Thursday, September 4, 2014

Mr. Obama, Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way

One week after publicly announcing that the United States did not yet have a strategy to deal with ISIS, President Barack Obama has indicated that the current goal of the US effort in Iraq is to diminish the extremist group to "a manageable problem." His comments, once more,instead of reassuring America and the world, raise more questions about whether the President has a clear and useful vision for eliminating the threat of ISIS and other jihadists. Before saying that his goal is to make ISIS "manageable," he had said the United States planned to "destroy" ISIS. But that has apparently changed, morphing into : "We know that if we are joined by the international community, we can continue to shrink ISIL's sphere of influence, its effectiveness, its financing, its military capabilities to the point where it is a manageable problem," Obama said during a speech Wednesday in Estonia, as reported by The Wall Street Journal. Obama also said in the speech that the administration's objective is to "degrade and destroy" ISIS in Iraq, and that the US has already been "moving effectively" to achieve that goal, The Hill reported. The remarks have created agitation among critics who argue that the comments are contradictory. Illinois GOP Representative Adam Kinzinger told "Fox and Friends" Wednesday that the President needed to decide whether the United States was going to "contain or crush" ISIS."That's the big question. Are we going to contain ISIS, or are we going to crush ISIS? And, the President has not answered that." Conservative radio show host Laura Ingraham also criticized Obama, saying his comments are nonsensical :"When you hear the President talk about destroy and degrade [ISIS], that makes sense. When you hear the President talking about managing the problem, that doesn't make sense," Ingraham said on "Fox and Friends," according to Politico. "I mean, we manage all sorts of problems in our daily lives, this is not a manageable problem, this is a force of evil." ~~~~~ The position of Pentagon leader Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel hasn't been clear, either. On August 21, at a press conference with General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Hagel said : "ISIS is beyond "just a terrorist group" and poses a greater threat than al-Qaida. This is beyond anything that we've seen....ISIS is as sophisticated and well-funded as any group that we have seen. They marry ideology, a sophistication of strategic and tactical military prowess. They are tremendously well-funded. So we must prepare for everything. And the only way you do that is that you take a cold, steely, hard look at it ... and get ready." General Dempsey said it was possible to "contain" ISIS, but "not in perpetuity....This is an organization that has an apocalyptic, end-of-days strategic vision and which will eventually have to be defeated." Hardly a vote for Obama's current "manageable" ploy. But, Hagel tried to fall into line this week, when Pentagon press secretary Rear Admiral John Kirby said that Obama's statements are consistent with one another : "It's actually both. And I know that sounds a little bit strange to hear." But, Kirby said the US can degrade, disrupt, and destroy ISIS "targets" in Iraq but cannot destroy ISIS as an organization. "The only way you're going to destroy an organization like this is by defeating their ideology," he said. "You can bomb them every day, and you're not going to get rid of the ideology that allows them to fester and to continue to get resources and to grow, to train and to equip. There's got to be a broader-based strategy, and we're working on that right now," That last phrase - working on that right now - is consistent, showing that the strategy has not been finalized. ~~~~~ And there is still the fundamenral criticism of Obama's Iraq, and al-Qaida / ISIS, policy -- that he let al-Qaida bounce back in Iraq because he pulled out US troops in 2011, thus setting the stage for the development of ISIS, a criticism most recently voiced by former Ambassador to Iraq Paul Bremer. The United States had defeated al-Qaida due to the 2007 surge, a fact that "President Obama admitted himself when he came into office," Bremer told Fox News. "We beat al-Qaida in Iraq under the surge directed by General Petraeus, and, obviously, authorized by President Bush," Bremer said Thursday. "The problem in Iraq is what has happened in the last two to three years, particularly after we pulled out the troops in 2011, which was a big mistake." By retreating from Iraq, "the vacuum allowed al-Qaida to regain strength, ultimately spawning ISIS, which now poses a threat to Middle Eastern countries....The West Arab countries would be willing to join with the United States to defeat ISIS, but they wanted to see American leadership in the effort." A lot of the Arabs in the Middle East have substantial military capabilities. They could be engaged to help fight ISIL. But, they won't do it unless they are persuaded America is prepared to take the lead," he said. "Saudi Arabia has a quarter-million men under arms. They have an advanced American-supplied air force. There's a lot that other countries in the region could be doing to help, but they won't do it unless they see a clear American commitment." ~~~~~ What we have is a US President who refuses to full-steam commit American resources and military forces into eliminating ISIS, even though the entire world is urging him to take up the challenge. A "manageable" ISIS is a very weak "strategy," if that is what it is, to use to confront an aggressively apocalyptic military force determined to rule the Middle East and the western world. Does Obama hesitate because he refuses to admit that the George Bush strategy worked and because it would nullify his sophomoric "no boots on the ground" position. Or is he simply incapable of making military decisions -- he has not made a single one that goes beyond airstrikes since becoming President. The US has had military aircraft, naval carriers and other ships and advisors in and near Iraq for several months, all capable of intelligence gathering. Regional allies have certainly added to this. If Obama really wanted to announce a strategy to destroy ISIS, he has had more than enough time to do it. It is long past time to act. ~~~~~ So, dear readers, what should the US strategy be? A friend who's a Middle East expert talked to me recently about the future for Iraq. His take is that what's going to happen to the Iraqi people is going to happen, and it is too late to stop events that will be painful to watch unfold. But, he said, now we must make sure that the spillover doesn't continue into Syria, Turkey, Israel, France, Italy -- the list keeps expanding outwardly because of US inaction. If eliminating ISIS and al-Qaida and their affiliates means destroying much of Syria and Iraq, that is the price those countries and the world must pay to be free of terrorism. The US will lead in rebuilding them and putting the Middle East on its economic and political feet, just as we did in Europe after WWII via the Marshall Plan. Even the oil fields, if rendered inoperable now, can be re-drilled and made operable later. But it has to be done now. Innocent people will die, but not as many if we turn and run. My friend addressed the tactical strategy and I took away the sense that the US knows where ISIS is -- its various headquarters and camps, its escape routes. It seems to me that it's possible to destroy ISIS, but that every day Obama dithers makes the job harder and more painful for the Iraqi and Syrian people. However, the pain would be much less than that of falling into the hands of the murderous, marauding beheaders who control ISIS. They need to be wiped out. And the way to do that seems to be so clear - the extinction of their army and leadership. There is such an urgency to act that any reaction that it is a religious war against Islam should be dealt with while the attack continues. If Obama is unable or unwilling to act, it is now up to Vice President Biden, the Joint Chiefs and Congress to force his hand. We have tried everything rlse with this President. It is now time, with Thomas Paine, to say, Mr. Obama, "Lead, follow, or get out of the way."

