The terror to come
The ghouls of ISIS are celebrating the attacks and threatening more to come: “American blood is best and we will taste it soon.”
Which brings up the topic of why we haven’t had a large scale terrorist attack in this country since 9/11.
When Bush was president, his response to 9/11 was such that I figured it acted as somewhat of a deterrent to organized terrorism and large-scale attacks on our soil. Why stir the American beast any more, when there were other Western targets without a cowboy like Bush as leader? Once Obama came to power, though, all bets were off.
And yet till recently there have still been no large-scale attacks of the 9/11 or Paris bombings type in this country (perhaps because it took organized terrorism a while to regroup after Afghanistan and Iraq?). I’ve been expecting one or more large attacks here for quite some time, and although I fervently hope I’m wrong in that regard, I continue to fully expect such an attack to happen, now more than ever.
It’s hard to know what our security and intelligence consist of at this point. I can only hope they are better than France’s, but I see no reason to think so. France is a smaller and less diverse country in general, so it should be easier to police, not harder.
At any rate, Obama’s weakness acts as a magnet for this sort of thing, both abroad and here. Terrorists have no fear of systemic and meaningful retaliation. Drone strikes make jihadi martyrs of the leaders (inspiring others), and those leaders can be replaced.
[NOTE: I watched Peggy Noonan speaking on Fox and Friends this morning, and she was both forthright and eloquent on the subject of Obama’s lack of leadership on fighting Islamic terrorism, and how Europe is going to ignore him. If anyone has a link, I’d appreciate it.]
UPDATE 8:31: Commenter “Harold” has kindly responded to my request:
Only just last week, we learned this — Syria refugee crisis: U.S. opens centres to speed vetting:
Would be nice if someone asked the Democrats in their debate tonight about this. Not holding my breath.
Too bad Peggy didn’t figure out Barack earlier. But I have!
Here’s what he will do. He’ll give one of his “famous” speeches because that’s what he does. It will sound good until you break it down. And then he will actually do little. You see, Obama is a man of words; not deeds.
He just wants to stall and run out the clock until his term is over. Then off to run a scam just like the Clintons’ Foundation!
What the left does not realize that with their inaction and now acceleration of bringing in Syrian ‘refugees,’ they are only pushing the voters in the direction of Trump. Yes, Trump.
This is how I see it: I may not 100% like what Trump says all the time. I may not even think he is ‘conservative enough’ in all areas, but in ONE area he has been consistent since he got into the race: immigration.
Looking at France today, I believe all Trump needs to do is keep immigration as the forefront of his message and he will not only win the nomination, he will win the election in 2016.
The looser Obama’s policies are regarding ISIS, refugees, immigration, the worse it will play out for them in 2016. I expect a landslide victory for Trump next year if he score the nomination. People from the other side of the aisle will come out in droves to vote for him.
All other topics do not matter.
The more than erupts in Europe (and possibly in America), except bigger and bigger numbers for Trump.
Cruz is trying to play catch up, unfortunately. I like that is he being louder about his position on immigration, but coming this late, it looks like he is copying what has worked for Trump. And this makes it look insincere to some.
Forgive some of my mistypes! My favorite is “except” instead of “expect”!
Is this Breitbart link the one you were looking for? French Officials Criticizing ‘Absence of US Leadership’ Against Terror
I found that at Instapundit along with a Drudge-like juxtaposition from 2008: “France Celebrates Obama’s Big Win.”
be alreadh said he was on theur side abd have helped them greatly…its the US public that wont believe
>>Obama’s weakness acts as a magnet for this sort of thing, both abroad and here
The man refused to speculate who was even behind the Paris horror show during his national address. How could he?
Cornhead:
Too bad Peggy didn’t figure out Barack earlier.
You beat me to it.
The attacks in Paris will hold the public’s attention for a few weeks at the most, then its down the memory hole. The politicans, at least the current crop, will bluster but do nothing significant. It will take dozens of similar attacks in the UK, Germany, Italy, and every other Western nation to make the public demand islam be slammed up against the infamous rock and stomped into the sand.
The sooner we admit this is a war between civilization and the barbarian horde the better.
K-E:
In fact, Cruz talked tough on immigration (and was following his talk with action in the Senate—action which, unfortunately, his fellow Republicans did not support) long before Trump was even a candidate.
He is NOT playing catch-up. I have a draft of a post on this somewhere, but I think that publishing it got superseded by other events somewhere along the line.
The myth grows that Trump is the only one who this or the only one who that, and that therefore—despite the fact that he has narcissistic personality disorder, is not a conservative, and has never done anything to back up his words about immigration (including his own companies; for example, he allows them to use visa programs he criticizes)—somehow he must be the nominee because he’s the only one.
It’s not the case. But it’s the main and only argument for Trump, and it’s a bogus one. The difference? Trump gets publicity; he gets coverage. When Cruz was going on and on with his opposition to the Gang of Eight bill, how many were paying attention?
Here’s just one example of what Cruz was doing two years ago.
I haven’t trusted anything Obama says for a while. Considering his lies and deceptions on immigration, plus US intelligence on ISIS being cooked to match Obama’s expectation of only good news, his words on this now are worthless.
Calling Obama weak seems as naive as still believing him the fool. It’s America who is weak on the international stage, made intentionally so by this administration.
Neo, I agree that Cruz has been talking about immigration before Trump came on the scene. But I am talking about in context of the election and when he got into the race. I do not remember hearing Cruz target immigration as a mega-topic, nor come out with brash remarks. Trump took that boat and sailed it. He may have been louder about it, but he is the one that rocketed to the top with his messy remarks about immigration.
