The Evil I Speak Out Against

This was shared by a Christian Clergy Women that I think is a confused about the nature of the evil we are facing at this present time. Very real enemy's exist to Liberal Western Civilization that IS NOT us. Enemies that are every bit as totalitarian, brutal and evil as the Nazi's, Communists, and Imperial Japanese at their worst. Enemies that are driven by a confidence in the righteousness and inevitability of their dreams of worldwide domination. Extremists of such a sort should never be underestimated especially when they readily announce their intentions to bring destruction to our way of life.

Not that our way of life is perfect, it most certainly is not.  We are human's.  We are flawed.  We make mistakes.  We sin against heaven.  We sin against our fellow man.  But for all of our faults at least we are not totalitarians. God help us all if these enemies of which I speak do prevail.  Not that I think they will.  But right now they have far to much oxygen to breathe.  They will use this oxygen to make the world a more messed up place.  They will continue to have it as long as Obama is in office and his leading from behind policies are in place.

C'mon President

U.S. Strategy Seeks to Avoid ISIS Prophecy from the NY Times

George Bush never stated it, but very much used a fly paper strategy by going to war in Iraq.  For some reason Obama never thought that agitating Jihadist's and goading them to battle our soldiers in their lands was a good strategy.  Even though our never stated strategy was clearly starting to bear fruit Obama put an end to it in Iraq.  Obviously (or obliviously) Obama knew What? was best.

What? was so smart about handing Iraq over to Iran to deal with?  How was that in our or any of our allies best interests?

Well as it turns out Obama's strategy is looking as foolish as he thought Bush was for invading Iraq.

So now we have an emboldened Iran and a resurgent Sunni jihadists. And now we have a very limited number of troops back in Iraq and presumably in Syria as well.   But those troops are not seen as occupiers in the eyes of the Jihadist's and those they are recruiting. (rolling eyes and smh)

So now we find out from the no less than the NY Times we must be careful not to fulfill some crazy Jihadist prophecy/fantasy.  C'mon President Obama don't tell me you believe in some crazy Jihadist superstition.  You want to do something about stemming Jihadist recruiting then go right after there crazy superstitions.  They want a battle in Dabiq, lets blow the place up and then send in the Marines along with your much vaunted international coalition.

Put aside your pride Obama, Bush was right, battle them over there and the problem won't be as bad over here.  

Guantanamo and Jihadist Propaganda- The Biggest Problem.

Yesterday my law student older brother posted a MinnPost.com article headlined: Local lawyers representing detainees at Guantanamo see big changes. Apparently something about the legal machinations inherent in the legal issues brought out is of interest to my brother. He indicated he would like to work on these issues in the future, but I am not sure what that means because there are several avenues of possibility.

Anyway, this article got me thinking about the proficiency and competence of our legal system and the conduct of the lawyers up to this point. From where I am sitting the legal system and lawyers in it get a very low grade because they have made what I regard to be inexcusable mistakes.

What are the inexcusable mistakes?

We have released a multitude of detainees that ended up right back on the battlefield, sometimes in leadership positions.

Note: I see from my Google research that a do gooder over at Huffington Post disputes the numbers given; mostly on the basis that some of these guys being counted have only engaged in anti-US agitation propaganda and have not gone back to the blood and guts battlefield per se. OK suppose I grant that anti-US agitation propaganda in a time of war is fine and dandy and so these guys shouldn't be counted and just to be ultra conservative lets say only 5 of the people believed to have taken up arms, really have.

Even if the number is only 5 that is a disaster of epic proportions and here's why?

These 5 will exist as a propaganda and recruiting bonanza orders of magnitude worse than the humane (or inhumane for that matter) detention of a few hundred possibly innocent Muslims. With those that are detained and suspected of being no threat we can always take steps to make the situation more palatable and pleasant to those detained; These efforts can be showcased to counter the jihadist propaganda that we are Christian ogres that eat Muslims for breakfast. In contrast the 5 that go back to fighting get to tell tall tails about how we are Christian ogres that eat Muslims for breakfast and their accusations are sure to be spread as far and wide as jihadist propagandists can distribute them. With them free we totally lose control of the message.

