Streetwise Professor

March 23, 2016

Our Peevish President Dismisses Terrorism, and Bolsters a Repressive Regime

Filed under: History,Military,Politics — The Professor @ 6:30 pm

The latest terrorist atrocity, this time in Brussels, proves yet again that Europe is infested with dens of vipers, which it is largely powerless to control. Perhaps this should be expected in a country like Belgium, which cannot execute raids between the hours of 10 PM and 5 AM, and must ring the doorbell when they do.

Obama’s reaction to these appalling events was appalling in its own way. The most peevish president was obviously immensely annoyed that ugly reality intruded on his Cuban victory lap/holiday. He grudgingly spared a grand total of 51 seconds to address the subject during a scheduled speech in Havana. He then proceeded to take in a baseball game, during which he did the wave with his new besty Raul Castro.

Obama’s remarks, such as they were, displayed his impatience with and indifference to the issue of terrorism. It consisted of the standard bromides, including the old standby of a promise to help bring the perpetrators to justice.

Um. The perpetrators were suicide bombers. They blew themselves up. They are quite clearly well beyond the reach of human justice.

When pressed on the issue today in Argentina, Obama responded with his by now familiar petulance and irritation at the topic.  He has a lot on his plate, he said, by way of rationalizing not giving the matter more attention. Further, in a reprise of another well-worn theme, Obama stated that terrorism is not an existential threat to the US.

This is Obama’s typical false choice/straw man rhetoric in action. There are very few existential threats: if presidents were bound to respond only to existential threats, their plates would be quite empty. Plenty of time for golf and ESPN. Come to think of it . . . . Seriously, though, although Obama thinks Americans are irrationally obsessed with a terrorism threat which in his mind ranks somewhere below the risk of drowning in the bathtub (no, really), although not existential, it is a sufficiently great danger that a more aggressive posture is fully warranted.

It should be said that Obama is doing more than he lets on. But that in itself is a problem. For the second time in recent months, only the death of an American serviceman has forced the administration (though not Obama personally, for he floats above it all, unquestioned by the press) to admit a more extensive involvement in combat in Iraq and Syria. This time, the death of a Marine in an ISIS rocket attack on  firebase in Iraq compelled the Pentagon to concede its existence, which it had previously not acknowledged: if the Marine hadn’t died (with eight more wounded) the firebase would remain a secret. From Americans, anyways. In response to questions arising from the Marine’s death, SecDef Carter was forced to concede that US personnel numbers in Iraq exceeded, by about 50 percent, the authorized number.

So this means that the war against ISIS is more robust than Obama admits. That’s good in a way, but the secrecy is disturbing. It is not for operational reasons: after all, ISIS clearly figured out the base was there, and took it under fire. It is purely to protect Obama personally. Acknowledging more robust campaign would be an admission that his past inaction on ISIS was a mistake. And Obama is constitutionally incapable of admitting error. Sadly, a press that would be baying like hounds on the trail of a fox if a Republican president had done this is silent, and thereby complicit in concealing military action from the American people.

Obama’s terrorism remarks were only one of many low points on his two day visit to Cuba. He spewed one leftist shibboleth about the Communist country after another. It was an extended exercise in moral equivalence between the US and Cuba.

For instance, he said the Cuban Revolution and the American Revolution were quite similar, in that they were both fighting oppression. Even overlooking the fact that the philosophical and political foundations of the two revolutions could not be more different, the obvious difference is that the Cuban Revolution replaced one tyranny with a far worse one, whereas the American revolution gave (in Lincoln’s words) a new birth of liberty. It is deeply insulting to compare the American founding generation to the murderous thugs who led the Cuban uprising, and who continue to grind the country under their geriatric heels almost 60 years later.

Further, Obama said that Cuba had things to teach the US about human rights (!), specifically citing universal health care. Where to begin? Identifying health care as a human right is typically progressive, but leave that aside for the moment. Cuba’s “universal health care” is a sick joke. The elite gets far better treatment than the vast majority of Cubans, who universally get crappy medical treatment: they are equal in the primitiveness of the treatment they get.

The low point in the visit was a photo op in front of the Cuban Interior Ministry, complete with a huge portrait of mass murdering, racist Che looming in the background. Given the meticulous planning that goes into presidential visits, this had to be deliberate: leftist trolling at its worst.

The boycott of Cuba is an anachronism. It is justifiable to jettison it, and to restore relations with Cuba. But that does not require doing what Obama did: validating, and arguably celebrating, a vicious, oppressive regime, while insulting and apologizing for the country that did him the honor of electing him president twice.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

5 Comments »

  1. Castro and Obama, together at last. If only Comrade Chavez were alive to see this.

    Comment by aaa — March 23, 2016 @ 7:20 pm

  2. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3507001/Maybe-advice-Barack-Obama-ignores-calls-come-home-wake-Brussels-attack-President-Michelle-attend-glitzy-state-dinner-Buenos-Aires.html

    Obama dances while Brussels burns: President and Michelle take to the floor to TANGO during glitzy state dinner in Buenos Aires as he ignores calls to come home in wake of terror attacks

    Good advice? Dozens of protesters took to the streets of Buenos Aires on Wednesday to demand that President Obama return home over human rights abuses that took place during the Cold War

    Comment by elmer — March 24, 2016 @ 9:24 am

  3. SWP et al:

    Is there any way to get the Castro Bros to keep him there permanently? Or perhaps the retrograde replacement of the Venezuelan paratrooper to ‘invite’ him to visit, but without an exit visa?

    Alas, the accommodations may not be up to par for Moochelle, but let’s ‘spread it around’ a bit, so to speak.

    One knows not whether to laugh or cry at this bunch. Thanks for providing an outlet, Street.

    Happy Orthodox Easter

    VP VVP

    Comment by Vlad — March 24, 2016 @ 2:43 pm

  4. Did the Cuban customs let that used reset button in his baggage go through?

    Comment by Ivan — March 26, 2016 @ 3:19 am

  5. About three hundred americans die each year in bathtubs. That’s a lot more than are killed by terrorists.

    Seems pretty sensible to me that a president should focus on what the data shows. The real threats are things like pandemics (number of americans killed in a bad flu outbreak about 50,000 – potentially millions with avian flu), cardiovascular disease (610,000 from heart attack alone annually, lots more if you include stroke), etc.

    All this obsession with terrorist is kind of weird. It’s like worrying about shark attacks instead of getting that mole checked out.

    Comment by rcyran — April 5, 2016 @ 3:33 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress