Marie Harf: on how to fight ISIS
The right is having a field day with Marie Harf’s latest pronouncement on the way to fight ISIS (see this, for example). Here’s Harf (speaking to Chris Matthews):
MATTHEWS: How do we stop this? I don’t see it…If i were ISIS, I wouldn’t be afraid right now. I can figure there is no existential threat to these people. They can keep finding places where they can hold executions and putting the camera work together, getting their props ready and killing people for show. And nothing we do right now seems to be directed at stopping this.
HARF: Well, I think there’s a few stages here. Right now what we’re doing is trying to take their leaders and their fighters off the battlefield in Iraq and Syria. That’s really where they flourish.
MATTHEWS: Are we killing enough of them?
HARF: We’re killing a lot of them and we’re going to keep killing more of them. So are the Egyptians, so are the Jordanians. They’re in this fight with us. But we cannot win this war by killing them. We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need in the medium to longer term to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups, whether it’s lack of opportunity for jobs, whether”¦
MATTHEWS: We’re not going to be able to stop that in our lifetime or fifty lifetimes. There’s always going to be poor people. There’s always going to be poor muslims, and as long as there are poor Muslims, the trumpet’s blowing and they’ll join. We can’t stop that, can we?
HARF: We can work with countries around the world to help improve their governance. We can help them build their economies so they can have job opportunities for these people”¦
So, what have we here? Boilerplate claptrap from Harf about root causes that doesn’t address the issue we’re facing today and the question Matthews was asking—are we killing enough ISIS fighters to put a dent into the atrocities they are committing right now? Harf’s answer, “We’re killing a lot of them and we’re going to keep killing more of them,” doesn’t define “a lot,” and it’s been pretty clear for quite some time that our efforts in that direction have been very, very small.
But the statement of Harf’s that has caused most of the fuss was this one: “…we cannot win this war by killing them. We cannot kill our way out of this war.” Harf does not even seem to understand what war is, and how wars are won. But this isn’t about Harf, really. It is about the administration for which she is a spokesperson, and its attitudes and policies towards this war. Her remarks reflect a larger attitude on their part, which is that war is not an activity in which you kill them before they can kill you (or others), it is a metaphor. And that idea ties into the administration’s overemphasis on the power of words.
This war is not a War on Poverty or a War on Drugs. Those were cases in which a war metaphor was used to indicate a vigorous effect. This war is—a war. Where you must kill a lot of people to win.
What Harf is doing here is typical of this administration. It involves glossing over the actual question (have we killed enough?) because the truth would reflect poorly on the administration, and going all meta and academic with the answer, an answer that isn’t even factually correct (we’ll get to that in a moment). But it is an answer that appeals to Obama’s base because it sounds less judgmental and harsh, and fits in with a common liberal solution for nearly everything, whether that solution actually has any chance at all of being delivered or not (in this case, as Matthews—a liberal, by the way—immediately points out, it does not).
In addition, even if Harf’s remedy, job opportunities, could somehow be achieved, it would not necessarily be an answer to the problem. Studies have consistently shown that terrorists do not tend to come disproportionately from the unemployed or the poor in the societies from which they emerge:
There should be little doubt that terrorists are drawn from society’s elites, not the dispossessed.
Yet some stereotypes die hard. In 1958 the political scientist Daniel Lerner argued, “The data obviate the conventional assumption that the extremists are simply the `have-nots.’ “
Die hard, indeed. Funny, too, how we don’t see many terrorists from non-Muslim third-world countries, even nations with worse economic situations than exist in those Muslim countries that supply the bulk of the terrorists in the world.
Actually, ISIS is so new that we have a poor idea who its members are, and from what societal layer they come. We know a bit more about the Westerners who join, such as Canadian Andre Poulin:
In the video message, which ISIS later used in a propaganda video, Poulin explained why he had joined the Sunni militant group. “Before I come here to Syria, I had money, I had a family, I had good friends. It wasn’t like I was some anarchist or somebody who just wants to destroy the world and kill everybody. I was a regular person,” Poulin, who later began calling himself Abu Muslim, said in the message. “We need the engineers, we need doctors, we need professionals. Every person can contribute something to the Islamic State.”
John Horgan, a psychologist who specializes in studying terrorists, says that ISIS seeks its recruits (not just its Western ones) online, particularly on social media, with very sophisticated approaches that tap into a desire for power and meaning in one’s life:
Most radicals don’t act on their beliefs, let alone become involved in terrorism. For the most part ISIS is working very hard on trying to not just provide opportunities for people to go out there, but to say that they’re being honest and upfront about their message. They’re offering an opportunity for people to feel powerful. They’re making disillusioned, disaffected radicals feel like they’re doing something truly meaningful with their lives.
There is no indication that poverty or unemployment have anything to do with this, for ISIS or other terrorist groups. For example, in a 2010 study of al Qaeda members, it was found that:
…[T]he al-Qaeda recruit does not fit easily into an economic profile. Some individuals studied had been unemployed for years and were living in poverty, while others came from privileged backgrounds and relative wealth. Those with the means financed their own travel, and those without means found sponsors willing to pick up the tab. As Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forums notes, radical Islamic ideologies, like other contemporary ideologically based movements, use the rhetoric of economic oppression to enhance their argument; however, their subjects are generally not drawn from the ranks of the desperately poor.
