Little-Acorn
12-07-2015, 05:16 PM
President Obama's speech on Sunday night was his opportunity to announce changes in his policies for fighting the terrorism that's growing around the world and has recently spread to the United States.
But he announced no real changes.
We must be careful not to say bad things about Muslims, because we might offend Muslims who aren't radical Islamic terrorists.
We need more "gun control" laws imposed on law-abiding people in America, even if the laws he proposes wouldn't have done anything to stop the terrorist attacks we have seen recently.
We will keep hoping that other countries start sending troops to fight on the ground against ISIS, but we won't send any. Except possibly a small number of Special Forces.
---------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/12/06/obama-speech-reassurances-about-isis-fall-flat-in-oval-office-address.html
Obama speech: Reassurances about ISIS fall flat in Oval Office address
By Christian Whiton
Published December 06, 2015
FoxNews.com
President Barack Obama addresses the nation from the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, Sunday night, Dec. 6, 2016. The address comes as recent attacks in Paris and California have raised concerns that the U.S. and other countries aren�t doing enough to prevent terror attacks. (Saul Loeb/Pool Photo via AP)
President Barack Obama addresses the nation from the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, Sunday night, Dec. 6, 2016. The address comes as recent attacks in Paris and California have raised concerns that the U.S. and other countries aren’t doing enough to prevent terror attacks. (Saul Loeb/Pool Photo via AP)
In the wake of the worst terrorist attack in America since 9/11, President Obama could have used his Oval Office address on Sunday night to announce different policies than the ones that have obviously failed to keep America safe from radical Islam.
He could have explained why a long-feared arrival of low-tech, soft-target terrorism had occurred, and what he would do to rectify the problem—beginning with apologizing for giving a U.S. visa to a jihadist from Pakistan and agreeing to stop his plan to bring more Syrian refugees here.
He could have announced a plan to undermine the ideology of our enemies—radical Islam—which impelled Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik to wage war in San Bernardino last week.
Instead he did what he always does with security threats: blame others for his administration’s lapses and do the minimum to appear to be reacting to them without actually doing anything.
The president instinctively wants to react to every security threat by assailing his domestic opponents.
In calling for Congress to ban those on the no-fly list from buying guns, Obama is attempting one of his trademark shifts in blame for problems he has created. The president instinctively wants to react to every security threat by assailing his domestic opponents.
Even if his proposed ban and other gun control measures were in place, they would not have stopped the attack in San Bernardino. Recent attacks like those in Paris show that jihadists have little problem overcoming gun laws, which serve mainly to disarm the law-abiding. Obama could also look to his adopted hometown of Chicago to see that gun control doesn’t work.
Obama’s moralizing about avoiding “suspicion and hate” implied, once again, that Americans are bigoted — another attempt to shift blame. It echoed a statement last week by Attorney General Loretta Lynch that the government would prosecute anti-Muslim speech that “edges toward violence,” whatever that means.
But he announced no real changes.
We must be careful not to say bad things about Muslims, because we might offend Muslims who aren't radical Islamic terrorists.
We need more "gun control" laws imposed on law-abiding people in America, even if the laws he proposes wouldn't have done anything to stop the terrorist attacks we have seen recently.
We will keep hoping that other countries start sending troops to fight on the ground against ISIS, but we won't send any. Except possibly a small number of Special Forces.
---------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/12/06/obama-speech-reassurances-about-isis-fall-flat-in-oval-office-address.html
Obama speech: Reassurances about ISIS fall flat in Oval Office address
By Christian Whiton
Published December 06, 2015
FoxNews.com
President Barack Obama addresses the nation from the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, Sunday night, Dec. 6, 2016. The address comes as recent attacks in Paris and California have raised concerns that the U.S. and other countries aren�t doing enough to prevent terror attacks. (Saul Loeb/Pool Photo via AP)
President Barack Obama addresses the nation from the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, Sunday night, Dec. 6, 2016. The address comes as recent attacks in Paris and California have raised concerns that the U.S. and other countries aren’t doing enough to prevent terror attacks. (Saul Loeb/Pool Photo via AP)
In the wake of the worst terrorist attack in America since 9/11, President Obama could have used his Oval Office address on Sunday night to announce different policies than the ones that have obviously failed to keep America safe from radical Islam.
He could have explained why a long-feared arrival of low-tech, soft-target terrorism had occurred, and what he would do to rectify the problem—beginning with apologizing for giving a U.S. visa to a jihadist from Pakistan and agreeing to stop his plan to bring more Syrian refugees here.
He could have announced a plan to undermine the ideology of our enemies—radical Islam—which impelled Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik to wage war in San Bernardino last week.
Instead he did what he always does with security threats: blame others for his administration’s lapses and do the minimum to appear to be reacting to them without actually doing anything.
The president instinctively wants to react to every security threat by assailing his domestic opponents.
In calling for Congress to ban those on the no-fly list from buying guns, Obama is attempting one of his trademark shifts in blame for problems he has created. The president instinctively wants to react to every security threat by assailing his domestic opponents.
Even if his proposed ban and other gun control measures were in place, they would not have stopped the attack in San Bernardino. Recent attacks like those in Paris show that jihadists have little problem overcoming gun laws, which serve mainly to disarm the law-abiding. Obama could also look to his adopted hometown of Chicago to see that gun control doesn’t work.
Obama’s moralizing about avoiding “suspicion and hate” implied, once again, that Americans are bigoted — another attempt to shift blame. It echoed a statement last week by Attorney General Loretta Lynch that the government would prosecute anti-Muslim speech that “edges toward violence,” whatever that means.