Here are some key questions citizens might ask themselves as they listen to the speech:
1.
How does the President define the nature of the enemy? Is it geographic or
ideological? Do the key aims have to do with territory in Iraq and Syria or
with a poisonous belief system with no borders? Any narrow focus on Iraq and
Syria is doomed to fail.
2.
Can Obama bring himself to describe the religious intensity of our enemies?
ISIS and its allies are deeply motivated by religion. Refusing to admit that
weakens any strategy to defeat them.
3.
What would the President consider victory? If it is not the complete defeat of
radical Islamism, it will not be a successful strategy. Talking about
"managing the problem" or "containing the problem" is a
concession of defeat. Every day the Islamic State, Hamas, Boko Haram, al Qaeda
and their allies survive, they recruit new people, develop new techniques and
become more dangerous
4.
How does he intend to defeat the more than 10,000 terrorists from more than 50
countries that are fighting with ISIS, and how does he account for the fact
that the threat is in 50 countries, not two?
5.
What is his strategy for defeating the terrorists and recruiters we now know
are coming from the United States? British Prime Minister David Cameron is
proposing significant restrictions on travel and activity by radical Islamists
in the UK. How does Obama propose to counter potential American terrorists?
6.
Is he prepared to ask for more resources for the military, which he is using in
more and more places while continuing to cut the budget? It is impossible to
have a serious strategy of defeating radical Islamism without an increase in
funding for the military unless he plans to transform the Pentagon
dramatically. Will he submit such a funding request to the Congress?
7.
Is his strategy designed to achieve rapid, decisive victory? There are rumors
of a three-year campaign. That would be an absurdity. In three years, the
radical Islamists will have recruited more people in more countries. It took
three years and eight months from the attack on Pearl Harbor for the United
States to defeat fascist Italy, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Taking that
long to defeat the Islamic State would be an exercise in self-defeating
timidity.
8.
Does the President plan to lead the fight against radical Islamism or merely to
support others who he asserts have to lead? If radical Islamism and the Islamic
State are mortal threats to Americans and to the United States, then we have to
defeat them, even if Iraq is incompetent, Syria is a dictatorship, and the
Europeans are timid. This has to be a coalition that is led by America, not a
coalition that leads America. Which is Obama describing?
9.
What are his plans for an extended conversation with the American people to
build enough support that the strategy can be sustained with popular approval
until victory is achieved? One speech, one time is a beginning, not a program
for victory.
10.
Will he seek congressional authorization for the plan he outlines? This is
crucial because the conflict must be the country's war, not Obama's war, and a
vote in Congress will legitimate his action.
11.
Finally, since ISIS is a direct threat to the U.S. will the president have the
resolve and leadership to go it alone (and show leadership) if he does not get
a U.N. coalition to back him?
No comments:
Post a Comment