No way in, no way out, newly built and completely modern. They are terrorists not Supermen after all. Hell you wouldn't even need walls let'em try to escape, they wouldn't make 10 miles on foot before they died. Bringing the terrorists here could go a long way to mending feelings over abu ghraib, and trying those caught on American in court would prove our commitment to rule of law and our constitution.
    How do you declare war on a world wide jihad? Well how about declaring war on the countries that sponsor and support terrorism? We have essentially done that already why not go the full nine yards? Said countries would either purge or pay, makes sense to me.
    America stands for and is a land of law. These laws need to upheld or we as a nation dim.

  11. You're sounding more conservative all the time...And all those atrocities you mentioned were perversions of the Christian dogma... I know you're going to say that Islamic terrorism is also a perversion of Islamic dogma, but the Qaran does mention killing all the infidels, and Jesus, whatever you think of him, talked about loving your enemies and those that despise and persecute you. And one other thing, How do you reconcile killing terrorist from the air with drone attacks, without due process, and giving them constitutional rights when caught in the act. And, aren't those drone attacks a military response? You can't have it both ways. Use the military on one hand, and then say military tribunals are off limits on the other...we need a consistent policy...I enjoy the debate though...

  12. Killing terrorists from drones is a bad idea. Why? Not because of due process but because using drones is a show of weakness in the Afghans eyes. They see it as "we kill a few of them, and look at the cowards, they need to use drones because they are afraid of dieing".
    The Christianity that you mention is a very new Christianity. Most of Christendom has adhered more closely with the Old Testament until the 20th Century, and they take the "Thou shall have no other Gods" bit rather seriously, and was punishable by death. So not not really a perversion but a Fundamental "old school" approach.
    As for giving them Constitutional Rights when caught in the act, I only mention that when they are caught red handed on OUR soil, not in a battlefield situation. Rule of law and the Constitution is much more important in the long run than this war. (yes I too use the term war, but I am a stickler for semantics)
    As for sounding more and more conservative you say conservative I say Idealist. America is and has been more than just a country; it is an idea, something to strive for. Freedom is a good thing, but some are just not ready for it. Remember it's not just the yellow lines in the road that keep us alive, you have to want to as well.

  13. KSM was caught on the battlefield, and your guy is still giving him a federal trial with all the amenities...

  14. p.s. The Christianity I mentioned has been around since Jesus walked the earth, over two thousand years ago....So what you've mentioned is a perversion. The doctrine is sound and peaceful, not so with Islam.

  15. KSM yeah, that I don't understand. A Nuremberg style trial would be better. I hate to sound redundant but I said only IF they where caught on US soil should they be tried in a US court. We wasn't so he shouldn't,,,.
    Yes Christianity has been around since then, but. Although the New Testament was written post death often up to 400 years after, the resurrection itself was written penticostos (50 years later). What we think of as Christianity truly is modern and nearly all post Trent (Counsel of Trent 1510). The old Testament was a Jewish doctrine cum "Christian" and more strictly followed until after Spain's fall from world dominance. Until then the Ten Commandments where to be followed and with each a death penalty was subscribed. That does not mean that everyone followed these to the letter,(they were often hand picked as needed),but when they were there is Biblical law to point at. Christianity is a Peaceful religion,(as it evolved from underground cult to a world wide and modern entity), unless you make an enemy, are too dark, etc,,, and then the Old Testament God is dusted off and let loose. This is not a perversion it is people hand picking Biblical law to suit their purpose. BTW the entire Old Testament is a perversion of Talmudic law. The Ten Commandments were Jewish and specific; Thou shall not kill,,,a Jew. (a whole new argument I am sure), we Christians just co-opted them and dropped the Jew in favour of a blanket statement i.e. don't kill anyone.

    Yes Islam is a religion of peace, (in the sense that they are "peaceful" to other Muslims, but God forbid you believe something else. Oh, and believe that you follow the Sons of Mohamed not his Chief Imams, OR the other way around).

  16. For taking such a tough decision concerning about the lives of innocent people any body even other then Mr. President will feel the tension and complication of standing near by a cross road.
    cheap last minute holidays

  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.