Making assumptions

What to do about ISIS and all of its implications regarding terrorist actions by all groups under one religious banner or another. I believe this requires some key assumptions and that is what I’ve done in writing these recommendations.

I believe history plays a major roll in what we should do to protect our homeland from terrorist and our citizens traveling worldwide for business and pleasure since it is now accepted we are in global economy requiring civil global communications.

While all my friends, liberal, conservative and those with only a passing interest in the issue seem to have the answer I’m a little less certain. Left-wingers point to the George W. Bush era as the catalyst for the spread of violence in the middle east President Obama points to the Christian crusades by implication says those terrorist groups using the Muslim religion [at the moment virtually all terrorist groups use the Muslim religion as their cover] as their rallying cause to correct a religious wrong. Of course representatives from the U.S. State Department pose the answer to stopping terrorist is “an effort to help Middle East states to establish democratic governmental regimes with education and jobs for the youth of the Middle East. If this is the state departments policy it is ludicrous at best but I suspect it is just an effort to support the Presidents position that the Muslim religion is being used for a cover and our country shouldn’t aver react. But this is drifting from the historical aspect of this major problem we are facing as a nation.

The most reasonable assumption it would seem to me is that approximately a hundred years ago the west and east seeking oil and other resources rearranged the borders of countries and created countries all without consideration of religious beliefs or hundreds of years of tribal history. These outsiders enforced their will on Middle East society by bribery and military forces.

It would appear religious ideas and tribal beliefs diehard in the Middle East and in fact not at all. As recently as three years ago the Obama administration lauded the “Arab Spring” delighted in the idea that Middle East “dictators,” friends of ours and recipients of billions of dollars in aid from our country would be replaced by governments free of extreme religious rulers and a modicum of freedom for the citizens of these countries. The Obama supported these rebellions and of course it didn’t work. This not to say that a conservative government in the U.S. would not have made the same decision but whomever made it, it didn’t work and we are known throughout the Middle East as a country not to be trusted. History says the so-called modern world made a huge mistake in the Middle East and we are seeing the outcome of those misplaced beliefs and actions has become a world of extremist driven by an interpretation of the Koran that supports their twisted beliefs of justice for the Muslim world through violence whether their brethren Muslims want this program or not.

What to do to stamp out the violence against Christians and Jews is the question facing the western/non-Muslim world today and in the immediate future.

One of the reasonable hopes is that of the 2.2 billion Muslims in the world the vast majority who rejects the extremist violent approach there will be a rejection by the religious leaders of this approach. The rejection needs to take place in the mosques of the world with the religious leaders urging their communities to work with the youth to reject the siren call of the Internet campaign to radicalize young Muslim men and woman.

Another more direct action the west can take is to withdraw from the tribal disputes in the Middle East and Africa. I know this will not be popular with “nation builders” and human rights organizations just to name two. Yes I’m aware that this knowingly allowing slavery to continue to flourish in this area of the world but let’s faces it slavery goes on now and our efforts have been futile in this area of civil rights concerns. We must allow the tribes to reestablish their “borders” and interact with the western world at their level of interest. When it comes to oil we need to open U.S. federal lands for fracking and other methods of extracting oil lessening our dependence on “foreign oil” with the exception of Canada and Mexico. South American oil sources are more dependent on civil unrest but are less of a threat to us than Middle East oil resources. This approach is simple to offer but will be difficult to implement because the Obama administration has no intentions of releasing federal lands for oil exploitations and that policy will probably remain in effect for the remainder of the Obama term as President.

Now to the obvious, we must negotiate with our fellow western countries to put up new checks and balances inside their respective countries and to seek some uniform travel checks and balances that lessen the risk of extremist easily getting into our country. In side our country we must continue and increase the surveillance of the potential extremist and the potential extremist thwarting lone wolf attempts to perform violent actions.

Finally we need to expand the seal team concept to powerful strike forces that can provide boots on the ground to direct fire, complete raids in concert with local forces, perform assignations and provide intelligence information to our country and our allies. This approach is based on the idea that the extremist may dream of a caliphate but in reality they are hit and run fighters using terror acts as their front-page headlines. The only exception would be a war with Iran where I believe the advantage would be with us because our forces are simply stronger than theirs. Of course there is the additional consideration that the Israel’s might defang the enemy before we have to face them with our mechanized ground forces.

Well there you have it, one persons thoughts on an active program to stop the Muslim extremist from killing our people, eliminating other religious beliefs and causing chaos in the world for all countries looking for a more friendly global world of business and civil communications.

