Conservatives don't fear ISIS; the Left will reap the whirlwind


President Obama thinks Republicans are scared of the Islamic State.  We are not.  But we’re terrified of Obama’s policies, the New York Times editorial board and the liberal narrative they are spouting.

The president said the Islamic State “can’t beat us on the battlefield so they try to terrorize us into being afraid.”  The Left’s response to being bullied to is be foolhardy, call Republicans fear-mongers, and deny responsibility for the entire situation.

The New York Times editorial board took Obama’s side Sunday, in a piece titled “The Price of Fear.”

History will always be kinder to those who are resolute and brave. Like the Japanese-American soldiers of World War II, whose response to injustice was to fight overseas, defending democracy with their lives. Or the leaders today who have been calm in the crisis, willing to see and to say what the mob does not. People like the governor of Washington State, Jay Inslee, who has urged open doors for Syrian refugees, citing the Japanese-American internment as a disastrous precedent. “We regret that,” he said. “We regret that we succumbed to fear.”

What the Times editors call “bullying cowardice” is nothing of the sort.  Comparing Syrian refugees to Japanese internment is a burning straw man (and beneath professional journalism—more in line with George Takei).  We were in a declared war with Japan, having suffered genuine military attacks in Hawaii and on our west coast.  A better comparison would be American resistance to admitting Jewish refugees after World War II.  We refused to accept them in large numbers, yet Jews (in general) share American values of liberty and free speech.  The same cannot be said of Syrians.

It isn’t solely fear that drives 92 percent of American voters to “regard radical Islamic terrorism as a serious threat to the United States.”  It’s the fact that the Paris killers, at least one of whom posed as a refugee to gain entrance to Europe, and whose leader boasted of his ability to slip and and out of Syria with ease, yelled “Allahu Akbar” as they slaughtered innocents.  The same cry is heard in Israel as Palestinians, stymied in their ability to import suicide bombs, stab Israeli citizens in increasing violence.  That’s not the “new normal” in Israel—it’s every day for the last 15 years.

Jonah Goldberg quoted Allahpundit:

Rather than face this unthinkable truth, Obama seeks to change the story line so that he is the noble and besieged martyr fighting the forces of reaction at home, rather than the hapless and bumbling nutty professor who let the world go to Hell on his watch. “Sanctimony over refugees is Obama’s way of restoring his own moral superiority over people who’ve been complaining for years, entirely correctly, that his Syria policy is FUBAR and has contributed to the disaster,” as Allahpundit writes.

Obama would like to think of ISIS as a bunch of unemployed drunk 18-year-olds with fake IDs at a dive bar frequented by sailors.  They know that on any given night half the patrons at that bar can beat the living entrails out of them, sober, drunk or half-blind, but they go there anyway.

A sixth degree Ninjutsu black belt having a drink with his Navy SEAL friend has nothing to fear.  A piss-drunk teenage idiot who messes with him possibly doesn’t know who he’s dealing with, and therefore the right answer for the Ninja is to walk away from a fight.

This is why Obama called ISIS the “JV” and “a bunch of killers with good social media.”  We could easily beat ISIS with boots on the ground and the determination to win—at a cost of some military casualties and foreign civilians.

Back to the dive bar analogy.  If the piss-drunk kid decides he wants the Ninja’s wallet, or to go home with the SEAL’s girlfriend, that’s really a different story, especially when he decides to call five of his friends.  Then the right move is the wipe the pavement with all of them.  But the Left says “hey, these boys are just acting out, and bystanders might get hurt, so let them go.  They’re not worth it.”

Obama’s solution would be to allow 18-year-olds with fake IDs into the bar, while banning SEALS and bouncers.  This is why it’s been reported that 75 percent of American bombing missions return with their ordinance intact due to the White House’s strict rules of engagement and ban on any collateral or civilian damage.  The Obama administration is micro-managing the so-called war on ISIS in a way that makes Nixon’s Vietnam look like Patton’s Battle of the Bulge.

But then the drunk boys will multiply as they call their friends, “hey, the badass Navy SEALS aren’t allowed to touch us.”  And innocent people will get mugged, and their girlfriends will be raped.  And the emboldened drunk teens will spread out to other bars and attract more kids to their rampage using Twitter and Snapchat.  Then it will be just accepted that certain places are just dangerous.

The president doesn’t want attacks like in Paris and threats that have shut down Brussels to become the “new normal.”  But what else could it be when terrorists are embedded with Syrian migrants who are spreading out into the West like baby spiders ballooning in the wind.

Have we learned nothing?  Do we really think that our political leaders should be given a pass simply because they occupy high office?  After years of being spectacularly wrong about ending the Iraq War, the “Arab Spring,” Libya, Syria, and ISIS, should the public continue to believe the Obama narrative that America leading from behind is in the world’s best interests?

Conservatives have not succumbed to fear of ISIS, but we greatly fear the price we’ll pay if we fail to fight.  If our government continues to underestimate the ability of radical Islam to attract people who want the power and notoriety of fighting for their cause, we will reap the whirlwind of increasing “random” violence.

They sow the wind,
And reap the whirlwind.
The stalk has no bud;
It shall never produce meal.
If it should produce,
Aliens would swallow it up

Hosea 8:7

That price may be okay to the Left, who don’t mind “acceptable losses,” but if blood is to be spilled, better we spill it on far away shores, using our trained warriors, than on our shores, and our innocents.