In remarks made before White House journalists on August 28, 2014 President Barack Obama, officially the Commander-in-Chief of the world’s most powerful military, offered his nation the following status of his leadership in the emerging global struggle with the Islamic State. “We don’t have a strategy yet,” so stated President Obama, with a level of reckless candor that is frankly astonishing.

And what about the Commander-in-Chief of the growing jihadi movement  coalescing under the framework of the caliphate that calls itself the Islamic State? The self-appointed caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, is much too savvy to reveal his grand strategic plan at a public press briefing. However, his public utterances display no ambiguity about his strategic goals and vision: to wage a merciless war of revenge against all the infidels on the planet, the United States  being his number one target. Furthermore, the impressive and swift battlefield successes achieved by the Islamic State over a wide geographic space encompassing  both Syria and Iraq display clear evidence of high-level strategic planning and near-flawless execution. It is unquestionably clear that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, unlike Barack Obama, is not waiting for a strategy to magically be formed; the grand strategy of the Islamic State not only exists; it is being aggressively implemented.

On paper, one could argue, it is inconceivable that the global jihad under the auspices of the Islamic State can defeat the world’s sole remaining superpower. Such rationalization betrays both intellectual conceit and a profound ignorance of history. From the fall of Rome to the Teutonic barbarians to the defeat of the British Empire by American revolutionaries, the historical record is replete with examples of supposedly mightier nations succumbing to numerically and economically inferior opponents on the battlefield. The brutal lesson of history is that very often it is not the side that is more humane and enlightened that prevails. Too often, the inverse is the case, though for reasons only tangentially linked to the display of greater ruthlessness. Strong leadership with a fierce devotion to victory at whatever cost, combined with a high level of strategic and tactical skill, is far more relevant in the martial contest between competing nations and ideologies than the relative level of civilization. Undoubtedly, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is both informed and inspired by what occurred in the century following the death of the Prophet Mohammed; the conquest of the Middle East, Southwest Asia, North Africa and large parts of Southern Europe by Arabian horsemen inspired by an uncompromising religious ideology that offered but one prescription: conquer or die.

With admirable honesty, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel informed the media that, with respect to the Islamic State, “They’re beyond just a terrorist group. They marry ideology, a sophistication of strategic and tactical military prowess. They are tremendously well-funded. Oh, this is beyond anything that we’ve seen. So we must prepare for everything.”

Since Hagel’s brutally frank characterization of the threat posed to the United States, administration officials and pundits have awkwardly attempted to walk back the perceived threat, arguing that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is too focused on operations in Iraq and Syria at present to be in a position to begin targeting the U.S. homeland-as though these people actually have a pipeline into the innermost thoughts of the caliph of the Islamic State. In reality, the U.S. intelligence community, and by extension President Obama and his administration, have no clear idea of the threat America confronts, or the military and operational capacity of the Islamic State. While frantic arguing ensues over the supposed threat of jihadists with European and American passports returning home to commit random acts of violence, has anyone in the policymaking echelon considered that a declared enemy of the United States who has already displayed an impressive level of operational skill is more likely to attack the American homeland in a manner that achieves far greater strategic consequences than merely bombing a subway or bus?

Until and unless the U.S. has leadership that is as determined, disciplined and focused as is found in the newly established caliphate, we may find the 21st century being overwhelmed and subjugated by the 7th century.

If Hillary Clinton runs for President of the United States  in 2016, see the video about the book that warned back in 2008 what a second Clinton presidency would mean for the USA:

CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW VIDEO Hillary Clinton Nude

As the world mark’s the 100th anniversary of the First World War, the self-proclaimed  Caliph of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, made his first public appearance at the Great Al-Nuri Mosque in Mosul, Iraq. In a fiery sermon, the man who claims to be the leader of the first Islamic caliphate since 1924 in effect declared war against the non-Islamic world. Across the globe, especially in Europe and America, his words were greeted with ridicule and scorn.  I would urge a less dismissive and much more analytical response.

