National Security Mush

President Obama’s so proud of his new National Security Strategy that the White House released it on the eve of a holiday weekend — when everybody in Washington’s racing for the beach, the ‘burbs or a bunker.

With good reason.  This isn’t a strategy.  It’s a stump speech.

If you want to know what details of a document really matter to any administration, don’t obsess on the text itself.  Listen to the roll-out speeches by the White House sales reps.

Remarks by terror czar John Brennan and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made it painfully clear that it isn’t only our Gulf Coast shoreline that’s threatened by this administration’s ineptitude and genius for self-delusion.

But Hillary only offered the standard boilerplate about the primacy of diplomacy and development in solving security problems.  (Terrific!  Let’s bring all the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan immediately and let the State Department and NGOs sort things out…).

But Brennan, in full tin-foil-hat mode, was downright scary.  Speaking on Wednesday, he even praised the administration’s response to the BP oil disaster.  Jeez…sycophancy should have legal limits.

Brennan was prepping the pundits on the terrorism side of the NSS.  Except that it’s not really terrorism, you see.  And it’s certainly not Islamist terrorism or a jihad.  Brennan spent an alarming amount of time on indirect apologies to Muslims.  As in:

“Nor do we describe our enemy as jihadists or Islamists because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community.”

What? Does this administration really believe that it gets to re-define jihad?  Sounds like one of its pet Muslim “experts” worked on the speech.  But trust me: When Osama says al-Qaeda’s waging jihad, Muslims believe him, not White-Bread John Brennan.

And by the way: Jihad in Islam usually means aggressive holy war to kill and subjugate infidels.  Check the Islamic texts (you know, the ones Muslims read).  And there’s no pope in Islam who gets to give claims of jihad a thumbs up or down.  If the local yokels declare a jihad, it’s a jihad, boys and girls.

Don’t facts matter at all to this administration?  I guess the 9/11 terrorists were just purifying themselves and their community.

The speech got worse.  Speaking of the Israel-Palestine situation, Brennan employed coded left-wing language when he said that “legitimate grievances can be resolved peacefully through…dialogue.”

In case you missed it, only the Palestinians have “legitimate grievances.”  Then Brennan invoked Obama’s blame-America Cairo speech as at least the equivalent of the Sermon on the Mount.  Okay, Big John: Where are the results?  Iran?  Hezbollah?  Hamas?  Al-Qaeda?  The Taliban?  Syria?

Of course, he called for “collective action,” another left-wing buzz-phrase.  Well, how’s all that collective action been going for this White House?  Got tough sanctions on Iran yet?  Or on North Korea?  Anybody notice that the Bush administration (boo, hiss, shame!) had more allies fighting beside us in Iraq than Obama has in Afghanistan?

Of course, Brennan, who’s turned into a shameless bootlicker, didn’t miss a chance to hammer Bush-Cheney, the true axis of evil.  As in his claim that his team is “responsibly ending the war in Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11.”

Well, the first point’s doubtful, while the last point depends on whether you’re a little-picture or big-picture thinker.  What’s indisputable is that the invasion did lead to the most catastrophic defeat al-Qaeda has yet suffered, when millions of Sunni Muslims turned on the terrorists.  No mention of that, of course.

Things grew even shabbier when Brennan—our top terrorism guy—spoke of “the senseless slaughter of 13 innocent Americans at Ft. Hood” as if they had been killed by space invaders.  No mention of Major Hasan, Anwar al-Alaqi, shouts of “Allah is great!” or jihad.

Tireless—at least behind a microphone–Brennan went back to stressing the importance of “international partnerships.”  Great.  We’re all with you, Big John.  But with who?  The allies Obama has stiffed?  Or was our terror czar speaking of Obama’s unprecedented success in engaging Iran, North Korea, Russia, China and his Venezuelan hug-buddy, Hugo Chavez?

Of course, Breanna didn’t say one word about the terror on our border with Mexico or in our illegal-immigrant-gang-plagued cities.  Nope, our problem’s just with al-Qaeda.  None of whose members are Islamists or jihadists.

Guess I ought to check out the Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Bahais and others in line down at the al-Qaeda recruiting office volunteering to purify their neighborhoods.

Our new National Security Strategy isn’t about security for our nation.  It’s about making our enemies feel good about themselves.  Sure, Brennan said we were going to get al-Qaeda.  But he made it clear that neither he nor our president is willing to recognize what al-Qaeda is.

Of course, that probably depends on what your definition of “is” is.

Ralph Peters’ latest book is “Endless War.”

  • iyzablue

    Great post sir, you always know how to slam in such a sophisticated way! Great points!

  • Kim Bruce

    "jihad, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community.”