Disappointed

In recent conversations with my friends who voted for President Obama I’ve noted a sense of disappointment. Note this is not true for what I affectionately call “The commie, pinko, perverts” left-wingers. Rather it is the average American probably from a family of long voting Democrats and viewing the party as for the little guy and unencumbered by hard and fast morality rules and regulations. I noticed in conversations going into the Obama re-election campaign in 2012 that many of these friends who had voted for Obama in 2008 indicated they would vote for him again “even though he didn’t exactly deliver on the hope and change promise” but they felt they should give him another chance. Now I hear disappointment in their collective voices, a lower tone, a less emphatic support of the administrations position on foreign policies and resignation to the fact that the President is a lame duck politically. Interestingly they don’t seem to blame anyone for perceived Obama failures but rather seem content to chalk up the administrations problems to the “politics” of our country. My gut says they will be less willing to vote in the 2016 election or at the least, less enthusiastically.

Do you sometimes just shake your head?

President Obama believes in his foreign policy and domestic programs. With twenty some months left in his term as president of this country he feels free to embrace and endorse approaches that might have been political suicide in the past. Witness a statement from a key advisor to Obama, David Axelrod. In his new book David references the fact that Obama believed in 2007 same sex marriage was correct and should be the law of the land but he knew that politically it would be a suicide move and so he took the more expedient approach of saying he was in favor of marriage only between a man and a woman. Now as he looks down the short road to the end of his term in office he feels free to say same sex marriage is correct and should be legal and most people believe he means it.

Obama feels free now to use his executive order to advance his immigration plan that is to give status to as many of the “illegal” aliens in this country as is possible.

The President is directing the DOJ to search out any discrimination in policing policies any voting laws that in particular center on poor people of black heritage. It is almost assured that his current nominee to replace Eric Holder as director of the DOJ will carry his policies forward, possibly at the expensive of other issues more relevant to the country’s needs and concerns.

The Presidents determination not to refer to the current beheadings, burnings, etc as Muslim terrorist or in any way related to the Muslim religion is clear. He is risking his support from Christian backers for example the Obama administration refers to the death of twenty-one Christian’s beheadings last week as “the death of twenty one Egyptian citizens.” Days later Obama issued a statement regarding three young people shot to death at the North Carolina State campus saying that in essence no one should be killed because of their religious beliefs. The difference was that the three killed at NC State were Muslim. Of course there is no proof at this point that the killing was anything other that a stupid man who says he shot these three because of a parking spot issue. The President chose to make it a Muslim issue but not to reference the beheadings of twenty-one Egyptians who were Christians as a religious issue even though ISIS announced the fact that these Christians were killed because they were Christians.

Education is a corner stone of Obama’s policies and since he is no longer required to run for office he is offering up free Junior College for two years. There is no proof that Obama’s efforts to fund junior college programs in the past resulted in any kind of success for the students or the country. Obama is also seeking additional funds for the Common Core program that smack of federal government control of state education programs. He may or may not be stopped by the congress but in any case he faces great difficulty in funding these programs now that he is a lame duck in a Republican controlled congress.

Obama owns Obamacare and he is very proud of the program while the general public is much less enthusiastic. The President faces some challenges in the Supreme Court and the results are very hard to predict. The worst part of this dilemma is that the Republicans do not appear to have an alternative unless Paul Ryan actually has a plan ready to launch in the unlikely event that the Supreme Court defangs Obamacare. The problem in no small part is that once you “give” the public oerks under a program like Obamacare the government will be hard pressed to take those benefits back and even harder to convince voters that if they want to keep those “free” programs they will have to pay for them.

Foreign policy is the category that is receiving the most attention at the moment. Many Republicans say the president doesn’t have a foreign policy. This is simply not correct. President Obama’s policy is to get the U.S. off their high horse as he said recently in a press conference and become a “good global citizen” which sounds good but is at odds with reality. All of the factors that play into our country’s image world wide including envy, hate, resentment of our economic success and yes superior attitude born from decades of success color how other country’s image of and relationship potential with the U.S.

The one thing that has been demonstrated in the six years of the Obama reign is that his policy of leading from behind isn’t working. Above all most average American citizens want to secure our country against attacks and encourage our economic growth. A strong U.S. is a safer and potentially more financially successful country. This is probably the weakest policy position that Obama will leave the next President and clearly the most dangerous policy we face as a nation.

One of the most confusing aspects of the Obama policies is the effort to “protect” the Muslim population worldwide by refusing to accept that there are militant Muslims driven by religious fervor to destroy the west. This does not mean all Muslims are like these anymore that all German’s were Nazi’s or even sympatric to Hitler’s policies against Jews.

When the President of this country steps down in 2017 his imprint will be clearly left on this country. Meanwhile Obama will take executive actions, direct the DOJ and appeal to the left side of his party for public support of his education and social programs free from needing the general public’s support. We can only guess what his lingering policies will have on the Democrat party’s efforts in the 2016 elections and beyond. Sometimes it just makes you shake your head.