Just like the Meccans who fourteen  centuries ago dismissed the Prophet Mohammed, only to later submit to him as the founder of the world’s second largest religious community, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is currently seen as nothing more than a transient figure. This reaction should be tempered by remembrance of a previous dismissal, especially  by American policy makers, when Osama bin Laden issued his fateful fatwa in 1996 declaring war on the United States.

In his sermon,  al-Baghdadi makes clear that the formation of the Islamic Caliphate is merely a means to an end. That end is defined in terms as brutally stark as they are unambiguous: revenge. In the words of the new caliph, “By Allah, we will take revenge! Even if it takes a while, we will take revenge, and every amount of harm against the ummah will be responded to with multitudes more against the perpetrator.” (https://ia902501.us.archive.org/2/items/hym3_22aw/english.pdf)

Who are the targets of al-Baghdadi’s uncompromising hatred? In general terms, he defines them as ” the crusaders and the atheists, and the guards of the Jews!” In addition, those political rulers within the Muslim world who, in his view, are agents of the above enemies, are also included on the target list. This would include advocates within the Islamic world for pluralistic democracy, since this contradicts, in al-Baghdadi’s worldview, the will of Allah, as manifested in Islam’s shariah law.

Much of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s polemic was devoted to annunciating contemporary grievances against the Muslim world which, in his strident mindset, cry out for a powerful vengeance. More than twenty specific references were made in al-Baghdadi’s sermon. Perhaps surprisingly, the Israel-Palestine conflict ranked only seventh on the Caliph’s list, preceded  by references to violence against Muslims in Burma, Kashmir, the Philippines, Bosnia and the Caucasus. The offending states include Russia, India and China, as well France (its sin being laws passed by the nation’s legislature for promoting the separation of church and state, which included restrictions on the wearing of the hijab).  Iran is also singled out as anti-Islamic, its Shiite form of Islamic governance regarded as apostasy and heresy, the most  grievous of all anti-Islamic offenses in the eyes of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and his followers.

In Islamic jurisprudence and shariah texts, holy war or jihad can be conducted against unbelievers and apostates. An extension of this theological rationale for waging war in the name of God is the division of the world into the House of Islam and the House of War, the latter encompassing the unbelievers and apostates. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi  has very dramatically appealed to his followers in a warlike sermon, calling on them to follow him as their leader as he wages war for the propagation of Islam by exacting revenge on the entirety of our planet that falls outside the new Caliph’s definition of the House of Islam.

There will be a tendency to ignore or belittle Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in much of the world. However, irrespective of what one may think of his merciless manner of waging war and general lack of humanity, I think that, looked at objectively, there can be no denying that Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is a remarkably  charismatic and able leader of the international jihadi movement.

Extremist notions in religion are not the monopoly of Islam. In times past, the most savage religious wars have been waged in the name of Christianity. In the seventeenth century  the Thirty-Years War between Protestants and Catholics  wiped out one third of Germany’s population.  In 1850 Hong Xiuquan, a Chinese religious fanatic, became convinced he was the younger brother of Jesus Christ, chosen by God to bring Christianity to China through the sword, and he launched the Taiping Rebellion. When the rebellion was finally suppressed in 1864, between twenty and forty million Chinese were slaughtered, making this religious war the second bloodiest military conflict in history. And that was with weapons that were very primitive by current standards.

The lessons of history itself should compel us to take Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s promise to wage a ferocious worldwide war of vengeance against those he sees as the enemies of God with the utmost seriousness. His sermon in Mosul may very well mark the opening shots of the Third World War, and the most ferocious religious conflict since the Taiping Rebellion.

If Hillary Clinton runs for President of the United States  in 2016, see the video about the book that warned back in 2008 what a second Clinton presidency would mean for the USA:

CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW VIDEO Hillary Clinton Nude