Barack H. Obama Clearly No Franklin D. Roosevelt

On Feb. 11,  President Obama asked Congress to pass a Joint Resolution Authorizing the Use of Military Force (AUMF) against the Islamic State (IS). In his letter to Congress, he wrote:

“My Administration’s draft AUMF would not authorize long-term, large-scale ground combat operations like those our Nation conducted in Iraq and Afghanistan. ...“Local forces, rather than U.S. military forces, should be deployed to conduct such operations....

“The authorization I propose would provide the flexibility to conduct ground combat operations in other, more limited circumstances, such as rescue operations involving U.S. or coalition personnel or the use of special operations forces to take military action against ISIL leadership....

“It would also authorize the use of U.S. forces in situations where ground combat operations are not expected or intended, such as intelligence collection and sharing, missions to enable kinetic strikes, or the provision of operational planning and other forms of advice and assistance to partner forces.”

Section 3 of his proposed AUMF provides “This authorization for the use of military force shall terminate  three years after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution.”

Compare Mr. Obama’s remarks with those of Franklin D. Roosevelt on Dec. 8, 1941, the day after Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor -- when FDR asked Congress for a Declaration of War in these unequivocal words:

“Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy -- the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan. ...

“As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. ...

“No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory. ...

“With confidence in our armed forces -- with the unbounding determination of our people -- we will GAIN THE INEVITABLE TRIUMPH -- so help us God.

“I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, Dec. 7, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire.”

President Obama’s Feb. 11 remarks are consistent with his Sept. 10, 2014 remarks, when he spoke of “degrading,” “destroying” and “managing” the “IS” threat.

Why didn’t Mr. Obama use FDR’s speech as a template?  And say:

“Over recent weeks a group of Muslim barbarians calling themselves; ‘The Islamic State’; have shamelessly and savagely beheaded Americans, Christians and anybody else, including other Muslims, they get their blood-stained hands on, who don’t share their despicable, perverted understanding of the Islamic faith. In addition, they have open and publicly declared their intent to kill Americans and fight jihad against  America and its people.

“All measures be taken for our defense ...

“No matter how long it may take ...  win through to absolute victory ...

“... we will gain the inevitable triumph -- so help us God.

“I ask that the Congress declare that since the 9/11 attacks on our country, that a state of war has existed between the United States and all Islamic terrorist, by whatever name they currently style themselves.”

That would have clearly signaled to our people, our allies and our enemies exactly what our president and the American people intend to do in response to Islamic terrorism.

Instead of recognizing these groups already have declared war, and are at war with us, and unequivocally vowing “absolute victory,” the president sends Marie Harf, the State Department “ditz,” out with an inane message that we need to find “jobs” for suicide bombers!

In war, there is no place for political correctness, euphemism or mixed-messages. The American people, our allies, and our enemies must understand why. If our president’s goal is to “degrade,” “manage” or “shrink the Islamic State’s sphere of influence,” that is limited war.

Destroying the Islamic State, on the other hand,  is total war. That is what FDR vowed to do to Japan. We destroyed them to the point of absolute victory. They were unable and unwilling to fight further. FDR knew the job of the Japanese army was to kill Americans; “Jobs for Japanese” was not part of his war plan.

Mr. Obama says, “Local forces, rather than U.S. military forces, should be deployed to conduct [ground] operations.”

But if Americans won’t do what is necessary to protect America from Islamist terrorism, why would local forces sign up to serve as canon fodder?

I can understand the president’s reluctance to fight another ground war. Sadly, he has no easy choices. Most military experts say the war can’t be won by the use of air power alone. How do you eliminate terrorists hiding among the civilian population with air strikes alone?

The real question is, can America win a war, if America fights a civilized war to mange IS,  while IS fights war rejecting all international norms and conventions?

Can we successfully fight a war to manage “IS,” while they fight a war to destroy us? If we do, do we afford them an extended opportunity to strike us catastrophically? Can we afford to sit by while IS becomes a full-fledged terrorist nation-state, financed by oil revenues and the power of taxation?

Dithering only enables IS.n   The more money IS has, the more difficult our winning becomes.

FDR did not speak in terms of degrading or managing  Japan; he spoke of winning an “absolute victory.” FDR didn’t tell our friends and enemies that our war effort would not include “long-term, large-scale ground combat operations;” instead, he spoke of using “all measures.”

FDR didn’t impose a three-year time limit; he spoke of winning -- “inevitable triumph” --  “no matter how long it may take!”


Posted: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 12:10 am
By John Donald O'Shea

Copyright 2015
John Donald O'Shea