The real truth behind Obama's 62 country anti-ISIS coalition is really, really depressing

March 31, 2015

Radio Clips

The Glenn Beck Program

ISIS has been pretty busy lately…

“ISIS' explosive expansion”

“ISIS' threats, Americans' fears growing”

“Islamic State is 'most potent threat to the world since Third Reich' says Nobel Prize winner”

That’s funny, I also think Glenn Beck said that…years ago. But he doesn’t have a Nobel Prize.

Can you imagine the damage ISIS could do if they were the Varsity team? Thank goodness they’re only the JV team.

But we really shouldn’t be worried.

John Kerry and his friends have gotten together to come up with a solution: A “core coalition” to stop ISIS.

It is interesting that our Secretary of State made a point to say that the “over” 62 countries and entities that are teaming up with us against terrorism is not “cosmetic.” I wonder why he would say something like that.

I thought it might be useful to check up on those countries and see what exactly they are doing to “degrade and defeat ISIL or DASH or ISIS or whatever.”

Here are the countries that have actually done some stuff:

Iraq: Ok, they’re in the thick of it. It’s their country. That’s not to say they have done enough. If they had done enough, they wouldn’t need us. However, one of their big contributions according to The Washington Post is requesting military airstrikes from the United States.

We also know that Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE have participated in airstrikes.

Our next category is “Countries that have done a little bit.”

France: Bombed a warehouse occupied by the Islamic State in Iraq and has vowed to take part in future airstrikes “if needed.” Also, they really don’t think we should be calling ISIS “the Islamic State” even though that is their name. Typical France.

Germany: Has sent 40 paratroopers to Iraq.

Now look, I don’t want to demean even one soldier being sent. These are real lives. But we’re talking about countries the size of Canada and Germany here. They’re sending about as many people as Subway gets during lunch hour.

Denmark: Isn’t bombing anyone, but they did Provide a transport aircraft. So they’re sort of like the Orbitz of this battle.

Italy: Italy has no plans to take part in airstrikes but has offered to aid in the refueling of planes instead. They’re kind of like the Sunoco of this battle.

The next category of the coalition is “Countries that have sent some stuff”

United Kingdom: Gifted $1.6 million of weapons and ammunition. Plus, Prime Minister David Cameron has not ruled out contributing to U.S.-led airstrikes in the future.

Thank you for not ruling out your future helping, that is so thoughtful.

Turkey: More than 100 trucks of humanitarian aid has been sent to Turkmen in Northern Iraq. So they’re probably sending 101 trucks.

Slovakia: And look, I don’t think Slovakia is loaded, they’re not the rich guys on the block. But we’re counting Slovakia as part of this coalition and they have donated $25,000 in aid or roughly the price of a brand new Kia Optima.

Qatar: Sent 300 tons of humanitarian aid to Iraq. And they also passed a new law to stop charities diverting money towards the Islamic State. Which apparently was happening.

Norway: Norway is part of the coalition is part of the coalition because they contributed some blankets and kitchen sets. This is a great donation because it works for a war or if you’re playing house.

Our next category is…“Countries that have said some stuff”

They haven’t done anything, but they have said things and that makes them part of the coalition.

Georgia: The defense minister said officials “fully support what the United States is doing to eradicate these barbarians.”

I’d rather have that than “I fully support what these barbarians are doing.”

Kosovo: The Prime Minister posted on Facebook that they are part of the “emerging global alliance to fight a great evil.” It’s a Facebook post, but a strongly worded Facebook post. I “like” it.

Finland: Will “concentrate on delivering humanitarian aid to people in desperate need.” Sounds a little more like a charity and less like an army.

Taiwan: Said it would “cooperate closely with the international community to provide humanitarian aid and will “monitor the threat to global security” and will If Taiwan is monitoring, we should be all set.

And these are the countries that have an “unspecified commitment” but are nonetheless counted as part of the coalition AKA “Countries that haven’t done anything”

For example...

Andorra, which doesn’t have an army, and relies on France for protection.

Bosnia is shaped like a heart. Very intimidating.

Lithuania is the only country in the world with an official scent. If it’s not pork scent—I’m not sure it’s going to scare ISIS.

Macedonia is reminiscent of sets from the Lord of the Rings so maybe it can bore terrorists to death.

Malta is a 122 square mile island.

Mexico can send their chupacabras to defeat ISIS, so they actually have something there.

Moldova is the poorest country in Europe.

Serbia is the largest exporter of raspberries—maybe fruit ISIS to death.

Slovenia has one of the largest brown bear populations in Europe. To their credit, bears are pretty scary.

Tunisia is doomed to fall to ISIS, so they can’t help us.

Ukraine is pretty much Russia now, so they have their own problems.

