Obama warns against overreaction to Islamic State attacks

[Dittohead not!]

[h=1]Obama warns against overreaction to Islamic State attacks[/h]

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia (AP) — Trying to reassure a nation on edge, President Barack Obama said Sunday the Islamic State group "cannot strike a mortal blow" against the U.S., and he warned that overreacting to the Paris attacks would play into extremists' hands. "We will destroy this terrorist organization," he vowed.

"We do not succumb to fear," he said. "The most powerful tool we have to fight ISIL is to say that we're not afraid, to not elevate them, to somehow buy into their fantasy that they're doing something important," Obama said,

Which sounds a lot like what President Bush said right after the attacks on 9/11:

"Our nation was horrified, but it's not going to be terrorized," President George W. Bush declared five days after those attacks. "We're a nation that can't be cowed by evil-doers."

and a bit like FDR's "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

Bush was right, FDR was right, and so is Obama. If we overreact out of fear, then ISIS or ISIL or Daesh or whatever you want to call the cockroaches in the Middle East have at least won a battle.

The best course is to pursue international efforts to wipe out this scourge and to bring an end to the civil war in Syria that is providing a fertile breeding ground for terrorism.

IMO, of course. What do you think?

 

[Glen Contrarian]

[h=1]Obama warns against overreaction to Islamic State attacks[/h]




Which sounds a lot like what President Bush said right after the attacks on 9/11:


and a bit like FDR's "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

Bush was right, FDR was right, and so is Obama. If we overreact out of fear, then ISIS or ISIL or Daesh or whatever you want to call the cockroaches in the Middle East have at least won a battle.

The best course is to pursue international efforts to wipe out this scourge and to bring an end to the civil war in Syria that is providing a fertile breeding ground for terrorism.

IMO, of course. What do you think?

Fear is what drives the Right, and what keeps us increasing the funding for the military-industrial complex. Oh, they'll claim they're not afraid, that they're just being prepared as they head in droves to buy guns and more guns and more ammo...but they are afraid indeed. And that fear simply continues to increase every time they turn on Fox News and the right-wing pundits.

 

[Van Basten]

I listen to that part of FDR's speech every now and then as a pick-me-up.

Anyway, I agree with Obama. He's right, Bush was right, and so was FDR.

I remember Noam Chomsky, in his rare moments of being right, saying something about America being an unusually frightened nation. It's media that drives it, not just mainstream, but at all levels, there's someone fear mongering. Which is ridiculous given we live in the sole superpower of the world. It's easy to let our fear get the best of us, we see that now with governors across parts of the US. They have reasonable concerns, obviously, but it's getting out of hand.

Fear is what drives the Right, and what keeps us increasing the funding for the military-industrial complex. Oh, they'll claim they're not afraid, that they're just being prepared as they head in droves to buy guns and more guns and more ammo...but they are afraid indeed. And that fear simply continues to increase every time they turn on Fox News and the right-wing pundits.

Very objective analysis.

 

[joG]

[h=1]Obama warns against overreaction to Islamic State attacks[/h]




Which sounds a lot like what President Bush said right after the attacks on 9/11:


and a bit like FDR's "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

Bush was right, FDR was right, and so is Obama. If we overreact out of fear, then ISIS or ISIL or Daesh or whatever you want to call the cockroaches in the Middle East have at least won a battle.

The best course is to pursue international efforts to wipe out this scourge and to bring an end to the civil war in Syria that is providing a fertile breeding ground for terrorism.

IMO, of course. What do you think?

That is correct. But there may also be no compromise on the Assad regime being eliminated and turned over to courts.

 

[Chomsky]

[h=1]Obama warns against overreaction to Islamic State attacks[/h]




Which sounds a lot like what President Bush said right after the attacks on 9/11:


and a bit like FDR's "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

Bush was right, FDR was right, and so is Obama. If we overreact out of fear, then ISIS or ISIL or Daesh or whatever you want to call the cockroaches in the Middle East have at least won a battle.

The best course is to pursue international efforts to wipe out this scourge and to bring an end to the civil war in Syria that is providing a fertile breeding ground for terrorism.

IMO, of course. What do you think?

He's absolutely right!

That's not to say he's necessarily handling these events correctly in all it's technical aspects, but he's right here - at least in general terms.

