Bumbling fools

Our wonderful “Christian nation” is steam rolling toward war (oops, war is declared by congress), invasion, occupation. No plan for the future, no goal, except eliminate ISIS. Then what? Will we come out smelling like a rose again, coasting along on past, and running out, rewards from a free market system? If only Peter Sellers were president…

 

Advertisements

One response to “Bumbling fools

  1. Obama laid-out pretty much a completely non-credible “strategy” to “ultimately destroy” ISIS (or ISIL). And as he is prone to do, he dutifully informed ISIS of what America would NOT do in its effort to destroy, or contain ISIS. Only Obama keeps the enemy informed as to what he won’t do to hurt them.

    Certainly, the Constitution requires the country to defend itself against threats from its enemies. But which Islamic sect have we pinpointed as the enemy? Since we are constantly told that Islam is a religion of peace and that ISIL (even though its name begins with the word “Islamic”) is NOT Islamic, and that no religion condones the killing of innocents, and that most of those killed by ISIL are Muslims, I guess we can’t view Islam as the enemy.

    Then what sect of Islam is the enemy? Is it al-Assad (an Alawite) and his army? Is it the Al-Nusra Front, the rebels fighting Assad in Syria, ISIS, or maybe even The New Syrian Army that Obama once described as not having a chance in hell of ousting Assad. Obama appears to not know exactly who we should fight. His speech had all the earmarks of a man flailing-about in search of the enemy’s identity.

    He wants Congress to authorize $500 million to train and arm the Free Syrian Army, you know, those “former doctors, farmers, pharmacists and so forth,” and send them into battle against an army of jihadist terrorists who just bit off one-third of Iraq. How many years will it take to train these guys? And then, once engaged in a battle, how many will turn-tail and run and/or join the army of the enemy? That was our experience in “training-up” the Iraq army under al-Maliki. They laid-down their weapons and ran, or joined the enemy’s (ISIS) military.

    The American people (aka, the Obama propagandist media) should get some answers before Congress okays this money.

    Whom will this Free Syrian Army fight? ISIL alone? The al-Nusra Front? Hezbollah in Syria? Assad’s army? How many years will it take to train, equip and build the NSA into a force that can crush both Assad and ISIL? And when push-comes-to-shove, will they even fight? Please, Mr. Obama, do tell us how this thing ends. But on this score, Obama was silent.

    Bottom line is that we should all take with a grain of salt the promises made in an Obama speech – and this talk is no different. The actions he describes taking against ISIS likely won’t add to those already being implemented, that is, the daily bombing sorties and drone attacks by American forces on ISIS positions.

    And maybe that’s okay, as containment (regardless of how long that may take) is far better than major offensives of U.S. military with “boots on the ground.” While I don’t believe there is a sane form of Islam, some sects of the ideology are less insane than others. A quite large segment of the world needs a sane Middle East right now, owing mostly to the dependence on oil, so containment of the insane Islamics might not be a poor approach.

    By the way, where are Turkey and Saudi Arabia in all of this? The third biggest spender on the military and armaments in the world is Saudi Arabia. Yet, Obama never mentions either of these countries that should be vested in containing, or eliminating, ISIS.

    I truly believe that the vast foreign policy inexperience of Obama and his acolytes manifests itself in his persistent contradictions as to what America should do and his seeming confusion as to which Islamic sect in the Middle East should be supported. Obama and his people are as perplexed about what is occurring in the Middle East as the average American.

    On another score, I see that for the first time in American statistical history, the majority of American adults are single (124 million or 50.2% of Americans are single). From a demographics standpoint, a population of single adults means the death of the Republican Party and the fact that libertarians will never make any serious in-roads toward arousing support for their fiscally conservative policies. A majority single population leads inevitably to the welfare state.

    Single people are less likely to have a support system that keeps them from becoming a public charge. Children born to single parents perform poorly in school and are more likely to engage in criminal behavior. A nation of single people will inevitably become a welfare state and a police state.

    The statistics have always been known and the conclusions to be drawn from them are inescapable.

    We have definitely devolved to a nanny state. And Republicans and libertarians who insist on running against the nanny state and emphasize only pro-family policies/values. The government is the new family in the U.S. People won’t vote against their short-term interests. Without family, the single person is vulnerable to life’s setbacks.

    The American vision of limited government depended on a stable society that could fend for itself. We don’t have that in America anymore. Republicans and libertarians need to find an alternative to government as the family, government as the nanny. They need to look for, and offer Americans, alternative institutions that can replace both family and government. Can they do this? I am highly skeptical.

    The great experiment that was America is now just a fond memory.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s