Morocco is one of the largest producers of hashish and cannabis—so they might not be the most focused on ISIS.

Portugal produces half of the world’s cork—I bet they can make some badass cork guns.

And there you have it. Obama’s core coalition.

Hm. I’m not an expert on combating terrorism, but I don’t think you assemble a team to degrade and destroy ISIS with players that haven’t even expressed any interest in playing and really have nothing to offer.

It’s kind of embarrassing, actually.

What’s most amazing about all of this is the lack of interest from the media. When the Bush’s “Coalition of the Willing” invaded Iraq, every news broadcast mocked the rag tag group of countries and comedians thought it was just hilarious.

Where are you Will Ferrell, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Dave Chappelle?

At least back in the Iraq days, they used to say it was just the United States and the UK. This time, the UK has just “not ruled out to contributing airstrikes in the future.”

Perhaps this time, they truly are enthralled by and supportive of the war coalition put together by this Nobel Peace Prize Winning president.

So to review:

-MORE THAN 82% OF THE COALITION IS SENDING 0 TROOPS AND FLYING 0 MISSIONS.

-14 COUNTRIES ARE IN THE COALITION BECAUSE THEY’VE SAID SOMETHING POSITIVE ABOUT THE COALITION.

-13 COUNTRIES ARE IN THE COALITION FOR NO DISCERNABLE REASON WHATSOEVER.

-WE’RE GLAD TO HAVE ALL THEIR SUPPORT, BUT I DOUBT THE ISLAMIC STATE IS GOING TO BE STOPPED BY A FACEBOOK POST. EVEN IF IT’S STRONGLY WORDED.

So, you heard we're fighting ISIS, with a giant mega-coalition. We're sure not going-it-alone, I tellya. What is our coalition made up of? Where is the media asking these questions anyway? Watch in horror.
Posted by Stu Burguiere on Tuesday, March 31, 2015

URGENT: Supreme Court case could redefine religious liberty

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

The state is effectively silencing professionals who dare speak truths about gender and sexuality, redefining faith-guided speech as illegal.

This week, free speech is once again on the line before the U.S. Supreme Court. At stake is whether Americans still have the right to talk about faith, morality, and truth in their private practice without the government’s permission.

The case comes out of Colorado, where lawmakers in 2019 passed a ban on what they call “conversion therapy.” The law prohibits licensed counselors from trying to change a minor’s gender identity or sexual orientation, including their behaviors or gender expression. The law specifically targets Christian counselors who serve clients attempting to overcome gender dysphoria and not fall prey to the transgender ideology.

The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The law does include one convenient exception. Counselors are free to “assist” a person who wants to transition genders but not someone who wants to affirm their biological sex. In other words, you can help a child move in one direction — one that is in line with the state’s progressive ideology — but not the other.

Think about that for a moment. The state is saying that a counselor can’t even discuss changing behavior with a client. Isn’t that the whole point of counseling?

One‑sided freedom

Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor in Colorado Springs, has been one of the victims of this blatant attack on the First Amendment. Chiles has dedicated her practice to helping clients dealing with addiction, trauma, sexuality struggles, and gender dysphoria. She’s also a Christian who serves patients seeking guidance rooted in biblical teaching.

Before 2019, she could counsel minors according to her faith. She could talk about biblical morality, identity, and the path to wholeness. When the state outlawed that speech, she stopped. She followed the law — and then she sued.

Her case, Chiles v. Salazar, is now before the Supreme Court. Justices heard oral arguments on Tuesday. The question: Is counseling a form of speech or merely a government‑regulated service?

If the court rules the wrong way, it won’t just silence therapists. It could muzzle pastors, teachers, parents — anyone who believes in truth grounded in something higher than the state.

Censored belief

I believe marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God. I believe that family — mother, father, child — is central to His design for humanity.

I believe that men and women are created in God’s image, with divine purpose and eternal worth. Gender isn’t an accessory; it’s part of who we are.

I believe the command to “be fruitful and multiply” still stands, that the power to create life is sacred, and that it belongs within marriage between a man and a woman.

And I believe that when we abandon these principles — when we treat sex as recreation, when we dissolve families, when we forget our vows — society fractures.

Are those statements controversial now? Maybe. But if this case goes against Chiles, those statements and others could soon be illegal to say aloud in public.

Faith on trial

In Colorado today, a counselor cannot sit down with a 15‑year‑old who’s struggling with gender identity and say, “You were made in God’s image, and He does not make mistakes.” That is now considered hate speech.

That’s the “freedom” the modern left is offering — freedom to affirm, but never to question. Freedom to comply, but never to dissent. The same movement that claims to champion tolerance now demands silence from anyone who disagrees. The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The real test

No matter what happens at the Supreme Court, we cannot stop speaking the truth. These beliefs aren’t political slogans. For me, they are the product of years of wrestling, searching, and learning through pain and grace what actually leads to peace. For us, they are the fundamental principles that lead to a flourishing life. We cannot balk at standing for truth.

