President Obama Wins War on Terror

President Obama chooses to give an important speech on peace the week before the day when Americans remember those who died to save their freedom-loving society, and to save many others (including me). President Obama declares in a recent speech that the war on terror, like all wars, must end. Then he ends it by declaring it ended. This happens about a month after two terrorists who happen to be Muslims blow up a bomb killing children at a public even in Boston. (The act was denounced by representatives of the Boston Muslim community.)

President Obama’s announcement also takes place one day after two men shouting something in Arabic comprising the word “Allah” assassinate a young man in full daylight in London. They use knives and ask passers-by to film the event. The speech happens also one or two days before a similar assassination attempt is carried out in Paris on a French soldier. (The attempt fails because French -grown terrorists are not a so competent.) London Muslim authorities condemn the first attack loudly and clearly. I am awaiting the French Muslim response as I write.

(In the same speech, President Obama also orders restrictions on the use of killer drones. I welcome some of the announced changes. The president is no always wrong, just most of the time.)

In response to President Obama’s announcing the end of the war on terror:

Imans and Muslim theologians in America and in Europe advise all good Muslims to turn anyone making terrorist noises over to the police.

“Al Quaida in the Islamic Maghreb” puts down its weapons. Its members ask for government jobs in the post offices of the various countries in North Africa.

The Northern Nigerian violent jihadist movement Boko Haram surrenders to the Nigerian Army in return for a pledge of immunity for their past crimes.

“Al Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula” announces that it will from now on dispute power in Yemen entirely through verbal propaganda and through the ballot box.

The Afghan Taliban (“students”) agree that they will desist from throwing acid in the eyes of little girls who like school. They say that they will just shoot them in the future.

Their neighbors, the Pakistani Taliban ( also “students”), go one better by promising never to shoot schoolgirls in the head again. Instead, they promise they will only beat schoolgirls as a measure of Islamic compassion.

The Ulemas of Saudi Arabia, soon backed by those of Egypt, state unambiguously that Islamic religious doctrine does not require Muslims to regain control of every piece of land that was once Muslim.

The democratically elected government of 85 % Muslim Indonesia declares that it’s unseemly to make illegal the practice of a religion – Judaism – explicitly declared by the Prophet Mohammed to be a respectable religion. It promises to abolish the prohibition of Judaism within months.

The moral and religious leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran formally promise to stop their past practice of tacitly protecting known terrorists living on the Republic’s territory. One ranking mullah also says quietly that it’s time the Republic re-examined its interpretation of sharia demanding that a woman who haas sex with a man not her husband be stoned to death in public.

Both Sunni Muslim and Shiite Muslim authorities declare unilaterally that following President Obama’s encouragement, they will now discontinue the practice of setting each other’s faithful on fire during religious services ( a practice designed to protest the American occupation of Muslim lands).

Long live Barack Obama the peace-maker!

In weather news: It snowed on the low mountains of south-central France on May 24th, another proof of global warming, no doubt.

5 thoughts on “President Obama Wins War on Terror

  1. Starting off an opinion piece with a false assertion never bodes well for the rest of one’s argument:

    those who died to save their freedom-loving society, and to save many others (including me).

    This is pure garbage. The United States of America has not been under threat from a foreign state since 1812, well over two hundred years ago. I find the sickening display of cowardice and gold calf-worshipping on behalf of the world’s most notorious murdering machine (the federal government) to be especially immoral. The American military is a sacred calf that needs to be slaughtered. It makes women out of men, fools out of the wise, and murderers out of the productive.

    Soldiers are nothing but glorified welfare queens.

    It would be interesting to see a study done that quantifies the number of murders committed by American soldiers compared to the number of murders committed by Muslim terrorists over the past one hundred years.

    PS: Dr Delacroix’s friend and secret crush, the murderous and loathesome Senator from Arizona, John McCain, spent the weekend in Syria drawing up plans that would arm al-Qaeda and Hizbollah, two Muslim organizations that the State Department considers to be terrorist.

    Islam is no more a threat to the republic or world peace than is Tinkerbell or the tooth fairy.

    • “This is pure garbage. The United States of America has not been under threat from a foreign state since 1812, well over two hundred years ago.”

      No Pearl Harbor, right. It was a self-attack.

      (I actually believe that’s what you are going to argue, Brandon.)

      Hitler did not formally declare war on the US (exactly the way your kind thinks hostilities should be started, by the way)? I am confused!

      What is sickening is the continuing massacre of Syrian civilians by an hereditary fascist dictator. I hope McCain succeeds, of course.

    • Let me get this straight: you believe that the United States of America should arm al-Qaeda?

      If so, could you justify your atrocious beliefs in light of the fact that al-Qaeda is responsible for murdering thousands of innocent civilians on 9/11?

    • To answer Brandon’s ever-breathless admonitions: I understand that deciding whom to arm, with what, in Syria and preventing transfers of weapons between one opposition group and another is quite difficult. (I remember that we armed the Taliban in Afghanistan.) The fallacy consists in believing, or pretending to believe, that doing nothing is necessarily the best course. Right now (5/28/13) it seems that the winning parties in the Syrian civil war are: 1 violent jihadists; 2 the Assad bloody dictatorship. This is close to the worst outcome for American interests and for the interests of those who are opposed to both systemic oppression and massacres.

      I am not accusing Brandon specifically of this, but I suspect a great deal of obscurantist xenophobia underlies the reactions of America opponents to intervention in Syria: All savages! Let them slaughter one another!

      Brandon and I have only one major difference in our understanding of the effect of war on civil society: I remember that some wars have had a hugely beneficial effect on the loser (LOSER); he does not.

      Brandon is often a sophisticated thinker. However, whenever he says anything about war, he seems to abandon his extra-fine marker for the extra-thick variety used to mark egg-cartons. He sounds as if he went on automatic. He is a closet pacifist. Pacifism is an immoral stance adopted by highly moral people. (Commentator Bruce says the same in greater detail in another response.) I imagine (IMAGINE) that a pacifist stance makes one feel so warm inside that it excuses on from exercising ordinary criticality.

      Brandon sounds as if he were opposed to all interventions abroad. I am not. Syrian civilians are dying in large numbers while we stand by. If it is the case (IF) that the US could diminish the massacre with air strikes, we are all complicit of mass murder. I admit that I am not a military expert. I just believe that the topic should be discussed, that it’s not taboo.

    • I guess I’ll just ask the question again:

      Let me get this straight: you believe that the United States of America should arm al-Qaeda?

      If so, could you justify your atrocious beliefs in light of the fact that al-Qaeda is responsible for murdering thousands of innocent civilians on 9/11?

      It’s a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ question Dr J…

Please keep it civil

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s