By Robert Laurie ——Bio and Archives--September 29, 2014
American Politics, News | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
Steve Kroft: Two years ago, in the White House, in this building, you talked about al Qaeda being decimated. You talked about al Qaeda being back on its heels. Two years later, you've got al Qaeda affiliates and al Qaeda offshoots controlling huge chunks of both Iraq and Syria. And you have militias, Islamic radical militias in control of Libya. President Obama: If you'll recall, Steve, you had an international network in al Qaeda between Afghanistan and Pakistan, headed by Bin Laden. And that structure we have rendered ineffective. But what I also said, and this was two years ago and a year ago, is that you have regional groups with regional ambitions and territorial ambitions. And what also has not changed is the kind of violent, ideologically driven extremism that has taken root in too much of the Muslim world. And this week, in my speech to the United Nations General Assembly, I made very clear we are not at war against Islam. Islam is a religion that preaches peace and the overwhelming majority of Muslims are peaceful. But in the Muslim world right now, there is a cancer that has grown for too long that suggests that it is acceptable to kill innocent people who worship a different God. And that kind of extremism, unfortunately, means that we're going to see for some time the possibility that in a whole bunch of different countries, radical groups may spring up, particularly in countries that are still relatively fragile, where you had sectarian tensions, where you don't have a strong state security apparatus. That's why what we have to do is rather than play whack-a-mole and send U.S. troops wherever this occurs, we have to build strong partnerships. We have to get the international community to recognize this is a problem. We've got to get Arab and Muslim leaders to say very clearly, "These folks do not represent us. They do not represent Islam," and to speak out forcefully against them. Steve Kroft: I understand all the caveats about these regional groups. But this is what an army of 40,000 people, according to some of the military estimates I heard the other day, very well-trained, very motivated. President Obama: Well, part of it was that... Steve Kroft: What? How did they end up where they are in control of so much territory? Was that a complete surprise to you? President Obama: Well I think, our head of the intelligence community, Jim Clapper, has acknowledged that I think they underestimated what had been taking place in Syria.Apparently, it was "they" who called ISIS the "J.V. team." I guess it was "they" who proudly took credit for the Iraq withdrawl before changing their mind and blaming it on Bush. It was "they" who laughed at Romney for his alleged desire to start a war in Syria. And, I supposed it was "they" who wants to arm "moderate" rebels who've signed a non-aggression pact with ISIS. "They" certainly have been wrong a lot. You would think that, since Obama views James Clapper as such a failure, he'd replace him. After all, Clapper has previously lied to Congress about the NSA and he's apparently terrible at his job in terms of alerting the world to the threat posed by ISIS. If he's so awful, why is he still part of the Obama team? Maybe it has something to do with the fact that much of the intelligence community doesn't seem too eager about being used as a scapegoat for the failures of "they." The Daily Beast managed to get in touch with one of their anonymous Pentagon sources for a post interview response. According to their info, Obama can't simply run around pretending that his "spies underestimated ISIS." As they reported:
Reached by The Daily Beast after Obama's interview aired, one former senior Pentagon official who worked closely on the threat posed by Sunni jihadists in Syria and Iraq was flabbergasted. “Either the president doesn't read the intelligence he's getting or he's bullshitting," the former official said.Could it be that firing "they" would open a can of worms that Obama would prefer to keep sealed? Perhaps Obama's just decided that it would be easier to let an angry scapegoat hang around than it would be to replace him. Heck. Our Nobel Peace Prize winning wartime President has only two more years in office - and a messy war in at least two countries - so we're sure he can do without a loyal, capable, intelligence community. It's much more important that Obama has an unpopular magnet he can use to draw blame away from his decisions. Why not let things ride and keep Clapper right where he is? Wait long enough, do whatever you want for the next 24 months, and it'll be the next guy's problem in no time at all. ...Isn't it funny how, whenever Obama gives an interview or a speech, it's "me, me, me" - right up until the point where everything falls apart? Then it's suddenly "they, they, they."
Support Canada Free Press
View Comments
Robert Laurie’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain.com
Be sure to “like” Robert Laurie over on Facebook and follow him on Twitter. You’ll be glad you did.