Comment Last Three
July 14, 2010
The White House's official policy of banning the word "Islam" in describing America's terrorist enemies is in direct conflict with the U.S. military's war-fighting doctrine now guiding commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan. General Petraeus is a talented military leader, but now he has to walk the fine line of winning a war and cow-towing to the liberal left Obama administration. The American people want the US to kill the Islamic terrorist, stablize the Afghan government, and come home as "winning the war".
John O. Brennan, President Obama's chief national security adviser for counterterrorism, delivered a major policy address on defining the enemy. He laid out the White House policy of detaching any reference to Islam when referring to terrorists, be it al Qaeda, the Taliban or any other group. However, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus led the production of an extensive counterinsurgency manual in December 2006 that does, in fact, tell commanders of a link between Islam and extremists.
The Petraeus doctrine refers to "Islamic insurgents," "Islamic extremists" and "Islamic subversives." It details ties between Muslim support groups and terrorists. His co-author was Gen. James F. Amos, whom Mr. Obama has picked as the next Marine Corps commandant and Joint Chiefs of Staff member. Currently, the Obama administration is telling the military that they have to call the Islamic terrorists----thugs. Yes, they are now thugs, just like thugs in American cities.
Mr. Brennan on May 26 told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies that "describing our enemy in religious terms would lend credence to the lie propagated by al Qaeda and its affiliates to justify terrorism, that the United States is somehow at war against Islam. The reality, of course, is that we have never been and will never be at war with Islam. After all, Islam, like so many faiths, is part of America."
In a speech that also severed the Obama administration from President George W. Bush's "war on terror," Mr. Brennan also said: "The president's strategy is absolutely clear about the threat we face. Our enemy is not terrorism because terrorism is but a tactic. Our enemy is not terror because terror is a state of mind and, as Americans, we refuse to live in fear. Nor do we describe our enemy as jihadists or Islamists because jihad is holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam meaning to purify oneself of one's community."
Asked about the discrepancy between the White House policy and the military's counterinsurgency doctrine, Michael Hammer, Mr. Brennan's spokesman, said "We don't have anything to add to John's speech." Larry Korb, a military analyst at the Center for American Progress, said Mr. Brennan is correct to avoid linking Islam to terrorism. "Once you attach a religious thing, you're basically saying somehow or other this is caused by the religion," Mr. Korb said. "Most Muslims are not that way."
He added, "If you put that term [Islamic terrorist] on there, it causes you more problems in the long run. You don't want to see this as a war on quote unquote the Muslim world. If I took a look at all the people, for example, who killed abortion doctors and I said they're Christian terrorists, or something like that, and they are all who have done that. That is their interpretation of the Bible. But most people are not. Some of these people will quote the Bible and say I had to go after this doctor because he's killing innocents."
This administration is putting American lives at risk by this insane policy and bowing to the Islamic terrorists. Who's side is the administration on? Just like supporting the illegal immigrants and drug runners coming across our southern border, the administration is targeting the citizens of Arizona--not the criminals or terrorists who are coming across our border.
February 03, 2010
The current policies of the administration encourage terrorist around the world. They know that they will not be sent to Gitmo and will be given US citizen rights--no military trials. They see America as weak and will take advantage of the "let's-get-along" policy of the Democrat Party.
The five senior leaders of the U.S. intelligence community told a Senate panel Tuesday they are "certain" that terrorists will attempt another attack on the United States in the next three to six months. "An attempted attack, the priority is certain, I would say," Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair, a retired admiral, said in response.
Possible terrorist attacks include:
• The threat of major cyber attacks on U.S. computer networks and infrastructure
• The increasingly dangerous Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan, Iraq and Africa
• Instability in nuclear-armed Pakistan
• Iranian and North Korean missile/nuclear programs and support of terrorist activities
• China's military buildup
• Efforts by the anti-U.S. government of Venezuela to develop closer ties with Iran, China and Russia
The warning about the threat of another attempted attack, like the failed Christmas Day bombing of a Northwest Airlines jet, was in keeping with the sober public assessment of threats outlined last year by Mr. Blair. "In our judgment, al Qaeda also retains the capability to recruit, train, and deploy operatives to mount some kind of an attack against the homeland," according to his written testimony.
The recent arrests of an al Qaeda cell led by Najibullah Zazi, the attempted bombing of the Northwest Airlines jet en route from Amsterdam to Detroit, and the Fort Hood, Texas, shooting rampage, with which Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan is charged, all suggest al Qaeda has come close to pulling off mayhem inside the United States. Both of these attackes should be treated as military attacks, but are not....
Iran is the major country that is supporting terrorists around the world and the civilized world must deal with Iraq on a united front. Iran cannot have nuclear weapons since they only care about the destruction of Israel and the United States. The security policies of the United States must be revamped and returned to more of the Bush anti-terrorism policies.
December 29, 2008
Israel is finally getting tough--again. Talking with Hamas (or Iran) does not work, but swift, hard military action does. Hamas must be stopped now before they are fully dug-in and supplied by Iran.
Israel's air force obliterated symbols of Hamas power on the third day of its overwhelming assault on Gaza on Monday, striking a house next to the Hamas premier's home, devastating a security compound and flattening a five-story building at a university closely linked to the Islamic group.
Israel launched the deadliest attack against Palestinians in decades on Saturday in retaliation for rocket fire aimed at civilians in southern Israeli towns. Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak told Israel's parliament in a special session that Israel was not fighting the residents of Gaza "but we have a war to the bitter end against Hamas and its branches."
The strikes appear to have gravely damaged Hamas' ability to launch rockets but a medium-range rocket fired at the Israeli city of Ashkelon killed a man there Monday and wounded several others. It was the second fatality in Israel since the beginning of the offensive and the first person ever to be killed by a rocket in Ashkelon, a city of 120,000.
Israel cannot make the same mistake in Gaza as they did in Lebanon. They cannot let Iran arm the Palestinians, like Hamas just north of Israel. Good job in fighting the terrorists in Gaza. Remain tough and be on the offensive.