Author Topic: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq  (Read 4733 times)

dario73

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
  • Getbig!
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #25 on: June 16, 2014, 06:15:52 AM »
And as usual the leftist ignore the fact that their messiah was wrong again in his assesment of the situation in Iraq. Much like he was wrong about Russia.

They seem to ignore a very important trend here. That the crapinthewhitehouse doesn't know what he is doing or what he is talking about when it comes to foreign relations.

Vince G, CSN MFT

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 25737
  • GETBIG3.COM!
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #26 on: June 16, 2014, 06:28:55 AM »
And as usual the leftist ignore the fact that their messiah was wrong again in his assesment of the situation in Iraq. Much like he was wrong about Russia.

They seem to ignore a very important trend here. That the crapinthewhitehouse doesn't know what he is doing or what he is talking about when it comes to foreign relations.


We got 2 aircraft carriers parked outside of Iraq and plenty of fighter jets.  Let the Iraqi citizens do the ground work because the minute they start beating some ass and cutting off some heads, those insurgents will disappear.  They'll only mess with people who won't fight back
A

Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6803
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #27 on: June 16, 2014, 06:33:12 AM »
I don't give a shit if Iraq falls....its not our problem and it was stable until Bush had the novel idea to invade for "weapons of mass destruction". 


However, Obama did the right thing by refusing to send troops because its forced Iraq to grow some balls.  The Ayatollah spoke and now you got about 200,000 armed and crazy civilians rushing out to confront them and beat their asses into the ground....they even got the little kids armed and stated that once they capture the insurgents that they are going to chop off all of their heads.


Let them have a go at it....that's what the US soldiers have been saying all along


The resident dumbass speaks.......

Just fuck it right, all the lives lost, just pack it up and let it all be for nothing ::), but as long as you can assign blame to Bush its all good.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Vince G, CSN MFT

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 25737
  • GETBIG3.COM!
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #28 on: June 16, 2014, 07:19:12 AM »
The resident dumbass speaks.......

Just fuck it right, all the lives lost, just pack it up and let it all be for nothing ::), but as long as you can assign blame to Bush its all good.


So we should continue to die for their country????  Fuck that shit.  They were told to grow a pair and they finally grew some....the minute they chop some heads off and beat some ass, the better they will be off. 

In school, the bully always picks on kids that he knows won't fight back.   

A

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #29 on: June 16, 2014, 07:25:45 AM »

So we should continue to die for their country????  Fuck that shit.  They were told to grow a pair and they finally grew some....the minute they chop some heads off and beat some ass, the better they will be off. 

In school, the bully always picks on kids that he knows won't fight back.   



maybe O-twink should go show them some muscle and how its done right? 

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #30 on: June 16, 2014, 07:29:14 AM »
The resident dumbass speaks.......

Just fuck it right, all the lives lost, just pack it up and let it all be for nothing ::), but as long as you can assign blame to Bush its all good.

As far as i am concerned BUSH is to blame for most of this.

He led the charge to invade.

He led it based on cherry picked intel and war fever

He allowed the worse post invasion plan in history

The place was far better off with Saddam.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #31 on: June 16, 2014, 07:33:25 AM »
As far as i am concerned BUSH is to blame for most of this.

He led the charge to invade.

He led it based on cherry picked intel and war fever

He allowed the worse post invasion plan in history

The place was far better off with Saddam.



Bullshit - the country was stablilized for years while we had some type of prescence there.   Obama has been president who what 6 years now?  Obama said he knew how to deal with this better than W and the results speak for themselves. 

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #32 on: June 16, 2014, 08:22:26 AM »
Bullshit - the country was stablilized for years while we had some type of prescence there.   Obama has been president who what 6 years now?  Obama said he knew how to deal with this better than W and the results speak for themselves. 

Nope.

We should have never went in there.  And when we did we fucked it up.

OB got handed a turd.

And then, the only real way to make sure things would have been stable there was to keep troops there, which OB shouldn't and didn't do.

Hence:  mostly Bush to blame. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #33 on: June 16, 2014, 08:31:48 AM »
Nope.

We should have never went in there.  And when we did we fucked it up.

OB got handed a turd.

And then, the only real way to make sure things would have been stable there was to keep troops there, which OB shouldn't and didn't do.

Hence:  mostly Bush to blame. 


