National security adviser: Term 'radical Islamic terrorism' isn't helpful


#1

(CNN) New national security adviser H.R. McMaster is already setting a strikingly different tone than President Donald Trump, saying the term “radical Islamic terrorism” isn’t helpful for US goals.

On Friday, during his remarks to the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, the President again used the term “radical Islamic terrorists,” as he often did on the campaign trail when criticizing President Barack Obama for not saying it.

However at an all-hands meeting of the National Security Council on Thursday, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster said jihadist terrorists aren’t true to their religion and that the use of the term “radical Islamic terrorism” doesn’t help the US in working with allies to defeat terrorist groups, an official present at the session confirmed to CNN.

McMaster also spoke in starkly different terms about Russia, saying the talk about Moscow being a friend of Washington is over, the source said.

cnn.com/2017/02/25/politics/nsa-radical-islamic-terror-term-unhelpful/


#2

This is yuge!


#3

I would like anyone on the far left (i.e. typical Trump bashers) to show where Islam prohibits terrorism. Please. Show us the central Islamic authority which teaches against terrorism. Please. Show us the discipline that terrorists are subject to in their home countries. Please. Show the world where Islamic governments have withdrawn support for known terrorist organizations. Please. Hint: Ask the government of Israel if you doubt.

This waffling and vacillation has reached surreal proportions. Does anyone seriously doubt that 9/12 is coming?


#4

This is bonkers absurd.


#5

How about political Islam?

Why We Are Afraid, A 1400 Year Secret


#6

I am SOOOOO confused…


#7

For all the concerns about Trump’s “narcissism and thin skin”, he seems to be comfortable working with people that don’t always agree with him.:shrug:


#8

Hard to say that Trump is comfortable. This was his fourth choice. The prior scandal and declinations strengthen McMaster’s hand, not Trump’s


#9

Because McMaster’s, after 40 odd years in the Army doesn’t understand “chain of command” and thinks he’s Trump’s boss?

Don’t get me wrong, I think McMaster’s is an excellent choice. I’ve read a couple of his papers, and the man is incredibly smart. The one from the Staff College on uncertainty in the battlespace when he was LTC McMaster is fantastic. I’ve read that it was this paper that got him passed over for Brigadier General back in 2006, because it’s conclusions really questioned the status quo of the time. He was very fortunate that the Secretary of the Army under W. called in David Petreaus to take over the promotion board to ensure top performers, like McMaster didn’t get cut loose.


#10

I am sure he will not disobey an order. But I also think he knows how to play the political game.


#11

More fake news from CNN & NYT (who also ran this story) with “unnamed sources”? I won’t believe anything they write until I hear it from the man himself. Trump is smart enough to allow people with their own minds into his camp, but I think everyone knows Trump has the last word.


#12

Then you can’t believe Trump.

abcnews.go.com/Politics/bashes-anonymous-sources-trump/story?id=45715113

rawstory.com/2017/02/anderson-cooper-calls-out-donald-trump-for-citing-anonymous-sources-before-railing-against-them/


#13

Anyone who makes General is a skilled politician.


#14

The term is obviously controversial


#15

Why are we getting leaks from a National Security Council meeting?

While the term is not helpful when used frequently, I do think there are times when it is appropriate. Big difference between using it too much and refusing to use it in the face of blatant terrorist attacks.


#16

I can believe Trump or at least I can pick and choose what I believe and don’t believe, like anyone else.

I live in NYC and saw people cheering when the World Trade Centers came down.

Trump is not a journalist and he’s not the media, there’s a difference. Journalist and the media should back up published information. CNN and NYT have published probably at least one fake news story a day.


#17

More saliently though did you see people in NYC cheer? That was I believe the original claim with regards to cheering.


#18

:thumbsup:


#19

I believe in God. For mundane things, I expect proof.

CNN and NYT have published probably at least one fake news story a day.

Like this. Anything to back this up? Choosing to believe made up stuff marks you.


#20

CNN is Clinton’s News Network. And you say they are criticizing the President again? Boy, that is news now isn’t it?


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.