„Defending his refusal to name the enemy, Obama sniffed peevishly that ‚radical Islam‘ is a ‚talking point: it isn’t a strategy.‘ But the talking point is really Obama’s: all informed analysts of the problem know that IS is not an isolated ‚extremist‘ threat, but part of a wave of numerous interrelated movements that have arisen out of the heart, not merely the fringes, of Islamic societies worldwide – even if most Muslims do not support them. (…) Of course, as Obama said, mere use of the phrase would not change the war by itself. But it would radically change our strategic policy toward Islamism – a movement he himself has aided via the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Tunisia and Yemen, and by waging a half-hearted military struggle against other elements of the jihad, like IS and al-Qaeda (AQ). Not to mention his disastrous nuclear deal with Iran, which handsomely rewarded what the State Department has just recertified as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism – while giving it a legal glide-path to building the bomb in a decade. (…)
Obama says that using ‚radical Islam‘ (or any term that would link ‚extremism‘ with Islam) – words he has had scrubbed from FBI counterterror training manuals, and from the mouth of French President François Hollande in a video on the White House website – would mean we are declaring war on Islam as a whole. (…) But nothing could be further from the truth: People can distinguish between radical Islam and the religion overall. Muslims, in fact, call these terrorists Islamists and jihadis – the groups‘ own descriptions of themselves. The leaders of our three most consistent allies in the fight against IS – Egypt, Jordan and Afghanistan – have each spoken of the need to thoroughly reform – even ‚revolutionize,‘ as Egypt’s President Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi has put it – mainstream Islam from within in order to stop the jihad’s appeal to young Muslims around the world.“
(Raymond Stock: „Denial Will Not Defeat Islamist Terror, Mr. President“)
