When will killing Americans begin bother Biden?
In a recent attack on a military barracks in Jordan, three American soldiers were killed, and dozens more injured as they slept. Many of the injuries were severe and may still lead to additional deaths. Many of the injuries were in the form of traumatic brain injuries. We know who fired those weapons – and we know who provided them.
This was not a shocking event because it was not unanticipated. It was inevitable. It was not a first-time event. These terrorists have attacked American military installations more than 100 times in the past few months with the intention and possibility of killing American soldiers. The tragically succeeded this time. These are not even the first Americans that have been killed by the recent increased terrorist activity. At least 33 Americans were murdered on October 7.
Once again Biden has promised to respond without specifics. Based on past history of Biden’s responses – from sanctions to military action — we have every reason to be concerned that it will AGAIN be too little/too late.
The purpose of response is to have an impact – to degrade the enemy and STOP belligerent actions. Not a single response Biden has made to aggression against the United States or allies has been effective. We need to keep in mind that NOT A SINGLE RESPONSE BIDEN HAS MADE TO THE RUSSIAN INVASION OF UKRIANE … THE HAMAS ATTACK ON ISRAEL …OR THE MULTIPLE ATTACKS ON AMERICANS AND AMERICAN ASSESTS … HAS STOPPED ANYTHING. Not the tough talk … the threats … the sanctions … the diplomacy … providing military equipment … the promise of an Iran nuclear deal … billion-dollar bribes … or “measured” military action. It has not even slowed down the aggressive behavior of our adversaries. In most cases, their actions have been escalating. Biden’s policies have utterly failed.
National Security advisor John Kirby appeared at a White House briefing to deal with this and other matters. He had some interesting things to say – mostly what Biden would NOT do as opposed to what he WOULD DO.
According to Kirby, the administration does not want a war with Iran – even as he conceded that Iran is behind the attacks. The Defense Department reiterated the administration’s assurance to the Iranian Supreme Leader that the United States does not seek war with Iran even though the DOJ said that Iran’s “fingerprints” are on the attack that killed the American soldiers.
That essentially ends any accountability from Biden for Iran’s role in promoting and supporting terrorism throughout the region – and the specific attack that killed and injured American soldiers. Kirby added that the White House does not want to even “escalate” the situation. But the situation has escalated dramatically. The only question is whether the United States will respond dramatically and effectively … or just with another of those “measured” responses. Unless the response is against Iran, will be meaningless.
The term Kirby used to assure the American people was that the Biden administration would “respond appropriately.” That is diplomatic weasel language that could mean anything – or nothing. We have heard that term used in the past and the only thing we know for sure is that the responses were not effective – just “appropriate.”
In another example of political double-talk, Kirby said that past U.S. action had “degraded” the Houthis ability to respond – but they responded anyway. Apparently “degrade” in Washington-ese does not mean to end the Houthis’ ability to continue to attack – to escalate.
The one thing that should be very clear by now is that these “appropriate” (weak) responses are not working – and will not work. As long as Biden policies have no impact on Iran, nothing will change. It does not have to be a full-scaled war, but there must be an attack on Iranian financial and military assets. This could mean seizing financial assets … greater sanctions … and military strikes on military installations and the munitions industry providing the weapons.
That does not necessarily mean that such actions will kick off a regional war – and certainly not a world war. However, we cannot allow that possibility to deter the United States – and others – from taking the issue of state-sponsored terrorism right to the source. We have to take whatever “effective” action is necessary.
The Neville Chamberlains of the world argue that it is not Iran attacking Israel or the United States. It is merely the Houthis … or Hamas … or Hezbollah … or al Qaeda … or ISIS … or the Taliban. But there is a common denominator — Iran. These terrorist groups are not “allies” or Iran, they are “surrogates.” To ignore that reality is like saying that the person who hires a killer to knock off a spouse should not be held accountable because they did not pull the trigger.
At the time of this writing, Biden has not offered any specifics about the nature or timing of his response – and of course, no response, yet. The only words from Biden’s lips are that there will be an appropriate response after they “study” the situation.
Perhaps the pressure of the presidential campaign – and the fact that there are three families grieving the loss of a loved one – and others dealing with crippling injuries — will motivate Biden to a more “effective” response. But if Iran gets a pass, there can be no “effective” response. And while Biden is looking for a “measured” response, there are three American heroes being measured for their burial uniforms. This might not have happened if Biden had responded “inappropriately” (meaning effectively) in the past. So, there ‘tis.