A Confused President Obama Running For The Door

image (2)We have been reassured by the Director of the CIA that the type of attack that happened in Paris will probably happen again. It could happen in Boston, or New York, or in Washington, DC. CIA Director John Brennan said“I certainly would not consider it a one-off event . It is clear to me that ISIS has an external agenda and that they are determined to carry out these types of attacks,”

He went on to add that: “I would anticipate that this is not the only operation that ISIL has in the pipeline.”

That is comforting news. When Boston’s Quincy Market is attacked Brennan can tell us we were warned it was coming. Is he trying to protect himself or us?

 You know ISIL, ISIS, IS, Daesch are all names for the terrorist group that calls itself the Islamic State. Most of the world calls it ISIS.

Obama said on Monday: “And the more we shrink . . . [ISIL] territory, the less they can pretend that they are a functioning state . . . We play into the ISIL narrative when we use routine military tactics that are designed to fight a state that is attacking another state. . . .  These are killers with fantasies of glory who are very savvy when it comes to social media and are able to infiltrate the minds not just of Iraqis and Syrians but disaffected individuals around the world.”

All right Mr. President, I agree. When we take away their territory we stop their brutality to the people under their control, eliminate their training camps, damage their ability to spread their dastardly propaganda, deprive others of a location where they can join them, cut off their access to oil money and other valuables, and eliminate the idea that an Islamic Caliphate exists since that requires territory.

But Obama also said on Monday, “Let’s assume that we were to send 50,000 troops into Syria. What happens when there’s a terrorist attack generated from Yemen? Do we then send more troops into there? Or Libya  perhaps? Or if there’s a terrorist network that’s operating anywhere else in North Africa or in Southeast Asia?” 

Wait a minute, Mr. President. Aren’t you showing a great deal of confusion here. On the one hand you are talking about shrinking their territory but on the other hand you suggest even if we do it will do no good because some terrorists can operate out of other area. I’m sort of glad you were not around on December 7, 1941. I can just hear you telling us that if we declare war on Japan the Germans might declare war on us so it is best we not do it.

To suggest that you do not want to go in and defeat an evil group such as ISIS which the CIA director tells us is planning more attacks because some “terrorist network” somewhere else may strike is a recipe for surrender. It’s like telling a person with cancer that you won’t treat it because it could occur again in another part of the body.

I’d suggest we deal with what exists and not with what ifs.

Last September Obama at the UN said:   “I have repeatedly said that our approach will take time. This is not an easy task, . . . This is not a conventional battle. This is a long-term campaign — not only against this particular network, but against its ideology.”

Obviously It will take time. That is because that is the strategy the president is following. WWII would have taken a lot longer time if we worried that defeating one evil group would embolden another.

Obama is right on some things. We should never have gone to war when our nation was not threatened or attacked like we did in Iraq and Vietnam. Wars of choice are foolish.

He is wrong on other things. He is incapable of seeing sometimes you have no choice as when we were attacked on December 7, 1941, September 11, 2001, and now in Paris on November 13, 2015.

Over two years ago Obama set out  his strategy for fighting ISIS.  A year later it was noted:   Promising airstrikes, refusing to commit ground troops, and offering a believable plan to “degrade and ultimately destroy” ISIL appeared to meet these domestic-political objectives. The only problem is that, one year on, the strategy appears to have failed on the ground.  Not only has ISIL not been destroyed, but the group continues to hold vast tracts of territory and possess the military means of waging a brutal war that shows no sign of abatement.”

Obama noted on Monday: “What I’m not interested in doing is posing or pursuing some notion of American leadership or America winning . . . that has no relationship to what is actually going to work to protect the American people and to protect the people in the region who are getting killed and to protect our allies and people like France. I’m too busy for that.”

Perhaps that is the problem. He’s too busy to see his strategy adopted two years ago has failed. He is too stubborn to accept that it has and that things have changed. He’s confused and making little sense.

I can only figure that Obama really wants one thing. That is to do nothing until he can get out of the job. Perhaps he thinks if we actually go to war and defeat our present enemy that has attacked us they may take back his Peace Prize. It is going to be a long 14 months.


29 thoughts on “A Confused President Obama Running For The Door

  1. Pardner, you are oh, so, right.
    I’m gonna shave my beard, and, try vote for Bernie, at least twice

  2. As horrible as the Paris attacks were, “we” were not attacked. France was attacked. France did not put in ground troops after this attack. The Kurds are pushing towards Raqqa with our support.

