Does president Obama consider ISIS a serious threat to America? To be clear, to be a serious threat, ISIS must be a group likely to mount attacks within the USA or against important American targets around the world. Half a year after ISIS made a major appearance on the world stage, I still am not sure what is the answer to that question. Seriously, does Obama think that ISIS would launch terror attacks in the USA if we do nothing to destroy the group now? Obama has not told us his view.
This is not idle speculation; the answer to that question is critical with regard to how America deals with ISIS. If we conclude that ISIS would move from mass killing in the Iraq and Syria to blowing up civilians in the USA, then we need to confront ISIS now before those attacks take place. On the other hand, if ISIS has no intention of threatening Americas in the USA and around the world, then there may be no need to do anything to stop the group.
Obama, of course, is one of the few individuals in the USA to have the full benefit of the vast amounts of intelligence put together by the CIA and other agencies. Obama ought to have a much more informed view of ISIS' intentions than most Americans. That means that it is incumbent upon Obama to tell his countrymen about what we know of those intentions and to lead us towards supporting the appropriate course.
And what about Bashir al Assad in Syria? In the past, Obama announced that Assad had to go. Shortly thereafter, Obama took steps that cemented Assad in place as leader of Syria.
Then there are nuclear weapons programs in Iran which continue as I write this. After six years of hearing how Iran's program must be stopped, the silence out of Washington on the topic is deafening. Does that mean that Obama has given up on this issue? I don't know, and no amount of research can tell me the answer. Obama just doesn't tell us.
America is supposed to be a democracy where the views of the people matter. I don't expect foreign policy to be run based upon poll results; that would be a catastrophe. I do expect, however, that as policies are developed, the White House should tell us all about them and explain in general terms the essence of the reasoning behind those policies. This is a task which Obama, despite all his statements and speeches, has chosen not to do. The basic tenets of America's foreign policy under Obama remain a mystery. Indeed, no one knows if there actually are any tenets for American foreign policy aside from the president's golden rule: "Do unto others the things that are most likely to lead to votes in the next election, or at least some big campaign contributions."
This is not idle speculation; the answer to that question is critical with regard to how America deals with ISIS. If we conclude that ISIS would move from mass killing in the Iraq and Syria to blowing up civilians in the USA, then we need to confront ISIS now before those attacks take place. On the other hand, if ISIS has no intention of threatening Americas in the USA and around the world, then there may be no need to do anything to stop the group.
Obama, of course, is one of the few individuals in the USA to have the full benefit of the vast amounts of intelligence put together by the CIA and other agencies. Obama ought to have a much more informed view of ISIS' intentions than most Americans. That means that it is incumbent upon Obama to tell his countrymen about what we know of those intentions and to lead us towards supporting the appropriate course.
And what about Bashir al Assad in Syria? In the past, Obama announced that Assad had to go. Shortly thereafter, Obama took steps that cemented Assad in place as leader of Syria.
Then there are nuclear weapons programs in Iran which continue as I write this. After six years of hearing how Iran's program must be stopped, the silence out of Washington on the topic is deafening. Does that mean that Obama has given up on this issue? I don't know, and no amount of research can tell me the answer. Obama just doesn't tell us.
America is supposed to be a democracy where the views of the people matter. I don't expect foreign policy to be run based upon poll results; that would be a catastrophe. I do expect, however, that as policies are developed, the White House should tell us all about them and explain in general terms the essence of the reasoning behind those policies. This is a task which Obama, despite all his statements and speeches, has chosen not to do. The basic tenets of America's foreign policy under Obama remain a mystery. Indeed, no one knows if there actually are any tenets for American foreign policy aside from the president's golden rule: "Do unto others the things that are most likely to lead to votes in the next election, or at least some big campaign contributions."
No comments:
Post a Comment