Wednesday, September 22, 2010


The buzz this morning is about Bob Woodward's new book, Obama's Wars, coming out next week.  The New York Times has excerpts as does The Washington Post.

This one...

"We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger." 

....just makes me nauseous.

"Everything we can to prevent it"?  Really?  Like closing Gitmo and setting terrorists free?  Oh wait...that hasn't worked out yet.  Like inviting an attack by attempting to hold the KSM trial in Manhattan?  I could go on...but I won't.  

We sure aren't "stronger" because of anything Obama has done.

Update:  Woah Nellie!  I was being restrained when I first posted this this morning but Victor Davis Hanson most definitely was NOT.  With regard to the above Obama quote, VDH calls it "a very callous and cruel editorial about the 3,000 who were so savagely killed and are no longer with us."

 You betcha.

Read the whole thing, but he finishes strong:

When all this is collated with the arbitrary withdrawal dates, the McChrystal mess, the confusions and flip-flopping on everything from Guantanamo to the KSM trial, the plethora of regional czars at the expense of the secretary of state’s traditional portfolio, the weird remarks like “allegedly” after the Mutallab attempt, the deliberate distortions of the issues involved in the Ground Zero mosque, the Cairo speech myth-making, the initial al-Arabiya review, the silence after the Iranian protests last years, and much more — then we, our allies, and our enemies all get the impression that Obama is uninterested in national-security issues, resents the position that he is put in by a war against terror and operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, and seems to think that at some abstract level past American culpability has provoked radical Islamists to lash out, requiring us to absorb rather than preempt their blows. This trumps even Carterism and is a prescription for national suicide.
See!  If I didn't have to rush off to work this morning, I'd have explained it just like that.  Well, close to that.  He's more eloquent.

(H/T:  Memeorandum)


LL said...

Woodward is a leftist journalist. And while I admire his investigative reporting in past generations, you'll note that he did NO investigative reporting pertaining to obama. So what good is he as a reporter in the context of the present world situation? He's droning on like every other flack and there is no reason to buy his book.

Staci said...

I find it really sick that anyone, much less the president, would say that we can "absorb" a terrorist attack. I wonder if the family members of victims of 9-11 feel like they've "absorbed" their loss.

Red said...

I think the operative word is 'oblivious'.

Jazz One said...

Semantics. You have a problem with the word "absorbed"?
If someone punched you in the stomach, would you absorb it and be stronger or would you walk around fearful and doubled over for the rest of you life?
My girlfriend passed away six weeks ago. It has been the worst punch in the gut in my life. I am trying to absorb this and still live my life. I want to think I'll be stronger after this. Honestly I don't think anything could hurt me more. Most of life's adversity pales in comparison.
That is the way I understood that quote.
I don't get how you can take a quote about the strength of this nation and pick it apart.
I am trying to understand how you got the idea that prisoners would just be set free if Gitmo closed? Did Rush tell you that? Did Beck say that? I am no genius be I am guessing that the prisoners would be moved to other facilities. In the entire history of this country could you come up with an example of a prison closing and all the prisoners released instead of being transferred?
Regarding the attempt to hold the KSM trial in Manhattan, what happened to the "home of the brave"? I think being fearful sends a message to the terrorists.

Pat Austin Becker said...

I'm really very sorry for your loss. That's tragic.

As to the quote, it's just a reflection of this president's entire national security perspective which is very different from mine. I don't believe you negotiate with terrorists or bow to dictators and I don't believe you should cater to terrorists. I don't think you should give them a public forum. I don't think you should make poor choices (trial in NYC) when you have better options (trial at Gitmo).

We disagree on politics, but I'm genuinely sorry for your loss on a personal level.

Jazz One said...

Thank you Pat. It's been a difficult time.
I enjoy your blog. I know we don't agree on much, but you remind me of family. Most of my family are conservatives and I'm the black sheep liberal.