    Putting in ground troops will solve nothing. It will not prevent the spread of terrorist cells in other countries. Wahhabism is an idea, not an army. Just as I feared, the parties involved are entering into conflict with one another, and not ISIS. Turkey just show down a Russian fighter. Russia is rattling its sabers at Turkey. This has the potential to lead to WW3, which is what ISIS wants.

    They are an apocalyptic organization, bent on bringing the worlds greatest military powers into a confrontation that will lead to the destruction of the world. Terrorist organizations benefit when western forces collapse regimes and send countries into chaos.

    You have a better chance of being shot by a 2 year old child in the US than being the victim of a terrorist attack. The Security/Surveillance state over the past 15 years has built itself up to stop 1 thing and 1 thing only, terrorist attacks. Why? We have had more domestic attacks than anything, yet no one wants to do a damn thing about gun control. Can you imagine if the government was as aggressive against gun nuts as they are against terrorists? People would be freaking out saying we are taking our freedoms. People only care about the 2nd amendment, not the 4th, which is much more relevant to their day to day lives.

    This security state apparatus and the military industrial complex it supports feeds off of perpetuating fear of terrorism. These individuals need it for sales, for job security, for career advancement etc. This country is being increasingly run by a “shadow government” in which the figure heads, (Presidents, Senators, Congressmen) change, but the deeply entrenched policies never do. We are going down a terrible terrible road of war, xenophobia, economic inequality and apathy toward the problem which will lead to humanity’s destruction, climate change. If we do not pull our heads out of the sand and realize that terrorists are nothing more than gangsters and thieves, and should be dealt with accordingly, they will have won. We have already lost so much freedom, this new attack will only be seen as an opportunity for those in power to take more.

    1. Dave:

      We were attacked. France is a member of NATO and we have agreed an attack on one is an attack on all.

      There have been other pernicious ideas that have been snuffed out with the effective use of troops. Ideas need places from which to germinate and be propagated and taking away the place helps to destroy them. The idea of a Caliphate without land is a non starter.

      Russia is playing a losing game in Syria and one that is against our interest. It is bombing the moderate Muslims who are our and Turkey’s allies. Do we sit back and let it happen? I think not.

      We are in a war with ISIS. Blaming some “shadow government” for it seems foolish. ISIS is more than gangsters and thieves; it is band of men who have formed their own government and military force which has captured land and imprisoned and executed people. They have to be fought on their own terms which is with a military force.

      As far as losing freedom I don’t see where we have lost any. In theory the capture of information by some of our intelligence agencies supposedly took away our freedom but there was not one case where it was shown that in fact it happened. There are real facts on the ground as shown by the Paris attacks that mus be dealt with. A robust intelligence agency and strong military is the only answer to them.

  3. Matt- or the crew- Does anyone remember the Attorney’s that got John Murderman the deal of the century? Sorry off topic…

    1. Doubting:

      He’s the guy I worked with as an associate when I was a defense lawyer – Frank DiMento .

  4. You may be seeing ” Y’all ” much sooner than next month P of D and G . Slow your roll . 🙂 … You kinda really just fucked up .

  5. Same Old Same Old … ” Profit Off Doom And Gloom ” … Not original. Already being researched by law enforcement undoubtedly as the language is threatening and unequivocally bad minded in tone. Get a life pally .

  6. Does Obama resemble the children’s toy puppet Curious George I often ask myself?
    Of course he does by saying and doing nothing.
    I believe his do nothing policy is going to cause a great deal of suffering in the months to come.

  7. Matt and Co.- This foreign nightmare is something i am still learning about in regards of going in to eliminate the Caliphate. I defer to the elders who have seen other presidents in deadly times and how they speak to the people. President Obama looked like a cry baby at the G20 not willing to budge, i know that is not a good sign and shows the lack of flex in his strategy, he looked weak and banal as ever. Is it time to invoke Article 5 ?

  8. Matt
    No disrespect at all but have you considered having 2 different blogs? One that only focuses on Whitey Bulger, FBI, LCN, John Connolly, etc and one for everything else. Selfishly I have been waiting to go through the other Whitey Bulger murders and you have yet to post again. Also, it would make going through the archives a lot smoother and less time consuming. Constructive criticism from an appreciative though frustrated reader.

    1. Jerome:

      I have hard enough time keeping up one blog. I understand your frustration but I promise to get back to Whitey shortly. I just viewed the Berlinger film – I’ll be writing about that soon.

