Obama Bombs Syria
U.S. forces struck Islamic State targets inside Syria for the first time last night. Command and control centers, vehicles and training camps were hit. But the likely reason for the attack was seemingly buried in most news reports.
Friday we told you about the Khorasan cell -- an elite Al Qaeda bomb-making unit based in Syria. At a Pentagon press briefing this morning, Lt. Gen. William Mayville said that the Khorasan cell "was in the final stages of plans to execute major attacks against Western targets and potentially the U.S. homeland."
The Khorasan cell was targeted last night. A Pentagon spokesman said, "We believe the individuals plotting and planning it were eliminated."
The Obama Administration and the media have ballyhooed this strike as a "coalition effort." This coalition is just five Arab states: Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Notably absent from the coalition is NATO member Turkey, which is step-by-step being taken over by the forces of radical Presbyterianism. Whoops, I mean radical Islam, which is why Turkey is increasingly an unreliable "ally." The whole region, this whole war, is defined by radical Islam -- regardless of whether Obama and our cultural elites admit it or not.
By the way, press accounts also indicate that the U.S. fired 47 Tomahawk cruise missiles in these strikes. You may recall that Obama's defense budget proposes eliminating these cruise missiles by 2016. According to one report, we have enough Tomahawk missiles to last only 85 days at the current "burn rate" of 47 a day. And the 47 launched last night would be nearly half of all the Tomahawks Obama plans to buy in 2015.
Obama has told us that the fight against the Islamic State will be a long, sustained effort. When he was pushed into action, he called on one of the most effective weapons we have. But what happens after 2015? Obama leaves office and the next president won't have the advantage of the very resources Obama is using now.
On The Wrong Track
Many national polls often ask respondents whether they feel the nation is on the right track or the wrong track. Currently, roughly two-thirds of Americans feel our country is on the wrong track.
Most political pundits attribute that to anxiety over the economy. I have often argued that it probably encompasses more than just concerns about pocketbook issues and budget deficits. And as the latest Pew poll suggests, millions of Americans are deeply concerned about our nation's growing virtue deficit.
Seventy-two percent of Americans feel that religion "is losing influence in American life." That is a record high in the past ten years of Pew's polling data.
Given how we are constantly being told that cultural attitudes are changing, those on the left might be encouraged by this news. But according to Pew, only 12% of the country believes the waning influence of religion is a good thing, while 56% say it is a bad thing.
Moreover, 59% say it is important for members of Congress to have strong religious beliefs. Americans are divided regarding the Obama Administration: 30% believe it is friendly toward religion, while 29% say it is unfriendly.
From forcing bakers and florists to violate their faith to attacking the Little Sisters of the Poor, there is no denying that the radical left's assault on Judeo-Christian values has quickened in recent years. Most Americans do not like this trend, but virtually none of the nation's media or political elites are speaking up for them or defending their values.
The Left Unhinged
Environmentalists took to the streets this weekend. They were marching to demand action on climate change. Whatever one's view on climate change or global warming, there are significant issues at stake in this debate.
We should have a rational debate about higher electricity prices and less energy, higher gas prices, higher food prices, higher taxes and more regulations, even the future of the free market.
But there are many on the left who are not interested in having a rational debate on any of these issues. If, as they insist, the science really is settled, what is there to debate? In the fevered brows of many leftists there is nothing to talk about. By the way, the science is far from settled.
There is no better example of the left's intolerance and its inherent impulse toward tyranny than Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., one of the leading spokesmen for the environmental movement. If it were up to Mr. Kennedy, he would punish people who disagree with his views on climate change:
"They are contemptible human beings. I wish there were a law you could punish them with. … Do I think the Koch brothers are treasonous? Yes I do. … Do I think they should be in jail? I think they should be enjoying three hots and a cot at the Hague with all the other war criminals."
Folks, this is not hyperbole. Remember the Occupy Wall Street movement? Polling found that nearly one-third of Occupiers supported the use of violence to achieve their political objectives.