Acceptable Losses
By: Bill O'ReillyJune 14, 2016
Archive
Comment
Email
Print
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

In the debate over the Orlando terror attack and fighting ISIS in general, both the left and right are making major mistakes.

And those mistakes are getting people killed, the so-called "acceptable losses" theory.

Today under heavy pressure President Obama was forced to talk tough about the ISIS savages:

OBAMA"Our mission is to destroy ISIL.  Since I last updated the American people on our campaign two months ago, we've seen that this continues to be a difficult fight, but we are making significant progress."

Some progress is being made in the half-measures being used against the ISIS savages but not enough to vanquish the jihad or even dent their murderous swagger.

The president and the American left bare a good measure of responsibility for not annihilating terror threats that are ongoing and have changed our way of life.

Here are the facts:

The left opposes a declaration of war against radical Islamic organizations.

They oppose the Patriot Act, which gives U.S. intelligence agencies more tools to blunt attacks.

The left opposes tough border security measures, in fact some in that crew want open borders.

Many on the left would not even support Kate's Law, which quickly and harshly punishes violent foreigners who defy deportation.

And in perhaps the greatest hypocrisy of all, instead of demanding strong punishment for criminals and terrorists who use guns, the left stands silent on that and so does Mr. Obama.

All they want is to obliterate the Second Amendment, which was put in the Constitution to give us the right to protect ourselves from bad people.

It's the guns not the terror threat that move the left:

WHOOPI GOLDBERG: "All you people on Twitter who like to come after folks, back up because you can't explain this.  You can't explain this away.  You couldn't explain it at Sandy Hook.  You can't explain it here. ((EDIT)) Keep your stuff to yourself.  I don't care what you think.  Back off.  I don't care."

The Orlando attack has mobilized Americans and quickly become a campaign and presidential legacy issue.

In response to persistent criticism that he does not verbally define Islamic terrorism, Mr. Obama today said this:

OBAMA: "There's not been a moment in my seven-and-a-half years as president where we have not been able to pursue a strategy because we didn't use the label radical Islam.  Not once has an advisor of mine said, 'Man, if we really use that phrase, we're going to turn this whole thing around.'  Not once."

Here's what the president does not seem to understand.

It is his job to lead the world against the jihad.

By not even spelling out the precise danger, by using substitute wording for Islamic terrorism, he is sending a message that it's not really the fault of the Muslim world that this atrocious jihadist campaign has taken root.

But here's the truth: If all the good Muslims in the world would unite against the jihad, it would be wiped out in weeks.

Are we clear?

Now for right-wing responsibility.

There is too much gun crime in the USA and high-powered weaponry is too easy to get.

That's the fact.

So let's deal with it.

We all have the right to bear arms, but we don't have the right to buy and maintain mortars even if you feel threatened by gangsters or a new world order.

No bazookas, no Sherman tanks, no hand grenades.

That's because the Second Amendment clearly states the government has the right to regulate militias made up of individuals in the name of public safety.

Therefore, Congress should debate what kind of weapons should be available for public sale and the states should decide what kind of carry laws are good for their people.

New laws are needed in the age of terrorism and mass murder.

The FBI and other federal agencies need the power to stop suspected terrorists or other evil-doers like Mateen from buying weapons.

That law needs to be very precise.

Also, gun dealers all across America should be required to report the sale of certain guns -- heavy weapons -- to the FBI.

Not handguns, but other weapons that would be defined by Congress.

That's sane and would make it a lot tougher for the Omar Mateens of the world to kill.

Although as Talking Points has stated many times, no society will ever stop all gun crimes, especially in a country which has hundreds of millions of guns already in circulation.

Now, back to ISIS.

According to a study by the Rand Corporation, the number of Sunni jihadist Muslims doubled between 2010 to 2013 - the prime years of President Obama's pullback in Iraq and the Middle East.

Just since 2014, more than one thousand human beings have been murdered by ISIS outside of their base areas in Syria and Iraq.

While President Obama is content with wearing ISIS down and outsourcing the direct fight to others, that strategy is clearly leading to more death and disruptions all over the planet.

But the left will not see that this is a war worth fighting.

STEPHEN COLBERT: "After 9/11 we went to war in Iraq. We treated it as a military ..."

O'REILLY: "That was a mistake."

COLBERT: "Why is this not a mistake to treat this as a military event?"

O'REILLY: "We were an occupier.  We wouldn't be an occupier here.  This is a war of attrition against a terror group that's the same philosophy at the Nazis - it's the Third Reich.  It's insane."

COLBERT: "But how does that stop a lone gunman here in the US?"

O'REILLY: "I told you, you can't stop that."

COLBERT: "You can't stop it so why would we then declare war based on this? (APPLAUSE)"

O'REILLY: "Rather than outsourcing the fighting to the Kurds, NATO would do it and NATO would destroy command and control of ISIS and al Qaeda.  Destroy it.  Right now guys like Mateen think ISIS is winning because they're on the internet and ISIS is telling them they're winning.  ISIS is causing all kinds of trouble.  Once the world sees these people are being annihilated, and I mean annihilated, that whole propaganda of 'winning the jihad, the caliphate, we're going to get this established' vanishes."

By the way, we've posted the entire interview with Colbert on BillOReilly.com.

Just in time to prove my point, a new Fox News poll asked Americans if America is a stronger or weaker country under President Obama's leadership.

The poll among registered voters is instructive:

49% say the USA is weaker since Mr. Obama took office.

40%, stronger.

Summing up, the Islamic jihad has declared war on America and the West.

We have not responded to their violence with any kind of urgency.

We are reactive rather than aggressive.

At home we need tighter regulation of individual weapons of mass destruction, but we also need to stop demonizing good people who own guns for protection and want to keep their rights in place.

I hope we are all clear.

And that's the memo.