A young Saudi captured while trying to cross into Iraq revealed that he was promoted at work and in line for a substantial pay raise just before he joined a local jihadist group. His is not an isolated case. Among the subjects studied, economic motivations were the least-cited reason for joining a terrorist organization.
If it is true that “radical Islamic ideologies…use the rhetoric of economic oppression to enhance their argument,’ then Harf and the administration are certainly helping them along.
One things needs to be made clear: people do not join ISIS merely because they are Muslims; Islam is a necessary but not sufficient condition. Terrorist groups tend to emphasize a particular interpretation of the Koran, and (as yesterday’s article explains) ISIS has a very special apocalyptic vision about its role in the religion, and is acting on that vision. If it’s anything like al Qaeda (and my guess is that it is at least something like it), this study indicates its ranks would probably be drawn from those with a somewhat spotty and fragmentary schooling in the religion. “As a result, they could become zealous adherents to an unorthodox and distorted version of Islam.” That makes a certain amount of sense.
However, it’s all irrelevant at this point, except that it might assist in the design of counter-propaganda. But Harf’s long-term goals are not only unobtainable, they ignore the problem we face in the here and now: to counter and effectively destroy the enemy, which is not only our enemy, but the enemy of most Muslims, all Christians and Jews, and humankind itself.
The problem we face is an insect infestation.
Those insects don’t like the color red:
http://woundedamericanwarrior.com/religion-of-peace-woman-stopped-on-street-pronounced-guilty-shot-in-the-head-for-wearing-red-video/
In another alarming development, today the BBC is reporting that ISIS militants have burned to death 45 people in this town in western Iraq. According to the report the local police chief, Col Qasim al-Obeidi, is saying members of his security forces are some of the 45 victims.
Is it just me, or does Ms. Harf come across as a light weight with a valley girl voice?
I can’t believe the State Department lets her represent them.
So, what have we here? Boilerplate claptrap from Harf about root causes that doesn’t address the issue we’re facing today and the question Matthews was asking
root causes is a feminist thing… ie. the patrairchy is the root cause of womens problems… white men are the root cause of all evil and such in the west… racism is the root cause of the behavior of african americans
the whole of the left is predicated on the idea that if you attack root causes problems go away, with the feminists being the forfront mental trainees for most of us… mens farting is a root cause… poverty is a root cause… patriarchy, etc.
we have been inundated till the insane is normalized by their constant usage of these principals and our ignoring who dumps crap in our heads…
Lily Thapa: The root cause of violence is the patriarchal society and gender discrimination
and for those not forced to take womens studies courses or such… and from here
http://www.wilpfinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Root-causes.pdf
Root cause NO1:
Patriarchy, Violent Masculinity and Gender Inequality
Root cause NO2:
Armament
Root cause NO3:
Exclusion
see? so all she is doing is applying her womens study courses ideas to the world… they are excluded from great jobs, and so they go burn people to death.
its obvious to women… duh.. [rolls eyes]
“[War] is a metaphor. And that idea ties into the administration’s overemphasis on the power of words.”–Neo
I have never seen any organization so rapt by the “power of words” yet use said words more powerlessly.
“I can’t believe the State Department lets [Marie Harf] represent them.”–Mr Frank
That’s the problem in a nutshell. Ms. Harf is a chosen representative for this administration which speaks volumes about those she represents.
RE: “But we cannot win this war by killing them. We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need in the medium to longer term to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups, whether it’s lack of opportunity for jobs …”
And I agree with you: Harf represents the majority opinion at the State Dept. Spokesperson Psaki is no better. And if her comments didn’t represent the State Dept., they would have been retracted by now.
There is a difference between ignorance and stupidity: ignorance is curable. You just can’t fix stupid.
“Harf Truths and Whole Lies: Can political correctness defeat terrorism?” By James Taranto on Feb. 17, 2015
“As funny as it is, it also feels a bit unsporting to pick on Harf like this. After all, she’s just doing her job, which is to act as a mouthpiece for an administration whose guiding principle seems to be that political correctness–which is to say, a thoroughgoing dishonesty–is the best weapon for dealing with Islamic terrorism.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/harf-truths-and-whole-lies-1424207249
I could never stand how liberals blame everything on poverty. They don’t seem to understand have free will. They tend to believe that people are wind-up toys. Whenever reality proves they are not (say when socialistic policies fell) the either ignore it or get angry at the people for not going along with them.
Poverty and racism are their favorite excuses for evil. They just can’t understand some people CHOOSE to be evil. (Well, okay, they believe Conservatives choose to be evil, but no one else.)
If the Jihadists captured Marie Harf, or John Stewart, or Michael Moore, or Babs Streisand, or Amanda Marcotte for that matter, would there be any reason not to shrug?