Maybe that’s why God allows these moments — moments when believers are pushed to the wall. They force us to ask hard questions: What is true? What is worth standing for? What is worth dying for — and living for?

If we answer those questions honestly, we’ll find not just truth, but freedom.

The state doesn’t grant real freedom — and it certainly isn’t defined by Colorado legislators. Real freedom comes from God. And the day we forget that, the First Amendment will mean nothing at all.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck joins Megyn Kelly LIVE — One night ONLY in Fort Worth!

Get ready for sparks to fly. For the first time in years, Glenn will come face-to-face with Megyn Kelly — and this time, he’s the one in the hot seat. On October 25, 2025, at Dickies Arena in Fort Worth, Texas, Glenn joins Megyn on her “Megyn Kelly Live Tour” for a no-holds-barred conversation that promises laughs, surprises, and maybe even a few uncomfortable questions.

What will happen when two of America’s sharpest voices collide under the spotlight? Will Glenn finally reveal the major announcement he’s been teasing on the radio for weeks? You’ll have to be there to find out.

This promises to be more than just an interview — it’s a live showdown packed with wit, honesty, and the kind of energy you can only feel if you are in the room. Tickets are selling fast, so don’t miss your chance to see Glenn like you’ve never seen him before.

Get your tickets NOW at www.MegynKelly.com before they’re gone!

What our response to Israel reveals about us

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

I have been honored to receive the Defender of Israel Award from Prime Minister Netanyahu.

The Jerusalem Post recently named me one of the strongest Christian voices in support of Israel.

And yet, my support is not blind loyalty. It’s not a rubber stamp for any government or policy. I support Israel because I believe it is my duty — first as a Christian, but even if I weren’t a believer, I would still support her as a man of reason, morality, and common sense.

Because faith isn’t required to understand this: Israel’s existence is not just about one nation’s survival — it is about the survival of Western civilization itself.

It is a lone beacon of shared values in the Middle East. It is a bulwark standing against radical Islam — the same evil that seeks to dismantle our own nation from within.

And my support is not rooted in politics. It is rooted in something simpler and older than politics: a people’s moral and historical right to their homeland, and their right to live in peace.

Israel has that right — and the right to defend herself against those who openly, repeatedly vow her destruction.

Let’s make it personal: if someone told me again and again that they wanted to kill me and my entire family — and then acted on that threat — would I not defend myself? Wouldn’t you? If Hamas were Canada, and we were Israel, and they did to us what Hamas has done to them, there wouldn’t be a single building left standing north of our border. That’s not a question of morality.

That’s just the truth. All people — every people — have a God-given right to protect themselves. And Israel is doing exactly that.

My support for Israel’s right to finish the fight against Hamas comes after eighty years of rejected peace offers and failed two-state solutions. Hamas has never hidden its mission — the eradication of Israel. That’s not a political disagreement.

That’s not a land dispute. That is an annihilationist ideology. And while I do not believe this is America’s war to fight, I do believe — with every fiber of my being — that it is Israel’s right, and moral duty, to defend her people.

Criticism of military tactics is fair. That’s not antisemitism. But denying Israel’s right to exist, or excusing — even celebrating — the barbarity of Hamas? That’s something far darker.

We saw it on October 7th — the face of evil itself. Women and children slaughtered. Babies burned alive. Innocent people raped and dragged through the streets. And now, to see our own fellow citizens march in defense of that evil… that is nothing short of a moral collapse.

If the chants in our streets were, “Hamas, return the hostages — Israel, stop the bombing,” we could have a conversation.

But that’s not what we hear.

What we hear is open sympathy for genocidal hatred. And that is a chasm — not just from decency, but from humanity itself. And here lies the danger: that same hatred is taking root here — in Dearborn, in London, in Paris — not as horror, but as heroism. If we are not vigilant, the enemy Israel faces today will be the enemy the free world faces tomorrow.

This isn’t about politics. It’s about truth. It’s about the courage to call evil by its name and to say “Never again” — and mean it.

And you don’t have to open a Bible to understand this. But if you do — if you are a believer — then this issue cuts even deeper. Because the question becomes: what did God promise, and does He keep His word?

He told Abraham, “I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you.” He promised to make Abraham the father of many nations and to give him “the whole land of Canaan.” And though Abraham had other sons, God reaffirmed that promise through Isaac. And then again through Isaac’s son, Jacob — Israel — saying: “The land I gave to Abraham and Isaac I give to you and to your descendants after you.”

That’s an everlasting promise.