    Yes, I understand now.
    Jihad means get rid of all Jews and Infidels in your community.
    By doing that you'll be pure Muslim and so will your community. If you must die in the process that's the highest level of purity. You'll spend eternity with 70 virgins and nubile young boys and drink non-alcoholic wine and crystal clear water. Not only that but you'll be celebrated as a martyr and your family will be taken care of financially, thanks, of course, to the jizya being paid by the dhimmis.

    • Tanstaafl

      Don't forget the booty! As a Muslim, you have a right to your share of infidel booty. One fifth goes to Allah, of course.

  • Paul P

    It is all "Political Correctness" run Amok. No matter how hard one tries, terrorism cannot be made to be a "feel good" proposition, particularly for the victims. This administration is playing a very dangerous and deadly game of attempting to pacify the enemy.

    This non-strategy is thought to be a modern, progressive and intellectual effort to stop terrorists from further harming the US. This strategy has never been attempted before and the worldly, intellectuals in the US administration, believe it will work, if only given a chance. I wonder how that terrorist rehabilitation program working out?

    This has never been tried before because, anyone who knows anything of war would never risk the lives of the innocent by means of a terribly misguded theory.

    • To the ignorant

      But according to progressives, the "Aim justifies the means", remember.

      It does not matter who and how many innocent die in the process of pushing their ideology!

      All that matters is that they know best and they will experiment, with our well being and life to the point of destroying this country!

  • Disabled Veteran

    Never before has any administration in the US been more corrupt, inept, and just plain dumb. Reminds me of the Cold War days, when the Soviets tried their propaganda campaign.

    Of course viewing the Obama friends in his past and present, this dialogue is not to hard to figure. Terrorism equals peace. Islam equals all that is good in the world. Wrong is right. We have to get these new ideas straight. Good thing we have a closet muslim, pro agenda Islam, know everything almost commander in chief in the White House.

  • USMCSniper

    Our national security has become one big joke and only the ineptness of the last three terrorists have prevented deaths on a massive scale. Even then. leftists still could care less about U.S. security as long as they get to stick the knife in Sarah Palin. Glenn Beck, the Tea Party movement, conservatives, and any others deemed enemies of George Soros’s utopian “open society” under his white house boy, Buraq Hussein. It’s all about scoring against their political enemies and they don’t care how many innocents get killed or hurt in the process.

    • Disabled Veteran

      How true! It is all about political points, all about a political game.

      • Carolina Don

        And now our hemale secretary of state wants to disarm all Americans. Every promise made by the Great Usurper during his campaign, has been broken except the one about not touching our guns. Now a deal has been cut with the UN in the form of the "small arms treaty"………….Just wait, the O will break that one also and we (or at least some) will be at the mercy of the peaceloving muslims.

  • Marty

    It is a pity that most American citizens understand that islam has been at war with western civilization for 1400 years and desires to utterly destroy all non-muslims or reduce them to slavery and the government lacks a clue. islam is a death cult founded by a pedophile and sociopath and hasn't experienced any significant reform in its entire miserable history.

    • Disabled Veteran

      Amen to that!

  • cochavi1

    80 Ahmadis murdered in Pakistan today. I believe that three of the four participants in Glazov's forum yesterday implied in one way or the other that the non-Sunni elements in Islam would eventually moderate it. The Ahmadis in Pakistan just received notice from the Sunni/Jihadist majority that they were heretics and not fit to live. Little doubt in my view that ISI-supported elements carried out this 'operation' against Ahmadis, slaughtering them.

    Timothy Furnish attempted to offer hope through the 'Twelvers' of Shiism, the core beliefs of the IRG in Tehran. Several of us commented that this was 'surreal' or words to that effect. Dr. Furnish said we were way off base.

    The only way to reform Islam is:

    1) to pray that it destroys itself;
    2) to help it do so.

    If that means that the DailyKos and HuffPo claim it's all a Mossad plot, that's fine with me, because – apart from people like Robert Spencer – few have a clue.

    • Tanstaafl

      Isn't ironic that the Ahmadis, who denounce the use of jihad by the sword (instead they use the jihad of the pen) are condemned as heretics by the robots of Islam and treated as infidels.

      Sort of disproves any talk of a possible "moderate" Islam.

    • Tim Furnish

      cochavi1: Are you incapable of, or simply unwilling to, understand my position? It is that since the core problem in Sunni Islam is the LITERAL reading of the very violent Qur'an, the answer to this problem is reading the violent suras OTHER than literally. Despite the very real animus directed at us by the leadership of Terhran, the fact is that Twelver Shi`ism allows for such a reading–IF ayatollahs choose to pursue it. And as I pointed out–but you either missed or ignored–the two most prominent and authoritative clerics of modern times, Montazeri (now dead a few months) and al-Sistani, BOTH REJECT the Khomeinist clerical rule in Tehran.

