Democrats Refuse To Confront Radical Islam

AUTHOR

November 18, 2015 12:53pm PST

The Democrat administration and its current crop of presidential candidates have backbones of steel when it comes to their refusal to finger “radical Islam” as the perpetrator of violent terrorism around the world. If England and America had practiced that same policy back in 1939 and 1942, we would all be speaking German right now, and the Muslims (staunch Hitler allies) would be enjoying the wonders of a Jew-free world.

What the Democrats will not acknowledge is that when evil comes calling, only three things can happen: You oppose it, you join it, or you die from it. Their silence means that Democrats are not opposing it, forcing America to be complicit with it or die from it. Sensible Americans are appalled by this policy approach. Progressives, however, know their candidates are doing what needs to be done.

Thus, Progressives are convinced that, if we just throw enough “love bombs” at Islam, the radical Islamists will be charmed by what deeply spiritual and kind people we are, throw down their guns, and return their home-made explosives to their original purpose as fertilizer. One wonders how in the world the Progressives got it into their collective heads that people who auction off prepubescent girls and boys as sex slaves, crucify children, toss gays off of off the tops of buildings so as to stone them at the bottom, and glory in decapitating, drowning, burning, and blowing up Christians and prisoners of war are likely to be beguiled into harmlessness because an old hippie croons “I still love you.”

Caroline Glick, writing in the November 18 issue of The Jerusalem Post, nails everything that’s wrong with the Leftist approach to radical Islam, all of which starts with its insistence that there is no such thing as radical Islam:

The operational consequences of the West’s refusal to acknowledge the nature of the forces waging war against it have disastrous.

Radical Islam is an ideology that serves both as an organizing principle for civil societies and a military doctrine. By ignoring it, the US and the rest of the free nations of the world have made it impossible to conceptualize or implement a strategy for either discrediting it or defeating its adherents.

Rather than develop comprehensive plans for dealing with this enemy, the Americans, the Europeans and others have opted for a mix of policies running the spectrum from appeasement to whack-a-mole operations.

Whose fault is this? Obama’s — and that is true even if you think America should not have gone into Iraq in the first place. When Bush left office, Iraq was stable and under American control. Within months, Obama pulled American troops out, creating a power vacuum that then invited something disgusting in.

That something was ISIS, which watched Obama retreat from his red line in Syria, join hands with the Muslim Brotherhood, negotiate a nuclear giveaway with Iran, refuse to acknowledge that Islam has a problem, and generally shout loudly that America will do nothing about anything vaguely related to Islamic violence. Small wonder that ISIS (or “Daesh,” as it hates to be called) swiftly went from a violent regional gang to an oil-rich super criminal that wreaks havoc in its own neighborhood and has used Europe’s border collapse to spread its particular brand of pain more widely.

comments

You must login in order to leave a comment.