Not long ago, the President was widely chastised for not closing down air travel from ebola areas, including refusing to readmit American medical volunteers back into the country! Our fellow Americans! He (wisely) stood his ground. And what happened to all the ebola noise from the GOP congress? Yeah, like so much other noise, it eventually died-down to normalcy.

His job is not to react to every political whim, but to provide calm leadership.

 

[Chomsky]

I listen to that part of FDR's speech every now and then as a pick-me-up.

Anyway, I agree with Obama. He's right, Bush was right, and so was FDR.

I remember Noam Chomsky, in his rare moments of being right, saying something about America being an unusually frightened nation. It's media that drives it, not just mainstream, but at all levels, there's someone fear mongering. Which is ridiculous given we live in the sole superpower of the world. It's easy to let our fear get the best of us, we see that now with governors across parts of the US. They have reasonable concerns, obviously, but it's getting out of hand.



Very objective analysis.

Not because of my avatar or nick, but I very much agree with Noam's assessment here.

But the real takeway, is: That excessive fear is often being placed, nurtured, and cultivated for political (and financial) reasons!

That's the insidious nature of many of America's fears.

 

[cpwill]

[h=1]Obama warns against overreaction to Islamic State attacks[/h]

Which sounds a lot like what President Bush said right after the attacks on 9/11:

and a bit like FDR's "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

Bush was right, FDR was right, and so is Obama. If we overreact out of fear, then ISIS or ISIL or Daesh or whatever you want to call the cockroaches in the Middle East have at least won a battle.

The best course is to pursue international efforts to wipe out this scourge and to bring an end to the civil war in Syria that is providing a fertile breeding ground for terrorism.

IMO, of course. What do you think?

He doesn't sound like either of those gentlemen, because the context for both Bush and FDR was "we don't have to fear; we simply have to go out and smash the enemy". He is using "we shouldn't overreact" as an excuse for not reacting.

 

[Shadowless]

Overreaction is something we do need to watch for. Actually, that's what ISIS is counting on, us overreacting.

 

[Chomsky]

Overreaction is something we do need to watch for. Actually, that's what ISIS is counting on, us overreacting.

Exactly!

 

[bubbabgone]

[h=1]Obama warns against overreaction to Islamic State attacks[/h]




Which sounds a lot like what President Bush said right after the attacks on 9/11:


and a bit like FDR's "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

Bush was right, FDR was right, and so is Obama. If we overreact out of fear, then ISIS or ISIL or Daesh or whatever you want to call the cockroaches in the Middle East have at least won a battle.

The best course is to pursue international efforts to wipe out this scourge and to bring an end to the civil war in Syria that is providing a fertile breeding ground for terrorism.

IMO, of course.

What do you think?

I think several things when I hear Obama say things like this ...
"... he warned that overreacting to the Paris attacks would play into extremists' hands."
1) he's biding his time until he's gone and this is his excuse for his inaction.
2) he knows what little he's doing has no positive effect on getting rid of ISIS.
3) if us being aggressive against ISIS plays into their hands, don't you think they really love it even more when we do little to nothing to stop them?

 

[Reformedfindlay]

Fear is what drives the Right, and what keeps us increasing the funding for the military-industrial complex. Oh, they'll claim they're not afraid, that they're just being prepared as they head in droves to buy guns and more guns and more ammo...but they are afraid indeed. And that fear simply continues to increase every time they turn on Fox News and the right-wing pundits.

uh huh, because the left is immune to fear :roll:

Hell, bring up the topic of student loans and half of the left along with Bernie Sanders start going a little off the edge :roll:

 

[Glen Contrarian]

uh huh, because the left is immune to fear :roll:

Hell, bring up the topic of student loans and half of the left along with Bernie Sanders start going a little off the edge :roll:

Crap. Every two days we have more people killed by our 'normal' level of gun violence than were killed in France in the attack. Yet we're so doggone skeered of those terrorists.

 

[Natan]

and a bit like FDR's "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

Bush was right, FDR was right, and so is Obama. If we overreact out of fear, then ISIS or ISIL or Daesh or whatever you want to call the cockroaches in the Middle East have at least won a battle.

FDR was right? He locked up the Japanese in concentration camps. Obama won't go that far, he goes the other extreme and won't do anything.

In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific reassurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction

 

[Dittohead not!]

He's absolutely right!

That's not to say he's necessarily handling these events correctly in all it's technical aspects, but he's right here - at least in general terms.

