Richard Fernandez:
Much of today’s commentary revolves around the president’s inability to articulate a policy towards ISIS. The president was pressed in Estonia to outline his plans amid multiple crises, especially in the aftermath of Steven Sotloff’s decapitation. The New York Times in an article headlined “Commitments on 3 Fronts Test Obama’s Foreign Policy” captures the dilemmas the president is facing.
WASHINGTON — In vowing in Estonia on Wednesday to defend vulnerable NATO nations from Russia, President Obama has now committed the United States to three major projections of its power: a “pivot” to Asia, a muscular presence in Europe and a new battle against Islamic extremists that seems likely to accelerate.
American officials acknowledge that these commitments are bound to upend Mr. Obama’s plans for shrinking the Pentagon’s budget before he leaves office in 2017. They also challenge a crucial doctrine of his first term: that the use of high technology and only a “light footprint” of military forces can deter ambitious powers and counter terrorists.
How, the article implicitly asks, is Obama going to take on three fronts and shrink the armed forces at the same time? No one has the answer to that head scratcher, but the president’s supporters are trying to interpolate one.
Kevin Drum argues that Obama’s statements have been so incomprehensible of late because the world is a complicated place. “I should add that nobody on the planet—not even John McCain!—knows how to destroy ISIS. Everybody wants some kind of magic bullet that will put them out of business without committing any ground troops, but nobody knows what that is. So until one of the blowhard hawks comes up with an actual plan that might actually work, I’ll stick with Obama’s more cautious approach. I figure he’ll do something, but only when politics and military strategy align to provide a plausible chance of success.”
As for Russia, Drum asks ‘what is all this talk about gray areas’. The president has been clear cut and decisive. “In fact Obama’s statement was unusually straightforward. He said the same thing he’s been saying for months about Ukraine, and it’s really pretty clear.”
- We are committed to the defense of NATO signatories.
- Ukraine is not part of NATO, which means we will not defend them militarily.
- However, we will continue to seek a peaceful settlement; we will continue to provide military aid to Ukraine; and we will continue to ratchet up sanctions on Russia if they continue their aggression in eastern Ukraine.
It’s clear in the way an eviction notice is clear; so clear it apparently means: Kiev is on its own.
Vox also tries to read the tea leaves. Zack Beauchamp argues that with respect to ISIS, what Obama is trying to convey is hard. “Obama’s rhetoric on ISIS is confused because his administration’s policy on ISIS is confused by internal contradictions. On the one hand, Obama really does have long term ambitions to destroy ISIS. On the other hand, he recognizes that this is impossible in the near term, and that the best the US can do is lay the groundwork for ISIS’ eventual collapse. This essential tension in American objectives explains why Obama’s rhetoric and actual policy on the group are so at odds.”
To this day our genius and dolt in the white is intentionally refusing to acknowledge the elephant in the room when it comes to ISIS – islam. His denial and talking in circles borders really not only on delusional but dangerously close to psychotic. He affinity of islam is the root cause for distorting who these satanic savages are and what they intent or end goal is. He knows – but sticks with his “JV’ team analogy and frankly – doesn’t care.
On the other hand – as truth is seeping to the surface – having not only ignored the rise since 2011/2012 of this born and growing radical Islamic jihadists; switching sides in the WOT joining our enemy – Benghazi/recruiting, training, arming and paying radical jihadists in Jordan to use them in overthrowing Assad in Syria – his administration, the EU and Saudi Arabia have actively participated in this out of control monster.
Having set the middle east on fire as a means to justify their plan – what is a man to do being caught in his own created dangerous clusterfarck?
To add insult to this injury is this administrations SOS giving a speech yesterday declaring “the biggest threat to humanity is global warming; we have to join and add muslim countries and fight this danger in order to save all muslim countries!” – WTH is wrong with these dangerous and delusional progressives and their administration?
While ISIS continuous on with their genocide across the middle east – threatening americans with their satanic butchery and these psychos worry about global warming? Really?
If this administration and their supporters continue to sleepwalk hoping ‘their’ product of ISIS is still the JV team and the world is now more safe than ever before – all that is left to wonder: “What is their real agenda and or are they insane”?
It’s obvious that 0Muslim, and the DemRino party, are waging war on the legal law abiding citizens of the United States. This is their real agenda.
Meanwhile, the current weapons of choice used by these NWO global elitists are the MSM, public schools, the Global Climate Change scam, Obama (doesn’t) Care, the IRS, illegal immigration, race baiting, and the 0Muslim/DemRino intensified chaos in the Middle East.
What are the liberals supposed to say now? When Bush was fighting terrorism, he had to constantly remind everyone that this is not a war on Islam; it is a war on Islamist terrorists. Of course, the left tore that down, claiming everything Bush did was Islamiphobic and racist.
Now, they are cooking in their own juices. Either they address the threat or are accused of cowardice (to the surprise of no one). They should not worry; most of their lap-dog media is not going to rudely remind them that, in days gone past, waging war on terrorists was a war on peaceful Islam.