Thoughts on the President’s Oval Office Speech

74 years ago, the United States was attacked – suddenly and deliberately – by the naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.  The next day, the President addressed the American people in front of Congress, and asked Congress for a declaration of war, which was granted.  We fought on from 1941 through to V-J Day nearly four years later, sacrificing over 400,000 American lives to the cause.  We responded swiftly, we responded with unity and we did not falter in the face of adversity.

Fourteen years ago, the United States was attacked – suddenly and deliberately – by the forces of hate and radical Islam, reaching out from their safe haven in Taliban controlled Afghanistan.  Three days later, the President addressed the American people, standing on a pile of rubble in New York.  Later that day, Congress authorized the use of military force against those terrorists.  We fought from 2001 and we are still fighting today, having sacrificed nearly 7,000 American lives to the cause.  We responded swiftly, responded with unity, and we did not falter in the face of adversity – at least, in the beginning.

Last week, the United States was attacked – suddenly and deliberately – by the forces of hate and radical Islam, reaching out from their declared state and “caliphate” in Syria and Iraq, using a self-radicalized natural born American citizen as their instrument. A week later, the President addressed the American people, and asked Congress for an authorization for the use of military force against those terrorists.

The President’s speech last night has been panned – wasn’t even out of his mouth before it began being panned, as Donald Trump and others were live tweeting about it instead of listening.  This morning, the biggest criticisms were the lack of “news” in the speech, the lack of any new strategies moving forward, and the inevitable attacks on gun rights.  But there were a few things that the President said that Republicans should pay attention to.

First, he acknowledged that the tragedy in San Bernardino was terrorism.  It is sad that this is a big victory, but given how many people expected him to focus on gun control and not terrorism, this was a victory nonetheless.  Even greater, however, was his acknowledgement that the Fort Hood shootings – which in the past the Government has labeled as “workplace violence” – and the attack in Chattanooga were terrorist acts as well.  The proclamation that Chattanooga was terrorism comes just three days after a story pointing out that the FBI had not yet labeled it so.  This was a big deal, but almost completely overlooked last night.

Second, he asked for an Authorization for the Use of Military Force against ISIS.  This is an issue that needs to be resolved, because the existing authorization being used to justify our actions in Syria and Iraq against ISIS is a convoluted reading of the 2001 AUMF against Al Qaeda.  In 1941 and in 2001, the declarations of war and authorization of military force were tangible, obvious steps that the United States was committed to defeating our opponents, whether it was Japan, or bin Laden and Al Qaeda.  It is critical that we demonstrate to the world that we take ISIS and their threat of global terror seriously.  They have demonstrated an ability to recruit, plan and carry out attacks against the west, and that’s something that we must take seriously.  ISIS may have been considered the JV team in the past, but they are not the JV team anymore.  Their attacks against us, and our tepid response has made them the new rallying cry for jihadists around the globe.  We need to demonstrate to them and to the rest of the world that those who attack the United States will be confronted with swift, powerful blows until they are defeated.

Third, and most important, he directly chastised muslims around the world, demanding that they “decisively and unequivocally reject the hateful ideology” that has lead to these attacks.  Read this section of his speech again – it’s important.

“That does not mean denying the fact that an extremist ideology has spread within some Muslim communities.  This is a real problem that Muslims must confront, without excuse.  Muslim leaders here and around the globe have to continue working with us to decisively and unequivocally reject the hateful ideology that groups like ISIL and al Qaeda promote; to speak out against not just acts of violence, but also those interpretations of Islam that are incompatible with the values of religious tolerance, mutual respect, and human dignity. “

This is one of the few, if not the first, times that the President has directly acknowledged the threat of radical Islamic terror – we’ve been demanding that he uses those words, and he’s refused to do so, but I don’t see how anybody can view that paragraph as anything but an acknowledgment that the threat we are facing is coming from radical Islamic terror.  It’s hard to believe that it’s taken this long – and so many lives lost – to acknowledge it, but this is a step in the right direction.

There was a lot not to like in last night’s speech – his mistake about the Visa Waiver program, the inevitable attack on “scary guns” that these guys just can’t help themselves from making, and that we are not changing our strategy – one that has not been working – on ISIS.

One thing that is clear from last night’s speech, however, is that the President is not the leader we need to defeat ISIS.  It is clear that no matter how big a threat they are, he will not take the likely necessary step of committing American forces in greater numbers to taking the fight to ISIS on their own territory.  Thus, we will have to endure, at least until January 20, 2017, a passive policy of limited engagement while ISIS continues to radicalize the misguided here in America, and plan more cowardly attacks on civilians in the west.

Now, more than ever, the American people – and the Republican party in particular – have to recognize that this presidential election needs to be about foreign policy.  We need to look at all our candidates and find someone who is credible and who understands the threat ISIS poses and is willing to put all options on the table to defeat them.  And we need a candidate who can be a stark contrast to Hillary Clinton, who spent four years being the voice of the President’s failed foreign policy, and has demonstrated little, if any, willingness to do more than he has done.

Roosevelt and Bush spoke, and the world not only listened, they heard our resolution.  It’s time they hear it again.