And a Lincoln in the White House
Winning a war is possible, if one has the political leadership and military know-how, and the will to win.
People do realize, don't they, that the ISIS/ISIL Jihadists that Obama is now bombing in Iraq are the very same people that he has been backing against Assad in Syria, and that Hillary wanted to arm in Syria against Assad?
The war against Islamist terror can be won, but not with the half measures, confused and weak actions of the current Obama Administration. Obama has created the current ISIS Sunni terrorist monster, first by his illegal intervention in Libya against the brutal but stable Qaddafi regime, then in Egypt on the side of the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood, and also in Syria on the side of the Sunni terrorist "rebels" and against the brutal but stable Assad regime. Obama has destroyed any stability in the region by his ill-advised, illegal and hap-hazard policies.
He is now bombing the very "rebels" that he created in Syria and Libya, and which he is still supporting in Syria! Our President has learned nothing, and refuses to admit his grave error; he still wants to overthrow Assad.
How can the terrorists be beaten? It's helpful to look back to the American Civil War. Abe Lincoln, through his generals, especially General William Tecumseh Sherman, unleashed total warfare, which was called "hard war" against our fellow Americans. From Wikipedia:
Like Grant, Sherman was convinced that the Confederacy's strategic, economic, and psychological ability to wage further war needed to be definitively crushed if the fighting were to end. Therefore, he believed that the North had to conduct its campaign as a war of conquest and employ scorched earth tactics to break the backbone of the rebellion. He called this strategy "hard war."
Sherman's advance through Georgia and South Carolina was characterized by widespread destruction of civilian supplies and infrastructure. Although looting was officially forbidden, historians disagree on how well this regulation was enforced. The speed and efficiency of the destruction by Sherman's army was remarkable. The practice of heating rails and bending them around trees, leaving behind what came to be known as "Sherman's neckties," made repairs difficult. Accusations that civilians were targeted and war crimes were committed on the march have made Sherman a controversial figure to this day, particularly in the American South.
Is winning important enough to wage this type of "hard war" in the 21st century? Well, only if one is as interested in saving Western Civilization as Lincoln was in preserving the Union! The American Civil War was brutal. Sherman was, and is, criticized for his tactics. Here is a written response from him to this criticism (Wikipedia):
You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out. I know I had no hand in making this war, and I know I will make more sacrifices to-day than any of you to secure peace. But you cannot have peace and a division of our country. If the United States submits to a division now, it will not stop, but will go on until we reap the fate of Mexico, which is eternal war [...] I want peace, and believe it can only be reached through union and war, and I will ever conduct war with a view to perfect and early success. But, my dear sirs, when peace does come, you may call on me for anything. Then will I share with you the last cracker, and watch with you to shield your homes and families against danger from every quarter. -W.T. Sherman
Excellent advice for the American president in the 21st century. So Mr. Obama, if you want to win, gird yourself and find a general like Sherman, and get it done. If you want the Islamists to win, well, just keep doing what you have been doing.
For a tutorial on ISIS, go to: http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/busting-the-medias-isis-myths/