Much has been made recently about the controversy surrounding the US military burning the Koran in Afghanistan, the Afghani response to it and President Obama’s apology for the whole thing.

The US military is accused of burning the Muslim holy book, the Koran. Virtually no press or coverage has been expended on why the U.S. military would have done such a thing. Has the general public been left to think that perhaps this was a wanton, indiscriminate act of reckless, disrespectful destruction on the part of our military? Has a reason been given by the Mainstream Media as to why this occurred?

Apparently, our military had reason to believe that Al Qaeda operatives were exchanging clandestine messages written in these Korans, so we confiscated them. The military then asked Muslim religious officials for their recommendation as to the proper way to dispose of them. The military was told by Muslim clerics that burning was a proper method of disposal, along with burying the items in the ground, wrapped in a shroud. One can only presume that the military thought that burying them whole didn’t offer a sure enough method to prevent their reclamation and reuse—terrorist messages intact—so they opted for the equally-acceptable method of burning.

It was very hard to find a mainstream Western news report where it said that the very act of writing in the Koran—as the Al Qaeda operatives supposedly did—also constitutes an act of desecration, with commensurately severe punishment.

So once again, the U.S. military is presented by the President and the liberal media as the villain, having committed unprovoked acts of insolence and unjustified arrogance. If ever the over-used, misplaced phrase “taken out of context” applies, it is here.

But President Obama, true to his well-shown behavioral pattern of weakness and disdain for all things military, apologizes to the world for his military’s actions. He doesn’t attempt to put the entire matter into perspective, to try to explain how and why this might have occurred, to get the full story from his military people on the ground before he says, essentially, “We’re wrong, we’re weak, we apologize, please forgive us, and we’re leaving your country as fast as I can get us out of there.”

Then several Administration officials—Hillary Clinton included—fell over each other with apologies in rapid succession, one after the other.

“We’re sorry.”
“No, we’re sorry.”
“No, we’re really sorry.”

Was there an actual episode here for which to apologize? We took our actions because we thought there was terrorist communications activity. We took these actions to protect the lives and well-being of other Americans, based on our interpretation of the information as we understood it at the time. To hear the news reports, one would think the U.S. military just arbitrarily decided to disgrace some highly-sensitive religious material for fun.

This matter appears to provide further evidence that President Obama’s “default mode,” so to speak, is to presume that the U.S. is at fault, that we’re in the wrong, that the norm, the rule—not the exception—is that our actions and responses are to be questioned and their motives doubted.

There is a fine line between confidence and national pride on the one hand and arrogance and unbridled hubris on the other hand. Seeing how George W. Bush’s Southern ‘Cowboy’ aura and lone wolf demeanor played so poorly to the soft, delicate, oh-so-sophisticated Western European sensibilities, President Obama has gone out of his way to portray America and the office of President as being incredibly cognizant and sensitive to the perceptions of the rest of the world. “American exceptionalism is no different than British exceptionalism or Greek exceptionalism,” he said early in his term (never dreaming, obviously, how incredibly ironic the “Greek” example would become.)

But there is just as fine a line between sensitivity and awareness on one hand and the perception of weakness, indecision, and otiosity on the other.

Americans want a leader who inspires pride in their country and a can-do attitude, not a humorless national misanthrope who is constantly asking for the forgiveness of others for ills more imagined than real.

Will any of this matter come Election Day? It’s doubtful. If remembered in November at all, this incident will be blithely dismissed by those who are firmly supportive of President Obama, just as those who oppose him will see this as yet further proof of his unfitness for high office.

Comments