Third Party & Independents Archives

The President Hits a Homer

Watched the President’s presentation on how we should deal with the Muslim extremist problem. I believe this is the best presentation he has given. He nailed it good as to how citizens of the world should react to terrorism. He covered the good, bad and ugly as it relates to the world community, noting that in order to win the day there must be a broad range of policies/actions covering political, law enforcement, human resources, economic opportunity/assistance, and so on - - -

I believe his words, going strongly toward inclusion of the world's citizens, will find praise in the US and the US Muslim community. And, I suppose that the speech was aimed at the US, moreso than overseas. I think his words will likely fall on mostly deaf ears in the Middle East. As we all know, politics is local and foreign Muslim populations primarily get their opinion/commentary thru the Imam's.

Middle Easterner's tend to be tribal and have been able to attain a level of survivability by operating as a large tribal family. Countries were often delineated by foreign powers and can only be held together by strongmen, who often deliver brutal leadership.

So, while the President may score some points with the US population he is not likely to make much of a dent in foreign lands.

But, as far as a great presentation that positions the US on the 'high road' re the global terrorist threat, he should receive a high score. In fact, ironically, his 'war on terrorism' just may become the cornerstone of his legacy. His attempt to lay the groundwork for a meaningful transition in the Muslim world may, overtime, take hold in the intl community.

His attempt at world peace will be heartfelt by the majority and puts the US in a very good position to move forward toward building way better relations with the Muslim community here and around the world, IMO.

Posted by Roy Ellis at February 18, 2015 5:17 PM
Comments
Comment #389196

You know that there are people who will find he is catering to Islamic terrorists on this very blog. They are deluded.

If religion can be measured in some form of progression from conception to present, the christian religion began about 2000 years ago. The Islamic religion began about 1300 years ago. Extrapolating that out as a comparison, the christian and in particular the catholic religion was not anything like it was today during the 1300-1500 time frame. Do you think that here could be such an extrapolation that would help understand why the Islamic faith is going through such terrible times today? The period of 1300-1500 covers the inquisition and other terrible times for christian thought, can a comparison be made? It is my opinion that the Islamic faith may have a couple hundred years of this testing of their resolve before progress is made.

Posted by: Speak4all at February 19, 2015 12:51 PM
Comment #389274

A plausible postulation, Speak4all.

The President’s speech, yesterday and today, serves to give all players a factual grounding in understanding the terrorists and a way to move forward, on a united front, to not only deal with the terrorist threat but, plan long term to integrate the Middle East into the global community.

Whether a global coalition can pull it off is to be seen. But, the President has established a good starting point. Definitely going to be a long term effort, maybe 50 years or more, IMO.

Posted by: roy ellis at February 19, 2015 11:02 PM
Comment #389357

There seems to be a lot of dissension as to how to proceed with doing in extremist terrorism.

Some are poo-pooing the admins decision to set a timetable for retaking Mosul. Seems near a moot point to me. On one hand, it is best to keep your enemy in the dark as to military operations. On the other hand, the admin needs some boots on the ground so advertising this big ‘fist fight’ in the desert is a way to get the word out to Muslims and others who might sign on for such an operation. Kind of like advertising on tv for a boxing match.

I’m assuming that US support troops will not be put in any serious physical danger. Certainly, there is no need to put US troops in close proximity to the actual fighting. I would envision some 30-40 drones flying in a big circle around Mosul taking names, selfies and so on - - -

An aspect of the current effort is to try and prevent folks from traveling to the war zone to assist ISIS in some way. Would seem more rational to not necessarily encourage travel to the area but, don’t impede their effort with travel restrictions, etc. IMO, it’s way better to get ISIS supporters into the war zone where, over the next couple of years they can be legally taken out. We should be able to deny citizenship to those that that seek to return to their home countries.

Posted by: roy ellis at February 20, 2015 12:59 PM
Comment #389410

Further, how could it be that a number of people residing in the US are beating feet to ISIS?

I recall when I was a kid we often pledged allegiance to the flag, was introduced to gov’t and civics along the way. When I go to watch the grandkids play basketball all stand for the national anthem before the games begin.

Recently, I posted about a young African man who had no concept of what ‘snug’ or ‘over-tighten’ mean re nuts and bolts.

Perhaps a number of folks cashing in for Jihad, setting sail for the deserts, might be afflicted in the same manner. Maybe they don’t understand America, don’t feel any ties or responsibilities and so on - - -

So, how could that be? Recall that with open borders and a ‘come as your are’ immigration policy it was more of an economic program as opposed to ‘yearning to breath free’, etc.

I would say globalism and Corpocracy have delivered us to this place. No easy task to put the genie back in the bottle and so on - - -

Otherwise, we have the Corpocracy we deserve

Posted by: roy ellis at February 20, 2015 8:28 PM
Post a comment