The Obama administration’s approach has been one of reacting incrementally to events with half-measures, such as proposing a string of new military bases across Africa, the Middle East and Asia, deploying 50 special operations personnel to Syria and a “specialized expeditionary targeting force” to Iraq.
IN THE WAKE of attacks on innocent civilians in San Bernardino, Paris and many other locations around the world, the American people are justifiably concerned about where the next terror assault will occur.
They want their government to secure our borders and determine exactly who is entering our country and for what purpose.
They want law enforcement and the intelligence community to root out Islamic extremists abroad and here at home.
They want our Armed Forces to act decisively to destroy ISIS, al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations overseas that pose a threat to our country.
And they want their elected leaders to speak with one determined voice on our commitment to protecting them.
Just hours before the Friday the 13th terror attacks in Paris, President Obama told the world that ISIS was “contained.”
“From the start, our goal has been first to contain, and we have contained them. They have not gained ground in Iraq,” he told ABC News. “And in Syria, they’ll come in, they’ll leave. But you don’t see this systematic march by ISIL across the terrain.”
A few days later, under questioning by members of the House Armed Service Committee, the chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph Dunford said clearly, “We have not contained [ISIS].”
And recently, the president’s primary adviser on national security, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, contradicted the president’s “containment” assertion.
This has left the American public confused and alarmed. Despite an announced intention to “degrade and ultimately destroy” ISIS, the president appears to have no clear, comprehensive strategy to accomplish that objective. And his most recent remarks at the Pentagon and the National Counterterrorism Center were hardly reassuring.
Necessary resources
I know we have acted in Congress to give our intelligence community and our military commanders, as well as law enforcement officials charged with protecting our homeland security, the resources needed to protect us at home and abroad.
My committee developed and will deliver to the president a defense appropriations bill that provides funding for our military readiness, operations that fight terror and protect American interests around the globe, and care for the wounded and their families. Our bill also includes funds to combat the realworld threat of ISIS, al-Qaida and other Islamic terror groups, to continue vital operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, and to combat other current and emerging threats from countries like Russia and China.
Of course, more money is not a substitute for leadership. The Obama administration’s approach has been one of reacting incrementally to events with half-measures, such as proposing a string of new military bases across Africa, the Middle East and Asia, deploying 50 special operations personnel to Syria and a “specialized expeditionary targeting force” to Iraq.
When it comes to containing threats abroad, we should follow the advice and direction of military leaders who have made it clear we have to be much more aggressive.
In Syria, we need to ensure that our airstrikes are really effective. In Iraq, likewise, we should better organize ground forces, particularly the Sunnis and the Kurds, and properly arm them so they can reverse advances ISIS has made over the last two years.
Flexibility
We must allow our special forces more flexibility in all theaters. We already embed advisers and trainers with the Iraqi security forces at senior levels, but this cooperation should be allowed closer to the actual battle front.
And we should provide this to those Kurds and others who actually want to fight ISIS. Finally, we should assign forward air controllers to guide airstrikes to assure greater precision and provide more lethal weapon systems to vetted groups.
At home, we need a much more reliable system for screening people entering our country and for tracking them while they are here. Our intelligence community must have the tools for identifying homegrown or imported threats in real time as they emerge. These needs are essential and immediate.
The resources are in place. Now we need a clear strategy and decisive leadership to ensure that they are spent wisely.
Comments