Whether we should or should not have been there is meaningless.  a true leader accepts the situation and improves it - Obama made it worse, far worse.  In 2008-2009 Iraq was not in turmoil even close to what we see now that Obama has gotten his policies implemented.  Remember - he ran on this and the results speak for itself.

You voted for him 2x and he failed miserable.  Own up to it already

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #34 on: June 16, 2014, 08:38:07 AM »

Whether we should or should not have been there is meaningless.  a true leader accepts the situation and improves it - Obama made it worse, far worse.  In 2008-2009 Iraq was not in turmoil even close to what we see now that Obama has gotten his policies implemented.  Remember - he ran on this and the results speak for itself.

You voted for him 2x and he failed miserable.  Own up to it already

Doesn't matter.

If i ram a truck into a nuclear power plant causing a melt down and spend the next 5 years trying to fix something that will not be fixed and then someone else takes over, seals it up the best they can, but a few years later it starts leaking again, doesn't put that person in fault.   the person who crash the truck is still to blame.

OB couldn't and shouldn't have left troops in there.  On top of that, after it NOT being about WMD's, and then being about "democracy" we needed to leave and them deal with it.

Which brings us to the point:  We should have never crashed our truck in there to begin with.

dario73

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
  • Getbig!
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #35 on: June 16, 2014, 08:44:50 AM »
Doesn't matter.

Which brings us to the point:  We should have never crashed our truck in there to begin with.

So you must really hate Hillary and Biden for voting in favor of the invasion.

I am sure that based on that you won't vote for Hitlery or Biden. Right? ::)

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #36 on: June 16, 2014, 08:52:02 AM »
So you must really have Hillary and Biden for voting in favor of the invasion.

I am sure that based on that you won't vote for Hitlery or Biden. Right? ::)

Not at all.  

I was against it when it happened.  Wasn't a supporter of Hilly or Biden then or now.

It's easy to see why all those dems voted for it.  To not vote for it would have been political suicide with the war fever in this country at the time.

You know someday Dario, you'll wake up and see that the whole dem vs rep thing is more of a puppet show.

We should have never invaded Iraq, even if we did find WMD's.  Anybody with even a little bit of intelligence could see that big picture.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #37 on: June 16, 2014, 09:04:37 AM »
Not at all.  

I was against it when it happened.  Wasn't a supporter of Hilly or Biden then or now.

It's easy to see why all those dems voted for it.  To not vote for it would have been political suicide with the war fever in this country at the time.

You know someday Dario, you'll wake up and see that the whole dem vs rep thing is more of a puppet show.

We should have never invaded Iraq, even if we did find WMD's.  Anybody with even a little bit of intelligence could see that big picture.

That was 10 years ago.  Obama promised that if we followed his plan things would get better.  You voted for him based on those promises.  Things are drastically worse now that he has gotten his way. 


OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #38 on: June 16, 2014, 09:10:09 AM »
That was 10 years ago.  Obama promised that if we followed his plan things would get better.  You voted for him based on those promises.  Things are drastically worse now that he has gotten his way. 



I didn't vote for him, most people didn't vote for him for those promises, most people voted against McCain as well as Romney (both turds)

Bush got us into the mess.

If i take a Machete and hack your arm off and 5 years latter its still bleeding because it can never be stopped unless you keep a doctor there all the time
 are you going to blame the doctor for you bleeding stump or me?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #39 on: June 16, 2014, 09:14:15 AM »
I didn't vote for him, most people didn't vote for him for those promises, most people voted against McCain as well as Romney (both turds)

Bush got us into the mess.

If i take a Machete and hack your arm off and 5 years latter its still bleeding because it can never be stopped unless you keep a doctor there all the time
 are you going to blame the doctor for you bleeding stump or me?

Straw Man argument as Obama ran on things getting BETTER if we followed his plan. 

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #40 on: June 16, 2014, 09:19:45 AM »
Straw Man argument as Obama ran on things getting BETTER if we followed his plan. 

Look, that piece of shit, arrogant, wanna be president fuck face, is at fault for a great many things.

But not Iraq. That "mostly" falls on Bush.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #41 on: June 16, 2014, 09:26:05 AM »
Look, that piece of shit, arrogant, wanna be president fuck face, is at fault for a great many things.

But not Iraq. That "mostly" falls on Bush.

