President Obama has finally let the dogs out … unleashing
air strikes against ISIS targets in northern Syria. I happen to believe that
this is the right thing for him to do. However, this action is bound to enrage
the leftist peaceniks and the rightist libertarians/isolationists. So he has a
very delicate job ahead of him in justifying this belligerency. Some are
already linking this to the “October surprise” that I had previously mentioned …
see:
October Surprise. This may be the case, but turning this opportunistic war into the Democrats’ holding
onto the Senate is bound to require a bit of legerdemain.
Many in the Democrat base will feel a eerie connection to
President Bush if they supposed to vote for their local Congressional candidates in November …
and therefore may stay home. Whereas, America-first Republicans (mostly in the
contested states) may be even more energized to throw Harry Reid’s band of
outlaws out of Senate. So I don’t envy Obama in this political balancing act. Yes, his Teleprompter writers
are good politicians and glib wordsmiths … but can they manipulate both these
blocs and save the Democrat bacon from this Middle-East conflagration? I am now
awaiting our fearless leader's TV address to the nation …
... I just heard the president’s talk. It was short, sweet, and
bereft of details. But he did say that Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Jordan, and
Qatar had joined us in these air strikes (exactly how?) and that that one specifically-targeted
group, Khorasan, an al Qaeda affiliated group, was planning an attack against a western interests (whom exactly?). He also said that this was just the start of what would be a sustained series of air attacks on ISIS (at least through election day.)
I also do commend the administration for this recently-assembled Sunni coalition, but believe that would be a lot more important
if they were actually sending “boots on the ground” into this area
instead of flying next to U.S. F-22s.
.jpg)
