The Right Way and the Wrong Way to Fight ISIS

Lanny Davis, a Clinton supporter, wrote a fascinating article about how to fight ISIS recently.  (See link.)  In the article he explains that military force alone can’t defeat ISIS.  Mr. Davis then quotes Hillary saying, "We are in a contest of ideas against an ideology of hate and we have to win."  I couldn’t disagree more.  ISIS believes that their violent cause is commanded and aided by God.  Jihadists view military success as evidence of divine favor.  Quaker style gentle persuasion is not going to change the hearts and minds of ISIS fanatics.

The right way to fight ISIS is to remove their funding by destroying their ability to sell oil. The wrong way to fight ISIS is to forbid air attacks on oil trucks because the drivers might be civilians. The right way to fight ISIS is to strafe and bomb military convoys moving ISIS fighters and supplies on ISIS highways. The wrong way is to forbid air attacks on military convoys if any civilian human shields are sighted traveling with the convoys. The right way to fight ISIS is to bomb Improvised explosive device factories. The wrong way to fight ISIS is to avoid bombing improvised explosive device factories because ISIS locates them is civilian neighborhoods. The right way to fight ISIS is to make sure that the most effective allies we have on the ground, the Kurds, are very well supplied with whatever they need to push ISIS out of Northern Iraq and Norther Syria. The wrong way is to route all military aid through Baghdad, whose army is ISIS' major supplier of weapons when they abandon them and run away.

To sum up, the only way to defeat the rabid dogs of ISIS is to kill a lot of them and take their territory away from them, which will discourage their potential recruits. What the Obama - Clinton team has been doing is pretending to fight ISIS, giving the appearance that ISIS is easily beating the US. This attracts more recruits to commit more terrorism. It gives Jihadist elements world-wide the impression that the US is a paper tiger that can be easily vanquished.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/25/the_right_way_and_wrong_way_to_defeat_isis_128847.html

Multiculturalism is the Problem, Not Immigration

The Paris attacks led people to question which immigrants are admitted to Europe, and by extension which immigrants are allowed into the US.  It seems like leftists the world over prefer to admit immigrants that are opposed to Western ideas and denounce Western Civilization.

All leftists hate Western ideas, either openly or covertly. It isn’t so surprising leftists want to import more folks who also hate Western ideas. It's also not too surprising that leftists are so stupid they can't see what the end game looks like when unassimilated minorities want to change the countries they live in to look more like the countries they came from. But the problem is not immigration itself.  The problem is the combination of immigration and multiculturalism.

The US needs educated self-supporting immigrants that assimilate. We don't have enough children on our own to prevent demographic collapse. We need the smartest people possible to maintain our technological edge. But immigration is one area where we absolutely need diversity. Too many of any one group means that group doesn't have to assimilate. They can just stick together as an undigested lump and insist everyone else adjust to them.

The traditional melting pot model of immigration actually works. My grandfather's family were Jews from Budapest. His life-long friend was a cowboy born in Montana who spoke Danish at home growing up. My grandmother's family were a mixture of late 1890’s English immigrants and Huguenot (Protestant) French who had been in this country for so long I don't know when they first got here.  Despite very different backgrounds, it all worked very well.

We should not let leftist idiots' multicultural manure force us to abandon what has worked for us for over two centuries. It's the multiculturalism that's the problem, not immigration.

No Matter What FBI Director Comey Does, Hillary Walks

Since there is no liberal alternative to Hillary, there will be no indictment, even if Director Comey finds enough classified material on Clinton's home email server to open a wikileaks franchise. The only thing Comey could do at that point is resign and call a press conference. However, if the Justice Department classifies the details of classified emails on Hillary's email server, Mr. Comey will not be able to reveal what he knows without breaking the law. You see, it's quite easily done as long as you don't care about the law or ethics or anything else except keeping power. Liberals believe they have the equivalent of a divine right to rule. Classifying the outcome of the Hillary investigation would be a no brainer for them.


http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/261582-fbi-chief-is-wild-card-for-clinton 

Republicans Need to Leak More Investigation Results

Republicans have no reason to expect Pravda Press coverage to be anything but Democrat's propaganda. For that reason, Republicans should give advance notice of everything they find in investigations to conservative media outlets well before Democrats testify in committee hearings. That gives the truth a head start before the Democrats start to drown it out with talking points which are divorced from reality. No mainstream lefty media should be able to scoop conservative media outlets on conservative events ever again. If the Hillary Clinton's emails about Al Qaeda involvement in Benghazi had been Fox News headlines and Wall Street Journal editorials 2 days before her testimony, it would have been much harder for the Pravda Press to ignore them as nothing new.  Keeping them a secret until the day of the hearings served no useful purpose.