McCaul: Terrorist Threat To US Growing Fast

by JASmius

Am I the only one who's noticing a pattern here?:

Representative Mike McCaul, R-TX10, says the terrorist threat facing America is growing and spreading like a web across Africa and the Middle East.

“I believe the threat has become greater, not lesser,” said McCaul, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, on CNN's State of the Union.

The White House has been touting a “false narrative and premise” that al Qaeda is now on the run because Osama bin Laden is dead, he said.

“I personally see it spreading like a spider web, like a wildfire in Africa through the Middle East,” McCaul said.

Indeed it is.  And the Regime is encouraging it, first and foremost because they saw what 9/11 did for President Bush politically.  A presidency that was already fading, his approval numbers dropping below 50%, shot through the roof to 90%+ as Dubya found his defining mission.  A one-term failed presidency was, um, transformed into a successful two-term tenure.  And right now, nobody needs the "rally 'round the flag" effect more that O.  The only question is whether he'd be willing to suppress his distaste and engage in the muscular military action that would cement said effect and permanently change the subject from ObamaCare (to the degree that's possible).

As to Congressman McCaul's remarks on The One's nuclear sellout to Iran, well....

McCaul also said that former aides to President George W. Bush tell him one of the biggest mistakes they made was agreeing to accords with North Korea, which ended up getting nuclear weapons anyway.

"I don't want to see that same mistake happen in Iran," McCaul said Sunday on CNN's State of the Union.

Kinda late for that, I think.

I was taken aback by something said on this subject by another guest, Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA28):

"You can have a peaceful nuclear energy program with no enrichment," Schiff said, adding that Iran wants thousands of centrifuges only for the purpose of "fast breakout capability."

"I wouldn't begin the process by conceding anything on enrichment," Schiff said. Now that they have it, Iran will never lose their bomb-making know-how, he said. The only way to stop them once they build....nuclear weapon[s] is a repeated bombing campaign that might also involve boots on the ground, he said.

Is it not astonishing to hear a Democrat admit this publicly?  Or is it a case of conceding what has always been the case now that we no longer have the military capability of carrying it out?

Regardless, Schiff has things out of order; once the mullahs have nukes (assuming they don't already), what would be the point?  And would we not be deterred from doing so precisely because Tehran had nuclear capability?  The whole point of a sustained bombing campaign and boots on the ground would be to prevent the mullahgarchy from going nuclear; once they have, the genie is out of the bottle and will never go back in.

Which is pretty much already the case.

Exit question: Is Schiff's candor pyrrhic or pre-emptively posthumous?