Glen Contrarian
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
- Messages
- 17,688
- Reaction score
- 8,046
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
As I understand it, one of the core principles of conservatism is the more we do for a person, the less that person will do for himself. We see it time and again, the assumption that those on Welfare (or any other social program) have no incentive to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Right? Right.
So what has Obama been doing in the Middle East? According to almost every GOP candidate (and just about every conservative on this forum), NOT ENOUGH. Trump says he'll "bomb the **** out of them". Cruz wants to bomb them until the sands glow (and one wonders how that could happen without nukes). I can't remember offhand if anyone wanted to send in ground troops...but the implication of such seems clear. I think it's safe to say that any Obama-hating Republican (i.e. ANY Republican) would say that by not unleashing the full fury of America's armed forces, Obama's just allowing ISIL to grow.
But something happened in the past few days:
Calling Islamic extremism a disease, Saudi Arabia has announced the formation of a coalition of 34 predominately Muslim nations to fight terrorism.
"This announcement comes from the Islamic world's vigilance in fighting this disease so it can be a partner, as a group of countries, in the fight against this disease," Saudi Deputy Crown Prince and Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman said. Asked whether the new coalition could include ground forces, Saudi Arabia's top diplomat told reporters in Paris on Tuesday that "nothing is off the table." The coalition's formation comes amid criticism that Arab states have not done enough to fight ISIS. The West has stepped up its war against the group, which is also known by its Arabic acronym Daesh.
"Today there are a number of countries that suffer from terrorism, for example Daesh in Syria and Iraq; terrorism in Sinai, terrorism in Yemen, terrorism in Libya, terrorism in Mali, terrorism in Nigeria, terrorism in Pakistan, terrorism in Afghanistan, and this requires a very strong effort to fight," Salman said. "Without a doubt, there will be coordination in these efforts."
...
In addition to Saudi Arabia, the coalition will include Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Turkey, Chad, Togo, Tunisia, Djibouti, Senegal, Sudan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Gabon, Guinea, the Palestinians, Comoros, Qatar, Cote d'Ivoire, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Maldives, Mali, Malaysia, Egypt, Morocco, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria and Yemen.
Even more interesting:
"It is time that the Islamic world take a stand, and they have done that by creating a coalition to push back and confront the terrorists and those who promote their violent ideologies," said Adel al-Jubeir, Saudi's foreign minister, speaking in Paris.
...
Bin Salman said the states would work together to target "any terrorist organisation, not just ISIL" in countries including Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt, and Afghanistan. Military operations would work in accordance with local laws and in cooperation with the international community, he added. In an earlier press statement issued by the Saudi Press Agency, officials said the group would be led by Saudi Arabia, which would host a "joint operations centre to coordinate" efforts.
The United States welcomed the announcement of the anti-terrorism alliance. "We look forward to learning more about what Saudi Arabia has in mind in terms of this coalition," Ashton Carter, US defence secretary, told journalists in Turkey.
"But in general, it appears it is very much in line with something we've been urging for quite some time, which is greater involvement in the campaign to combat ISIL by Sunni Arab countries."
In other words, by not doing as much as Republicans demand, America's so-called "lack of action" (never mind that we're using bombs faster than we're manufacturing them) has resulted in the Sunni Muslim nations forming a coalition to fight terror...which is what President Obama's been urging them to do all along.
But if we had done what Republicans demand, if we were unleashing that full fury of American military might against ISIS, would the Muslim nations have done this? Would they be "pulling themselves up by the bootstraps" in their fight against terrorism? Or would they have continued to sit back and let us do it for them? In my opinion, what President Obama did is fully in line with classic conservative thought...and America's conservatives should point to the formation of the Sunni Muslim coalition against terrorism as a triumph of conservative theory, of not helping so much that people have no incentive to do for themselves.
So what has Obama been doing in the Middle East? According to almost every GOP candidate (and just about every conservative on this forum), NOT ENOUGH. Trump says he'll "bomb the **** out of them". Cruz wants to bomb them until the sands glow (and one wonders how that could happen without nukes). I can't remember offhand if anyone wanted to send in ground troops...but the implication of such seems clear. I think it's safe to say that any Obama-hating Republican (i.e. ANY Republican) would say that by not unleashing the full fury of America's armed forces, Obama's just allowing ISIL to grow.
But something happened in the past few days:
Calling Islamic extremism a disease, Saudi Arabia has announced the formation of a coalition of 34 predominately Muslim nations to fight terrorism.
"This announcement comes from the Islamic world's vigilance in fighting this disease so it can be a partner, as a group of countries, in the fight against this disease," Saudi Deputy Crown Prince and Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman said. Asked whether the new coalition could include ground forces, Saudi Arabia's top diplomat told reporters in Paris on Tuesday that "nothing is off the table." The coalition's formation comes amid criticism that Arab states have not done enough to fight ISIS. The West has stepped up its war against the group, which is also known by its Arabic acronym Daesh.
"Today there are a number of countries that suffer from terrorism, for example Daesh in Syria and Iraq; terrorism in Sinai, terrorism in Yemen, terrorism in Libya, terrorism in Mali, terrorism in Nigeria, terrorism in Pakistan, terrorism in Afghanistan, and this requires a very strong effort to fight," Salman said. "Without a doubt, there will be coordination in these efforts."
...
In addition to Saudi Arabia, the coalition will include Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Turkey, Chad, Togo, Tunisia, Djibouti, Senegal, Sudan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Gabon, Guinea, the Palestinians, Comoros, Qatar, Cote d'Ivoire, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Maldives, Mali, Malaysia, Egypt, Morocco, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria and Yemen.
Even more interesting:
"It is time that the Islamic world take a stand, and they have done that by creating a coalition to push back and confront the terrorists and those who promote their violent ideologies," said Adel al-Jubeir, Saudi's foreign minister, speaking in Paris.
...
Bin Salman said the states would work together to target "any terrorist organisation, not just ISIL" in countries including Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt, and Afghanistan. Military operations would work in accordance with local laws and in cooperation with the international community, he added. In an earlier press statement issued by the Saudi Press Agency, officials said the group would be led by Saudi Arabia, which would host a "joint operations centre to coordinate" efforts.
The United States welcomed the announcement of the anti-terrorism alliance. "We look forward to learning more about what Saudi Arabia has in mind in terms of this coalition," Ashton Carter, US defence secretary, told journalists in Turkey.
"But in general, it appears it is very much in line with something we've been urging for quite some time, which is greater involvement in the campaign to combat ISIL by Sunni Arab countries."
In other words, by not doing as much as Republicans demand, America's so-called "lack of action" (never mind that we're using bombs faster than we're manufacturing them) has resulted in the Sunni Muslim nations forming a coalition to fight terror...which is what President Obama's been urging them to do all along.
But if we had done what Republicans demand, if we were unleashing that full fury of American military might against ISIS, would the Muslim nations have done this? Would they be "pulling themselves up by the bootstraps" in their fight against terrorism? Or would they have continued to sit back and let us do it for them? In my opinion, what President Obama did is fully in line with classic conservative thought...and America's conservatives should point to the formation of the Sunni Muslim coalition against terrorism as a triumph of conservative theory, of not helping so much that people have no incentive to do for themselves.