These clowns won’t wise up until some Islamist with an AK 47 takes out a bunch of studio executives, or some Manhattan Progressive caucus cocktail party; or, blows up The Dakota.
ISIS already has jobs – killing Jews and infidels. Harf is too stupid to figure that out.
Maybe we need to try midnight basketball in the Middle East.
Artfldgr Says:
February 17th, 2015 at 4:53 pm
Meet Zuriya:
http://theothermccain.com/2015/02/11/common-man-hating-feminism/
You’re welcome!
Western civilization, at present, is made vulnerable, is threatened, not by Islam’s terrorists, nor their sponsors, nor their cheerleaders, nor Islams prevaricators i.e., taqiyya artists, nor Islam’s apologists, nor Islam’s insouciant moderates, nor the muslim diaspora/invasion, and most certainly not by Islam’s intellectual sterility and spiritual deficiencies, nor by the model Prophet’s temporal appetites — sex, slavery, rape, plunder and, full circle complete, barbarous violence.
Western civilization is vulnerable, is threatened, by its self-percipitated nihilism. Nihilism had provided the vacuum, nature’s regulatory framework filled it with the only significantly substantive social element extant — Islam. It’s of no matter if it is retrograde, it’s the only belief system going.
The three most important books about Western Civilization in the last 50 years:
The Camp of The Saints, by Jean Raspail
Clash of Civilizations, by Samuel Huntington
Soumission (Submission), by Michel Houellebecq
The last, like the first, a novel, is brilliant in it’s exposition. The narrator/protagonist eventually submits to Islam – faute de mieux – For ‘lack of better’ choice.
Any sign anyone in the West has anything more significant on their mind than the next election?
It’s so awful. I don’t like to use ad hominems which then cut off all communication with so many out there, but these people are so stupid, led by such a scumbag, and just waiting until he’s out of office seems passive and weak. I have my own excuses, which at this point I’m not going to publicly air. Patience. Patience and controlled dread.
Because what else is there? Publicly wish for some equivalent to “Seven Days in May”?
When President Bush applied a spectrum of liberal, humanitarian reform vis-é -vis the US-led, UN-mandated compliance process for Iraq – following the guidance of US law and policy and UN mandates that preceded his administration, largely formed by his Democratic predecessor – the Left howled and bayed and did much to sabotage the effort.
My understanding is that we attempted similar reforms in the Vietnam campaign that was also sabotaged by the Left.
Is Harf a leftist or a liberal? The Left coopts liberal speech but in action, the Left is anti-liberal.
Was islam a necessary but not sufficient reason for mohammed himself? Or was islam enough for the Perfect Man whose every aspect of life is a guide for every human being?
It is not sufficient to believe mohammed was the Perfect Man? What else? His appeal to those monsters in life who love to be able to rape, enslave and kill with allah’s blessing, as mohammed did?
And when do we finally get to hear the variant interpretations of the koran which are supposed to affect our thinking on how to assess our enemies? What about the hadith?
Why this stubborn search for non-practicing vegetarians?
In that exchange Chris Matthews went on to say this:
This sounds like we’re going to get rid of juvenile delinquency in America over time by erasing poverty, improving education. Sure, over time,” Matthews said. “But the American people, I think, are getting humiliated morally by this…What are the American people supposed to do about this?”
Matthew’s saying that the American people are becoming “humilated” by all the hideous slaughter is politically interesting, and seems to indicate that the Dems are getting very worried about how this is going to affect coming elections.
Even Harf tries to sound a bit tough as she answers Matthew’s question:
“They should know that the United States military is taking direct action in Iraq and in Syria. We’re taking their leaders out. We’re taking out their financing. We’re taking out their training camps. This is a long fight,” Harf said. “But I also think, not to take it to politics for a second, they should tell their elected leaders to support the AUMF that we sent to Congress.”
The American people got what they wanted, a mental midget spokesperson for a mental midget president.
“They” killed their way into this. We can certainly kill our way out of it. We have the will power and the ability. We do not have a leader
Harf needs to learn the strong horse / weak horse competitive value system that the terrorists use to evaluate their opponents in their particular activist arena.
Killing is a principal metric of that competitive value system.
The jihadists recovered most of their damage in Iraq and Afghanistan via America’s funding of the Syrian and Libyan conflicts. Which, coincidentally, was mostly about Hussein Obola wanting to off a US ally in counter nuclear proliferation for Libya.
“The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
George Orwell
_______________________________________
Harf cannot speak to truth in regards to the radical Islamists and their religious jihad towards Christians, Jews, opposing muslim tribes.
Obama cannot speak to truth as to who our enemy is.
Valerie Jarrett ignores that truth of who ISIS is.
There is no doubting that Progressives and Leftists hate YOU who claim to speak the truth.
General Curtis LeMay said “If you kill enough of them they stop fighting”
I’ll take his word for it, rather then the imbecile at the state department.
_______________________________________
“When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear.”
