• Not addressing the enemy

    Our president says valiant things, but his actions in the past have proven he cant be trusted, in his speech he said that "we shouldn't speculate" about who was responsible, even though one of the shooters shouted allah akbar before he opened fire on innocent civilians, our president has no intentions of really doing anything about it, he is all talk no action and won't even call the enemies for who/what they are, islamic extremists, but no instead we "shouldn't speculate"

  • President treading dangerous grounds

    When something as horrible as a terrorist attack occurs, the role of our president in crucial. He could decide to do nothing, or do something drastic. Either way, he is going to receive opposition from the public. In the case of the Paris attacks, I feel he did the right thing in supporting the nation in their troubled times.

  • Obama's decision to support to stand in solidarity with France was the correct move.

    There have been several arguments in regards to President Obama's decisions following the Paris attacks.
    After the attacks in Paris this week there has been intensified pressure on the US President as others look for leadership in this uncertain time. To support France, the President released intelligence which supported the recent airstrikes across Iraq and Syria.

    The US has been conducting airstrikes across Iraq and Syria over the past year with mixed success, this only goes to show that further intelligence is needed before harder attacks are used. The President has discussed Special Operations to conduct raids, the use and allegiance with local allies, the fortification of our borders and the continued diplomatic talks as an immediate move. The continued diplomatic talks following on from the summit in Turkey are encouraging world leaders to stand together and face the war on terror in the same manner, to be honest and share knowledge in a bid to support one another and protect the world from another war.

    The pressure for the President to put American forces on the ground has become extreme, however his ability to resist this has been commendable. No-one wants another Iraq war, were thousands upon thousands of troops were lost. The need for further intelligence is great, we need to be fully prepared for what is to come. There has been a lack of ability to track ISIS activity or to attempt to predict their next moves.

    Every country is in the same amount of danger, ISIS warned that by opening the borders to refugees they would infiltrate every country. They proved that with their attack on Paris, not attacking government officials by attacking civilians going about their day-to-day lives. The attacks were vicious and barbaric, ISIS has proven that it's members are amongst us. Fortifying our borders and conducting thorough checks on refugees and those moving across borders has become of the highest importance - Obama has supported this objective and this will not only allow those fleeing terror into our countries but protect us.
    Continued airstrikes will ensure that ISIS protects itself at home, and perhaps will delay any future planned attacks. This also supports Obama's decision to look at home, weed out people who have infiltrated our societies and remove them. The fight is no longer on foreign soil, this is important to note and needs to be a part of the discussions between the world leaders.

    In summar, I believe that Obama has made the right decision, he has resisted a knee-jerk reaction of putting American forces on the ground and has suggested a more intelligent way to go about things. Intelligence is needed, shared knowlegde is required - diplomatic talks will support this process. I congratulate Obama on this decision and support the decision for peace and not war.

  • No, Obama calmly yet effectively addressed the terror attacks in Paris.

    In his response to the past weekend's attacks of terror in Paris, Obama remarked upon the possible military response in the United States while keeping the focus on France and the tragic mass killings in Paris late Friday night. Because the United States were not the target for the ISIS-affiliated attack, it was appropriate for President Obama to keep his response to the events minimal. I believe Obama addressed the tragedy in Paris and the consequent potential of increasing U.S. military force against ISIS at an appropriate caliber due to the lack of U.S. involvement.

  • Perfect Response to Attacks

    Sometimes saying less means more. In his speech to the press, soon after the terror attacks, Barrack Obama expressed his outrage at the slaying of the innocent, while maintaining that France has his support. I think his response was enough. Saying too much might give away his plan for the terrorist.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.