Is Surrendering to ISIS the Only Way to Defeat it?
That got your attention didn’t it? A title similar to that was on an article by Daniel Greenfield, an American who writes for Breaking Israel News. His premise is that world leaders, and especially Barack Obama, have a backwards way of dealing with the radical Islamists called ISIS (or any others). He calls it “counterintuitive strategy.”
Counterintuitive strategy- will never work
“If you’re keeping score, freeing Islamic terrorists from Gitmo does not play into the hands of ISIS. Neither does bringing Syrians, many of whom sympathize with Islamic terrorists, into our country. And aiding the Muslim Brotherhood parent organization of ISIS does not play into the Islamic group’s hands.
However if you use the words “Islamic terrorism” or even milder derivatives such as “radical Islamic terrorism”, you are playing into the hands of ISIS. If you call for closer law enforcement scrutiny of Muslim areas before they turn into Molenbeek style no-go zones or suggest ending the stream of new immigrant recruits to ISIS in San Bernardino, Paris or Brussels, you are also playing into the hands of ISIS.
And if you carpet bomb ISIS, destroy its headquarters and training camps, you’re just playing into its hands. According to Obama and his experts, who have wrecked the Middle East, what ISIS fears most is that we’ll ignore it and let it go about its business. And what it wants most is for us to utterly destroy it. Or as Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau said, ‘If you kill your enemies, they win.'”
Is the President surrendering to Islamists by using word games?
Greenfield is right, of course. Political correctness has never worked to defeat an enemy, never. Playing word games is useless. But it does seem as if the Prez wants to surrender to Islamists instead of defeat them.
The only thing that defeats them is kicking their butts all over the map. Removing dictators by funding their opposition with weapons isn’t the best idea either. (Take a gander at Libya after Gaddafi – how’d that work for us? Let’s ask Ambassador Stevens, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Tyrone Woods…oh wait, we can’t).
It’s all extremely backwards. Bowing to them by these politically correct terms or actions simply shows that our leaders are weak in the face of a real enemy. Obama and the UN play those word games, believing they make terrorists shudder in their boots. But ISIS and other radical Islamists don’t really give a rip.