The smart approach
The LA Times laments the potential cancellation of some of the cuts to military spending. I kinda predict that most of those cuts will still be made and Obama will justify them by how “smartly” he will use America’s military power.
Why, just by recruiting more transgenders to address an alarming shortage, balancing the racial and gender distribution of military commanders, and ramping up training of military personnel in diversity, anger management, Islamic studies (you know, the “true Islam”, as taught by Obama the scholar), effective use of female Special Ops, understanding workplace violence etc, etc our military will be able to operate on a tiny fraction of even today’s sharply cut budget.
That’s the key…smart power!
The New York Times’ former editorial page editor Gail Collins kind of agrees with our reading of Obama’s policy. She simplifies it to just do the opposite of what Dick Chaney believes. Very smart.
We’re feeling insecure. It’s comforting to have Dick Cheney around, so we can at least know what we definitely want to avoid. This week, in a Washington speech, the former vice president said Obama has to “understand we are at war and that we must do what it takes, for as long as it takes, to win,” and spend way more money on defense.”
Which means that:
A) Fighting ISIS is going to be more complicated than just war.
B) The president should put timetables on everything.
C) The defense budget needs to go down.
Remember that no matter what else happens, Dick Cheney will never steer us right.
Understanding that erudition we can be assured we were always getting the straight scoop from the Gray Lady.
Connecting the dots?
Scary…but what’s not when it involves the Obama/Holder criminal enterprise known as the Executive Branch of the US government?
This piece suggests a dark strategy which would be considered totally implausible if pursued by any previous administration but must be considered likely by this one.
Obama’s people sat on the Petraeus “scandal” until they thought they could use it to divert attention from a greater scandal of their making. General Allen, based on what is known was somehow also swept up in the Petraeus matter and ‘retired’ suddenly before full facts were revealed about to what extent.
Now Allen is called back to service to lead Obama’s mission to “degrade and ultimately destroy” ISIS, er, “ISIL”.
Must be we don’t have any competent military leaders left? Give Obama 2 more years, and…I’ll believe that!
DLH
Talking tough and carrying a wet noodle
Alan Carubs writes at his Facts not Fantasy blog site (excerpts):
The War Neither Obama, Nor Any Other Nation Wants to Fight
Who would support a President who said he had no intention of being “dragged back into a war in Iraq”?
That is not a “strategy.” It’s surrender. It is an admission of a lack of intent to confront what will surely emerge as a major threat to the Middle East and the West.
Middle East expert, Walid Phares, says ISIS’s message is that it has concluded that neither the U.S. nor Great Britain will engage it with troops, preferring only air strikes. No military expert believes that will be sufficient to defeat ISIS. . . .
Turkey, that shares a border with Syria, Iraq and Iran, is fearful for the lives of nearly fifty of its diplomats taken hostage in Mosul when it was captured in June. They have cause, but Turkey has been increasingly Islamic in its outlook for nearly a decade, shedding its secular approach to governance. It has refused to allow the U.S. to use bases there to fight ISIS.
In Europe, Germany said it would not take part in any airstrikes against ISIS. Other EU nations will likely follow its lead. In a similar fashion, Arab nations have not indicated any intention to actively—militarily—participate in what appears to be a “coalition” in name only.
