Many are asking today about the seemingly missing strategy from the U.S. in fighting ISIS. The word that seems to be on everyone’s lips is ISIS, and President Obama is taking all the heat for the apparent lack of action. Some commenters feel that Obama seems to have no strategy at all for dealing with ISIS, one of the most troubling and dangerous terror organizations the world has ever known.
People are saying that Obama has not thought through how to deal with this very real terror alert that is on everyone’s lips, minds and thoughts. Some say the Democrats are to blame while others say it is the Republicans who are responsible due to previous foreign policy failures. The truth most likely lies, as usual, somewhere in between.
When George Bush and his conservative base started the “War on Terror,” little information was given about their exact strategy. At that time, people did not seem to demand the short-term, medium-term and long term plan for how they intended to fight – and more importantly – win the war. Many Democrats feel that when Bush started his War on Terror, it was a knee-jerk reaction. The terrorists were linked to Osama Bin Laden and since Bin Laden was in Afghanistan, Bush decided to begin the war there.
Saddam Hussein had a hand in 9/11 – or so it was claimed – and it was also claimed that he had weapons of mass destruction, so the next focus was on him. Osama Bin Laden had moved to Pakistan, though, and it was later revealed that Hussein, indeed, did not have weapons of mass destruction. None of that stopped the government of the day from pursuing the fight in the two countries for no apparent reason, with no apparent success and with no strategy seemingly in place.
Many liberals at that time asked to be informed of a strategy and yet they felt none was provided. To be fair, fighting an amorphous entity that keeps changing tactics and keeps moving from country to country, region to region with seemingly no other goal but to keep the world’s super power on its toes, on terror alert and with no options of any kind is far from easy.
Democrats feel as though George Bush left the White House with Osama Bin Laden at large, with a no-win war going on in Afghanistan and yet another similar one in Iraq. This war on terror gave birth to the so-called Arab Spring that resulted in “democratic” upheavals all over the Arab countries from Libya to Tunisia to Egypt. It resulted in the deaths of many American soldiers.
Democrats say that Barrack Obama was elected to clean up the mess left by ten years of George Bush and the conservatives. Obama, to his credit, was successful in killing Bin Laden. He also got the U.S. troops out of the two unending wars that they stood no chance of winning. He did not cause the ISIS problem, but despite Bush’s lack of apparent strategy during his term in office, it is still incumbent upon Obama to come up with a strategy to defeat ISIS. It is important for Democrats to resist resting on the excuse that “Bush did not provide a strategy when he was in office, so Obama does not have to provide one now.”
Indeed, Obama does need to provide one, and despite his wavering on the subject two weeks ago, he claims he will provide a plan eventually. Until he does so, people will keep asking about his missing strategy and with good reason. The American people deserve to know what will be done to stop the threat of ISIS and the risks the terror group poses to all peaceful people.
Opinion by: Rebecca Savastio