Bill O'Reilly summarizes all of the problems facing American today because of the incompetence in Washington. He could probably add a few more.
Some O'Reilly comments:
Even though President Obama promised to confront ISIS and downgrade it -- that has not happened.So while ISIS is burning human beings alive, Congresswoman Pelosi is concerned about the social media aspect of the struggle.
Harry Reid is blaming congress (Republican-controlled) for not doing more to support Obama against ISIS-->O'Reilly thinks this is crazy because many congressman are wanting a reluctant Obama to do more.
Recently Secretary of State John Kerry met with Putin promising him sanctions would be lifted if he promised to stop seizing more territory. That must have delighted Vlad Putin who I have nicknamed Vlad the invader as he saw once again the U.S.A. desperately trying to appease him.
China -- that country is now expanding in the specific, seizing territory that does not belong to it and developing its military in a dramatic way. China seeks to dominate Southeast Asia and understands it can now expand without any consequence from the West.
Next up: a phony nuke deal with Iran that will empower that villainous country. God help the next president of the United States.
Some people have excitedly sent me emails about the Shemitah (Leviticus 25) and its application to America as a result of reading Jonathan Cahn's book, The Harbinger, and watching him on TV. They believe wholeheartedly in what Cahn is saying, but I am a bit of a "Berean" and want to make sure it is not just a false hermeneutic.
I have been trying to find if there is a biblical basis to Shemitah and other Old Testament prophecies for America today. I am a bit late in reading Jonathan Cahn's the Harbinger. It is not a well-written book, but he tries to build the case for God working in events in America based on a verse in Isaiah and 7 & 50 year cycles related to the jubilee years. America is in trouble but are his interpretations accurate? It is clear that God judges nations, but is America's judgment a result of prophecies in Isaiah written to the nation of Israel or more because we are a nation violating God's moral principles (Romans 1)?
I am also concerned because money and marketing are involved and in addition after doing some internet reading, some people are seeing signs in some strange things like the number "7" on a cow's face. It also strikes me a bit like the old "British Israelism" heresy that was using Old Testament verses to argue the British people descended from Israel and were finding Old Testament verses to support its case.
Here are a couple of people who are questioning his biblical interpretation. These critics may be wrong, but they do point up issues and failures of the 7 year cycle to have any apparent consistent impact looking back into recent history.
This is a pivotal
turning point showing the failure of U.S. policy and also it is a slap in the
face to the U.S. soldiers who died there not to mention the tens of thousands
of Iraqis who have been and will be killed. Here is a summary of reports
on Ramadi’s takeover by ISIS (although it may be more than you want to read).
But it does show a wide consensus among policy analysts that the fall of
Ramadi is a disaster. Everything the administration has said and done is
quickly degenerating in the Middle East.
plenty of criticism that can be leveled against George W. Bush’s decision to
invade Iraq in 2003, but he didn’t deliberately mislead the
country about Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to
solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq
isn’t a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.
as the Islamic State takeover of the capital city of Iraq’s largest province
seemed nearly complete on Sunday, the Pentagoncontinued to arguethat the situation was still “fluid and contested.” That
assessmentwas counteredby reports that “hundreds
of police personnel, soldiers and tribal fighters abandoned the city,” leaving
it and a“large store” of
ISIS hands. The BBCciteda statement “purportedly from IS”
claiming that the city had been “purged.”
was also a development that American officials not only didn’t prefer, but
evidently didn’t see coming a month ago, when a senior U.S. officialtoldForeign Policyit was unlikely that Shiite militias would fight the Islamic
State in Anbar. The Iraqi government’s
growing reliance on Shiite militias to fight ISIS has the potential to
undermine American-trained Iraqi security forces. And the fall of Ramadi
despite a U.S. air campaign aimed at blunting ISIS’s momentum shows the limits
of the American strategy.
A decade later and
after millions of American dollars, thousands of casualties, and seemingly
hundreds of different policies, Iraq is very much broken. Even though he has
boasted of "ending" the U.S. role in the war and even though he
didn't create the situation, Obama very much owns the mess. And he finds
himself on a timetable not of his choosing and very much at odds with his policy.
fair-minded reading of the facts, I think, shows that when Mr. Obama was sworn
in, the Iraq war had more or less been won. Things were fragile to be sure. But
the errors that were made during the occupation of Iraq following the fall of
Saddam, which were extremely costly, were corrected in 2007. That was when
President Bush made what is in my estimation his most impressive decision. In
the face of enormous political opposition, with the nation weary of the war,
Mr. Bush implemented a new counterinsurgency strategy, dubbed the “surge” and
led by the estimable General David Petraeus. It resulted in startling gains.
sum up, then: post-surge, Iraq was making significant progress on virtually
every front. The Obama administration said as much. The president was not
engaged or eager to sign a new SOFA. A full withdrawal was the right decision.
His own top advisers admitted as much. The president had long argued he wanted
all American troops out of Iraq during his presidency, and he got his wish. He
met his goal.
White House on Monday acknowledged the seizure represents a “setback” but
signaled it is unlikely to alter its approach to combatting ISIS, which relies
on U.S.-led airstrikes and training Iraqi security forces to fight the ground
It seems as
though things couldn’t possibly get worse, but they almost certainly will. We
are seeing the fruit of a set of policies that were based on the false premise
that problems in the Middle East are mostly the fault of the United States. Not
only were such policies misbegotten, they have been executed incompetently. The
resulting collapse is occurring with sickening speed.
Islam State on The Defensive, Just not in Ramadi: Foreign Policy. http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/05/18/pentagon-islamic-state-on-the-defensive-just-not-in-ramadi/ The Pentagon spins the situation, but where
do we have ISIL on the “defensive”?—Mosul has also fallen within the past year. What will happen if Baghdad falls? The Pentagon is shifting the blame to Iraqi
leaders, but the administration got rid of all of Bush’s Iraqi leaders for
these guys who they are now saying a bad leaders. Go figure.
The Islamic State’s capture of the Iraqi city of Ramadi is
sparking renewed criticism of Obama administration policies in the region --
from the decision to withdraw virtually all U.S. troops in 2011 to the current
anti-ISIS strategy that relies mostly on airstrikes.
The charges of those opposing Obamacare have finally been proven. The architect, Jonathan Gruber, admits that language was used to mislead about the costs and impact of the law.Watch the video.
Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And, basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really very very critical to get the thing to pass. And, you know, it’s the second best argument. I wish Mark was right we could make this transparent but I would rather have this law than not.”
A book review of "How the UN Became Anti-Israel" by Joshua Muravchik. Can there be any doubt that Israel is the most reviled country in the world today? No other nation engenders as much scorn, whether measured in newspaper column inches, street protests, or computer pixels. The only aspect of the hatred more disturbing than its virulent omnipresence is how out of proportion it is to Israel’s real (and alleged) wrongdoing. North Korea functions as a vast gulag, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad deploys chemical weapons on children, and the Castro brothers have ruled despotically over their Cuban island fiefdom for five decades running, but none of these dictatorial regimes invite anywhere near the scrutiny, never mind spittle-flecked loathing, engendered by the Jewish democratic state. A majority of Europeans, according to polls, consider this tiny country of eight million people to be the greatest threat to world peace. An Israeli soldier fires a rubber bullet in the West Bank and it will generate venomous crowds in cities around the globe; Iranian paramilitary basij forces murder peaceful demonstrators in broad daylight and the world emits barely a peep of protest.
Why the Jewish state generates such disproportionate anger is the subject of Joshua Muravchik’s thorough and careful study,