Dr. Thomas Sowell
_______________________________________
General Curtis LeMay: “If you kill enough of them they stop fighting”
Marie Harf: “If you hire enough of them they stop fighting”
Ian Tuttle does seem to have nailed it:
Psaki and Harf = Lucy and Ethel
Their actions and words tell you all you need to know. Kill them in great numbers without mercy. That is the only way to discourage recruitment. The only way to defeat them.
As far as harf’s idiotic comment about jobs is concerned, perhaps she should ask her messiah about the many millions of Americans who have left the workforce for a lack of jobs. We have an administration staffed by sophmoric twits with a narcissistic bull shit artist who believes his own BS calling the shots whenever he can find the time to get off the golf course.
Who constitutes Obama’s “base” regarding the lack of war on terror. How many Americans are there left who feel the way Obama does about this war? Surely it must be a quite small group.
Scott, 7:32 pm — “Who constitutes Obama’s ‘base’ regarding the lack of war on terror. How many Americans are there left who feel the way Obama does about this war? Surely it must be a quite small group.”
Today’s news . . .
Obama Job Approval Hits 50% for First Time Since 2013
http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/181283/obama-approval-hits-first-time-2013.aspx?utm_source=position1&utm_medium=related&utm_campaign=tiles
As a kid I loved to watch Charlie McCarthy. Charlie seemed very clever; and you could almost forget, if you let your mind drift, that he was a dummy. Now with Mortimer Snerd, it was painfully obvious that he was not only a dummy, but was forced into the role of a stupid dummy. Poor Mortimer, he had no choice.
Everyone who speaks for our government seems to have morphed into Mortimer Snerd. Or maybe they are Charlie McCarthy wannabes, and Mortimer Snerd is the manipulator.
At any rate, it is not clever; and these dummies, er people, have a choice.
Dummie, who pulls the strings?:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W60cq-T02yk
Sorros maybe:
http://www.mrc.org/articles/soros-10-million-funds-group-slamming-conservative-islamophobia
Dear State Dept. SpokesBlonde: One simply CANNOT make this SHIT Up!!
**In this Huge time ofDark Age Islam on the March, what do we have?? Answer: An Alinskyite in the White House and FOOLS Spokesblathering for him.
Do any of these dingbats live in the real world ?
George Pal, excellent recommendations!
“The three most important books about Western Civilization in the last 50 years:
The Camp of The Saints, by Jean Raspail
Clash of Civilizations, by Samuel Huntington
Soumission (Submission), by Michel Houellebecq””
To these, add a fourth:
“On the Eve of the Millenium”, by the late Conner Cruise O’Brien. A short but brilliant read – published in 1994 – its concluding chapter, “The Guarded Palace”, is starkly enlightening and eerily prescient of the world of 2015.
And maybe a fifth?
“Silent Revolution: How the Left Rose to Political Power and Cultural Dominance”, by the late Barry Rubin, just published in 2014.
rickl:
Perhaps the IRS could give them jobs. I heard they’re hiring.
John Podhoretz suggests giving them all jobs — at Gitmo.
In the meantime, while Harf ponders long-term solutions: Italy Fears ISIS Invasion From Libya — As ISIS makes inroads into Libya, officials in Rome are panicking about an Islamic State just across the sea–but have no idea how to combat the crisis.
I laughed out loud when she talked about helping them start businesses. I can’t help referring to her as the spokesgirl.
So, having engaged the Nazis with a “kill em all” attitude was the wrong approach!?!
Sending warships, air armadas, the nuclear bomb and a 100% “all in”, kill the bastards, “we’re in it to win it”, “Never say die”, “Go to Hell”, F**K YOU to Japan did not really convince those little dweebs that it was over for them?!!?!??!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Sorry Marie Barf, but your pathetic narrative might play in Code Pink coffee klatches, but there are enough of us out here who simply can’t sink our teeth into your, squishy, doughy, dipsy-doodle delusional dystopia.
Getting really disgusted with these wobbly wenches…
liberalism that is senseless. It’s chickified, it denies reality, and this is the number two spokeswoman at the State Department. Her boss is not very much more cogent. That would be the infamous Jen Psaki. –rush limbaugh
I can’t believe the State Department lets her represent them.
Consider for a second the idea that Harf’s superiors may not be all that smart themselves, and it will start to make sense that a bubblehead would be given the job of being their spokesperson.
Ace nailed it: “It is believed the job-seeking jihadis were on line hoping to get hired as greeters at Target when one among them said “Ah fuck this, let’s start burning families to death,” to the general approval of the queue.”
Leftists are materialists to the core. Everything to them is about money. EVERY THING.
They are utterly baffled by a phenom like a satanic death cult, because they don’t realize that most people need a reason to live even more than they need the means.
Art, most of the leaders of the International Left are, get this, males. (I won’t call them “men” because they’re unworthy of the name.) They use foolish women as tools.
ISIS is Nazism — recruitment wise — revisited.
The parallels are too striking to pass unnoticed.
Like wise ISIS is in the same mode — of recruitment — as Bolshevism — circa 1918.
One harkens back to the naivate of Reed in “Reds.”
The ardent acolytes INVARIABLY are ‘spotty’ on history and reality.
