(Video) How Barack Obama is blowing Afghanistan

July 12, 2012

Remember how President Obama used to deride the war in Iraq as a “war of choice,” while Afghanistan was the “war of necessity” that the Bush administration had botched and he would do right? Good times, good times.

In this episode of Trifecta, PJTV hosts Stephen Greene, Scott Ott, and Bill Whittle can barely contain their wrath at how President Obama has botched his “necessary war:”

Infighting, back-stabbing, and all-around immaturity topped off by nonexistent leadership from the (try not to roll your eyes) “Commander in Chief.”

Heckuva way to fight a war, isn’t it?

To be fair, rancor in the high command or between the services isn’t a new phenomenon: MacArthur didn’t play well with the Navy in WWII and famously had to be smacked down by Truman during the Korean War. Jealousy and rivalry among commanders was a problem for both the Union and the Confederacy during the Civil War, and the fractiousness and outright insubordination among Winfield Scott’s staff in Mexico was so bad, I’m amazed we won.

But that it happens doesn’t excuse the president from letting it go on. Obama is the only constitutional officer charged with overseeing the military — it is his job, and his alone, to if need be knock heads and give his staff, military and civilian their orders. That he hasn’t or couldn’t is a grave failure on his part.

I have to disagree with Bill Whittle’s summary somewhat: almost all the choices he describes were also faced by the Bush administration. The fact is we never really settled on a strategy for Afghanistan, counterterror vs. counterinsurgency, and whether what worked in Iraq would also work in far more primitive Afghanistan. The war muddled on for years.

But Obama showed those same uncertainties and ramped it up into a full-blown Hamlet act when trying to decide on a surge for Afghanistan, which took him valuable months and, when he did, it was grudging, halfhearted, and undermanned. And which he undercut by launching ludicrous negotiations with the Taliban, who are al Qaeda allies. Then –finally– when General Petraeus was appointed and began making serious progress, Obama pulled him out and sent him to the CIA. I think to sideline a potential electoral rival.

Thus, after three years, the war in Afghanistan is Obama’s and it is Obama who is losing it. That should be part of the record Americans review when making their choice for president next November.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Advertisements

Jihad: Bending over and taking it for Allah

July 12, 2012

Remember the “butt bomber?” This was the suicide bomber who tried to assassinate the head of Saudi counter-terror operations, Prince Nayef, in 2009 hiding the explosives in his tuchus. Didn’t kill the prince, but it sure did cure the jihadi’s constipation…

But I digress. It seems the training program for our anal assassin has come to light. To wit, “Bend over, and think of Allah:

Not only did the original “underwear bomber” Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri hide explosives in his rectum to assassinate Saudi Prince Muhammad bin Nayef—they met in 2009 after the 22-year-old holy warrior “feigned repentance for his jihadi views“—but al-Asiri apparently had fellow jihadis repeatedly sodomize him to “widen” his anus in order to accommodate the explosives— all in accordance with the fatwas [religious edicts] of Islamic clerics.

A 2010 Arabic news video that is making the rounds on the Internet gives the details. Apparently a cleric, one Abu al-Dema al-Qasab, informed jihadis of an “innovative and unprecedented way to execute martyrdom operations: place explosive capsules in your anus. However, to undertake this jihadi approach you must agree to be sodomized for a while to widen your anus so it can hold the explosives.”

But, sodomy is prohibited in Islam, so how can the good Muslim do this? Asiri asked his imam, who gave this answer: “As long as it’s for Islam, it’s a-ok:”

However, jihad comes first, for it is the pinnacle of Islam, and if the pinnacle of Islam can only be achieved through sodomy, then there is no wrong in it. For the overarching rule of [Islamic] jurisprudence asserts that “necessity makes permissible the prohibited.” And if obligatory matters can only be achieved by performing the prohibited, then it becomes obligatory to perform the prohibited, and there is no greater duty than jihad. After he sodomizes you, you must ask Allah for forgiveness and praise him all the more. And know that Allah will reward the jihadis on the Day of Resurrection, according to their intentions—and your intention, Allah willing, is for the victory of Islam, and we ask that Allah accept it of you.

I’m reminded of the “thank you, sir!” scene from “Animal House.”

As Raymond Ibrahim points out, there’s serious Islamic ideology dating back centuries behind this ruling, however much we may snicker at the mental visuals. Lying, killing women and children, sodomy, suicide… all of these normally forbidden things are permissible when done in jihad to make Islam supreme — fi sabil Allah.

This isn’t to say all Muslims act on these precepts, of course, but those precepts are there in the religion, and a significant number of Muslims do act on them, enough to kill thousands worldwide in the name of religion.

We need to keep this in mind as the struggle against the jihad goes on; read the whole thing.