With another Memorial Day come and gone, there is one theme in Barack Obama’s latest college lecture, ahem, policy speech that merits consideration and discussion.
Remember the good old days when we either declared war on a country or we got militarily involved to protect a country against a hostile sovereign aggressor? The “War on Terror” is neither of these. I’ve been saying this for years, long before Barack decided to share this pearl of wisdom. You cannot fight a war against a concept, or a tactic. Terrorism is a tactic used to further the interests of the terrorists who are not in current times sovereign nations.
I’ve always said that terrorism should be treated as an international crime and be dealt with via international law enforcement. Many disagree. So even if I concede that we need military action, can’t we at least agree we need better definitions? True wars have a beginning and an end. This war on terror has no end. And let’s admit something else. Terror existed long before 9/11 and we have hunted down terrorists long before 9/11. Perhaps the grand scale of 9/11 prompted us to up the ante and use the word “war” to combat it?
Or here is another thought — I’m just thinking out loud here — why don’t we just get it over with and declare war on radical Islam? Isn’t that the source of most of our woes right now? We have no problem targeting the Mafia quite explicitly. Why don’t we just stop the political correctness and target radical Islam? Understand, I’m not talking normal motherhood and apple pie Islam. I’m talking nutjobs who think they’re supposed to kill everyone who disagrees with them.
So here is my modest proposal. Let’s either stop talking “war” or proactively identify the group we are at war with. I don’t think that is too much to ask.
Reader mail: Well ok, not mail really but a comment that appeared in my last blog post. “Who is the leader of the Democratic Party?” That depends on what we mean. If we mean who gets the most face time right now, it’s probably Chuck Schumer or Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. But I’d hardly call them leaders of the party. If we mean who is likely to be the next Dem POTUS nominee then the bench is so thin, it is disturbing. Unless something changes, 2016 will see a deep and interesting bench of GOP candidates. The Dem’s, not so much. It all comes down to Hillary. Joe Biden is not all that inspiring. Martin O’Malley is one big yawn.
And yes, as my reader pointed out, our President Obama does not appear to be leading anything right now. He learns about stuff the same way we do — reading the newspaper.