The vision of Barack Obama on ISIS and immigration will mean war abroad and in our homeland.
Here’s the latest public speech of Barack Obama on ISIS and immigration. You would think that these are two different issues, but not according to our president.
So Barack Obama on ISIS and immigration is basically a recipe for war abroad and the security state at home. ISIS deserves to be destroyed for the horrendous crimes they have committed, but that destruction isn’t necessarily the responsibility of American taxpayers. Obama claims that ISIS (or ISIL as he likes to call them) is a threat to civilization worldwide. But that is ridiculous. How many people are actually in ISIS? Not enough to overrun civilization. ISIS is a problem in a local area that should be handled by local governments.
Trending: Science is Settled
Obama says that John Kerry is bringing an end to war in Syria. That is hard to believe when our ruling class is working hard to get the American people to believe in the war in Syria and side with terrorists.
But even more questionable is Obama’s insistence that we must win the war with ISIS by setting a good example and welcoming refugees. Thus, the Washington Examiner,
“We have to wield another weapon alongside our airstrikes, our military, our counterterrorism work, and our diplomacy,” Obama said. “And that’s the power of our example. Our openness to refugees fleeing ISIL’s violence. Our determination to win the battle against ISIL’s hateful and violent propaganda – a distorted view of Islam that aims to radicalize young Muslims to their cause.”
Is there any evidence that ISIS cares about our example?
And what about other nations that need a good example. For example, should Belgium be encouraged by an example of “welcoming” refugees?
If the refugees are genuinely fleeing from violent versions of Islam, and want to become Americans, there is an argument for allowing immigration. But Obama has not assured us that we are not going to become another Belgium.
He talks about worrying for the safety of his children, but President Obama’s family members get high-level security. It is vastly more likely that a terrorist attack will hurt ordinary Americans. Obama’s decision will cost him very little and give him political benefits. For all his moralistic posturing, he is putting others at risk for political reasons.
With the new risks will come new opportunities to impose a more intrusive surveillance state on the American people. While controlling the border is considered un-American, creating Big Brother to keep us “safe” is perfectly acceptable to our political class.