      1. Matt
        Thanks. I will be able to go through your posts during the months of the Whitey Bulger trial during the holidays. I look forward to your post on the Berlinger documentary. I am currently going through MOST WANTED by Tom Foley. Besides the John Naivomich (sp?) aspect is there anything else to keep in mind? I still would like to flush out ALL the aspects pertininet to the deals by the 3 amigos in the future when you have time. I can not imagine how pissed off your friend is that his brother (Veranis) was murdered by Martorano only to watch him serve only 12 years. As crass as this might sound I am still amazed that Bulger, Flemmi, and Martorano outlived and outlasted so many other criminals. Its amazing how so many organized crime men get murdered.

        1. Jerome:

          For your planning purposes I will try to devote the first three days of the week to Whitey material and the rest of the week to other stuff. You will not have to bother checking other than Monday through Wednesday. I will begin the review of the Berling film on the Monday following Thanksgiving and hopefully be through with all the murders by Christmas.

          You know about Naimovich how Foley went after him during the time they were supposed to be working on my wiretap which was on Abe Sarkis and Mel Berger and because they were chasing him they screwed up my bug and wiretap failing to cover important meets. They even continued after him even though the reason they gave in the beginning to do so by the FBI was not valid. How does that make sense.

          Foley gives the FBI credit for uncovering the Apalachin Mafia meeting which is wrong; he also has the date of the Lancaster Street surveillance in 1983 when it was in 1980. He fails to talk about that investigation which showed the state police had no problems going after Whitey. He does that because it takes away from his portrayal of himself as being the first guy to do a lot of the stuff that had become routine.

          Hew portrays going up the ladder from lower bookie to higher bookie as something he thought up when we had been doing that routinely for years – the Naimovich operation that he undermined was precisely that.

          He presents the matters as if he is the only guy who is on the level. He tells about going to see Tom Reilly the DA in Middlesex – He said he went to him and sought his help on Whitey. Reilly agreed to help. He presents that as something unusual when I had been doing it with the state police and others for years and the state police had almost grabbed him in 1980.

          He’s with Reilly in 1990 and he writes something to the effect that after Reilly gave him the okay to go after Whitey he said something to him about Billy Bulger and politics and that it took great courage to go after Whitey because of Billy and that everyone knew you didn’t cross Billy and that by going after Whitey that would be crossing Billy. That was in my opinion outrageous and showed the guy is a total fraud because as I mentioned no one ever thought that way. In my years going after Whitey – who was one of our original targets back in the mid-1970s no one ever mentioned Billy. I find his making up this story reprehensible which reflects badly on all the law enforcement guys who went after him.
          You put that in context and you realize Foley’s story is full of holes.

          1. Matt
            Thank you for deciding to focus on Whitey and the gang on Monday to Wednesday. I would imagine (fingers crossed) that by the beginning of 2016 we will have covered everything there is to cover pertaining to Bluger. On a side note I preferred the book WHITEY ON TRIAL to the TJ English book. My 2 cents.

            Am I correct that Whitey Bulger kept an extremely low profile in South Boston and Quincy? If he wasnt at Marshall Motors (then later Lancaster street garage) then he was usually with Stanley or Greig or Weeks? Do you think he kept a low profile inorder to be more effective as a scare tactic when he extorted and threatened individuals? I am still amazed that some folks paid from $50,000 to $250,000 to him. I am guessing they were criminals themselves so had no desire to get law enforcement involved in the shakedowns.

            1. Jerome:

              I thought Whitey On Trial was a little light in it coverage and analysis; I prefer English’s book to that because of the extensive work he did even though I disagreed with it a lot. The authors of the former book really had no background in the area although their interview at the end of the book was informative.

              Whitey kept an extremely low profile because he was a gangster. Despite hearing of his reign of terror, 99% or more of the people in Boston and its suburbs outside of Southie never heard from him. It is like all gangsters from Gerry Angiulo, Larry Baione, etc. They live in their own little village which is usually open at night and inhabited by other criminals. The live with and prey on criminals or criminal associates.

              His profile among criminals was high; his profile among law abiding people was non existent. If you were a person living a normal crime free life and he approached you saying he was Whitey Bulger that would not mean anything to you so it would not scare you. If you were living in the criminal world and he did then it would mean something. All the people involved in the shakedowns had to have known him and except for a very few I’d say they all were involved in some sort of scam.