      • Tim Furnish

        And continuing, @cochavi1: My very valid point is that Twelver Shi`ism POTENTIALLY could be a venue of Islamic reform–POTENTIALLY. I never said, nor do I foolishly believe, that the current leadership is anything but inimical to our interests. And my larger point, which you and a legion of folks on here either–again–misunderstand or miscontrue, is that there ARE sects of Islam that REJECT Sunni-approved Qur'anic literalist violence. The murdered Ahmadis of Pakistan today are a case in point. But unless the Sunni jihadists are wiling to engage in virtual genocide, they cannot kill 15 million Ahmadis.
        To paraphrase Dr. Henry Jones (Senior): try reading positions you don't agree with, instead of burning them.

        • cochavi1

          Perhaps I didn't read what you said in the forum carefully enough, but if so it's because I already agree with Robert Spencer. Maybe that's wrong; but his views seem to be backed up by nearly everything that happens in the real world.

      • cochavi1

        Okay, Tim, I grant you that the point in theory makes sense. In reality it makes no sense. So I will ignore the personal stuff and figure it's partly because you know you can't really defend your position in the real world.

        I have sympathy for anyone trying to find a bright light in the darkness of the political, Islamic world, but I see no evidence that the clerical rule in Tehran will come to an end without the help of Israeli and/or American action.

        • Tim Furnish

          I work in the real world on a daily basis and in fact my position–founded as it is on historical, political and religious reality–is far more real than the two-dimensional one which fails to acknowledge that Islam is NOT monolithic. If we Americans can understand AND EXPLOIT the differences between the Islamic sects, we stand a much better chance of winning the global conflict with Islam. Take a look at another piece I did, which deals with a hard-headed, real-world, way of exploiting this issue:

          • cochavi1

            Tim, to me you sound both dogmatic and quite angry. I never said Islam was monolithic, except perhaps in its complete dismissal of the infidel and dar al-Harb. I am well aware of differences between sects and various histories. I also studied ME history and Arabic and Ottoman History specifically.

            Anyhow, I said explicitly up above that I'm Israeli, so how you exploit the differences is up to you. The US leadership, as witnessed by every President, as well as Bloomberg's decision to welcome the triumphialist mosque at the WTC, is basically in bed with many of the theological inspirations of the Jihad. This is a problem you can't solve as an academic, and this makes academic research and even hair-splitting somewhat 'academic' in the light of these events.

          • cochavi1

            and I'm sorry that you have no influence, because you might be able to lend some light. But the real battles are in Gaza and Lebanon, and in the streets of NYC etc.

      • To the ignorant

        So what???????

        Why should we care??????

        Clean your house, your religion and your problem at home and stop telling us, how wonderful and loving you are in OUR home!!!!!!!!!

    • To the ignorant

      Amen to that!

  • Carolyn

    Does anyone else see the vast potential in this man, Ralph Peters? His intelligence and patriotism make him eligible for high office. Dare I mention (whisper) President?

  • zsqpwxxeh

    "In reading Muslim literature — both contemporary and classical — one can see that the evidence for the primacy of spiritual jihad is negligible. Today it is certain that no Muslim, writing in a non-Western language (such as Arabic, Persian, Urdu), would ever make claims that jihad is primarily nonviolent or has been superseded by the spiritual jihad. Such claims are made solely by Western scholars, primarily those who study Sufism and/or work in interfaith dialogue, and by Muslim apologists who are trying to present Islam in the most innocuous manner possible."

    –David Cook, Understanding Jihad, University of California Press, 2005, p.165-6

  • zsqpwxxeh

    The above from a scholar who knows Islam. The following from one of the fathers of modern militant radical Islam, Sayed Abul A'la Maududi:

    "Islam wants the whole earth and does not content itself with only a part thereof…Islam wants to employ all forces and means that can be employed to bring about a universal, all-embracing revolution. It will spare no effort for the achievement of this supreme objective. This far-reaching struggle that continuously exhausts our forces and this employment of all possible means is called jihad."

  • zsqpwxxeh

    Finally, here's a link to the 1998 Al-Qaeda fatwa declaring war against us and Israel. Seems to have something to do with the Islamic doctrine of jihad.

    "Know enemy, know yourself, one hundred battles, one hundred victories." And the converse is true as well, Master Sun.

  • jemc50

    Aahhhh! A security strategy only Neville Chamberlain and other appeasers could love.

  • Bobbie

    Obama Administration is hiding its head in the sand and foolishly ignoring their problem. A large portion of it has to do with incompetency and ignorance.