I think I made it clear in both posts that I think Pape is part of Obama’s thinking, but he’s most definitely not “merely” following Pape. His position is overdetermined by many, many motivations. But Pape is part of it.

By Dr. Arieh Eldad – M.D. at Hadassah Hospital in Israel

A true story of gratitude

I was instrumental in establishing the “Israeli National Skin Bank”, which is the largest in the world. The National Skin Bank stores skin for everyday needs as well as for war time or mass casualty situations.

This skin bank is hosted at the Hadassah Ein Kerem University hospital in Jerusalem where I was the Chairman of plastic surgery.

This is how I was asked to supply skin for an Arab woman from Gaza, who was hospitalized in Soroka Hospital in Beersheva, after her family burned her. Usually, such atrocities happen among Arab families when the women are suspected of having an affair.

We supplied all the needed homografts for her treatment. She was successfully treated by my friend and colleague, Prof. Lior Rosenberg and discharged to return to Gaza.

She was invited for regular follow-up visits to the outpatient clinic in Beersheva.

One day she was caught at a border crossing wearing a suicide belt. She meant to explode herself in the outpatient clinic of the hospital where they saved her life. It seems that her family promised her that if she did that, they would forgive her.

This is only one example of the war between Jews and Muslims in the Land of Israel. It is not a territorial conflict. This is a civilization conflict, or rather a war between civilization and barbarism.

Bibi (Netanyahu) gets it, Obama does not.

I have never written before asking everyone to please forward this so that as many as possible can understand radical islam and what awaits the world if it is not stopped.

Dr Arieh Eldad

It is war. The legalistic wringing of hands over letting Mooslime in the land is bullshi@t ….
If the womyn of the land truly objected there would be no Islaaaam problem here. Womyn don’t object instead they … coo:
CLINTON PREACHES LOVE AND KINDNESS [not a spoof]

Off to Pam Geller’s blog!
We need women with balls willing to get shot at …

Mark Zuckerberg’s statement posted by G6loq at 4:59 pm is bound to feed anti-semitism. Why the man deems it his right to speak for all Jews is beyond comprehension, but boy howdy has he ever stepped in it.
“As a Jew, my parents taught me that we must stand up against attacks on all communities….If you’re a Muslim in this community, as the leader of Facebook I want you to know that you are always welcome here and that we will fight to protect your rights and create a peaceful and safe environment for you.”
What a hypocrite. Right now, Jews in Israel are under attack by their Muslim subjects. Shall we all side with the Muslims against the Jews? After all, the main demand the Muslims have of the Jews is the right of return to their homes in Israel. Then all would be well. Most Jews in the region will be dead but hey we did the right thing. Right?

Incidentally, didn’t Zuckerberg renounce his American citizenship? Since he didn’t want to be an American any more, what right does he, a foreigner, have to speak for anyone here? Why isn’t he living in Switzerland? Unfortunately, leftists like Zuckerberg feed right into negative stereotypes of Jews.

Yann at 11:48 pm has stated the problem with occupation very well in my opinion. When you are dealing with an expansionist ideology, everyone is an occupier everywhere.
That is why we have to defeat the ideology itself, Islam.

Rather than fully implementing Pape’s recommendation, as Ron Paul might, which would have been bad enough, Obama is having the US intervene with our reputation on the line, but doing so insufficiently on its face to win. He’s positioned the US as the weak horse in the contest, which is worse. He’s not not-playing – he’s playing the US so that the other players in the game, including Iran, appear stronger than the US.

For example, the WSJ article reporting that Iraqis believe the US doesn’t want to defeat ISIS because they remember the US recently defeated AQI, so they know we could defeat ISIS, as Cornhead points out. It’s not theory to them, because they experienced the US as the strong horse. Thus, it appears deliberate to them that the US is not addressing the situation like we did before. In other words, Obama’s decisions are actively discrediting the US on the ground.

I disagree with Frog that ISIS and the other AQ derivatives are not a problem. I agree that Iran is a problem. Yet Obama’s decisions have favored Iran. In their elastic narrative, Iran is an ally against ISIS, not unlike the Russian argument that anything anti-Assad is pro-ISIS. Both Iran and ISIS need to be stopped.

The current situation is worse than Saddam’s regime, but Saddam was not the solution, either, because Saddam was in fact a terrorist who worked with al Qaeda and affiliates in his wider terrorist network that rivaled and overlapped al Qaeda, among his breach across the board of the terms of the Gulf War ceasefire that triggered OIF.

