If We Have To Fight Someone, May As Well Fight ‘Evil’
This will probably put me at odds with my more pacifist, isolationist, “let’s just use our WORDS” progressive friends. But I forced myself to watch the entire video of the ISIS butcher sawing off the head of an American journalist. And they are not going to stop just because we asked them nicely.
If President Obama means to “extract this cancer” as he stated in his press conference the other day, he needs to follow the recommended Constitutional protocol. He needs to call Congress back from its vacation. He needs to convince the American people that this is not about non-existent “weapons of mass destruction.” This is not about forcing Afghanistan to adopt 21st Century Democracy when what the people there really want is 14th Century Theocracy.
This is about going to war. Real war. War against the self-described Islamic State. Making it clear that this is not a war against Islam. These butchers are murdering Muslims like they were being paid on a piecework rate.
The president needs to do what he can to get at least the verbal support of our European allies. No easy feat for a bunch of milksop cowards who pay ransoms to Al Qaeda to get French, or German, or Spanish hostages returned. But he needs to be clear that there really is, like it or not, one force for good in the world, and that is the United States of America. We have the weapons. We have the manpower.
The President does need to do this step by step. He needs to secure the cooperation of our allies, and shame them into helping if they won’t do so willingly. With that done, he will need to address the American People about the need to put boots on the ground in Iraq and Syria. This is not a continuation of Bush’s war. This is a CONSEQUENCE of Bush’s war. This is what happens when you remove a brutal regime and have nothing to replace it with. We need to realize that the stated goal of the Islamic State is to turn the entire globe into a caliphate under their narrow, violent interpretation of Islam. Taking them down one at a time won’t do the job, any more than you can rid your house of one insect at a time.
This will require the concentrated effort of Americans and our allies. This will require a resolution, a declaration of war by the United States Congress against the Islamic State. This will require bringing the full power of America’s military machine to bear.
If we do nothing, no one else will. Iraq can’t do the job by itself. Syria will not do anything. Our allies, whose hash we have pulled out of the fire time and time again, are more concerned with Russian oil and natural gas than they are with international justice.
This is a time for strong leadership, and a Congress that is united behind that leadership. ISIS is the face of evil on the planet today. They are a clear and present danger to each and every one of us — if not this moment, then soon.
The President needs to act. But to act, he will need the support of Congress and the American people.
He has my support. Does he have yours?
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Bill Schmalfeldt
I no longer use Twitter or Facebook because they are evil. I do continue to blog at http://Schmalfeldt.org, where you can get information about other stuff I do, like comedy/parody CDs and MP3 downloads and audiobooks and such. Get yours now. When I'm dead, there will be a drastic price increase.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
trees August 23rd, 2014 at 04:41
“This is a CONSEQUENCE of Bush’s war.”
I must respectfully disagree, as this is a consequence of Obama’s own erroneous political calculation. You see, Obama wanted to end the war in Iraq, not win it. He never wanted to prevail, or effect real change, and in his defense I’ll say that he didn’t believe it was winnable, he didn’t believe real change was possible. Reading through the comments by the liberals who post here you see this same sentiment being expressed.
He calculated that Americans wanted out, as he himself wanted out, and that if he presented this desire correctly he could appeal to the voters. In doing so he broadcast his pledge to leave Iraq to the world. He set a timetable for withdrawal, and he portrayed weakness by doing this. He demonstrated a lack of resolve and demonstrated poor judgment. Obama has so undermined his position in the world that he has no ability to repel, or prevent, other regimes from doing whatever they please. They don’t fear him, and as a result they don’t respect him. Putin laughs at him, seriously, Putin laughs at Obama. The “JV team” of terrorists in Iraq address him directly, why? Because they know how weak he his and they delight in taunting him. Obama delivers hollow ultimatums. He has no clue what to do, and is currently hiding, hoping that somehow these problems will resolve themselves.
The enemies of this country are emboldened in a way that is truly frightening.