And from those descendants came a child — born in Bethlehem — who claimed to be the Savior of the world. Jesus never rejected His title as “son of David,” the great King of Israel.

He said plainly that He came “for the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” And when He returns, Scripture says He will return as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah.” And where do you think He will go? Back to His homeland — Israel.

Tamir Kalifa / Stringer | Getty Images

And what will He find when He gets there? His brothers — or his brothers’ enemies? Will the roads where He once walked be preserved? Or will they lie in rubble, as Gaza does today? If what He finds looks like the aftermath of October 7th, then tell me — what will be my defense as a Christian?

Some Christians argue that God’s promises to Israel have been transferred exclusively to the Church. I don’t believe that. But even if you do, then ask yourself this: if we’ve inherited the promises, do we not also inherit the land? Can we claim the birthright and then, like Esau, treat it as worthless when the world tries to steal it?

So, when terrorists come to slaughter Israelis simply for living in the land promised to Abraham, will we stand by? Or will we step forward — into the line of fire — and say,

“Take me instead”?

Because this is not just about Israel’s right to exist.

It’s about whether we still know the difference between good and evil.

It’s about whether we still have the courage to stand where God stands.

And if we cannot — if we will not — then maybe the question isn’t whether Israel will survive. Maybe the question is whether we will.

America’s moral erosion: How we were conditioned to accept the unthinkable

MATHIEU LEWIS-ROLLAND / Contributor | Getty Images

Every time we look away from lawlessness, we tell the next mob it can go a little further.

Chicago, Portland, and other American cities are showing us what happens when the rule of law breaks down. These cities have become openly lawless — and that’s not hyperbole.

When a governor declares she doesn’t believe federal agents about a credible threat to their lives, when Chicago orders its police not to assist federal officers, and when cartels print wanted posters offering bounties for the deaths of U.S. immigration agents, you’re looking at a country flirting with anarchy.

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic.

This isn’t a matter of partisan politics. The struggle we’re watching now is not between Democrats and Republicans. It’s between good and evil, right and wrong, self‑government and chaos.

Moral erosion

For generations, Americans have inherited a republic based on law, liberty, and moral responsibility. That legacy is now under assault by extremists who openly seek to collapse the system and replace it with something darker.

Antifa, well‑financed by the left, isn’t an isolated fringe any more than Occupy Wall Street was. As with Occupy, big money and global interests are quietly aligned with “anti‑establishment” radicals. The goal is disruption, not reform.

And they’ve learned how to condition us. Twenty‑five years ago, few Americans would have supported drag shows in elementary schools, biological males in women’s sports, forced vaccinations, or government partnerships with mega‑corporations to decide which businesses live or die. Few would have tolerated cartels threatening federal agents or tolerated mobs doxxing political opponents. Yet today, many shrug — or cheer.

How did we get here? What evidence convinced so many people to reverse themselves on fundamental questions of morality, liberty, and law? Those long laboring to disrupt our republic have sought to condition people to believe that the ends justify the means.

Promoting “tolerance” justifies women losing to biological men in sports. “Compassion” justifies harboring illegal immigrants, even violent criminals. Whatever deluded ideals Antifa espouses is supposed to somehow justify targeting federal agents and overturning the rule of law. Our culture has been conditioned for this moment.

The buck stops with us

That’s why the debate over using troops to restore order in American cities matters so much. I’ve never supported soldiers executing civilian law, and I still don’t. But we need to speak honestly about what the Constitution allows and why. The Posse Comitatus Act sharply limits the use of the military for domestic policing. The Insurrection Act, however, exists for rare emergencies — when federal law truly can’t be enforced by ordinary means and when mobs, cartels, or coordinated violence block the courts.

Even then, the Constitution demands limits: a public proclamation ordering offenders to disperse, transparency about the mission, a narrow scope, temporary duration, and judicial oversight.

Soldiers fight wars. Cops enforce laws. We blur that line at our peril.

But we also cannot allow intimidation of federal officers or tolerate local officials who openly obstruct federal enforcement. Both extremes — lawlessness on one side and militarization on the other — endanger the republic.

The only way out is the Constitution itself. Protect civil liberty. Enforce the rule of law. Demand transparency. Reject the temptation to justify any tactic because “our side” is winning. We’ve already seen how fear after 9/11 led to the Patriot Act and years of surveillance.

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic. The left cannot be allowed to shut down enforcement, and the right cannot be allowed to abandon constitutional restraint.

The real threat to the republic isn’t just the mobs or the cartels. It’s us — citizens who stop caring about truth and constitutional limits. Anything can be justified when fear takes over. Everything collapses when enough people decide “the ends justify the means.”

We must choose differently. Uphold the rule of law. Guard civil liberties. And remember that the only way to preserve a government of, by, and for the people is to act like the people still want it.