      2. Just finished reading, Where the bodies are buried. Interesting reading,most of all about Pat Nee, the man in the shadows

        1. Norwood:

          I’m in the process of reading it. Will have comments on it when I finish. English is a good writer. Not sure how accurate the book is with Nee as the consultant.

    2. Jerome- Got a nice treat for you to look at it is The Jimmy Dimora files, one of the most corrupt local Governments of all time, it’s based in Cuyahoga county in Ohio . A boat load of wiretaps and transcripts galore were released couple weeks ago. The AG released 3 discs of treasure. The story will have your jaw on the floor. Hookers,Vegas, Pay to play up the ying yang. Take care pal, i think it will be right up your alley. Ofcourse the county commissioner is straight out of central casting about 350 and cannot stop eating Jimmy Dimora aka The human Garbage Disposal.

      1. Doubting Thomas
        You know me all too well. I have yet to get to DEAL WITH THE DEVIL book by Peter Lance as I am now reading MOST WANTED by Tom Foley. anyway, can you provide a link for these transcripts and tapes? Other than that hope all is well. I recently was in Quincy and saw some noted locatioons of the Bulger saga. Louisburg Square, Squantum, Neponset River Bridge, spot across Florian Hall, etc etc.

        1. Jerome- Just google Jimmy Dimora Files and it will come up through the Cleveland Plain Dealer they archived it all. If you google him on youtube he has a bunch of videos showing him fighting with reporters about being treated unfairly. It is really gonna be a treat for you. Hope all is well and happy hunting!!!

          1. Doubting Thomas
            Thanks for the suggestions and I will get on it ASAP. Have a great Thanksgiving as well. Are you currently reading any good books?

  9. Sometimes, doing nothing is the wisest thing to do.

    Armed anarchy rules the day in Syria. Company sized units of murderous condotti ravage the cities, and, countryside, under one petty warlord, or, another. They rob, they ruin, they kidnap, they kill. Political affiliations and sectarian loyalties don’t really seem to matter. These gangs of thugs are all commanded by Satan.
    It would be crazy for the US to jump into the deadly mix. A lot of young people would be sent to the devil for nothing. Absolutely nothing.
    Syria is Hell on earth. The copious bloodshed we saw in Paris this week, happens everyday in Syria.

    1. Khalid:

      Doing nothing means we have more November 13, 2015 – precisely for the reasons you assert that the horrific bloodshed that is happening in Syria means we must do something. We must do something big not only for our own sake but for the millions of Syrians who have been displaced. You write how the average Muslim citizen hates their rulers yet when given a chance for free elections they bring us the Muslims with the idea of instituting a caliphate. We have extremists, a term you prefer, who base their extremism on their Muslim’s beliefs murdering Christians, Jews, Muslims and others who do not prescribe to their form of extremism. Anarchy is loosed in Syria, only the US can bring order which we should have done two or so years ago.

      1. Matt:

        Shia Muslims do not support the restoration of the Caliphate, and, while the great majority of Sunni Muslims cherish the ideal of the four rightly guided Caliphas, they do not support the restoration of the Caliphate in any physical sense. Think of Augustine’s City of God, if you are searching for an analogy in Western thought. Muslims can be sophisticated in their beliefs, too.
        Which elections are you referring to? Egypt? Turkey?

        As far land campaign in Syria is concerned, such a move would be madness. The invading coalition would face an enemy who’s had years to dig in and harden their defenses. IS engineers have dug a maze of tunnels under Raqqa to connect their bunkers and firing positions. Taking the city will be very costly to the troops who have to do the job. How can such a sacrifice be justified? Why, exactly, do any Americans have to die in this bootless venture?

  10. Barak is a crafty SOB. We state this affectionately but with a customary pulling up at figuring just what the F he is up to half the time.

    The morphology of Terrorism, it’s herding a mercury ball to smash it only to see it magnetically re-coalesce, is his ideological bete noir. And he gets wrestled into very defensive and academically distant sounding remarks and observations. He is a True Believer. Even if you hate him you concede that. He is Messianic in Presidential temperament. He feels thwarted. Do NOT underestimate his capacity for decisive action. He is the CIC. Events must dictate a stronger letter to him in order that he stop tergiversating, stop the word that obfuscates, stop milling in a welter of ” What ifs ” and ” We shouldda done’s,” and Act .

  11. Nice cartoon, Matt.

    Let BHO leave now; 14 months of an empty Oval Office would be just fine with me. One problem, of course: Biden would step in.

Comments are closed.