You can either fight them over there, or you can fight them over here.
One way or the other, it’s really just a matter of time.
mike_D August 23rd, 2014 at 06:12
Suggest you reread his article once more.
OldLefty August 23rd, 2014 at 07:19
Thou dost project too much, Methinks.
Also suggest you reread recent history, and some news from outside the right wing echo chamber.
Iraq’s Government, Not Obama,
Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence
http://world.time.com/2011/10/21/iraq-not-obama-called-time-on-the-u-s-troop-presence/
Still burdened by the traumas of this and previous wars, and having
watched the revolutions sweeping their region, the Iraqis were unwilling to
accept anything that infringed on their sovereignty.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0
1) Even the idea that troops (and the $16 M we were paying the insurgents)would have prevented anything is silly.
2) How would Americans have
reacted if they prosecuted, convicted and hanged an American soldier in the
public square on TV, as the Iraqis said they would not grant immunity to
remaining troops?
Putin?? Seriously??
Again, you are projecting Bush’s weakness and Bush’s Putin, who told him that even his dog was bigger and better than Bush’s dog.
Bush could not have commanded the sanctions that Obama did.
Few people even thought Bush was in the loop here as his administration did everything that Osama bin Laden wanted them to do.
And ISIS was the JV team even as Mccain urged the Saudis to fund them.
With headlines like;
2007; War in Iraq Propelling A Massive Migration
In the years following 2003, Iraq’s
refugee problem has grown into what many observers regard as an unprecedented
A population shift on this scale has not occurred in the Middle East since
the establishment of the state of Israel and the displacement of Palestinians
in 1948.
2007; Iraqi Refugees in the
Syrian Arab Republic: A Field-Based Snapshot
15 June 2008; Iraqi refugees facing
desperate situation
What did you think was going to happen???
OldLefty August 23rd, 2014 at 07:28
Thou dost project too much, Methinks.
Also suggest you reread recent history, and some news from outside the right wing echo chamber.
Iraq’s Government, Not Obama,
Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence
http://world.time.com/2011/10/21/iraq-not-obama-called-time-on-the-u-s-troop-presence/
Still burdened by the traumas of this and previous wars, and having
watched the revolutions sweeping their region, the Iraqis were unwilling to
accept anything that infringed on their sovereignty.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0
1) Even the idea that troops (and the $16 M we were paying the insurgents)would have prevented anything is silly.
2) How would Americans have
reacted if they prosecuted, convicted and hanged an American soldier in the
public square on TV, as the Iraqis said they would not grant immunity to
remaining troops?
Putin??
Seriously!!
Again, you are projecting Bush’s Putin, who told him that even his dog was bigger and better than Bush’s dog.
Bush could not have commanded the sanctions that Obama did.
And ISIS was the JV team even as Mccain urged the Saudis to fund them.
greenfloyd August 23rd, 2014 at 08:24
Wow! You are a liberal buzz-kill. A President that actually wants the same thing most Americans want, said he would get us out and then made it so… shame on him. Now faced with the Islamic State Obama again proves you wrong to be the first to put the brakes on their advances into Iraq.
trees August 23rd, 2014 at 12:45
I don’t think anyone wants war just for the sake of it. A lot of Americans did not understand what was at stake, and lacking this understanding wanted to leave prematurely. The heavy lifting is always strenuous, and absent a clearly understood reason for lifting things that are really heavy the American people will choose to rest, rather than strain.
greenfloyd August 24th, 2014 at 01:49
History does not bear that out, especially among various well armed and organized religious fanatics-cum-genocidal psychopaths. Such as the Islamic State, for example.
Many Americans, including this President, didn’t think we should have invaded Iraq in the first place. After eight very bloody, expensive and “strenuous” years, lacking still any rational reason for remaining as an occupation force in a country that wanted us out and declined a “status of forces” agreement, so we left. There’s no dishonor in that.
