History will record that the two biggest deficits of the Obama administration were the failure to create a robust economy and the president's retreat from the terrorist battlefield.

For years, Talking Points has been telling you the Obama administration has no strategy to defeat the ISIS threat.

Random bombing is not going to do it and every honest military analyst knows that.

But President Obama somehow does not seem to understand that the civilized world is losing the fight against ISIS.

Just nine hours before the Paris attack this was broadcast:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS ANCHOR: “ISIS is gaining strength, aren't they?”

BARACK OBAMA: “I don't think they're gaining strength.  What is true is that from the start, our goal has been first to contain and we have contained them.”

Obviously that is not true.  The United States and its allies have not contained ISIS.  They are a threat worldwide. They continue to kill people with impunity.

Nevertheless, the president is unrepentant and unwilling to admit that his strategy has failed even though some in his own party take exception.

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D-CA): “I’ve never been more concerned.  I read the intelligence faithfully.  ISIL is not contained.  ISIL is expanding.  They just put out a video saying it’s their intent to attack this country.  And I think we have to be prepared.”

Nice thought, senator.  Why not back it up with action and vote for Kate's Law which punishes alien criminals who defy deportation?  There are more than a few terrorists in that crew.

But back to the president.

Even though France says the ISIS attack was an act of war, Mr. Obama is not going to change his strategy:

OBAMA: “When we send troops in, those troops get injured.  They get killed.  They’re away from their families.  Our country spends hundreds of billions of dollars.  ((EDIT)) It’s best that we don’t shoot first and aim later.  It’s important for us to get the strategy right.  And the strategy we’re pursing is the right one.”  

How can that be when ISIS continues to disrupt order all over the world?

A simple question the president cannot answer and does not even address.

On the other side, the Republican Party is taking note:

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): “I recognize that Barack Obama does not wish to defend the country.  He may have been tired of war, but our enemies are not tired of killing us. They're getting stronger and every region on earth has gotten worse under the Obama-Clinton foreign policy.”

((EDIT))

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): “I hope Hillary Clinton, I hope the president will listen to what I’m saying.  We don’t have until the next election to deal with ISIL.  There’s a 9/11 coming, and it’s coming from Syria if we don’t disrupt their operations inside of Syria.”

Republicans now have an opportunity to make a campaign issue out of ISIS.

It is clear most Democrats will not stop backing Mr. Obama on the issue.

JOHN DICKERSON, CBS NEWS ANCHOR: “Marco Rubio, also running for president, said that ‘this attack showed’ -- the attack in Paris ‘showed that we are at war with radical Islam.’ Do you agree with that characterization, radical Islam?”

HILLARY CLINTON:  “I don't think we're at war with Islam.  I don't think we are at war with all Muslims.  I think we're at war with jihadists who have ..”

DICKERSON: “Just to interrupt, he didn't say all Muslims.  He just said radical Islam.  Is that a phrase you don't …”

CLINTON: “I think that you can -- you can talk about Islamists who clearly are also jihadists.  But I think -- it's not particularly helpful.”

Number one, Hillary Clinton tried to dodge the question by equating all Muslims with radical jihadists.  She understood the question; she tried to dodge it.

Number two, Mrs. Clinton has no strategy to defeat ISIS.  None.

Even worse is her competitor Bernie Sanders:

DICKERSON: “In the previous debate you said the greatest threat to national security was climate change.  Do you still believe that?”

SANDERS:  “Absolutely.  In fact, climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism.”

Senator Sanders just made a fool out of himself, so there you go.

It is long past time that we the people demand ISIS be defeated, not contained.

In 2006 the organization was formed.

In 2013 it was named and began to accumulate power.

Initially President Obama called ISIS the junior varsity.

But as the threat grew in furiosity and thousands of miles of territory was seized by ISIS, many expected the president to take aggressive action.

He did not, ordering tepid bombing and outsourcing the ground fight to Iran is not aggressive action.

Now critical mass has been reached, as Paris has been devastated.

OBAMA: “Folks want to pop off and have opinions about what they think they would do?  Present a specific plan.  If they think that somehow their advisers are better than my chairman of my Joint Chiefs of Staff or folks actually on the ground, I want to meet them.”  

Well here I am Mr. President and here's the strategy you should employ.

The president of France clearly stated that the ISIS attack was an act of war.

France is a member of the 28-nation NATO alliance.

Article Five of that alliance says that an attack on one country is an attack on all, so all 28 nations should now begin to organize a campaign to crush the ISIS killers.

That should include ground troops, bombings, no fly zones, border security for Turkey, Jordan, Iraq and a central-command-and-control center based in Europe.

Once NATO declares war on ISIS, things will radically change, the anti-ISIS Arab nations will step up their participation, and the jihadist group will begin to be isolated.

No one is calling for an occupation of Syria and Iraq.  That would be foolish.

But surely 28 nations can launch tactical strikes both on the ground and in the air.  That will crush these people.

President Obama should take the lead, along with France and Great Britain, to make all that happen.

The first step -- a declaration of war by NATO.

Finally it was quite clear in the president's press conference today that he is very concerned about the refugees fleeing Syria.

He should be concerned because it's his fault.

When the Syrian dictator Assad used poison gas, President Obama threatened the man.

You may remember he did not carry out his threat, which he could have easily done by destroying the Syrian air force, which was delivering some of the gas.

The president's retreat from Syria has caused the massive refugee problem.

And remember, one of the ISIS killers in Paris apparently posed as a refugee to enter France.

Nevertheless, Mr. Obama is quite confident that no terrorists will be among the ten-thousand refugees he wants to resettle in America.

That, of course, is another delusion and at least 15 states have already said they will not accept any refugees.

Expect that number to grow as more Americans finally realize that the president of the United States has lost control of the War on Terror.

There is no question about it.

And that's the memo.