As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Obama Must Refocus the Nation on Terrorism

America has been under threat from terrorism during President Obama’s entire presidency, though you would hardly know it.

For most of his first term, there hadn’t been major attacks, and the president had been studiously downplaying the threat, while trumpeting the “gutsy move” of killing Bin Laden. He decided that we were not in a “war” against terrorism. During the campaign, we were told that “al Qaeda is on the path to defeat.”

Obama failed to even mention terrorism during his Inaugural Address. Meanwhile, we were assured, remote controlled model airplanes were decimating the ranks al Qaeda’s leadership.

Obama KarzaiBut now, in the span of just seven months, there have been two major terrorist assaults, one in Benghazi and the other in Boston. It’s time for some reflection at the White House.

These attacks, as awful as they were, are nothing compared to what can happen if the bad guys really get lucky. And with the success rate growing, our enemies will be more willing to roll the dice.

I’m not saying I know that Obama’s approach is to blame for either of these attacks. I know he wants to defend the country and believes he is doing the right things, the things that need to be done to prevent terrorism.

But while the drone operation has killed a lot of terrorists, we have taken steps that reduce our ability to understand what the terrorist are up to.

We are heading out of Afghanistan without completing the job. We have withdrawn too fully from Iraq. We have toned down out treatment of prisoners who could give us valuable information and told them they’d be receiving no worse treatment than they can read about in the Army Field Manual.

In places like Syria, Libya and Egypt, we’ve done too little prevent – and we’ve even abetted – the growing influence of Islamists. We show weakness to our enemies by expressing eternal faith in negotiations and failing to confront more directly the menace of Iran.

Obama needs to remind the country more often that we remain in a potentially existential struggle with an enemy that is still capable of striking us hard. He needs to prepare the nation, and he needs to act like terrorism is the central focus of his presidency. Everyone tasked to prevent terrorism is trying to do their job and I’m sure doing it well. But when it sees the president if fully and publicly focused, the rest of the government takes its game up a notch.

Universal early childhood education, nice as that sounds, can wait, please.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone

50 Responses to Obama Must Refocus the Nation on Terrorism

  1. The only thing he’s focused on is having to get up early this morning.

    Neglect is not unique to him. Politicians in general are only using this subject to further their agendas, paying off their buds, etc. They are ignoring a lot of bad information as is Homeland Security and the rest of the government. We have been lured into a false sense of security.

  2. You are overlooking Fort Hood, Keith. THREE terrorist attacks on American soil. I am not accepting Obama’s characterization of the Fort Hood massacre.

    • Yes, that should be re-classifed immediately as terrorism as it should have been from the beginning.
      Republicans in Congress have an opportunity now to push on that, Benghazi, and Boston.

  3. TruIy sorry to say, I have very little confidence in Obama and less in Holder and Napolitano. The FBI seems to be performing well with the full on response and help from Boston locals.

    This is where the full on impact of having a President who lies to the American people shows. Nobody knows who to believe while Obama is looking for someone to blame.

  4. So what are the lessons here? Here are the facts:
    •Massachusetts has some of the nation’s strictest gun-control laws. Did the terrorists obtain their guns legally?
    •MIT is a “gun free” zone.
    •Manufacturing bombs is illegal, but they did it anyway.
    •Pressure-cookers are widely available.
    •Two terrorist punks were able to gain legal residence in the U.S., and create chaos, including the virtual shutdown of metropolitan Boston, all by themselves.

    I would conclude that gun-control legislation will have even a more difficult time with its misplaced logic. Perhaps Obama, Pelosi, and Reid will now propose a ban on pressure-cookers.

  5. My father was a psychiatrist and he always said you cannot tell what someone else is thinking. What sticks me in all this is the first video of the two strolling along on a mission to blow the legs off strangers. The mind just stops–can’t take it in. For some reason, the paper delivery guy skipped me this morning, but in watching TV for a little while, I heard that the older brother did not understand Americans and had no American friends–oh, boohoo, is this how the spin begins.

  6. These two heartless terrorists lived here for over a decade. Peacefully going through their lives. Suddenly, out of the blue, they attack.