I think most Americans, myself included, would take offense at your sideways insult implying we’re lazy and stupid. Although I admit there’s always ample evidence to prove otherwise, especially in politics which sadly most Americans ignore. At any rate, I like to believe we’ve moved on from “lifting things” that are not ours to lift. Now we must focus on fixing things here at home, while keeping a wary eye on IS in the ongoing multi-lateral fight against international terrorists.
trees August 23rd, 2014 at 12:56
“Now faced with the Islamic State Obama again proves you wrong to be the first to put the brakes on their advances into Iraq.”
Wrong. He has no choice in this. He’s being compelled to act. He’s the proverbial “bozo” that Uzza pointed to. We were in a position of control in Iraq, and for politically expedient reasons here at home he abandoned this position if favor of a weaker one. Now he’s slowly immersing himself in a quagmire…..
Sending over a couple hundred advisers is akin to testing the water by sticking your toe in it…
OldLefty August 23rd, 2014 at 13:11
We were in a position of control in Iraq, and for politically expedient reasons here at home he abandoned
______
We were NEVER in a position of control in Iraq.
We were paying insurgents $16 million/month not to fight while tens of thousands of refugees fled to Syria.
What do you think they have done in the meantime???
Obama refused to provide American air support until Iraqis had made a move towards cleaning up their act.
They took a first step.
Obama figured that Iraqi Kurdistan would be a crucial for “U.S. projection of power”, he pledged to defend Irbil.
“there’s key infrastructure inside of Iraq that we have to be concerned about.” Few noticed. This month, 57 of the 90 U.S. airstrikes have been in support of Iraqi forces at the Mosul dam.
Knowing that these wackos were holding U.S. journalists hostage, Obama ordered a raid to free them. It failed, but it was the right thing to do.
European governments had paid huge ransoms to free their hostages which encourages more hostage taking.
Some people never learn from their mistakes.
greenfloyd August 24th, 2014 at 00:19
Yes, by the actions of Islamic State. You are also correct, he had no choice, considering the humanitarian and military threat to American interests and allies.
The Iraqis and Kurds have pulled together, no small feat in itself, and with our help IS has been stopped along its eastern flank, thousands of innocent people safe, Mosul Dam secured, even the Iranians are pleased with the new Iraqi government, albeit ongoing, long-standing sectarian violence that still threatens to tear Iraq apart.
In my book Obama has hit a home-run with bases loaded, although it’s early innings and there’s no doubt we’ll face these guys again. Barack Obama will deal with IS just as he did with Osama bin Laden. Not in a quagmire, but rather at a time and place of our choosing on our terms.
trees August 23rd, 2014 at 04:41
“This is a CONSEQUENCE of Bush’s war.”
I must respectfully disagree, as this is a consequence of Obama’s own erroneous political calculation. You see, Obama wanted to end the war in Iraq, not win it. He never wanted to prevail, or effect real change, and in his defense I’ll say that he didn’t believe it was winnable, he didn’t believe real change was possible. Reading through the comments by the liberals who post here you see this same sentiment being expressed.
He calculated that Americans wanted out, as he himself wanted out, and that if he presented this desire correctly he could appeal to the voters. In doing so he broadcast his pledge to leave Iraq to the world. He set a timetable for withdrawal, and he portrayed weakness by doing this. He demonstrated a lack of resolve and demonstrated poor judgment. Obama has so undermined his position in the world that he has no ability to repel, or prevent, other regimes from doing whatever they please. They don’t fear him, and as a result they don’t respect him. Putin laughs at him, seriously, Putin laughs at Obama. The “JV team” of terrorists in Iraq address him directly, why? Because they know how weak he his and they delight in taunting him. Obama delivers hollow ultimatums. He has no clue what to do, and is currently hiding, hoping that somehow these problems will resolve themselves.
The enemies of this country are emboldened in a way that is truly frightening.
You can either fight them over there, or you can fight them over here.
