Charles Krauthammer points out that Obama has effectively surrendered in the War on Terror:
On Special Report, Charles Krauthammer exposed the “flaw at the center” of President Obama’s national-security address delivered Thursday afternoon: “this notion [that] every war has to come to an end.” “That is a naïve and utopian idea,” he said.
“To end a war you need two sides,” Krauthammer reminded viewers. “It’s as if Obama stood up in 1958 and said, ‘The Cold War has to end, and I’m going to end it.’ The problem is it doesn’t end until either al-Qaeda disappears or it renounces the declaration of war it made in 1996. That’s why all the proposals he wants are completely impractical and ultimately harmful.”
I tend to agree with the good Dr. Krauthammer but what I heard was something a little different – what I heard was Obama saying to the terrorist community:
What do you say, guys, can we just pretend that this whole war on terror thing never happened and go back to the way it was on September 10, 2001 when we could just not make such a big deal of you killing our people? I really find this whole “war” thing tiring and distasteful. How about it? Sound good?
I’ve written before that in modern “warfare” there is no metric to determine when the war is over and one side just standing up and saying “I’m tired of fighting, I won, you can stop attacking me now” is not winning and will do nothing to stop the actual conflict.
What we saw in London this week was a shift of tactics by the Islamists.
They are taking the attacks on the West down to an individual level.
In testimony before a joint meeting of the House and Senate Intelligence committees on September 12, 2011, David Petraeus and James Clapper warned:
…that al-Qaeda remains a significant threat to the United States because of a new willingness to embrace smaller-scale attacks…
And I agree with Obama when he says:
Neither I, nor any President, can promise the total defeat of terror. We will never erase the evil that lies in the hearts of some human beings, nor stamp out every danger to our open society.
What Obama has just proposed is that we are going to stop waging an actual war to protect our country as a whole and accept the collateral damage to individual citizens when small scale attacks occur. What he is saying essentially is this:
We can’t stop someone on the street from turning and attacking you while screaming “Allahu Akbar!”. You are pretty much on your own.
He intends to demote terrorism from an act of war against our nation to a “law enforcement matter”, regarding these individual acts as crimes against individuals – just as we are doing with the Boston Marathon bombings.
If you want a lesson in what this means, just look to London this week. How many people stood by and watched as those two Islamists butchered that soldier? How many chose “not to get involved”? How many shot video from their mobile phones instead of using them to call for help or put them down to render aid to the squaddie who was being hacked to death?
What shocked me was that it took a woman, a mother, to step forward and try to render aid. It was two other women stood by the soldier after the attack. No man even attempted to intervene. That’s not a sexist remark, she was incredibly brave to do what she did, it is just an observation of how the traditional role of a man as a protector has been neutered and males have truly been emasculated in modern society. It is also an alarming example of how devalued military service has become that not one person would put their life on the line for someone who made a career of putting his on the line for them.
Also note how people just stood and waited for 20 minutes for the police to arrive while there was a fellow human, a soldier no less, bleeding out on the pavement in the middle of a public street as his murderers stood over him. They were compliant little sheeple, milling about while waiting for the nanny state sheepherders to arrive and shepherd them to safety. This was a western civilization that has surrendered, that has accepted their place in line at the slaughterhouse (remember this?).
But then again, Britain has banned handguns and has strict laws about carrying a knife with a blade long enough that it could be used as an “offensive” weapon. It is actually illegal to even carry a knife in public without good reason.
I guess “beheading” is a “good reason”.
Because of the lack of a gun or a knife in public hands, the British public was defenseless and therefore powerless to step in without meeting the same fate as the soldier, Lee Rigby.
It was if it had been torn from the pages of Orwell’s 1984.
What sets America apart is the Second Amendment.
If Obama is going to individualize terror, America must make sure that we can individualize the response.