Benghazi and Camp Bastion reflect Obama’s ‘If wishes were horses’ war policy

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on the couch with anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan in 2008 before Obama became president. The photo has been removed from Pelosi's site as best we could determine.(Photo from Pelosi website/U.S. Government)At the Democrats’ convention in Charlotte, President Barack Obama implied the war was going well.

“We've blunted the Taliban's momentum in Afghanistan and in 2014, our longest war will be over,” the president said, adding, “al-Qaida is on the path to defeat…”

Obama’s remarks echoed a State Dept. official who told media in April, 2012, that the War on Terror is over—a “legitimate Islamism” was emerging.

Remember that old saying, “If wishes were horses, beggars would ride”?

One week after terrorists attacked the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi and killed 4 Americans, it became apparent the War on Terror is not over.

Three days after the attack on the Consulate, as protests against U.S. interests raged around the globe, Taliban attacked Camp Bastion in Afghanistan. One analyst noted the consequences of the attack—“Marines at Camp Freedom are now without effective fixed-wing air support.” The analyst said the attack on Camp Bastion was “arguably the worst day in USMC aviation history since the Tet Offensive of 1968.”

Not a single reporter has connected these events. Not a single reporter has grilled the Obama administration on the impact of the attack on Camp Bastion.

This isn’t surprising—it’s the same media malpractice that left much of the public completely unaware of the perils our country faced in the years preceding Sept. 11, 2001.

The 9/11 Commission Report (2004) noted:

“It is hard now to recapture the conventional wisdom before 9/11. For example, a New York Times article in April, 1999 sought to debunk claims that Bin Ladin was a terrorist leader…”

Some analysts claim the escalated attacks may be due to Obama announcing a deadline for troop withdrawals. If you lived in Afghanistan, would you switch sides as a just-in-case if Taliban retake the country once Western troops are gone? It would take a great deal of strength and commitment to forego that switch if you live there.

Obama has spoken about America’s ability to withstand another attack—we could “absorb” it, he said.

We haven’t fully absorbed the 2001 attacks, at least not financially. We have also sacrificed freedom on the altar of security.

Meanwhile, we have adopted a head-in-the-sand approach.

For instance, the BBC provides online a “graphical representation” of Camp Bastion. Despite BBC claims the diagram is “not accurate,” why would you place information like this on the Web? Do you really think the enemy cares whether it’s “accurate”? Obviously not, considering the success Taliban had on Sept. 14.

Over the weekend, more troop deaths were announced. The majority of the total deaths—70 percent at last count—occurred during Obama’s first term.

Meanwhile, we have an administration in power that blamed an unknown filmmaker for the Libya attack and now backtracks, with many officials saying it looks like terrorism.

That 1999 New York Times article contained a statement the Left ignores and the rest of us should heed:

''You can kill Osama bin Laden today or tomorrow; you can arrest him and put him on trial in New York or in Washington,'' said Ahmed Sattar, an aide to Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind Egyptian cleric convicted of inspiring the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. ''If this will end the problem -- no. Tomorrow you will get somebody else.''

There’s a warning in the 9/11 Commission Report worth repeating [boldface added]:

“We learned about an enemy who is sophisticated, patient, disciplined and lethal. The enemy rallies broad support in the Arab and Muslim world by demanding redress of political grievances, but its hostility toward us and our values is limitless. Its purpose is to rid the world of religious and political pluralism, the plebiscite, and equal rights for women. It makes no distinction between military and civilian targets.”

As our embassies and interests were attacked around the globe, our president’s first instinct was to apologize for insulting Islam. Obama blamed a film no one ever heard of—it became famous because the administration elevated it far beyond its value to anyone. Imagine how easy it is to inflame passions among people who believe it’s permissible to kill someone if you perceive an insult—a gang mentality Americans are familiar with.

GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s first instinct was to stand up for the First Amendment.

The Left stayed mum, more willing to back an errant president than to stand up for a freedom Americans should value perhaps above all others.

The Left did the same thing ahead of 9/11/2001 and eventually acted as foil to America’s war efforts. Look what that has cost us.

~~Ed. Note: Spellings on terms such as al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden's name have varied over the years.

 (Commentary by Kay B. Day/Oct. 1, 2012)

Related at The US Report

'War is Over'...draws parallels to Orwell

Sept. 11 observed--like it or not, it is a war on terror