Anything Cruz tries to say now will look to some like ‘copy cat’ material. It might not be TRUE, but that is the perception.
I am not saying that Cruz is not tough enough or anything of the sort. I am saying that Trump has been the one that appears to be on the forefront of this issue, brings it up every debate, etc. That is what he is known for. Trump will gain a lot from this.
You might not like it, but I’m just reading the tea leaves here.
K-E:
Blame the media, not Cruz.
By the way, as I’ve written before, Trump’s mention of immigration in HIS campaign kickoff speech was very brief. He wasn’t emphasizing it at all. The media seized on the “rape” reference because they thought it would hurt him. Instead, it helped him, and it was only after that that Trump realized he should make it his focus. It was not his focus initially. It was serendipitous, a product of media attention, and Trump capitalized on it.
Meanwhile, Cruz had been working solidly on it for years.
If you’re saying it’s the perception that Trump is big on it, a perception he now encourages, the MSM fosters, and commenters and bloggers who support him keep repeating, I’ll certainly concede that.
Link to Peggy Noonan on Fox and Friends. I think it is embedded into a leftist web site (crooks & liars).
http://tinyurl.com/orrwl5h
Harold:
Thanks. I added the video as an addendum to the post.
Noonan has been making the rounds. She must have a book coming out. She was an Obama voter (not sure if once or twice), but she’s proven she’s a fool.
Peggy brings up something else in that video clip — the “power of religious feeling in a vacuous world”. Now that’s existential!
Matt_SE:
She’s proven she was a fool about Obama.
She wasn’t a fool about Reagan. She doesn’t seem to be a fool about Obama now. Do you really subscribe to “once a fool, always a fool, forever and evermore”?
I don’t. If someone was a fool once, I’m wary. But they can certainly prove themselves to have learned from their errors.
Have you never heard of William Blake’s “The fool who persists in his folly will become wise”? I would modify it to “may become wise.”
It’s also the theme of “Groundhog Day”—although he had to persist pretty persistently.
When are those Syrian refugees expected? We can expect something shortly after they arrive. Apparently some of the terrorists arrived from Syria only a short time ago.
BTW if you think Obama is weak wait for Hillary.
@neo
It depends on them demonstrating that they’ve learned their lesson. They get double points for a mea culpa explaining why they allowed themselves to get hoodwinked the first time.
In Noonan’s case, she’s far too old to use inexperience as an excuse. After her years in the Reagan administration, she ought to know better. Finally, there’s a category difference between supporting someone who was marginal and supporting someone with Obama’s record. Sure, the MSM was covering it up as best they could, but the info was out there for anyone who wanted to know.
A salty dog like Noonan has no excuse for ignorance, other than that she wanted to be fooled. What’s to stop her from self-deception in the future?
On the reformed fool, David Brooks has never reformed. And I don’t expect the moderate (and faux token “conservative” on PBS to ever reform)!
Peggy Noonan? (Sigh) Too inured to NYC living and the blind, good-hearted but pathologically altruistic Leftists that surround her there to easily see “light,” much less reform into a reliable, consistent, conservative public intellectual, methinks.
I this if only to contrast her life as a thinker and writer, with Jean’s (Neo)….
The accellerated processing of Syrian “refugees” and the inevitable result (barring what Mr. Carson amusingly would call “malpractice” by terrorists) here in the U.S. is not something the administration is showing any evidence of being worried about. On the contrary, this is a FEATURE, not a “bug.” To appropriate some programmer language for another purpose. In other words, Himself has made a consistent effort to bring about a situation that will result in unfortunate events, clearly in the hope of having a crisis to take advantage of. It is my belief that we have been very, very lucky so far.
Islamic Jihad is allied with the Leftist alliance.
Those who underestimate the power of Jihad, is also in many ways underestimating the threat of the Left. And those who underestimate the Left, also underestimate the power of Jihad.
The Left interprets Islamic extremism in the context of its belief in Decolonialism/Multiculturalism, which is one of the three pillars of the faith and the source of moral certitude. Hence, the immediate handwringing about “racist backlash.” We can add to this the Left’s recognition that the terrorists have adopted Leninist ethics, in which the morality or immorality of an act depends on “who” is acting and to “whom” the action is done.
So the Left can’t recognize Islamic extremism as a threat or take effective steps to attack it at its ideological and social roots. I don’t think Islamic extremism will need to fight and suppress the Left. The Left will surrender because of the force of its deepest internal logic. Arthur Koestler would understand.
We will see progessive colonization of Left causes and organizations to this end. This is intimately connected to the week’s news of the viral uprisings on campus.
I agree that all of this strengthens Trump’s support. More attacks will gain him further support. However… might a similar situation in the Republican nomination apply as does in the democrat party’s? i.e. “No wonder Hillary thinks she is inevitable: She ALREADY has the votes of 500 Democratic establishment ‘superdelegates’ locked up”
Might the delegates ignore primary results and just vote for the establishment’s pick, someone like Rubio?
Yes, that would destroy the GOP’s support but given the past, their attitude appears to be, so what?
Who are the useful idiots now? We can hope that Obama’s scorned “lovers” may get back on track providing useful narratives for legions of our lost and bewildered.
“American blood is best and we will taste it soon.”
Join the fight, start an abortion “clinic”. It’s safe, legal, humane, and politically correct… for now.
Better yet, open a Planned Parenthood office and reap the profits from killing, harvesting, and trafficking of bodies, organs, tissue, and other clumps of cells from wholly innocent human lives.