Not long ago, the President was widely chastised for not closing down air travel from ebola areas, including refusing to readmit American medical volunteers back into the country! Our fellow Americans! He (wisely) stood his ground. And what happened to all the ebola noise from the GOP congress? Yeah, like so much other noise, it eventually died-down to normalcy.

His job is not to react to every political whim, but to provide calm leadership.

Funny, we aren't hearing a lot about Ebola any more, not even from right wing rant radio. At one time, Obama was rounding up carriers of Ebola from Central America and bringing them here.

At least, that is what was being claimed.

 

[Dittohead not!]

He doesn't sound like either of those gentlemen, because the context for both Bush and FDR was "we don't have to fear; we simply have to go out and smash the enemy". He is using "we shouldn't overreact" as an excuse for not reacting.

The point could be made that Bush did overreact, but only if you buy the idea that the invasion of Iraq was a reaction to the attack on 9/11.

 

[Dittohead not!]

FDR was right? He locked up the Japanese in concentration camps. Obama won't go that far, he goes the other extreme and won't do anything.

I believe the statement was about the great depression, not the Japanese.
But, that is an example of an overreaction, and still today is being held up as an example of a monumental mistake due to fear.

 

[Chomsky]

Funny, we aren't hearing a lot about Ebola any more, not even from right wing rant radio. At one time, Obama was rounding up carriers of Ebola from Central America and bringing them here.

At least, that is what was being claimed.

We haven't heard much about Benghazi lately either, since HRC got a bounce from the last hearing.

Curious how that works, isn't it?

 

[Dittohead not!]

We haven't heard much about Benghazi lately either, since HRC got a bounce from the last hearing.

Curious how that works, isn't it?

It is, but I doubt we've heard the last of Bengazi even now.

Wait until the mudslinging starts. It will get ugly, and that's for sure.

 

[ludin]

He's absolutely right!

That's not to say he's necessarily handling these events correctly in all it's technical aspects, but he's right here - at least in general terms.

Not long ago, the President was widely chastised for not closing down air travel from ebola areas, including refusing to readmit American medical volunteers back into the country! Our fellow Americans! He (wisely) stood his ground. And what happened to all the ebola noise from the GOP congress? Yeah, like so much other noise, it eventually died-down to normalcy.

His job is not to react to every political whim, but to provide calm leadership.

His job is to also make commonsense policy decisions and he has basically failed in both the ebola and the Syrian cases.
yes that noise died to something else which is how it works.
memory in congress is short lived given everything that goes on.

however that doesn't say that he didn't blunder these instances into disasters.

 

[Chomsky]

His job is to also make commonsense policy decisions and he has basically failed in both the ebola and the Syrian cases.
yes that noise died to something else which is how it works.
memory in congress is short lived given everything that goes on.

however that doesn't say that he didn't blunder these instances into disasters.

I was speaking in general terms of not overreacting.

But in specific terms, no President Obama's far from perfect.

But I have no issue with his handling of the ebola situation; it does seem (in terms of American consequences), to have been much to do about nothing.

 

[cpwill]

The point could be made that Bush did overreact, but only if you buy the idea that the invasion of Iraq was a reaction to the attack on 9/11.

I would argue that it was a decision made in the post-9/11 atmosphere, where we felt compelled to work within concepts like the 1% Doctrine.

 

[Dittohead not!]

I would argue that it was a decision made in the post-9/11 atmosphere, where we felt compelled to work within concepts like the 1% Doctrine.

Had to look that one up. 1% doctrine:

Suskind describes the Cheney doctrine as follows: "Even if there's just a 1 percent chance of the unimaginable coming due, act as if it is a certainty. It's not about 'our analysis,' as Cheney said. It's about 'our response.' … Justified or not, fact-based or not, 'our response' is what matters. As to 'evidence,' the bar was set so low that the word itself almost didn't apply."

Sounds to me like a formula for overreaction.

 

[ludin]

I was speaking in general terms of not overreacting.

But in specific terms, no President Obama's far from perfect.

But I have no issue with his handling of the ebola situation; it does seem (in terms of American consequences), to have been much to do about nothing.

I think it was more to the fact that his people didn't verify that she was clear when she wasn't and luckily we were able to contain
it before it got worse.

 

[Excon]

He doesn't sound like either of those gentlemen, because the context for both Bush and FDR was "we don't have to fear; we simply have to go out and smash the enemy". He is using "we shouldn't overreact" as an excuse for not reacting.

^ This.