Obama tries on WOT rhetoric

Who said this after the jihadi Mumbai massacres of last week?

"These terrorists who targeted innocent civilians will not defeat India's great democracy, nor shake the will of a global coalition to defeat them... The United States must stand with India and all nations and people who are committed to destroying terrorist networks, and defeating their hate-filled ideology." 

Duhhh... George W. Bush? Sure sounds like President Bush, right?

Well, it was Barack Obama last week. It sure doesn't sound like the Obama of a month ago, who wanted just to sit down and have teac with all the bad guys around the world. And it sure doesn't sound like the Left-radical Obama before the Democrat convention in Denver, who sympathized with the dark side.

So Mr. Obama is now trying on WOT rhetoric, the way he might try on a spiffy new suit. Does he look good in the mirror? How does Obama look with a Kevlar helmet and assault rifle? Hmmmm... not bad, not bad at all...

The difference is, of course, that George W. Bush means it when he says things like that. He's shown us for seven years, and he's got the scars for it. So do our soldiers.

But does our coming president mean it? There's no way of knowing. Mr. Obama is trying out WOT language. If it suits him, he will keep it, sometimes. If the country is luckier than it is smart, he may even discover a new inner Obama, one who defends civilization from barbarism. But we don't know anything yet.

Tomorrow he might flip again.

That's what it means to say that George W. Bush has character, and staying power, and commitment. You can trust Bush to fight shoulder-to-shoulder in a foxhole.

We will find out very soon if the civilized world can trust Obama to fight never-say-die jihad ideology.

Obama is now being challenged by three imperialistic tyrannies:

  • 1. The Mumbai massacre seems to come from the radical Islamists in Pakistan's jihadist intelligence apparatus. It is testing majority-Hindu India and its fast-developing democracy, along with the US. 
  • 2. The Russians have just challenged the US to withdraw purely defensive anti-missile systems from the Czech Republic and Poland, to see if he can be pushed around
  • 3. The Syrians (cheek-by-jowl with Iran) are making nice with Democrats, including Robert Malley and Samantha Powers, two O messengers. Trouble is, Syria is developing its nuclear technology at the same time, in tandem with Iran. They think the O's can be rolled. They might be right

Even before O walks into the Oval, we have three hardened tyrannies challenging the One. How will he respond? That's what they want to know. Can he be pushed around? Can he be suckered? How much advantage can be squeezed from a foreign policy team that has signaled appeasement in newspaper editorials for years? You can't blame the wolves for salivating at the prospect. Wolves are wolves.

George W. Bush didn't think that negotiating with hardened fanatics was a promising strategy. Bush thinks they have to be defeated first. But behind the scenes, all the appeasers have been trying it --- the Europeans, the Indians, the international Left ---- letting eternal hope triumph over repeated experience.

It seems likely that the O's will promise a lot of goodies to the bad guys, only to discover that it doesn't work. That's what happened with Jimmy Carter and the Clintons. And the Clinton team is back in power, wondering how much more we can hand over to the bad guys.

No wonder the wolves are drooling.
Who said this after the jihadi Mumbai massacres of last week?

"These terrorists who targeted innocent civilians will not defeat India's great democracy, nor shake the will of a global coalition to defeat them... The United States must stand with India and all nations and people who are committed to destroying terrorist networks, and defeating their hate-filled ideology." 

Duhhh... George W. Bush? Sure sounds like President Bush, right?

Well, it was Barack Obama last week. It sure doesn't sound like the Obama of a month ago, who wanted just to sit down and have teac with all the bad guys around the world. And it sure doesn't sound like the Left-radical Obama before the Democrat convention in Denver, who sympathized with the dark side.

So Mr. Obama is now trying on WOT rhetoric, the way he might try on a spiffy new suit. Does he look good in the mirror? How does Obama look with a Kevlar helmet and assault rifle? Hmmmm... not bad, not bad at all...

The difference is, of course, that George W. Bush means it when he says things like that. He's shown us for seven years, and he's got the scars for it. So do our soldiers.

But does our coming president mean it? There's no way of knowing. Mr. Obama is trying out WOT language. If it suits him, he will keep it, sometimes. If the country is luckier than it is smart, he may even discover a new inner Obama, one who defends civilization from barbarism. But we don't know anything yet.

Tomorrow he might flip again.

That's what it means to say that George W. Bush has character, and staying power, and commitment. You can trust Bush to fight shoulder-to-shoulder in a foxhole.

We will find out very soon if the civilized world can trust Obama to fight never-say-die jihad ideology.

Obama is now being challenged by three imperialistic tyrannies:

  • 1. The Mumbai massacre seems to come from the radical Islamists in Pakistan's jihadist intelligence apparatus. It is testing majority-Hindu India and its fast-developing democracy, along with the US. 
  • 2. The Russians have just challenged the US to withdraw purely defensive anti-missile systems from the Czech Republic and Poland, to see if he can be pushed around
  • 3. The Syrians (cheek-by-jowl with Iran) are making nice with Democrats, including Robert Malley and Samantha Powers, two O messengers. Trouble is, Syria is developing its nuclear technology at the same time, in tandem with Iran. They think the O's can be rolled. They might be right

Even before O walks into the Oval, we have three hardened tyrannies challenging the One. How will he respond? That's what they want to know. Can he be pushed around? Can he be suckered? How much advantage can be squeezed from a foreign policy team that has signaled appeasement in newspaper editorials for years? You can't blame the wolves for salivating at the prospect. Wolves are wolves.

George W. Bush didn't think that negotiating with hardened fanatics was a promising strategy. Bush thinks they have to be defeated first. But behind the scenes, all the appeasers have been trying it --- the Europeans, the Indians, the international Left ---- letting eternal hope triumph over repeated experience.

It seems likely that the O's will promise a lot of goodies to the bad guys, only to discover that it doesn't work. That's what happened with Jimmy Carter and the Clintons. And the Clinton team is back in power, wondering how much more we can hand over to the bad guys.

No wonder the wolves are drooling.