Presidential Incoherence Barack Obama is sending conflicting messages on ISIS. This incoherence has America, and the world, wondering whether our president even has a clue. We learned earlier this week that Obama has been receiving detailed intelligence reports on the rise of ISIS for a year. Obama also admitted that he has yet to come up with a plan on how to handle ISIS. Then he contradicts himself within the same speech on our goals related to ISIS. On the one hand, Obama vows to “degrade and destroy” ISIS. But moments later he refers to ISIS as a regional threat that we must shrink into a “manageable problem.” Not only that, but Obama adds the caveat of “if we are joined by the international community.” Which is it, Mr. President? Is our goal to eradicate these barbaric Islamic militants who pose a threat to America and the world or simply to shrink their capabilities into something tolerable, and only if the international community goes along? It's mixed messages such as this which has the world scratching its head. What does America stand for? Under the “leadership” of Barack Obama, we've lacked a consistent and clear foreign policy. In this vacuum of true American leadership, our enemies have been emboldened and our allies question our commitment and resolve. Obama's own administration can't seem to propagate a consistent message. Take Obama's mixed messages and put them up against Vice President Joe Biden's recent comments: “We take care of those who are grieving and when that’s finished, they should know, we will follow them to the gates of hell until they are brought to justice.” Which is it for this administration: the gates of hell or manageable? It's no wonder we do not have a strategy to deal with ISIS. In order to have a strategy, you first need a goal. If you can't define the goal, it's a bit difficult to draw the roadmap to achieving it. |
Comments
Post a Comment