Dot Connecting


The Hill has a post up by Philip Haney in which Mr. Haney, a former Department of Homeland Security official, alleges that he was ordered to remove pertinent information about terrorists from law enforcement databases.

As the number of successful and attempted Islamic terrorist attacks on America increased, the type of information that the Obama administration ordered removed from travel and national security databases was the kind of information that, if properly assessed, could have prevented subsequent domestic Islamist attacks like the ones committed by Faisal Shahzad (May 2010), Detroit “honor killing” perpetrator Rahim A. Alfetlawi (2011); Amine El Khalifi, who plotted to blow up the U.S. Capitol (2012); Dzhokhar or Tamerlan Tsarnaev who conducted the Boston Marathon bombing (2013); Oklahoma beheading suspect Alton Nolen (2014); or Muhammed Yusuf Abdulazeez, who opened fire on two military installations in Chattanooga, Tennessee (2015).

Read the whole thing.

Bitterly Clinging to Their …


… false narrative. The Left in Germany is having trouble dealing with the fallout from the New Year’s Eve sex crimes in Cologne and other cities. John Hinderaker has a post about the elite’s resistance to the unraveling of their narrative about recent immigrants.

Europe’s leftists are clinging bitterly to their illusions, in some instances actually trying to excuse the sex criminals. Some city officials have issued recommendations for how young women should act to avoid “provoking” rapists from “other cultures.” Will non-elite Europeans put up with such nonsense? I doubt it. In Europe, even more than in the U.S., fundamental transformation through mass immigration is a policy that the elites just can’t sell.

Read the whole thing.

UPDATE—There’s something to be said for General Charles Napier‘s method of dealing with “other cultures” and their treatment of women.

UPDATE 2—Broken link fixed.

Clausewitz and ISIS


Carl von Clausewitz’s book On Warfare is required reading at almost every military academy. It has its imperfections, but it offers some useful ideas on how war can be used to implement policy. James Holmes, a professor of strategy at the Naval War College has written an interesting essay on how Clausewitz might have viewed President Obama’s ISIS strategy.

Such is the topsy-turvy challenge before Washington. Administration leaders must put policy and strategy, not artificial limits on military means, in charge of the counter-ISIL campaign. If U.S. policy is to destroy ISIL, let us figure out what that entails in terms of ground, air, and sea forces and set those forces in motion. If it is to contain ISIL through airpower, let us say that and resign ourselves to an open-ended effort promising few satisfactions.

The United States can wage unlimited war against the Islamic State, or it can wage war by contingent. Trying to do both opens up a world of strategic problems.

Read the whole thing.

Unmanaging the Unmanageable


Jennifer Rubin has a piece over at WaPo about the commander-in-chief’s meltdown in the polls. It begins:

President Obama’s petulant news conference in Turkey insisting there is no need to shift our strategy for fighting the Islamic State might have been the low point in his presidency. But that does not mean he’s hit rock bottom.

Yeah, well, until he hits bottom, he’s not going to realize that he’s powerless over the world situation and that our lives have become unmanageable.

Read the whole thing.

Do We Want to Win?


Larry Kudlow has a piece up called If We Want to Destroy ISIS, We Can Destroy ISIS. This raises the question: Are we willing to destroy ISIS? Do we want to win?

Here’s what winning a war looks like:Atlanta 1864That’s a picture of Atlanta in 1864. Here’s what Berlin and Hiroshima looked like in 1945.1945

In the wars we’ve won, the United States crushed our enemies. We killed them and laid waste to their countries until we destroyed their will to continue fighting. Even if we knew how to go about doing that in the present circumstance with ISIS, I’m not sure we are willing to do the hard work of inflicting sufficient pain of our enemy to win.