Has President Obama been wise or foolish in his strategy in dealing with terrorist suicide bombers?

In my previous post I stated I would  explore plans and strategies of the past, present and future we are, were and will decide in the future about terrorist suicide bombers. Are they criminals or enemies and is President Obama present plans wise  or foolish. You may be surprised?

To answer this question, we need to compare what was done before and since he took office.  

Comparisons of Bush versus Obama  Results

If you compare  number of  terrorist suicide bombings that have occurred in the world since September 11, 2001,  the USA would have a low ratio of occurrences compared to other countries according to this report HERE.

If you then considered the number of US military personnel lives lost in Iraq only. As of May 12, 2012 there were 4425 deaths and 32, 323 wounded. As for the number of other casualties in those conflicts, you can compare   HERE. 

In addition to lives, it has been estimated that the cost exceeded over two trillion dollars by the USA.

Obama Plans and Strategies for US Involvement

I frankly do not know or believe President Obama has a strategy other than to minimize the USA involvement in wars.  The fact is that less US military are dying and being wounded as a result of  his policies of not engaging military in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Policing the World

At the same time, the US is no longer the only country engaged in active bombing against various Muslim terrorists.  Other countries are being directly affected by terrorism and the exodus of refugees to other countries. Obama has stated Muslims must solve the conflict because if Western Countries interfere, Muslims may perceive it to be another Crusade.

In my opinion, the male refugees are the best Muslim candidates to fight back to regain what they are fleeing from, rather than US military personnel. When you consider there are millions of refugees fleeing and ISIS supposedly has a total force of 35,000, train the one million to fight back for their homeland.

We should not allow ourselves to become “cats paws.” HERE

King Solomon

If King Solomon were alive today, what would he advise President Obama. I chose this proverbs for him to consider what issue he needs to consider..

When the wicked rise to power, citizens conceal themselves, but when they perish, righteous men come to power. (Proverb 28:28)

Which side is righteous.  wicked, or needs to perish?. Common sense would indicate which side the number of refugees are fleeing from to know which side is wicked.  The righteous Muslims need to come out of hiding or they will perish.

Protecting Our Homeland

In the USA, there are numerous FBI agents and affiliated police agencies and personnel. However, in my opinion, Obama is neither wise nor prudent to believe that open borders will not create a greater risk in the USA.  

President Obama, having been a social organizer in his resume, is a recipe for compassion for all religious and ethnic backgrounds. However, the reality is that not all races are trying to kill us. Idealism must be weighed with prudence. Were our founding fathers idealists or realists? We know they were patriots. Is idealism good or bad? Only if coupled with prudence, reality and  patriotism in my opinion.  

A prudent person foresees danger and takes precautions. The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences. (Proverb 22:3).

Ancient War Strategies

In a previous post below, I explained that when the ancient Hebrews warred against the Amalekites, both the fighters and their families were purposely killed to prevent later avengement the warring parties. Trying to kill everyone did not work well in ancient times as recorded in history but did serve to cause many a foe to surrender or die.

When attacking a enemy in a walled city, the siege strategy was used to wait and starve the defenders to surrender. For some reason, Obama has avoided destroying the oilfields to prevent ISIS from fueling and feeding their fighters. Either has he done anything to attack whoever the buyers of the oil who are funding ISIS by their actions. Whoever is buying the oil is profiting on the lives of victims and should be considered an ally of terrorism and their facilities bombed..

Are Terrorists Criminals or Traitors?

Since Congress has never declared war, terrorists are considered criminals and the Boston Bomber was tried as a criminal rather than a traitor. Why war has not been declared is beyond me? I wonder if Congress does not trust Obama to obtain war powers?

War powers can be used against terrorists in time of war on how to treat traitors or spies by a firing squad. Captured soldiers in uniform may be imprisoned. Any combatant not in uniform was considered a spy and shot in wartime.

Instead of asking computer companies to decode encrypted internet messages, they can be ordered.  


Purpose of this Post

in my opinion, continuing to accept refugees fleeing war, while it is compassionate, poses risks of terrorism in our homeland. Today suicide terrorists use guns, homemade bombs and planes. Tomorrow, will it be nuclear weapons? I do not know what strategy to use to  solve the Mid-East problems. All I know is terrorists want to kill us.

In my opinion we need to listen carefully on what the Presidential candidates are proposing to do in the Mid-East  and the policies they will propose on how to protect our borders from both legal and illegal immigration.

We are now listening to the debates on what candidates propose to do if they are elected President.  The US now knows what happened in the past when we decided to police the world on our own to change the Mid-East leaders.  We will have to decide on the next President and give him the power as Commander and Chief over our military along with implement policies for Homeland Security.

Will he or she be righteous and capable to perish our enemies, regardless of the present controversy about what name to call terrorists? Reality is we are being killed and maimed by terrorist suicide bombers regardless of what names we decide to call them.  

Which strategy will you vote for? The candidates beating war drum retaliations again, or another idealist? The loudest, toughest, most aggressive, or the smoothest talker. The most experienced in war?

Or should we consider what a fellow blogger, CitizenTom.com suggested.

“We don’t have to vote for the best candidate to win the election. We can vote for the best person for the job.”

Regards and goodwill blogging.

Previous Post Links