Skip to comments.War by wordplay
Posted on 08/09/2013 6:33:53 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Jen Psaki, blameless State Department spokeswoman, explained that the hasty evacuation of our embassy in Yemen was not an evacuation but a reduction in staff. This proved a problem because the Yemeni government had already announced (and denounced) the evacuation the word normal folks use for the panicky ordering of people onto planes headed out of the country.
Thus continues the administrations penchant for wordplay, the bending of language to fit a political need.
This would all be comical and merely peculiar if it didnt reflect a larger, more troubling reality: The confusion of language is a direct result of a confusion of policy which is served by constant obfuscation.
In the end, this isnt about language. Its about leadership. The wordplay is merely cover for uncertain policy embedded in confusion and ambivalence about the whole enterprise.
This is not leading from behind. This is not leading at all.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I believe general McClellan called it a "strategic redeployment".
Churchill's maiden speech as Prime Minister to Commons.
The question is, what is our policy? That question should be answered with nothing less than stark Churchillian clarity.
First, we have to define the condition of the world. We are in a world under assault by aggressive, murderous, suicidal, Islam. They intend to extinguish our Western culture, our Anglo Saxons system of law, our Bill of Rights, our democracy and to subject us to Sharia. The Islamist ideology controls an unknown percentage of Muslims but those who adhere to this radical belief system are as immune to reason, diplomacy, and persuasion as are members of any cult. Think of the reaction of the Aberdeen American community to the verdict acquitting George Zimmerman.
Therefore, the threat of aggressive Islam is an existential threat. It is a threat which cannot be successfully averted by the same strategies which contained and ultimately defeated communism because radical Islam is essentially irrational. The existential threat of radical Islam presents a multifaceted attack on the West which includes infiltration, intimidation, and even the threat of nuclear annihilation. Whatever tactics are employed, whether subversion of democracy through immigration and intimidation or terror up to and including weapons of mass destruction, conventional international sanctions, typical alliances, and diplomacy are inadequate.
Since we are in an existential war not of our choosing we should acknowledge it, that is, declare it to be so. Bush declared war on "terror" and Obama has prematurely declared victory. Clarity requires identification of the enemy and the enemy is not "terror" and the enemy has not been defeated. The enemy should be defined as radical, aggressive, Islam.
In waging this war we must understand that our resources have been greatly diminished by the failed policies of George Bush and the lack of coherent policy by Barack Obama. Note: Barack Obama's policies have been so incoherent and so destructive of America's national interests that a persuasive case can be made that he is quite deliberately undermining America's security.
The Islamic threat is nearly immune to the conventional military arts. Our occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan have failed, partly because of the policies of Barack Obama, but also because of their own weight. At the end of the day, America is poorer, our international stature is diminished, our serving men and women are disillusioned and embittered, our citizens are frustrated, all by our experience in nation building. Worse, as a result of a combination of factors involving the policies of Bush and Obama, radical Islam is establishing a Crescent of radical regimes from Pakistan's borders with China through Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and on toward the Atlantic shores of Morocco.
Iran is everyday closer to the bomb and Obama's feckless policy has not delayed them in the slightest but it has revealed his administration to be a paper tiger. But beware-a radical leftist is an extremely dangerous animal when his power and his ideology are threatened. This is what makes Obama so difficult to analyze, so difficult to predict, so dangerous.
Hypocrite in Chief. Where is the openness and honesty we were promised?