Fighting to Win Against ISIS
By: Bill O'ReillySeptember 15, 2014
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

A new Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll says just 28 percent of Americans are confident President Obama will be able to defeat the ISIS terror threat. 

Twenty-eight percent.

Sixty-eight percent have their doubts.

The reason Americans are tentative about their commander-in-chief is that he has not been assertive in using U.S. power, and indeed seems to be somewhat ashamed of it.

But now with weekly beheadings by ISIS, the reluctant warrior must wage war.  But not total war ... tepid war.

JOHN KERRY, SECRETARY OF STATE: “Well, we're not looking to put troops on the ground. ((EDIT))  There are troops on the ground that don't belong to us, they're called Syrian.  The Syrian opposition is on the ground.  One of the regrettable things is, it has been fighting ISIS by itself over the course of the last couple of years.”

And why has it been fighting ISIS by itself, Mr. Kerry?

Well, because your boss would not help them, overruling most of his foreign policy advisors, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Talking Points wonders whether Mr. Kerry understands he just put his boss in a bad place.

Anyway, even the national media now understands the president's war plan is folly:

CHUCK TODD, “MEET THE PRESS” MODERATOR: There's not a single military adviser that has come to you guys and said you can defeat ISIS without some combat troops -- ISIS and Syria without some combat troops.  That's a fact.”

DENIS MCDONOUGH, WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: That's correct.  That's a fact and that's the President's view.  That's what we need Congress to do right now. And frankly we're seeing very good progress on this thing to the speaker and to others is to put together support for what the president calls a Title 10 program to train and equip the Syrian opposition on the ground fighting ISIL.”

Swell.  But here's the truth: the Syrian opposition is not going to defeat ISIS or Assad or anyone else.

They are far too weak and disorganized to be an effective fighting force.

Again, everyone in the international arena knows that.

So why are we playing this game?

The answer to that question is complicated and rooted in fear.

President Obama does not want a wide war on terrorism that consumes his administration.  He wants small-ball isolated attacks on the evildoers.

But with the dramatic rise of the ISIS Nazis that strategy is not enough.

MICHAEL HAYDEN, FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE C.I.A.: “Look, people don't question American power.  What people need to be convinced of is American will.”

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: “And so what do you think should be done? It sounds to me like you're saying we should be sending U.S. ground troops.”

HAYDEN: “I don't think we should have arbitrary limits on how we use the forces we send there. Look, no one is picturing U.S. brigade combat teams maneuvering in the western Iraqi desert.  But we do need to have a presence on the ground.”

Of course that's what we need, but again President Obama doesn't want to put Americans in harm's way; it goes against his liberal belief system.

So he wants to form a big anti-terror coalition … team up with countries all over the world to get ISIS and other Islamic terror organizations.

Only Mr. Obama does not like to use the Islamic word.

Okay, let's look at the coalition.

Australia, as usual, has stepped up with troops and planes.  What a great ally that country is.

Great Britain talks a good game, but even though ISIS beheaded a British subject over the weekend, Prime Minister Cameron isn't really committing much to the fight.  Maybe that will change.

France, if you can believe it, is doing more than Britain, saying it will take part in bombing raids against ISIS.  France has also defeated Islamic terror threats in Africa, so way to go Paris.

Germany, as usual, is not doing much.  They sit back and let the U.S.A. and others do the hard work of protecting innocent people.  Germany is a very selfish country.

Italy says it will help out a bit, all they can do.

Canada, not really committed … they might help out a little.

In the Muslim world, Turkey once again turns against their NATO allies.

That country could cripple ISIS because supplies to the terror group flow through Turkey.  Also, Turkish air bases are very close. 

But the Turks fear the jihadists because there are so many living in that country.

Behind the scenes Turkey may help out, but quietly.

Egypt will help a little for all the money we send their military.

Saudi Arabia says the Syrians can train on its soil.

Jordan, Lebanon and other small Muslim countries will do a little.

Qatar remains quite the problem.  Terror funding goes right through that little place.  It says it's a friend to America, but the money says differently.

President Obama should crack down on those people fast.

So you can see that any big coalition movement is a pipe dream.  We live in a cowardly world and that's why ISIS, al Qaeda, and other Islamic killers can get away with what they do.

The sad truth is, and has been, that only the United States can lead a fight against evil.

Russia and China have power, but neither nation is interested in righting wrongs or protecting innocent people.  They want power, money, and a tight hold over their own citizens.

ISIS --- they couldn't care less.

If President Obama really wants to protect Americans and defeat ISIS, he must become a much stronger presence.

He's wishy-washy up there -- Patton and U.S. Grant are rolling over.

He's dispassionate, much too nuanced, not fully engaged.

Few nations will follow a leader who tells the enemy what he won't do and whose record of retreat dominates his resume.

We need a presidential commitment to kill terrorists wherever they may be. 

To do that, the President and Congress must pass a declaration of war against Islamic terrorists.

We have to have an official document that says here we come.

But we don't invade, nation build or arm corrupt, ineffective fighting forces.

We fight smart, taking help from nations that are willing to give it, and bringing the fight to the enemy in a variety of ways.

Few American politicians would oppose a declaration of war for fear of their careers.

So let's get rolling.


Or do we need a few more beheadings?


And that's the memo.