America – Has Obama put a “Kick Me” sign on our backs?

Foiled bombings in Chicago and Brooklyn. Virginia man arrested for casing Metro for terrorist action. Have we emboldened terrorism by our soft international stance, i.e. “negotiating” with the Taliban; Obama’s infamous, and pedestrian, speech reaching out to the Muslim world as a religion of peace. (As two teen girls are executed by Islamists in Somalia.) Or is this the build up of years of planning by Al Queda and the like and pure coincidence that it all comes tumbling down now? Or is it radical Islam doesn’t want to see Stewart and Colbert take the stage tomorrow? I put it to those more expert than I here at Ricochet.

Personally, I’ve always felt another successful terrorist attempt was inevitable in a society as free, and freely hated by our enemies, as ours. Living in Los Angeles you see the simplicity of a suicide bomber walking into a mall and detonating him/herself.

I propose one anti-conspiracy conspiracy theory…the closeness of this to the election cannot be favorable for the Dems. And Al Queda doesn’t want to lose such an international softy as Obama. Or do they? On the other hand, at least the MSM can’t say it’s all a set up by Baby Bush to help Republicans on Tuesday. (Which it will.)

  1. Mark Lewis

    I can hear the liberal media now…”Reactionary knuckle draggers will certainly use this opportunity to stoke the fears of flyover country to get more power and placate their corporate and wall street masters. Embolden our enemies? What classic right-wing fear-mongering…”

    Strong horse? Weak horse?

    We are certainly doing our best as an administration to posture as the weak horse.

  2. Kenneth

    Well, when the over-rated Richard Holbrooke declares that he welcomes Iran’s cooperation in establishing stability in Afghanistan, that’s a real bend-over moment.

    Meanwhile, Hamid Karzai chuckles at our impotence as he counts all those Euro’s the Iranians hand to him in shopping bags.

  3. Jaydee_007

    Simply put;

    Obama has lowered the Cost of any attack.

    One thing was certain, when Bush was in charge the Cost Benefit analysis of attacking America made the decision easy:

    Attack Spain

    Attack Britain

    Attack Anywhere else but America.

    Let us wait until Bush is gone and see if it will be profitable to Attack America.

    From thier viewpoint; “The Benefits now outweigh the Costs. Heck, he won’t even acknowledge that we are the enemy. His Enemies are the Republicans. There is a good chance if we successfully attack America Obama will assault the Republicans harder than his response to AQ.”

  4. Charles Mark

    What’s the Arabic for pre-election contingency operation?They did have a game-changer in Spain a few years ago,you may recall.

  5. Dave Roy
    Charles Mark: What’s the Arabic for pre-election contingency operation?They did have a game-changer in Spain a few years ago,you may recall. · Oct 30 at 1:14pm

    Sure, but wouldn’t this tend to make people want a tougher response? Something Obama doesn’t seem capable of doing?

    I would think this would push people more into the Republican camp, if it had worked.

    Since it didn’t, the public can now just ignore it as if it never happened, of course.

  6. BlueAnt
    Denise Moss: Have we emboldened terrorism by our soft international stance, i.e. “negotiating” with the Taliban

    No no, see, this is all happening because we have a cowboy in the White House who enrages the Muslim world with his stark black-and-white characterizations. Wait a second, I think I got my narratives mixed up…

    The world is becoming more violent because we have a washed up actor in the White House who’s playing cowboy, talking tough to the major forces in the world arrayed against us, leading us down the path to confrontation and nuclear devast– no, wait, that’s not the one either.

    Someone remind me how it goes? The one where chanting “hope” and singing Kum-Ba-Ya is a brilliant negotiating gambit?

  7. Charles Mark

    David, I don’t think they care how they influence us as long as they can influence us- we think a week is a long time in politics;they think in terms of ages.By the way, anyone know the Arabic for man-caused disaster?

  8. Patrick in Albuquerque

    I’ll probably rue the day, but I offer a contrarian view.

    Who thought the Islamists gave up because of our invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq? Precisely no one. So ongoing attacks should be no surprise. And who thinks we can “win” in Afghanistan? History argues against a win there. I wouldn’t bet on it – even if we “stayed the course”.

    So what’s the future of this war on terror? The most visible offensive thing is and will be the drone attacks. Bush started and Obama has ramped them up. Credit to them both. It seems to me that it is the drones that are keeping the highly organized attacks – think 9/11 and Bojinka – from happening. This is the likely future of our war against the Islamists. Heck I’d bet that some of it’s going on elsewhere, we just aren’t aware of it.

    So maybe, one could argue that the Dude-in-Chief has not painted a bullseye on our backs.

  9. dittoheadadt
    Charles Mark: What’s the Arabic for pre-election contingency operation?They did have a game-changer in Spain a few years ago,you may recall. · Oct 30 at 1:14pm

    What’s the Arabic for “October Surprise?” Do they even have October on their 5th-century calendars?

  10. Charles Mark

    What phrase is conspicuous by it’s absence from discussion of this attempted attack? ….”Anti-Semitic!”

  11. Publius

    AQ been a fan of using the civil aviation system for their attacks so the delivery method isn’t anything all that radically new for them. Targeting the “joos” is pretty much reflexive for these people since they’re a bunch of knuckle dragging anti-semitic troglodytes. This seems just like another day in the life of being a seventh century barbarian rather than something specifically aimed at this election cycle, but who knows?

    We have learned that they respond aggressively to weakness and the West has shown quite a bit of it over the last thirty years or so with some exceptions here and there such as the Bush administration taking care of business after 9/11.

    All of the drone attacks in Pakistan won’t matter if we go wobbly in Afghanistan and Obama has been very clear that he values disengagement over victory. That’s why you see Karzai making kissy face with the bad guys.

    In other words, Obama is all about projecting weakness as part of his foreign policy so the pre-existing bullseye is just getting bigger with him running the show.