Worse than this the jihadists get to tell their "true story's" about how Allah delivered the faithful mujaheddin from the hand of the infidel. Make no mistake the narrative that invokes the guidance, protection, and intervention of Allah is the most potent arrow in the jihadist propaganda quiver. It is a morale booster for those putting their lives on the line and it is "sign and wonder" that points directly in the direction of the righteousness of the jihadist cause. As far as it is possible to us we cannot and must not give jihadists grounds for claiming miracles that can plausibly be believed as such.

From a distance we can let the hardcore lie all they want, but when that hardcore jihadist lies in the flesh and blood, we have a big problem.

So what to do with those that might be innocent?

This is war, collateral damage is an unfortunate consequence that should be managed with wisdom and a bigger picture in mind. Unfortunately, I don't think very many of our legal minds and absolutely not a single one of the "progressive" ACLU types understands the bigger picture.

The Hype of An Illegitimate Grievance- Guantanamo Bay

I was struck by President Obama's remark today about how supposidly the terrorists prison at Guantanamo Bay is a national security liability and recruiting boon for the jihadists. I think it quite pathetic that some people in the West have gotten it stuck in their craw that the prison at Guantanamo represents some kind of special human rights scandal and grand injustice. I maintain that this hype about Guantanmo is simply nothing more than misguided self-righteousness run amok.

It's misguided because as long as Muslims, whether they are terrorist jihadists or not, are held in any Western nation prisons those Muslims will serve as a Raison d'être and major recruiting talking point for jihadists. The fact that some self-righteous baffoons here in the West have raised a stink served only to amplify something that is going to be a terrorist complaint no matter what we did.

I throughly believe Obama and the rest of you Guantanamo hype haters have been nothing but extremely useful idiots. Good Job Fools!

? Didn't write this but wish I did.

I don't agree with the idea of easing up in Afghanistan. This asymmetrical war is not about crushing the enemy and signing a peace treaty. It's about eroding the enemy's support among the populace and his will to fight.

These comments were made by Original MikeS at JustOneMinute Blog

It may seem counter intuitive to many that we should basically engage in a war of attrition with the Taliban; After all isn't that pretty much the Taliban strategy to beat us? War is expensive and blood is certainly not cheap but the same pretty much holds true for both sides relatively speaking (although to be honest blood is a lot cheaper to them than it is to us.) I may be wrong on this, but I do believe a big part of winning the the Iraq war was about attrition through a collapse of insurgent leadership and finance. Although it will be a bit more difficult I think the same basic path to victory can work in Afghanistan provided that this countries leadership commits itself to the task.

Unfortunately I am not sure Obama is up to this.

Here is a bit more from the same JustOneMinute blog comment section:

So - given the character of our leadership I would follow Tom Friedman, focus on transforming Iraq, and let Afghanistan slide.

TM

Your lack of confidence in Obama is totally justified but with the greatest respect what reason is there to think that al Qaeda and the Taliban will stop at Afghanistan with Pakistan and its nukes next door? John Bolton doesn't think they will settle for Afghanistan and I agree with him.

It sucks when your enemy is prepared to fight for a hundred years.

Afghanistan is going to be extremely difficult to pacify but IMHO the choice here is between bad and infinitely worse


I third the notion that the fight in Afghanistan isn't so much about Afghanistan as it is about Pakistan and their nukes at this point. Pressure on the Taliban in Afghanistan is pressure on the Taliban in Pakistan who are waging a war in that country as well. At this point I firmly believe that keeping the Taliban occupied in Afghanistan keeps the most dedicated anti-western Sunni Jihadists focused on defending that Muslim land instead of on doing terrorism in the West or going for WMD's in Pakistan. Thankfully I think a debilitating weakness in the Jihadist worldview is that defending Muslim territory from the infidel seems to take precedence over pretty much everything else. I feel like the Jihadists are suckers for our military hard target and they just screw themselves when they take out their frustrations of not being able to expel the infidel out on fellow Muslims.