I’ve heard so many people–on the left and the right—say that Obama’s goal has been to “end” the wars in which the United States has been engaged since the Islamic terror attacks against us on September 11, 2001. I think they believe that that is a sensible use of the word “end.” But a one-sided end is…surrender. The enemy gets a vote as to whether a war has “ended.” They get a veto over that concept. And unless and until they are thoroughly vanquished, the war—from their side—is not over. When they vote to continue the war, and we vote to “end” it, it’s a surrender.
Winston Churchill famously said, “Never surrender!” President Obama never fails to surrender. Iraq is falling to al Qaeda, Afghanistan is falling to the (newly replenished) Taliban, Libya and Syria are falling to chaos, Iran is marching toward a nuclear weapon, Russia is invading its neighbors, and China is newly aggressive in Asia and the world. All because the American president has checked out. He has decided that he will never use military force in any meaningful way (witness the lack of any attempt to save our people under terrorist attack in Benghazi.) Our enemies know this, and they are taking full advantage of it. Why wouldn’t our enemies seize the moment to advance their interests and attack ours? There’s nobody there to stop them. American weakness and lack of leadership breed contempt and violence.
In war, you either win, lose despite trying to win, or surrender.
Obama doesn’t “end” wars. He quits.
Have PoliticalMavens.com delivered to your inbox in a daily digest by clicking here