Gauging the threat posed by ISIS
Comments Sunday by members of Congress familiar with the threat of terrorism should set off alarm bells in the heads of thoughtful Americans. The lawmakers worry President Barack Obama is not doing enough to stop Islamic State barbarians in Iraq and Syria.
Unless Obama does something decisive – a trait for which he is not known, except against domestic political foes – the Islamic State may launch devastating attacks in the United States, the lawmakers predict.
Giving their warnings credibility is that while one of the critics is a Republican leader, the other is a Democrat with a long record of staunch partisanship.
Warnings came from House of Representatives Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Mich.; and Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.
While Rogers’ comments were more critical of Obama, Feinstein’s certainly were not supportive. She termed the president “too cautious” because he is not doing more to cope with the Islamic State threat.
And Feinstein added the terrorist group is exceedingly dangerous – and dedicated to killing Americans.
Obama’s foreign policy has been both hesitant and usually wrong. It has permitted foes of U.S. interests to gain ground throughout the world.
Americans have a variety of reasons for rejecting armed intervention in foreign countries. But it is part of the president’s responsibility to provide leadership in situations such as this -and to find ways acceptable to the nation of eliminating threats like that clearly posed by the Islamic State terrorists.