Obama’s Tragic Response to Tragedy
On Sunday afternoon, after every civilian in America knew that the man who carried out the worst terrorist attack since 9/11 was an Islamic radical, the President of the United States addressed the nation without once mentioning the ideology behind the killings.
Obama, sore over his canceled tee time, used the address to discuss the law enforcement response, hate crimes against the LGBT community, gun control, and the dangers of letting an attack like this change who we are as Americans. But he didn’t mention Islam. He didn’t mention ISIS.
Instead, he connected the Orlando massacre to the wrong tapestry of events.
In the president’s view, this was not the latest in a series of attacks that include 9/11, Ft. Hood, the Boston Marathon bombing, the Paris attacks (in both 2014 and 2015), Brussels, and San Bernardino; it was Aurora, Sandy Hook, and Columbine that preceded the bloodshed at a gay nightclub in Central Florida.
Over the coming days, every pundit in America – paid and unpaid – will weigh in on what we should do to prevent these tragedies in the future. But even among those rare individuals who actually have half a clue about what’s going on in the world, most of these opinions will be worthless because they’ll come from people who willfully refuse to acknowledge what this tragedy was about. It’s not that they don’t know – everyone knows – it’s that they won’t say it.
And sadly, one of those people just happens to be our commander-in-chief.
But put that aside for a moment. Let’s pretend for a minute that Obama had surprised us. Let’s pretend that he took to the podium with renewed determination, vowing to continue America’s long war on Islamic terror. Let’s even pretend that he broke with tradition for once, and actually said those two words.
Even then, we wouldn’t be in any better position than we are now. Words are just words. Obama saying “Islamic terrorism” won’t, by itself, change his woefully inadequate military response to ISIS. He’s bombing them, sure, but he’s doing it in such a way that you’d think we have the rest of the century to win this war. His strategy is muddled, incoherent, and lazy. He does not comport himself like a wartime president, even though he has been one every single day of his presidency. To him, ISIS is just an inconvenient distraction.
In eight months, Obama’s last term in office will come to an end, so it’s useless to keep criticizing him in the vain hope that he might finally see the light. He won’t.
But one of two people will take his place. One of them holds beliefs so similar that she might as well be Obama in a dress (or a pantsuit, as the case may be). The other couldn’t be more different. And if you have any interest whatsoever in actually defeating ISIS, the choice is clear.
Comments are closed.