One way or the other, it’s really just a matter of time.
mike_D August 23rd, 2014 at 06:12
Suggest you reread his article once more.
OldLefty August 23rd, 2014 at 07:19
Thou dost project too much, Methinks.
Also suggest you reread recent history, and some news from outside the right wing echo chamber.
Iraq’s Government, Not Obama,
Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence
http://world.time.com/2011/10/21/iraq-not-obama-called-time-on-the-u-s-troop-presence/
Still burdened by the traumas of this and previous wars, and having
watched the revolutions sweeping their region, the Iraqis were unwilling to
accept anything that infringed on their sovereignty.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0
1) Even the idea that troops (and the $16 M we were paying the insurgents)would have prevented anything is silly.
2) How would Americans have
reacted if they prosecuted, convicted and hanged an American soldier in the
public square on TV, as the Iraqis said they would not grant immunity to
remaining troops?
Putin?? Seriously??
Again, you are projecting Bush’s weakness and Bush’s Putin, who told him that even his dog was bigger and better than Bush’s dog.
Bush could not have commanded the sanctions that Obama did.
Few people even thought Bush was in the loop here as his administration did everything that Osama bin Laden wanted them to do.
And ISIS was the JV team even as Mccain urged the Saudis to fund them.
With headlines like;
2007; War in Iraq Propelling A Massive Migration
In the years following 2003, Iraq’s
refugee problem has grown into what many observers regard as an unprecedented
A population shift on this scale has not occurred in the Middle East since
the establishment of the state of Israel and the displacement of Palestinians
in 1948.
2007; Iraqi Refugees in the
Syrian Arab Republic: A Field-Based Snapshot
15 June 2008; Iraqi refugees facing
desperate situation
What did you think was going to happen???
OldLefty August 23rd, 2014 at 07:28
Thou dost project too much, Methinks.
Also suggest you reread recent history, and some news from outside the right wing echo chamber.
Iraq’s Government, Not Obama,
Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence
http://world.time.com/2011/10/21/iraq-not-obama-called-time-on-the-u-s-troop-presence/
Still burdened by the traumas of this and previous wars, and having
watched the revolutions sweeping their region, the Iraqis were unwilling to
accept anything that infringed on their sovereignty.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0
1) Even the idea that troops (and the $16 M we were paying the insurgents)would have prevented anything is silly.
2) How would Americans have
reacted if they prosecuted, convicted and hanged an American soldier in the
public square on TV, as the Iraqis said they would not grant immunity to
remaining troops?
Putin??
Seriously!!
Again, you are projecting Bush’s Putin, who told him that even his dog was bigger and better than Bush’s dog.
Bush could not have commanded the sanctions that Obama did.
And ISIS was the JV team even as Mccain urged the Saudis to fund them.
floyd[@]greenfloyd.org August 23rd, 2014 at 08:24
Wow! You are a liberal buzz-kill. A President that actually wants the same thing most Americans want, said he would get us out and then made it so… shame on him. Now faced with the Islamic State Obama again proves you wrong to be the first to put the brakes on their advances into Iraq.
trees August 23rd, 2014 at 12:45
I don’t think anyone wants war just for the sake of it. A lot of Americans did not understand what was at stake, and lacking this understanding wanted to leave prematurely. The heavy lifting is always strenuous, and absent a clearly understood reason for lifting things that are really heavy the American people will choose to rest, rather than strain.
floyd[@]greenfloyd.org August 24th, 2014 at 01:49
History does not bear that out, especially among various well armed and organized religious fanatics-cum-genocidal psychopaths. Such as the Islamic State, for example.
Many Americans, including this President, didn’t think we should have invaded Iraq in the first place. After eight very bloody, expensive and “strenuous” years, lacking still any rational reason for remaining as an occupation force in a country that wanted us out and declined a “status of forces” agreement, so we left. There’s no dishonor in that.