So everything that has been eternal is new again — in their opinions.
In effect, they’re the demographic that tunes in to the “Daily Show” to get ‘reality’ pounded into their bones by imam Stewart. [ the ‘Scottish’ ‘wit’ ]
[ Court jester as prince. ]
ISIS is Jones Town for those able to pack their own Koolaid.
They don’t respect individual dignity. They don’t acknowledge intrinsic value. One follows the prophet and a barbaric universal church. Another follows the secular profits of wealth, pleasure, and leisure; and a barbaric universal church. Neither is capable of comprehending, let alone appreciating, abstract moral axioms or the fragility of human life. The former when it is uniquely vulnerable. Send in the abortionists, the pro-choicers. Fight ISIS on equal terms.
Please tell me these people aren’t running our government.
I’m baffled. Who hires idiots like this? And why? The light-working, smartest, bestest man in America…
I can’t even complete the sentence.
No amount of intellectual or physical rage I can muster would be enough to denounce the ignorance and foolishness of government by our well-educated superiors.
Harf’s policies have a long history. LBJ proposed a Mekong Development Authority or Mekong Marshall Plan to bribe or mollify Communists. Didn’t work then, either.
Come to think of it, LBJ’s half-hearted war didn’t work either.
Actually, LBJ personally picking bombing targets–as Obama chooses drone strikes–didn’t work either.
There is something very American–if you believe the Democrat Party intellectuals and politicians are American–about Harf.
The Left coopts liberal speech but in action, the Left is anti-liberal.
If liberals repudiated the Left, that might be believable. Instead liberals’ behavior shows that the hardest of the Hard Left is the culmination of liberalism.
There’s no fighting here. This is a war!
The Sorority Sisters are put in charge of grown up men things.
Men have self-abdicated leadership.
Disaster looms ahead.
FOUND:
A previously unidentified photo of Ms. Harf
Marie and Jen, SpokesBlondes of State, said ALL we needed to know about Hillary and, now, John Boy Kerry.
And, there’s one pretending to be a boy spokesdoofusing at the Defense Dept. He, too, is skin cringing, metro and dang near spikey haired.
And a growing(on steroids)Death Cult is swallowing land and slaughtering people in the Middle East and Africa and licking its chops to come over the border from Mexico to foist another 9-11-2001 over and over.
And….Oh, Yeah, Y’all…The White House is hosting a Lovefest about “extremism” with Joe Biden as Genius Host.
Are we not blessed, America?
“If it’s anything like al Qaeda (and my guess is that it is at least something like it), this study indicates its ranks would probably be drawn from those with a somewhat spotty and fragmentary schooling in the religion. “As a result, they could become zealous adherents to an unorthodox and distorted version of Islam.” That makes a certain amount of sense.” — NeoNeoCon
Unfortunately, Neo, ISIS is engaging in behavior that is both sanctioned and MANDATED by the Koran. They are living up to the ideals of their so-called prophet. If anything, they are the most orthodox Muslims in the world. If you don’t understand this, then I’m sorry, but you simply don’t understand Islam. The only reason the rest of the Muslim world might be bothered about ISIS behavior is because they also attack other Muslims (i.e. “moderate” Muslims that don’t live up to ISIS standards). They don’t make a single peep about the atrocities committed against Christians, Jews, or other non-Muslims (i.e. kafir).
Can’t really blame Harf and Psaki, they are just representing the entire administration. As I’ve said before, none of this is surprising to anyone within academia. It’s as if the entire faculty from the humanities and social studies from any random college suddenly were put in charge of the government. Everything the administration has done is straight out of the faculty lounges.
But, to go ahead and pick on the easy target and get a few laughs:
http://freebeacon.com/blog/general-marie-harf-through-history/
on another note:
first of all, free market goes back to before the romans..
second of all, their wish is to change it to a system that has failed 100% of the time, and has led to starvation, death, wars, genocide, eugenics, euthanasia, and state slavery
DNW Says: These clowns won’t wise up until some Islamist with an AK 47 takes out a bunch of studio executives, or some Manhattan Progressive caucus cocktail party; or, blows up The Dakota.
yes. but then they would blame it on the inanimate AK47 and the bullets…
Marie Harf to Critics: Maybe My Comments Were ‘Too Nuanced’ for You
[translation: im a genius, every one of you is a gruberian moron]
“I’m not the first person to say something like this,” Harf said. “Military commanders that we’ve had throughout many years here fighting this war on terrorism have said the exact same thing, that in the short term when there’s a threat like ISIL. We’ll take direct military action against these terrorists. We have done that. We are doing that in Iraq and Syria. But longer term, we have to look at how we combat the conditions that can lead people to turn to extremism.”
[translation: watch me play you as morons… ]
Harf isn’t wrong in her ‘what’ concepts, but she is fuzzy on the ‘how’ proportion and sequence.
War isn’t a sports contest that ends when a victor is declared, and then conditions reset to zero and everyone goes home. Winning a war requires building the peace. Harf is okay as far as that goes.