    Is that not the the outward sign of a “sleeper cell”???

    They had to have gotten their training and funding to make bombs and explosive vests from somebody. Of course, that somebody would have to be a radical islamic terrorist group, so Im sure this angle won’t be touched by the current administration.

    • I know you are being ironic–but the training elsewhere thing has come up. I think all this is sort of pending…right, wrong, in between, inconclusive–unfolding.

    • The cat is already out of the bag. The uncle of the two bombers stated on national TV that they were ‘radicalized’. It’s only a matter of time until we learn who is behind this domestic terrorist attack. Obama needs to expand his vocabulary to include Radical Islamic Terrrorist! He needs to write it on a chalk board 100 x a day!

    • Sleeper cell, I agree. They’ve been living here a long time, and when they discovered a good ‘soft’ target, the Boston Marathon, they went back (or at least one did) for final instructions.

  7. This should put pressure on Congress to seek answers on Benghazi and to get Major Hasan tried as a terrorist, not a work place shooter.

    • You know the Defense Department denied Purple Hearts for victims of the Fort Hood terrorist attack, don’t you? It might offend the sensitivites of the terrorist if they awarded them…

      “Despite extensive evidence that Hasan was in communication with al Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki prior to the attack, the military has denied the victims a Purple Heart and has treated the incident as “workplace violence” instead of “combat related” or terrorism. Last month, a spokesman for recently appointed Defense Secretary, Chuck Hagel, told ABC News the Department’s position had not changed under his leadership. ”

      http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/purple-hearts-fort-hood-victims-pentagon/story?id=18845771

      Obama LOVES his brave soldiers, don’t he?

  8. Nice headline. But wishful thinking.
    The occupier of the Oval Office can only seem to focus on his golf game, his vacays and his political agenda.
    He will never do what is right for the country and its citizens.

  9. President Golf Swing focused on terrorism? Please…..

    He’s a Muslim, he doesn’t give a sh*t. Just another set of “freedom fighters” from his true religion.

    How many times does this country need to be reminded? Not all Muslims are terrorists, but nearly all terrorists are Muslims.

  10. From Scott Johnson, at Powerline:
    “Andrew McCarthy reminds us that the grand strategy of President Obama involves an inability to sort out our friends from our enemies: The president is mulishly determined to cultivate Islamic-supremacist governments and movements like the Muslim Brotherhood. The stubborn problem is that al Qaeda — the only Muslim outfit the administration seems willing to hang the “terrorist” label on — is also Islamic-supremacist.”

  11. John al-Quds Brennan declared the end to the war on terrorism in 2009.

    It’s official. The U.S. is no longer engaged in a “war on terrorism.” Neither is it fighting “jihadists” or in a “global war.”

    President Obama’s top homeland security and counterterrorism official took all three terms off the table of acceptable words inside the White House during a speech Thursday at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank.

    “The President does not describe this as a ‘war on terrorism,’” said John Brennan, head of the White House homeland security office, who outlined a “new way of seeing” the fight against terrorism.

    The only terminology that Mr. Brennan said the administration is using is that the U.S. is “at war with al Qaeda.”

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/06/white-house-war-terrorism-over/?feat=home_headlines

  12. When the only thing you believe in is ‘transforming’ America into a welfare state, ‘terrorism and security’ doesn’t really rank at the top of the priorities.
    Yes, that’s harsh but just look at his record, look at his schedule that is posted here each and every day one is released, he does NOTHING but give speeches, attend fund-raisers, party and play. Look at Obama in totality and you see an agenda and priorities that are as anti-American as any would be foreign invader ever dreamed of.

  13. Obama thought he was going to be the Boy Wonder whose muslim childhood years gave him the key to winning over the muslims.

    Another delusion of grandeur.

    • Again, whatever he is, it ain’t American.
      Thanks, Soros, thanks, dems, thanks to all the fools who bought the package, and voted for him.
      The blood is on your hands.

      • sportinlife: don’t forget the 2 or 3million “Republicans” who voted for John McCain in 2008 but couldn’t be bothered to vote for Romney in 2012. they would have made the difference. personally, I blame those idjits more than I blame the Dems.