In the wake of the policy of appeasement which is nearly cost Western civilization its very existence, it fell to Winston Churchill, in the words of John F. Kennedy (or rather Ted Sorenson), "to mobilize the English language and hurl it into battle." Before one can wage war, especially before one can mobilize a nation, actually a whole civilization, to wage world war one must be able to tell the people what the policy is. Churchill articulated perfectly the only policy available for his time. No one could listen to his speech and not know that England was in an existential war for its own survival, the survival of the Empire, and ultimately the survival of Western civilization against a monstrous tyranny.
Barak Obama is either incapable or unwilling to articulate any policy whatsoever. He is in fact unwilling to tell us who the enemy is or even if we are at war at all. Yet he wages war and while he wages it he declares he is ending it not in victory but according to the calendar. He will not identify the enemy, indeed he apologizes to the enemy for our very existence.
If George Bush failed to identify the human enemy and instead called the enemy "terrorism" against whom he declared war, at least we knew we were in war, a global war, an existential war. One can understand George Bush's reluctance to name Muslim extremism as the enemy out of a concern not to radicalize more of the 1.6 billion Muslims who inhabit the earth. So he resorted to euphemism but he made it clear, nevertheless, that we were at war.
Barack Obama euphemizes the English language and hurls it against his own people. He resorts to euphemisms for domestic terrorist murders like "workplace violence." Foreign terrorist attacks are called, "Man-made disasters." Winston Churchill waged war for the survival of Western civilization, Obama engages in, "foreign contingency operations."
If a policy cannot be clearly articulated there is no policy.
But it is worse than all this because all of this is only a symptom of a truly frightening dimension of the Obama administration's foreign policy. Obama's inability to articulate a coherent foreign policy for the war against militant Islam is not the product of muddled thinking but of divided loyalties. For the first time in American history we are led into war by a commander-in-chief who is emotionally and ideologically opposed to the existence of the United States as it has been constitutionally created. He despises the present system and wants to "transform" it.
Obama is a radical and radicals who think like Obama, and with whom he has associated all his life, despise America. Their default position is to make common cause with America's enemies. This they have done consistently during my lifetime and most flagrantly during the time of the Molotov/Ribbentrop pact which pitched the world into World War II and created the need for Winston Churchill to articulate his policy. It is difficult to determine conclusively whether Obama harbors independent sympathy for Islam because of his association with it and instruction in it as a youth, because of his dalliance with Pakistanis while at Columbia, because of his association with Saudi money and entrée into Harvard, or whether Obama is merely behaving as a typical leftist radical making temporary alliances under the theory, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Either way, America is terribly vulnerable at the very top.
The author of this article wants America to engage in unconventional stealth warfare around the world which by definition must be done secretly. But who is to oversee Obama? How can the American people have confidence that the sons and daughters they send into harm's way, some of whom inevitably will come home with missing arms or legs or in body bags, are actually sacrificing on behalf of an America that most Americans have always loved but whom Obama despises?
We don't know what our foreign policy is, we don't know if there is a hidden agenda behind Obamas muddled speech and policies, we do not know if he wants us to actually win his wars, we do not know what the endgame is, we don't not know how we are to get there, we do not know why we should care. Never in American history has there been such a frightening abdication of duty by a commander-in-chief.
We do not know if Obama secretly wants the Muslim Brotherhood to prevail and create an Islamic crescent running from Pakistan's border with China to the beaches of Western Morocco. We can only see the evidence of our eyes and the ominous trends which have occurred in that direction.
What is our policy? There is an interesting theory concerning the inability of the French to wage effective war against the Nazi invasion of 1940. Many believe that the French, well aware of the recent history of the Spanish Civil War in which the Communists nearly won and in the process re-created many of the horrors of the French Revolution and the Bolshevik Revolution, concluded that it was better to be conquered by the Nazis than by the Communists within. In other words, they feared the brutality of the left even more than occupation by Hitler.
A country so riven with mistrust cannot prevail and it certainly cannot win wars. What is Obama's policy?