But building the peace first requires securing the peace as fundamental and foundation, ie, establish and maintain dominant control. That’s where the sufficient killing part is necessary. Hard power first, then soft power. Building peace is (likely) impossible when lacking dominant control at its core and base.
The elementary error of prematurely removing the fundamental and foundational US peace-operations forces from Iraq showed the Obama administration’s basic (or for the more conspiracy minded, deliberate) misunderstanding of the ‘how’ of peace-building.
ErisGuy: “If liberals repudiated the Left, that might be believable. Instead liberals’ behavior shows that the hardest of the Hard Left is the culmination of liberalism.”
You’re describing a leftist disguised as a liberal.
However, it’s possible that the Left’s cooption has advanced such that few genuine liberals remain.
“”we have to look at how we combat the conditions that can lead people to turn to extremism.”
Its pretty obvious what that “condition” is. Progressive liberalism. We kept the Islamic barbarians at bay for 1400 years because we weren’t ruled by such squishy thinking leaders in our government.
Miss Harf has no clue that she herself is one of the main reasons islam has turned out violent extremist. And if people like herself were even shown its factually the case they could never accept it for the destruction it would cause to their entrenched worldview.
To add to the last paragraph of my comment at February 18th, 2015 at 9:41 am, the most disturbing trend of the Obama administration in its conduct of foreign affairs is not its course changes, but rather its choices that have caused correct courses to fail.
Indeed, creative destruction is a tenet of activism. It’s not enough to change ways, but one must destroy the old ways to end the threat of the competitive alternative.
Harf!:
http://freebeacon.com/blog/general-marie-harf-through-history/
Whether it is liberalism or progressivism, the left is generational or unprincipled, characterized by their pro-choice or selective morality. They prefer tangible returns over abstract concepts, including individual dignity, intrinsic value… until they don’t in order to marginalize competing interests. Unfortunately, there are not a few on the right who are also pro-choice in order to follow the secular profits of wealth, pleasure, and leisure. They are counterparts and competitors.
Frankly, her statement must be the most representative yet of the whole mentality of the Obama administration. If historians look for one sentence to sum up the world view of the Obama supporter/ believer/ administration Harf’s should be it. Delusional, immature, uniformed, naive, gullible, stupid, way beyond merely simplistic and above all else informative of the collective interpretative powers of the smartest man to ever sit in the White House. We should be grateful for her forthrightness. It will be tragic if this statement is not forever and prominently attached to the Obama administration. It should form the title of the history of this presidency. She deserves a special place in US and maybe world history.
That said, I am glad she is a White House spokesperson and not a babysitter or laundress.
Bob from Virginia:
“That said, I am glad she is a White House spokesperson and not a babysitter or laundress.”
_______________________________________
Actually, she is very much a babysitter. She watches over and cares for the president’s (immature, childish) ideology and narratives. She “feeds” them and “bathes” them in her loving adulation and parades them in the public square; shows it off.
Yep—-babysitter.
Indeed, the role is one in the same. Spot on.
Valerie Jarrett, Jen Psaki, Marie Barf and the girly-man potus are perfect examples of the kind of governance, leadership America should expect from a Liberal woman in the white house.
Cue up Hillary Clinton.
Now, that “laundress” part is going to require a bit more thought.
Obviously, Marie Harf has not read the article in the Atlantic which was released this week. It explains ISIS straight up.
Valley Girl Harf: Like, if only Isis had jobs. They’d like, totally stop the killing and stuff, ya know.
Like, if she only had a brain, ya know.
Like, we are in deep doo doo, ya know.
Time for that golden oldie, “Send in the Clowns.”
And the LIVs don’t know or care, ya know.
The Caliphate begins its bloody reign by massacring Moslems. Hmm. Didn’t the French and Russian revolutions begin by killing their own in large numbers?
You’re describing a leftist disguised as a liberal.
I knew all those college presidents in 1960s were Commies. Thanks for the verification.
I honestly don’t know how someone can witness the daily horror show of ISIS – months of mass executions via guns, burning, crucifixion, beheadings, rape – and so blithely spout that what they need in the long-term are jobs.
This is past delusional, it is insane; it is a failure to acknowledge the monsters howling outside our door. Do they think if their refusal to recognize ISIS’s crusade will somehow make it go away?
I do blame Harf, Psaki, and Kerry along with Obama and the rest of his incompetent WH staff, because this willful blindness is signaling America’s weakness, which only emboldens ISIS to attack citizens of our allies and (likely) eventually us. This ignorance has a daily body count and it makes me sick.
@ J.J.
Tubular…
erisguy
Whom else did the revolutionaries kill but their own??
it was revolution…not war
unless you want to call it civil war…
When liberals espouse war is not the answer, the jihadist conclude that massacre is.
Apparently Harf is just saying what Obama believes. Check out Obama’s op-ed in the LA Times:
” More broadly, groups like al Qaeda and ISIL exploit the anger that festers when people feel that injustice and corruption leave them with no chance of improving their lives. The world has to offer today’s youth something better.
