Going all the way back to 2001, there has been an argument in America. Oh, it hasn’t been one that you’ve heard in any structured kind of way on the talk shows, or anywhere else in the media, and that’s because the winning side (1) didn’t know it had won, and (2) wasn’t really arguing their winning point all that enthusiastically.
The topic of the argument is pretty simple: What is the Western World’s most effective deterrent to terrorist recruitment?
It was never expressed this way. The actual expression of the argument went this way: Every time someone proposed strong, decisive action directed at terrorism or at terrorists, someone on America’s political left immediately started a chorus of, “We must not do that, because it will be [fill in terrorist group name here]’s greatest recruiting tool!”
Hence, we saw the argument play itself out as: the strong, decisive action either happened, or did not happen. And we were able to review the results of either the action or the inaction.
Well, now we know.
George W. Bush — love him, hate him, or indifferent about him — had international terrorism (read: Islamic terrorism) on the ropes when he left office. It would be hard to characterize his actions as weak and indecisive. Were they effective? Not entirely. Terrorism was not dead never to rise again, obviously. However, Bush’s actions did leave a pacified Iraq, a stable Afghanistan, and real hope that there was a light at the end of a very dark, ugly tunnel.
Then Obama came along.
For all his many obvious faults, Obama did do one important thing. He provided objective evidence that his way was the wrong way.
For those of us who actually spent some time thinking about it, this simply confirmed what we already knew: when you’re faced with ravening, rabid dogs — as Islamic terrorists are — then any sign of weakness, or indifference, or appeasement will only spur them to go straight for your throat. Period.
Or: You can’t deal with mad dogs as you might your elderly, but slightly cantankerous, neighbor.
Without Obama, there would have been no Paris attack, no Charlie Hebdo, no Brussels terrorist bombings, no San Bernardino, none of the beheadings, crucifixions, live burnings, none of the tens of thousands of atrocities that are the results either of direct action from ISIS, or inspired by that group of gibbering baboons.
None of it.
Here’s a screen shot I took today that nicely illustrates what I’ve been saying here:
It’s a really jarring web page that shows a Reuters headline from back in August of 2014, along with a picture of Obama from this past week, tangoing with a beautiful South American lady.
Surely I’m not the only one to bring to mind: “Nero fiddling as Rome burns.” As it turns out, I’m not.
You could fill in any headline you wish, but the accompanying Obama photo would always be the same type of thing. Obama golfing. Obama sailing on Martha’s Vineyard. Obama dancing. Obama enjoying a really sweet life as others die miserable, gruesome deaths at the hands of bloodthirsty, psychotic sub-humans, because of Obama’s inaction.
Had Obama not abandoned Iraq, there would have been no ISIS, and no headline reading, “Islamic State massacres 80 Yazidis in north Iraq: officials.” No headline reading, “Scores Dead in Paris Islamic Terror Attack.” Or, “Scores Dead in Brussels Islamic Terror Attack.” Or, “Scores Dead in [fill in place name here] Islamic Terror Attack.”
So, what have we learned from all this? Well, it’s simple: If you want to encourage terrorism, if you don’t mind hearing about really gruesome acts by sub-human monsters, then you deploy a reasonable, conciliatory, kind of abject, really kind of pathetic, face toward those selfsame sub-human monsters. You elect Barack Obama. Or Hillary Clinton. Or Bernie Sanders.
Or, if you’d really rather that there not be scores of rapes of women, and crucifixions of children, and thousands of people having their heads sawed off … well then you kill the bastards. You kill them and you blow their filthy remains all the way to kingdom come, and you allow desert snakes, lizards and other vermin to feast on them.
Then see how many they can get to sign up for their sick, disgusting club.
Or, in shorthand: We won the argument.