Last summer started months of what former Vice President Cheney called the Obama administration's dithering over troop levels in Afghanistan. The long delay before President Obama decided to send the additional troops requested by his hand-picked general frustrated many and sent the wrong message to our enemies. He showed a level of decisiveness compatible with that of, to paraphrase former Governor Sarah Palin, a law professor at the lectern not a commander-in-chief. And to paraphrase former President Ronald Reagan, there he goes again.

Continued...

First, President Obama has admitted reconsidering whether the civilian trial of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed should be held in New York City. Then, when asked on Friday about the administration's options for trying the terrorist known as KSM, attorney General Eric Holder and White House spokesman Robert Gibbs would not rule out a military trial. (source)

Mr. Holder's initial announcement months ago that KSM and four of his 9/11 accomplices would be tried in federal court in New York City was met with opposition from Republicans, New York City officials, relatives of 9/11 victims and the majority of the American people. Certainly admitting that decision was a mistake and announcing that KSM and his fellow terrorists would be tried before a military tribunal would have been met with a positive reaction from everyone but those on the ideological far-left. But this "maybe I will and maybe I won't" game the president and his cronies are playing with such a vital component of our national security is, again, sending the wrong message to our enemies.

Representative Peter King (R-New York) who claims the White House has bungled the issue from the start said of the current situation, “What it shows is there was no preparation, no advance work done by the administration. It's one of the most irresponsible decisions anyone has ever made."

This Keystone Cops approach to prosecuting a war is giving Al-Qaeda assurances of our current leadership's weakness and their fear of offending their political base by making the strong decisions on national security.

There have been other examples of this "maybe/maybe not" stance regarding terrorism: the “don't jump to conclusions” reaction to the Fort Hood attack, the reading of Miranda rights to the Underwear Bomber on Christmas Day and of course that dithering last year over the Afghanistan decision. There were suspicions then that President Obama was delaying an announcement of increased troop levels until after the gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia. The thought being he wouldn't want to offend his anti-war base before they went out to vote for the Democratic candidates. But if that was his plan, it didn't work - he did delay and his candidates lost anyway. With this latest round of dithering over how and where KSM and company will be tried, will the president stall again; this time until after November's mid-term elections for the same political reason?

Perhaps the question of whether or not President Obama is indecisive on these matters may, ironically, have two answers. He may not be able to make strong and resolute calls on issues of national security and he may be making decisions swiftly and with purpose based on his own political interests.