Governments that deny human rights play into the hands of extremists who claim that violence is the only way to achieve change. Efforts to counter violent extremism will only succeed if citizens can address legitimate grievances through the democratic process and express themselves through strong civil societies. Those efforts must be matched by economic, educational and entrepreneurial development so people have hope for a life of dignity.”
We need to address “legitimate grievances” to stop terrorism.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-obama-terrorism-conference-20150218-story.html
Lizzy: “We need to address “legitimate grievances” to stop terrorism.”
Just like Obama has done such a wonderful job of creating jobs in this country? And has addressed the problems in the black community? Or Obama’s great successes in improving the economic lot of the middle class?
There will be no improvement in economic conditions in the U.S. or in the Muslim hell holes until the progs give up the idea of government central planning as a solution. They should pass out copies of Hernando de Soto’s book, “The Mystery of Capital,” at the conference and call it a day. Then Obama and his minions should read the book as well.
The only role of the Federal government is to protect the people so the people can get on with the business of creating wealth. That’s where this conference should be aimed – at how to protect the people from Islamic extremist jihadis.
“”We need to address “legitimate grievances” to stop terrorism.””
Yes. Little Omar needs a vocation where he can be taxed to death to fix all the grievances more legitimate than his. That’ll fix those jihadis.
The Obama oped in the LA Times screams “community organizer.” I have taken to posting these things on my FB page again. NO ONE COMMENTS. What is interesting about that is the fact that the liberals USED to JUMP on anything I posted with a whiff of anti Obama (even obliquely) and beat me to a pulp. I posted the Atlantic article and some articles about the the Kurds defending Irbil and …. Crickets. This is somewhat odd. I hope they are reading and thinking. But, I doubt it.
this is a let them eat cake moment…
when the state is strong enough to defend itself from all if not most…then its also capable of protecting its delusions… and then there is no way for them to be tested and as such, errors add up without correction, and eventually, nutters rule… that is until the incompetency of their delusions cause so much ill, that they no longer can rule, or govern, or defend themselves.
ultimately i have read many a paper as to the end of civiliazations and countries that were dominant, like rome, and they go on for pages and reams trying to figure out why…
above is the easiest simplest occams razor why…
[the same applies to why so many women are ditzy and men tend not to be… women are protected and as long and most of the time its not worth combating the delusion, and so, ditzy delusion is the order of the day. women in the past were less so, because their actions were more tested in the crucible of things. but the more men protect them, the courts protect them, the state protects them and the order is you cant question or assail their points without punishment, you get wacko as normal… ergo feminist now fighting the bad fight against mens farts]
janetoo,
Their MO is narrative conformity by means of rationalization, disqualification, and/or dismissal out of hand.
For example, I explain Bush’s decision for Operation Iraqi Freedom in large part by showing the strong continuity with Clinton’s enforcement of the UN mandates for Iraq.
It’s obvious that Bush didn’t just make up OIF but instead enforced longstanding law and policy.
Yet I’ve found that once I demonstrate the link, they consistently and predictably break off the discussion at that point. Then, if they raise the topic again, it’s as though we never had the prior discussion.
It’s all about the narrative contest of the activist game for them.
JJ,
The rest can work, but nothing can work without the necessary predicate foundation of security and stability and the dominant control to dictate/enforce terms.
Harf reminds me of a clueless sorority girl. As if!
What’s with the huge, over-sized glasses on these odious high school honor club overlords we have ruling over us nowadays? I can’t take any of them seriously when they look so goofy.
Lizzy:
Even without the op-ed, there is very little question that Harf is always speaking as Obama’s mouthpiece. She is always briefed as to what to say. That is her job.
Yeah, I know Harf is doing her job as Obama’s spokesman.
It’s just that this time we have Obama repeating the line himself. This is not always the case, such as when Obama never once made a statement about why he did not attend the Paris Unity rally (while Josh Earnest came up with increasingly absurd dodges). Gives him some wiggle room for his defenders to then claim Obama is not being served well by his staff – if only Obama knew!
– – –
I think Obama’s op-ed, with it’s reference to “legitimate grievances,” makes it clear that he sees this so-called “extremism” along the same lines as a domestic protest. Sure sounds similar to his statement on Ferguson protesters blocking bridges that we all have to tolerate the inconveniences that are necessary to affect change. Except you can’t community organize your way out of a war with ISIS, AQ, and Boko Haram. This is frighteningly naive and ethnocentric at best.
Can you say hopelessly lost boys and girls?
I suggest that Amy Miller over at Legal Insurrection sums it up quite succinctly:
The link:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/02/is-the-administration-legitimizing-isis-acts-of-terror/#more-116913
Either that or they’re actively and intentionally enabling the enemy.
As for actively and intentionally enabling the enemy:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/02/obama_and_the_muslim_gang_sign.html
One must wonder . . .
“One must wonder”:
You find yourself wondering and asking why, it is too late for you …
Harf counts “Militant Christians” amongst extremist threats we face ….
The lady needs some serious 50 Shades.
