In a somewhat bizarre snippet from a New York Times account of Obama’s prelude to war with ISIS, we find this strange bit of advice for ISIS from the Commander-in-Chief himself. The Times fails to point out that it makes no sense, while also betraying Obama’s lack of leadership.
But the president said he had already been headed toward a military response before the men’s deaths. He added that ISIS had made a major strategic error by killing them because the anger it generated resulted in the American public’s quickly backing military action.
If he had been “an adviser to ISIS,” Mr. Obama added, he would not have killed the hostages but released them and pinned notes on their chests saying, “Stay out of here; this is none of your business.” Such a move, he speculated, might have undercut support for military intervention.
How as it a mistake if Obama had “already been headed toward a military response before the men’s deaths’? Or, is he saying, even if he decided military action was necessary, he wouldn’t undertake it without broad public support the videos allegedly provide?
Furthermore, what proof is there that that’s the least bit correct? Days ago Obama admitted to having no strategy for the problem, now we learn he was all but set to go to war. Really? This sounds more like the words of a professorial president able to talk in and around every side of virtually every issue, while effectively leading on none – with the help of an entirely uncritical press determined to put the best face on anything and everything he does.
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.