Are we killing enough jihadis? I don't know if it is enough, but Marie Harf sure enjoys the smell of napalm in the morning, or something.
"We're killing a lot of 'em. And we're going to kill more of them."
Wow. Take it easy, there, old "blood and guts" Harf.
(If the definition of a diplomat is an honorable person sent abroad to lie for their country, the person sent to lie to Americans about our diplomacy is obviously called Marie Harf. Lord, she's annoying.)
But note the glee she expresses when she says we are killing jihadis. Try
to tell me with a straight face that if a Republican had smiled that
way that we wouldn't be told that the person enjoyed bombing brown people.
Oh, right. The hope and change make it okay.
Sure, I have no problem killing jihadis. But I'm a knuckle dragger, right? She has those "I'm totally nuanced, let's put on pajamas, drink hot cocoa, and discuss ISIL" glasses, and everything!
And her statement deserves a foray into effective versus ineffective use of force to defeat jihadis.
Still, I suppose that after 6 years this counts as progress. It wasn't so long ago that the Obama administration ignored
this long-term nature of the war and assured us that al Qaeda was on the
Once, the Obama administration even thought that a nice outreach speech in Cairo and a presidential biography that included eating dog meat as a child growing up in Indonesia would totally disarm the jihadi impulse against us.
I really am a "glass half full" kind of guy.