Last night, Barack Hussein Obama told the American people that they would once again put their sons and daughters lives on the lines for a people who have been unwilling to fight for themselves against an Islamic enemy. Wait, did I say Islamic enemy? I did! And furthermore, this Islamic enemy is made up of Islamists from both Syria and Iraq, not just Iraq. This is exactly why Obama used the term ISIL all during his speech on Wednesday, never once, referencing the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria as ISIS.

So why is this important? Because he is manipulating the public to think this will only concern Iraq and he is also acting as though he has the authority to engage in this type of action.

Dr. Gary North rightly points out:

Here is his problem. ISIS stands for Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. ISIL stands for Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Hardly any American knows what the Levant is. It’s the entire region.

If President Obama were to stick with the acronym ISIS, this would create a huge PR problem. If he calls it the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, this makes it clear that two countries are involved. Therefore, he must commit American forces — but not troops, meaning “boots on the ground” — to war in two nations. One of them is Syria. Until a few months ago, ISIS was regarded by American foreign policy experts as being part of the opposition in Syria — opposition to the government of Syria, which is run by Bashar “Hitler” Assad.

ISIS four months ago was a freedom-fighting organization. Now it is officially a fighting-freedom organization.

…

He calls it ISIL Over the last year, the President has overseen the transfer of money and weapons to ISIS, a freedom-fighting organization in Syria. Now he is going to transfer more money and more weapons to the freedom fighters in Syria, who will use it to fight the ISIL organization, which is fighting-freedom organization.

I hope you understand the difference. You have an obligation to understand the difference. Without this understanding, American foreign policy would look like decision-making by lunatics.

If you didn’t know, the Levant today consists of Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, and part of southern Turkey. This will be an international war.

We are going to continue a permanent state of war that will indebt us and take the lives of America’s defenders, and I ask for what? For a bunch of people that don’t know how to conduct themselves, who think that beheadings, rape and crucifixion is a way of life? I want nothing to do with it.

As far as Islamists go, I would rather deal with those Islamists in our own backyard first before dealing with the Islamists in the front yard of Iraqis and Syrians. In fact, as Bryan Fischer rightly points out, “Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar have all the incentive they need to go after the Islamic State because ISIS is after their oil fields. The reason the king of Saudi Arabia is appealing to us for help is that he doesn’t want to spend his own treasure and blood to protect his oil interests; he wants us to spend ours. No thanks. This mess is in their front yard, and they should form their own coalition and clean it up themselves.”

Don’t get me wrong here, I think we should get our people out of those countries and bring as many Christians with them here for asylum, but we don’t seem to learn our lesson, nor the lessons of history when it comes to the Middle East.

For instance, most people reading this article recognize that Barack Obama despises the United States. Oh, he likes the goodies he is provided in the White House, but he hates America and he hates the Constitution. We also recognize he is in a concerted effort to overwhelm the system, even congressmen recognize this. So what do you think this new war, which is really a continuation of the Bush war will do? That’s right, it’s going to overwhelm the system.

Furthermore, where is Congress on any of this? Have they authorized a declaration of war? Do they even care about following the Constitution? I’m not seeing evidence that they are doing any such thing.

As last I recall, after Obama went into Libya, his Defense Secretary was crawled on the carpet by Rep. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) because he did not get Congressional authorization to do so. Secretary Panetta said he simply needed an international coalition and didn’t acknowledge that he needed Congress’ permission.

Following that little dance, North Carolina Representative Walter Jones (R) put forth a resolution in preparation for a war in Iran. That resolution stated, “That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.”

That resolution never made it out of committee.

Here’s the question I pose: Where is the authorization for Obama to go back into Iraq? He has none. He is acting lawlessly… again. Where is his Congressional authorization (a declaration of war) to be involved in Syria? He doesn’t have any.

Make no mistake. This will not stop with Iraq. Syria is next and it will come at the expense of a financial burden the American people cannot afford and the blood of their sons and daughters. This is a slow motion 9/11 2014 and the Muslim-in-chief is orchestrating it all Hegelian Dialectic style.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration continues to allow illegal aliens into the United States via the Southern Border, quite possibly including members of ISIS.

It’s long past Americans not standing up and openly declaring this administration as a criminal administration with a criminally complicit Congress, but I’ll bet the people on both sides of the aisle will continue to vote the same people in come November because they think their team can do no wrong. God forbid!