12 comments:

  1. As De Oppressor Liber explained yesterday to Casey Pops posting there is a small difference between ISIL that Obama likes to call them and ISIS. A small difference but one that covers a huge amount of land mass. ISIL is so much larger and includes many more countries other than Iraq & Syria. Obama’s affection with the term ISIL is simple – it includes more countries, more land, more room for policy error.

    So if success on a very limited base would be achieved by Obama’s yet stated plan… the flash bulbs would be going nuts at the photo op in the Rose Garden. If his plan fails or is never articulated its then becomes DOD & State fault or no one’s fault because there was never a stated plan. And the same would go for any Coalition effort that the US was part of. Obama would love to see a large Coalition involved in the effort to wipe out ISIs/ISIL – all the more fall guys to point fingers at.

    I think Obama will but on his military leadership suit as soon as a coalition is up and running or he never will by hiding behind the Coalition. His reasoning to the public would be “too many spoons in the soup.”

    “Lead, Follow, or get out of the way?” I see Obama just meddling around determining which way the winds of opportunity (for him and his poll numbers) are blowing

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “One of the things the United States does well is building coalitions. What the U.S. knows is that if you don't have a coalition with you, you will have a coalition against you”
      Shimon Peres

      Delete
    2. What a great t-shirt that would make...

      Delete
    3. Shimon Peres always says so much with simple words that have long, extended meanings

      Delete
  2. The United States has to ask itself whom do we prefer in Damascus: Bashar al-Assad or ISIS? For in the near term, these are the only realistic options. Second, if ISIS is the main enemy, the principal enemy, the enemy with whom reconciliation is impossible, are we prepared to work not only with Assad, but his allies—Iran, Hezbollah, the PKK, and Vladimir Putin’s Russia, for the defeat of ISIS?

    The Kurdish PKK, whom we regard as terrorists, and military officers of Iran were apparently among the forces helping inflict the defeats on ISIS, along with the decisive use of U.S. air power. In short, a coalition is forming in Iraq that can provide the ground troops for the steady attrition of ISIS and recapture of the Sunni lands it has taken, while the U.S. strikes from the air.

    The confusion in Syria & Iraq is not in the ability to defeat ISIS once and for all … it is in what we will have to work with while rebuilding both nations after the defeat of ISIS. And what will be there is going to be a heavily tilted form of government that is strange to Western beliefs and is populated with those that today and yesterday were our sworn enemies – terrorist (of one sort or another) one and all

    ReplyDelete
  3. A possibility is haunting Europe—fear of the impact hundreds of European volunteers to the Syrian jihad might have on their home countries once they return. Perhaps nowhere is the potential danger of this Syrian blowback greater than in the Balkans. According to one estimate, Bosnia has provided more volunteers per capita for the Syrian jihad than any other country in Europe, and various reports suggest there are probably more than five hundred jihadis from southeastern Europe now in Syria.

