Exit question

Allahpundit asks in his post titled "Scarborough: Obama saying he has no strategy against ISIS is a tactic straight out of “The Art of War”

Which chapter of “The Art of War” mentions dithering on whether or not to rescue a hostage who later ends up being murdered by the enemy?

That is Allahpundit's exit question. There is no chapter that address dithering concerning the rescue of a hostage who later ends up being murdered by the enemy. So it cannot be said as Joe Scarborough does say that Obama remarking that he (Obama) has no strategy is a tactic straight out of The Art of War.

Exit answer:

That is a ridiculously specific circumstance to expect to have been addressed by Lao Tsu in 500 bc, however more generally in chapter three, Attack by Stratagem, Lao Tsu does say,

Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; 

And,

Therefore the skillful leader subdues the enemy's troops without any fighting; he captures their cities without laying siege to them; he overthrows their kingdom without lengthy operations in the field. 

What Scarborough had in mind most likely is found in chapter 1, Laying Plans. This is among the most familiar quotations from The Art of War.

All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.

Condensed as:

All warfare is based on deception.

These observations made by a general applying to enemy forces can be understood as applying to allies as well. It can be asked, rightly or not, by a so-called superpower, "why must we always reliably assume the role of policeman for the whole world? Why set up ourselves for 'damned when we do, damned when we don't' attitude by our own allies? Presently this affects you as much and possibly more than it affects us. Pull your own weight." Indeed, why must a U.S. president automatically assume responsibility for forming an international coalition and be the center of that activity, and further be responsible for holding it together to the end? To determine the end, when we see ourselves attacked by our own allies, as we inevitably are. You do it this time.

All the while formulating plans.

We are always formulating plans. To say otherwise is ridiculous. That is what generals do. That is their job all day long. Plans within plans about plans. Twenty-year plans, ten-year plans, five-year plans, one-year plans, six-month plans, next month plans, next week plans, plans for lunch. Layers of generals, all sides of the pentagon, planning every hour of every day, every week, month of the year. They are nothing if not planners. To say "we do not have a plan" is to say "we have not decided conclusively just yet." The elected president may not have settled on his personal plan for immediate action but his generals certainly do have plans, and Lao Tsu was an ancient general not a emperor. The book being referenced is for generals not necessarily for political leaders, heads of political parties. Even so, Scarborough could be correct. Bush II was always similarly underestimated.

Then again...

On the other hand,  search images [Obama eating] There's your guy with a plan. Is it even possible to underestimate this man?

Him?

No wonder people have no confidence in his ability for war planning. All his wars occur to his immediate right. All his wars are with his own citizenry.

Unfair? Try [Reagan eating] you get jelly beans and other monkeyshines, Photoshopped parody images.

[Bush II eating] corn on the cob and Photoshop images of that single photo with a kitten in place of the corn, ha ha, very funny, a crow in place of the corn, eating a baby's head, just more mean-spirited Photoshops, pudding, but not the proper images of adolescent junk food that fills the whole screen as it does with Obama. Both of the Obamas. No, Scarborough is wrong. There is no serious geopolitical planner present in those images, merely a community organizer provided the paraphernalia of high office, the full resources of both supporters and non supporters, and quite active on a national scale.