Saudis know how to handle it: boy is she noisy!
http://shoebat.com/2015/01/15/video-woman-gets-beheaded-middle-street-right-public-view/
The other arm of their argument just repeated by Eric Holder: ‘We’re Not at a Time of War’
here is something funny, and which spurs thinking on the subject
General Marie Harf Through History
http://freebeacon.com/blog/general-marie-harf-through-history/
the images are a piss in that you see harf addressing ceaser, napoleon, etc…
while these are meant to be funny, they ultimately are examples of where killing worked, and we imagine that harf was their and advised otherwise…
but then i thought, is there an example that actually fits? where the redistribution of wealth was tried, and that the outcome was NOT what harf said it would be?
Between 820 and 844 the vikings attacked france, specifically normandy.
then in 845, they laid seige to Paris
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Paris_%28845%29
After plundering and occupying the city, the Vikings finally withdrew after receiving a ransom payment of 7,000 French livres (2,570 kilograms or 5,670 pounds) of silver and gold from Charles the Bald.
redistributing the wealth of paris to the vikings
this is harfs example.. the jihadis attack, and attack and ultimately jobs and money would be used to “pay them off” (nevermind what the koran says about that, or what marx in the jewish questions says about that!!!)
ultimately what ended up happening is that when they went back home, and others saw what they got, they loaded up and increased their efforts to attack some more to get more!!!!! and eventually laid seige to paris again.
Although the Vikings had attacked parts of Francia previously, they reached Paris for the first time in 845, eventually sacking the city. They attacked Paris three times more in the 860s, leaving only when they had acquired sufficient loot or bribes
the larger point here is that HARF CAN BE BOUGHT, SO SHE THINKS THAT EVERYONE CAN BE BOUGHT.
however, religious zealots are not willing to be bought!! they are NOT MATERIALISTS (socialists), and so, they seek reward in a non material plain despising rewards in this realm.
if she was christian, i would tell her to turn to the bible and read the part about the hippocrites.
Matthew 7:5 ESV: You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.
though more specifically:
Matthew 6:5 ESV: “And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward.
the religious idea is that if you accept reward “in this life” then you will not be rewarded in the after life, because you dont get paid twice…
being a materialist, she would not get this. even if she believes herself to be christian (i have no idea).
the jihadi want the reward that comes in the realm of the eternal, not the reward that comes in the realm of the temporary. so ultimately, they will not cooperate.
oh, they WILL take the reward, but tiqya will result in them taking it, and then going right back to what they are doing considering the jobs and money to be jizya, and that which she thinks will stop them will only embolden them more as they will see allah rewarding them with bounty from their enemies.
welcome to the game…
or rather… harf should read tsun tsu
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
there is also this one… not funny… but interesting.
Marie Harf, Barack Obama, and ‘Legitimate Grievances’
http://freebeacon.com/blog/marie-harf-barack-obama-and-legitimate-grievances/
Marie Barf says:
“We can work with countries around the world to help improve their governance. We can help them build their economies so they can have job opportunities for these people…”
_______________________________________
So, Ms. Harf is suggesting that America take an active role in the governance of these countries?!?
I’ve not previously seen a member of the U.S. State Department advocate for taking active control of a foreign (sovereign) nation.
In addition, what type of economy is Ms. Harf recommending?
A Socialist oriented economy?
A Communist oriented economy?
Some hybrid of the above?
Surely she is not advocating for a market-based economy? Her leaders loathe capitalism and all that it represents.
Therefore, it seems highly unlikely that Ms. Harf and her “team” is not suggesting “helping” these countries with anything akin to a capitalistic oriented economy.
I know, it seems such a fundamental question.
But then, I am not the one who recommended interfering with the economies of these other countries…
Inquiring minds want to know…
My Dad’s B-29 outfit with the 20th Air Force in CBI and later Tinian Island was The HELLBIRDS. The 462nd Bomb Group of the 58th Bomb Wing. The Group Motto—on the nose of every airplane—was something I love and honor:
WITH MALICE TOWARD SOME
Get it?
Eric: “The rest can work, but nothing can work without the necessary predicate foundation of security and stability and the dominant control to dictate/enforce terms.”
Don’t quite get your point. If you’re referring to my 12:14 comment, I was opining that the conference was probably a waste of time. That they know nothing about changing poverty or what motivates Islamic jihadis. Obama would do better to figure out what he’s doing wrong economically at home and concentrating on his #1 job, protecting the American people. Affecting the behavior of foreign nations – tell them to read the “Mystery of Capital” and get with the program. Much more productive than holding big conferences where much is said and precious little accomplished.
The Evolution of ISIS
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ar/security/2013/11/syria-islamic-state-iraq-sham-growth.html#
A Socialist oriented economy?
A Communist oriented economy?
Some hybrid of the above
they are the same thing… distinction without a difference IF you take the time to know what marx actually says…which most dont… so they believe that socialism is the lesser of evils.
kind of like saying lucifer is better than beelzebub…
Pingback:Obama | Columbia | nuclear disarmament
Pingback:Obama’s long-held dream of nuclear disarmament - Freedom's Floodgates