Despite this, he managed to not have a plan, as he told the world last week. Perhaps a little less time on the links, your Majesty. Meanwhile, a second American journalist paid the price for the colossal lack of leadership displayed by our "Commander-in-Chief", as ISIS beheaded Steven Sotloff, a man who was simply attempting to expose the atrocities that were going on in the region. Perhaps if our king was paying as much attention to world events as Sotloff, and James Foley, they might still be alive, as would be the many others who ISIS has brutalized over the past year.
Meanwhile, if the Wall Street Journal is on top of their game (they generally are), that's simply the starting point for this group of terrorists (and many of their ilk in that region of the world.) According to this report, women are being raped, mutilated, kidnapped, and herded about like cattle, all in the name of jihad. The WSJ report was the first that I've seen on this front, which is disappointing, but not surprising. Even more disappointing is the fact that our President has not condemned those actions, at least not yet. Why would he? The American public's fascination with pop 'culture' doesn't require him to do so.
Then again, they are also the same people that cheered and voted for him when he promised to bring home American troops from the region, despite warnings that doing so would destabilize the region. One of the people who issued such a warning was former President George W. Bush who said in 2006:
Mr. Zarqawi and Al Qaida, the very same people that attacked the United States, have made it clear that they want to drive us out of Iraq so they can plan, plot and attack America again. That's what they have said. That's their objective. I think it is very important to have a president who's realistic and listens to what the enemy says. Secondly, I am confident -- or I believe; I'm optimistic -- we'll succeed. If not, I'd pull our troops out. If I didn't believe we had a plan for victory, I wouldn't leave our people in harm's way. And that's important for the woman to understand. Thirdly, in spite of the bad news on television -- and there is bad news; you brought it up. You said, How do I react to a bombing that took place yesterday? It's precisely what the enemy understands is possible to do. I'm not suggesting you shouldn't talk about it. I'm certainly not being -- please don't take that as criticism. But it also is a realistic assessment of the enemy's capability to affect the debate, and they know that.
They're capable of blowing up innocent life so it ends up on your TV show. And, therefore, it affects the woman in Cleveland you were talking to. And I can understand how Americans are worried about whether or not we can win. I think most Americans understand we need to win. But they're concerned about whether or not we can win. So one of the reasons I go around the country to Cleveland is to explain why I think we can win. And so I would say: Yes, I'm optimistic about being able to achieve a victory.
But I'm also realistic. I fully understand the consequences of this war. I understand people's lives are being lost. But I also understand the consequences of not achieving our objective by leaving too early. Iraq would become a place of instability, a place from which the enemy can plot, plan and attack. I believe that they want to hurt us again. And, therefore, I know we need to stay on the offense against this enemy. They've declared Iraq to be the central front. And, therefore, we've got to make sure we win that. And I believe we will (emphasis added.)
So in 2006, President George W. Bush understood the potential consequences and foresaw a possible outcome that has come to pass if America and its allies did not follow through with the plan that was in place to help stabilize the region. In a rush to appear cool and in charge, Obama accomplished exactly the opposite of what (I can only hope) he was trying to achieve: he made that area, our nation, and the world a much less safe place to be. All in the name of appeasing those that President Bush so rightly spoke of in 2006:
Now, some in this country don't -- I can understand it -- don't view the enemy that way. I guess they, kind of, view it as an isolated group of people that occasionally kill. I just don't see it that way. I see them bound by a philosophy with plans and tactics to impose their will on other countries. The enemy has said that it's just a matter of time before the United States loses its nerve and withdraws from Iraq. That's what they have said. And their objective for driving us out of Iraq is to have a place from which to launch their campaign to overthrow moderate governments in the Middle East, as well as to continue attacking places like the United States. Now, maybe some discount those words as, kind of, meaningless propaganda.As a result of kowtowing to those with no knowledge of how the world actually operates, not only has the President jeopardized all who currently are in the region, but he has also regulated the sacrifice that was made by Americans and her allies to secure the region in the wake of 09/11/2001. It is a poor way to repay such a sacrifice. One can only hope that whatever the plan is that comes out of Washington is, it somehow manages to provide safety, security, and shelter for those in the Middle East, while providing peace for Americans everywhere.