Contra Pape, the solution was the post-Surge, ex-Obama Iraq empowered by strong-horse US peace operations. In Iraq, we had taken the upper hand in the contest. In that window of opportunity, hard earned at high cost, Obama was correct to assess ISIS as the “jayvee”. But then, despite being given a winning hand by Bush – a better hand than Truman gave Eisenhower – Obama proceeded to break it down and enabled the jayvee to develop into the varsity while Obama refused Iraq’s requests for the US to honor the hard-earned partnership until it was too late to curb the problem encroaching Iraq, opening the way for Iran to fill the vacuum left irresponsibly by the US.

They will continue on their course as long as their narrative is intact. Their narrative must be discredited deeper than the issue level on the surface. To dislodge and break it, their premises must be discredited. What’s past is prologue: it’s necessary to re-lay the foundation by setting the record straight on OIF at the premise level, which sets up discrediting the false narrative and its false narrators.

Setting the record straight on OIF is not a time machine to restore post-Surge, ex-Obama Iraq. But it is a necessary step to de-stigmatize OIF in order to re-normalize the range of action and strong-horse American leadership that manifested with OIF in the Overton Window, which is needed to recover the approach for re-establishing the US as the strong horse on the ground.

Imagine for just a moment that Obama is not his own man, but is being controlled by someone close to him who is in the employ of a foreign power. Someone who can control him daily without others near him wondering why he is pursuing policies that no one in his cabinet recommends or understands.

We can parse his actions, try to understand who influenced him in college, wonder if Frank Marshall Davis turned him into a communist. But perhaps the real question is, does Obama spend more than a few minutes a day on his day job? Does he devote hours a day watching sports on TV as has been suggested by a few who have been close to him, and just wait for his controller to tell him what to do? Does he skip his daily intelligence briefings because he doesn’t need to know what is happening in the world — because someone else will tell him what to do anyway?

I know, that story has already been told and it was a Grade B movie at that. But just imagine, if a Muslim operative who is in the background at virtually all times were calling the shots, and another operative from the same organization were already in place to do the same with Hillary, how would we know? And what would we do if the most powerful person in the country did things that made us shake our head in wonder all the time?

How would we change that equation? How would we convince others that our crazy theory might be true? Especially when the legacy media carries his water so perfectly?

But it’s just a crazy theory . . .

Well, believe it or not, the problem is not jihad, but occupation.

Both Obama and Pape are RIGHT, no matter you agree or you don’t.

The problem is, now that they have left Muslims enter the western world, they have claimed it. And we are, indeed, occupants.

Just remember that Middle East was mainly christian until a few centuries ago. This is the big elephant in the liberal room nobody wants to talk about. What Palestinians claim now, for example, was not Muslim neither Arabic until a couple of centuries ago. But once they enter, it becomes something they can claim rightfully.

Muslims still claim Al-Andalus, even if they were expelled one thousand years ago. For them, once a Muslim land, Muslim land forever.

So, yeah, Obama is right. It’s a problem of occupation. And we only need to withdraw from the Western World and then, everything will be Ok 🙂

I don’t trust anything that comes out of Obama’s mouth. It is all taqiyya to me.

I don’t think he is a coward in the sense that the question was posed.

His heart isn’t into going after ISIS because he is sympathetic to radical Islam. He proved it when he supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. He proved it when he deposed Gaddafi. He proved it every time he snubbed or attacked Netanyahu. He proved it when Hamas fired thousands of rockets at Israel and Obama wanted to halt arms shipments to Israel.

I do think he wants to destroy the American Dream. He’s over halfway there. That doesn’t take courage. It takes malice aforethought and complicity throughout the elite organizations of this country, starting with the Media but also including the likes of Google and Facebook.

in these cases inaction is often the action one can take and not be blamed for. there are not too many examples in history noted for the bad of inaction that are remembered. with the biggest maybe being Nero and McClellan – but at least the latter might have been hot at and the former was enjoying the view in his diddling.

obama serves mother russia, and in this case doing nothing is the safest thing to do which will allow his comerades the most leeway in action without issue or games back and forth. a case of you dont bother us, we wont say inconvenient things about you. not to mention that we dont know if they have anything on obama that they would reveal inconveniently.

right now they mentioned using nuclear weapons, and if they did, it would not be strategic weapons but battle field tactical nukes… which would serve them quite well in destabilization and confusion.

so it has nothing to do with bravery or cowardice it has to do with the calculation and if he can figure out a path and thats only if he has to figure one and not be part of some plan that is going on related to his comment to medvedev or not…