by Robert Janicki
President Obama is scheduled to speak to the nation on Wednesday to outline what America will not do to stop ISIS, ISIL or whatever the acronym of the day might be. If the president and his minions can't figure out how to address this mob of murdering thugs, I can't really hold out much hope that he will have anything of consequence to tell Americans.
Paraphrasing Brit Hume of Fox News in small part, Obama will continue to tell the world what he won't do and then try and fit a strategy and a set of tactics, to fit the narrowly tailored parameters he will lay out. Obama will then try to stretch and convolute logic by outlining a strange labyrinth of means that he may or may not employ against an enemy, which he really does not believe is a danger to America's security.
They're Muslims after all is said and done and they're believers in the religion of peace. How could that possibly present a danger to America? Of course the facts do not support such a conclusion at any time in history.
That's one of the major obstacles that President Obama can not seem to overcome. When you see these Muslim barbarians act with inhuman behavior toward other human beings, it's difficult for most people to believe they are anything but the worst of the worst in the animal world.
Expect more obfuscation by President Obama in his speech to the nation on Wednesday. Still further, expect Obama to push the responsibility of cleaning up the mess he created by completely leaving Iraq, to the the nations in the neighborhood of the ISIS. Admittedly, it's difficult to find fault with that concept, but expect Obama to use that as an excuse to restrain American participation in dealing with the ISIS barbarians. Expect not to hear Obama talk about destroying ISIS. Instead, expect Obama to weasel his words to work around that concept and direct his talk to containment and management of the barbarians of ISIS.
War has only one ultimate purpose and that is to destroy the enemy as quickly as possible with overwhelming force to save lives of the innocent and the forces for liberty and freedom. If that necessitates the killing of large numbers of the enemy, so be it, that is the responsibility of the enemy aggressors. Of course, bleeding heart liberals will cry "unnecessary force beyond a measured and proportional response".
That's just how liberal losers always respond.