I think most Americans, myself included, would take offense at your sideways insult implying we’re lazy and stupid. Although I admit there’s always ample evidence to prove otherwise, especially in politics which sadly most Americans ignore. At any rate, I like to believe we’ve moved on from “lifting things” that are not ours to lift. Now we must focus on fixing things here at home, while keeping a wary eye on IS in the ongoing multi-lateral fight against international terrorists.
trees August 23rd, 2014 at 12:56
“Now faced with the Islamic State Obama again proves you wrong to be the first to put the brakes on their advances into Iraq.”
Wrong. He has no choice in this. He’s being compelled to act. He’s the proverbial “bozo” that Uzza pointed to. We were in a position of control in Iraq, and for politically expedient reasons here at home he abandoned this position if favor of a weaker one. Now he’s slowly immersing himself in a quagmire…..
Sending over a couple hundred advisers is akin to testing the water by sticking your toe in it…
OldLefty August 23rd, 2014 at 13:11
We were in a position of control in Iraq, and for politically expedient reasons here at home he abandoned
______
We were NEVER in a position of control in Iraq.
We were paying insurgents $16 million/month not to fight while tens of thousands of refugees fled to Syria.
What do you think they have done in the meantime???
Obama refused to provide American air support until Iraqis had made a move towards cleaning up their act.
They took a first step.
Obama figured that Iraqi Kurdistan would be a crucial for “U.S. projection of power”, he pledged to defend Irbil.
“there’s key infrastructure inside of Iraq that we have to be concerned about.” Few noticed. This month, 57 of the 90 U.S. airstrikes have been in support of Iraqi forces at the Mosul dam.
Knowing that these wackos were holding U.S. journalists hostage, Obama ordered a raid to free them. It failed, but it was the right thing to do.
European governments had paid huge ransoms to free their hostages which encourages more hostage taking.
Some people never learn from their mistakes.
floyd[@]greenfloyd.org August 24th, 2014 at 00:19
Yes, by the actions of Islamic State. You are also correct, he had no choice, considering the humanitarian and military threat to American interests and allies.
The Iraqis and Kurds have pulled together, no small feat in itself, and with our help IS has been stopped along its eastern flank, thousands of innocent people safe, Mosul Dam secured, even the Iranians are pleased with the new Iraqi government, albeit ongoing, long-standing sectarian violence that still threatens to tear Iraq apart.
In my book Obama has hit a home-run with bases loaded, although it’s early innings and there’s no doubt we’ll face these guys again. Barack Obama will deal with IS just as he did with Osama bin Laden. Not in a quagmire, but rather at a time and place of our choosing on our terms.
greenfloyd August 23rd, 2014 at 06:36
It’s also an iteration of Global Jihad 2014 taking it to the next level of brutality and prowess, the so-called “Caliphate.” as proclaimed by the Islamic State, also known as IS and several other names and affiliations. What it amounts to is the emergence of a new state with an “apocalyptic” view. Which will eventually be its own downfall.
Meanwhile, America moves on and the existential threat IS may pose to the US Homeland, worthy of concern and help to our allies, yes, but not major military deployment of US troops in Iraq.
We do need to be concerned about Americans going to Syria, joining IS and perhaps returning to commit acts of terrorism here. Sadly there’s a growing pool of disaffected youth in America to recruit from.
floyd[@]greenfloyd.org August 23rd, 2014 at 06:36
It’s also an iteration of Global Jihad 2014 taking it to the next level of brutality and prowess, the so-called “Caliphate.” as proclaimed by the Islamic State, also known as IS and several other names and affiliations. What it amounts to is the emergence of a new state with an “apocalyptic” view. Which will eventually be its own downfall.
Meanwhile, America moves on and the existential threat IS may pose to the US Homeland, worthy of concern and help to our allies, yes, but not major military deployment of US troops in Iraq.
We do need to be concerned about Americans going to Syria, joining IS and perhaps returning to commit acts of terrorism here. Sadly there’s a growing pool of disaffected youth in America to recruit from.