Suppose you read this excerpt from, say, Time Magazine\’s web site. What would you think:
The United States is dramatically escalating its efforts to combat the spread of ISIS in Syria, Iraq and beyond, President Barack Obama announced Tuesday, during a visit to the Pentagon in Washington D.C.
The unprecedented response will include the deployment of 3,000 U.S. military forces and more than $500 million in defense spending drawn from funding normally used for efforts like the war in Afghanistan, senior administration officials outlined Monday. Obama has called America\’s response to ISIS a “national-security priority,” with top foreign policy and defense officials leading the government\’s efforts.
The officials said Obama believes that in order to best contain ISIS, the U.S. must “lead” the global response effort. In the Pentagon\’s largest deployment in response, more than 100 officials are currently on the ground and $175 million has been allocated to Syria to help combat the spread of ISIS. Those efforts will be expanded with the assistance of U.S. Middle East Command, which will deploy logistics, command and control, medical, and engineering resources.
Would you think it made sense? Would you see it as a very unpleasent and undesirable decision, but one that had to be made because of the significant, and rapidly increasing, threat ISIS poses – not only to the Islamic world but to the west as well: especially to the United States, which ISIS has specifically told us it intends to hit?
If so, we are largely in agreement (not completely, because we don\’t know who the good guys, if any, are in Syria).
But none of this matters. We are not doing this. We have committed no troops to fight ISIS (which is why the so-called “coalition” being touted by Obama & Co. is such a farce: i.e. since we\’re not putting our boots on the ground, neither are they).
So what was that hypothetical Time Magazine article about?
It is about the fact that, although President Obama will not put boots on the ground to fight radical islam as it goes about the business of taking over more and more of the Muslim world, he will send 3,000 troops to Africa… to “fight ebola”.
Excerpted from Zeke J. Miller\’s article at (you guessed it) Time Magazine – and this is not hypothetical, it is real:
TheUnited States is dramatically escalating its efforts to combat thespread of Ebola in West Africa, President Barack Obama announcedTuesday, during a visit to the Centers for Disease Control andPrevention in Atlanta.
The unprecedented response will include the deployment of 3,000 U.S. military forces and more than $500 million in defense spending drawn from funding normally used for efforts like the war in Afghanistan, senior administration officials outlined Monday. Obama has called America’s response to the disease a “national-security priority,” with top foreign policy and defense officials leading the government\’s efforts.
The officials said Obama believes that in order to best contain the disease, the U.S. must “lead” the global response effort. In the CDC’s largest deployment in response to an epidemic, more than 100 officials from the agency are currently on the ground and $175 million has been allocated to West Africa to help combat the spread of Ebola. Those efforts will be expanded with the assistance of U.S. Africa Command, which will deploy logistics, command and control, medical, and engineering resources to affected countries.
???????????
Look, I\’m no military expert. Maybe I\’m missing the rarefied nuances of this move. But I can\’t help thinking that delivering these supplies to humanitarian organizations already working in the affected areas – along with a small contingency force to insure they actually get to where we are sending them (a significant problem in third-world countries) is what makes sense.
Why are thousands of military troops being deployed? What are they going to do? Shoot their weapons in the air hoping to hit an ebola air pocket? Why are they being put in harm\’s way of this deadly condition?
Those same 3,000 troops, committed to leading, organizing and advising other countries\’ troops to fight ISIS, might have generated a real international coalition, with real soldiers willing to put their lives on the line because the coalition\’s leader is right there with them: not just in airplanes, on high, watching the combat take place.
But that seems to have escaped this President and his administration. So, instead, we have a coalition of promises, promises, promises, with little or no substance to it – which Mr. Obama\’s Accomplice Media are shamelessly comparing to the real coalition President Bush put together when he invaded Iraq. To Obama & Co. it makes more sense to send our troops to Africa, where they can use their military know-how to “fight ebola”.
Is it January 17th, 2017, about noontime, yet? Please tell me it is.