    While the Muslims of southeastern Europe remain the world’s most moderate Islamic populations, an estimated five to ten percent has become indoctrinated in the more extreme forms of Islam typical of places such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt. This is not an accident—the rise and growth of militant Islamism in southeastern Europe is the result of long-term efforts by extremists to radicalize local populations. Over the past several decades, the militant Islamist movement in southeastern Europe has created a sophisticated infrastructure consisting of local safe havens in isolated villages and in mosques controlled by radical clergy, along with a wide array of electronic and print media propagating news from various jihad fronts, relaying orders from al-Qaeda leaders, and attempting to convert impressionable young people to join their cause. All of this is funded by generous Middle Eastern donors and supported by small groups of local extremists who have infiltrated influential political, religious, and social institutions.

    The so-called FREE WORLD really has no place to turn. Tightly knit coalitions of 15 to 20 western nations need to step forward with not a 6 month or “until Iraq & Syria are vanquished of ISIS” plan … But a 10 year strategy requiring almost sworn allegiance to in blood. PM David Cameron should maybe be the designated leader of this Coalition for the life span of the Coalition. Britain can elect a new PM. The world can’t exist with ISIS/ISIL –or for that matter any radicle Islamic, jihad terrorists.

    There are now friends US and THEM. There is nothing in-between. As President Bush said immediately after 9/11 …”Your with us or your against us”

    ReplyDelete
  4. Do you have a feeling that Barack - baby is missing your very obvious hint???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is not listening, he has never listened, he will never listen. he feels he is the annotated one. He believes all he has told us to be the truth because he spoke it.

      Is he going to suddenly start to head our words, or will he change, or will he resign - NEVER TO ALL!

      Delete
  5. We have the single largest disconnect between the people of the United States and the president ever. The most recent presidential approval poll number is very unkind to Obama. 38% of the people say that is doing –not an outstanding job- but somewhat acceptable. 58% say his performance is totally not acceptable. Folks if you walk down the street of a major city in America for an hour 2 out of 3 people you pass DISAGREE with Obama’s leadership capabilities. That is despicable at best.

    If we disagree with Obama so indisputably, how then can we be held hostage to waiting on “his” plan/policy to combat ISIS/ISIL? It is within the confines of the conduct of Foreign Affairs and keeping America safe that Obama gets his lowest approval numbers.

    He serves “WE the People” not vice versa. Southern Europe is in dire straight of suffering the extension of ISIS post Iraq/Syria – they need to be stopped long before it reaches their borders. But yet the free world is sitting and waiting for Obama to decide …WHAT?

    ReplyDelete
  6. 'Mr. Obama, lead, Follow, or get out of the Way" Casey Pops asks? My Choice would be the last ... "get out of the way" because he is what he is and he's not about to suddenly change.

    To expect Obama to walk out into the Rose Garden and suddenly start spouting words of praise for the United States, it's Constitution, it's people, it's value to the world as a leader not a follower, the good we have done over the past 2254 plus years, and mostly the good we have yet to do and can do for the world.

    NO, that Obama doesn't live at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, nor does he have access to the Rose Garden. That address and garden is reserved for presidents who serve this country honorably, who serve with thoughtfulness, who serve with gratitude for being allowed to serve the greatest nation in this world.

    So to expect Obama to choose between "Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way" is akin to waiting for Putin to ever change his "Method of Operation"

    ReplyDelete
  7. This may in your mind have nothing to do with Casey Pops posting yesterday … bu it has everything to do with it.

    Today the financial numbers watchers waited for Friday’s report. And it was BAD. Nearly 100,000 less jobs created in August than expected, unemployment new filings up over last week, warnings that the housing markets are sliding into trouble, etc. And yet the Obama Labor Department reports that unemployment percentage fell from 6.2% to 6.1%. Now how can that be without Labor playing mathematical games with mix and match categories to come up with a lower overall unemployment rate right before the mid-term elections?

    Translate this lack of “honesty” to foreign policy and why Obama is doing nothing (except sitting on his hands) and telling us he’s working on a policy to rid the world of ISIS/ISIL? What’s his plan to wait for old age to claim all ISIS radicle terrorists or is it to delay long enough to get out of Washington DC?

    Either answer is disastrous to the world’s well being

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Plus more good news just when Obama needs it (doesn't that always happen for him) ... "Ahmed Abdi Godane, leader of terror group al-Shabaab, was killed in a U.S. airstrike in Somalia" last weekend

      Now how do we exactly know that now. Did we take control of all the bodies and body parts in Somalia? Where they transported back to Dover AFB for examination? And they were compared to WHAT records?

      In my mind just another made up story

      Delete