I think that he ran on an anti war platform , however, the facts on the ground should have made him more responsible and realize that just pulling out on a dime like that was guaranteed to result in what has happened.   He was too afraid to piss off his radical base in 2012 and now we see the results. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #42 on: June 16, 2014, 09:30:58 AM »
Revealed: How Obama SET FREE the merciless terrorist warlord now leading the ISIS (short)
MailOnline ^  | Published: 10:55 EST, 13 June 2014 | Updated: 14:20 EST, 13 June 2014 Read more: http://www.dailym | By Francesca Chambers

Posted on ‎6‎/‎16‎/‎2014‎ ‎12‎:‎27‎:‎11‎ ‎PM by F15Eagle

Islamic State of Iraq and al-Shams (ISIS) leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi in custody at a detention facility in Iraq, but president Barack Obama let him go, it was revealed on Friday.

Al Baghdadi was among the prisoners released in 2009 from the U.S.'s now-closed Camp Bucca near Umm Qasr in Iraq.

But now five years later he is leading the army of ruthless extremists bearing down on Baghdad who want to turn the country into an Islamist state by blazing a bloody trail through towns and cities, executing Iraqi soldiers, beheading police officers and gunning down innocent civilians.

It is unclear why the U.S. let the merciless al Qaeda leader slip away, however, one theory proposed by The Telegraph is that al Baghadadi was granted amnesty along with thousands of other detainees because the U.S. was preparing to pull out of Iraq.

The United States began withdrawing troops from Iraq in 2010,and Camp Bucca closed in 2011 along with the United States' other military facilities as President Obama declared that the War in Iraq had come to an end.


(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22729
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #43 on: June 16, 2014, 09:35:06 AM »
I think that he ran on an anti war platform , however, the facts on the ground should have made him more responsible and realize that just pulling out on a dime like that was guaranteed to result in what has happened.   He was too afraid to piss off his radical base in 2012 and now we see the results. 

He didn't pull out on a dime.  It took over 2 years.

Additionally, we couldn't afford to be there any longer, they didn't want us there, and american citizens wanted our troops to come home.

Crazy, though, 5 years after "Mission Accomplished".

Do you think we should have stayed?

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63777
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #44 on: June 16, 2014, 10:18:32 AM »
Bullshit - the country was stablilized for years while we had some type of prescence there.   Obama has been president who what 6 years now?  Obama said he knew how to deal with this better than W and the results speak for themselves. 

I agree with this.

dario73

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
  • Getbig!
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #45 on: June 16, 2014, 10:48:30 AM »
That was 10 years ago.  Obama promised that if we followed his plan things would get better.  You voted for him based on those promises.  Things are drastically worse now that he has gotten his way.  



Leftists made it look like he could improve relations between us and mooslims because at some point he had read the Koran or some other crap reason they came up with.

It must be painful for all those delusional, low information voters to realize that their messiah is a fraud. However, that won't keep them from repeating the same mistake by voting for Hitlery.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63777
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #46 on: June 16, 2014, 10:50:11 AM »
What difference do Benghazi, Iran and Iraq make now?
Dan Miller's Blog ^  | June 13, 2014 | Dan Miller

Posted on ‎6‎/‎13‎/‎2014‎ ‎2‎:‎28‎:‎56‎ ‎PM by DanMiller

As the United States of Obama belatedly mumbles about getting slightly re-involved in the Iraq mess and Iran gets massively involved, the Benghazi clusterdunk remains relevant and should provide useful guidance for those interested in foreign policy and its consequences. Benghazi

This video by Bill Whittle explains why Benghazi still matters. Please pay close attention to the timeline presented beginning at 00:02:13.

]

Video link

In the next video, the commander of the Air Force plane sent to retrieve the bodies of Ambassador Stevens, the other dead and thirty still alive Americans from Libya explains why and how Ambassador Stevens and others killed in Benghazi could have been retrieved while still alive -- had it been authorized on a timely basis. As Bill Whittle's timeline explains, there were ample time and solid intelligence during the days immediately preceding September 11th to get them out.

]

Video link

We had pretty good intelligence about the Benghazi mess before, during and after its evolution. For political reasons, the Obama Administration ignored it in favor of nonsense about a "spontaneous demonstration" by Muslims rightfully outraged by a YouTube video. Has the Administration behaved in a similar fashion with respect to the Iraq mess?

Iraq

Here's the Obama Administration position on Iraq back in 2011:

]

Video link

MissionAccomplished0067(Tip of the hat to Power Line.)

It would be tough for President Obama to admit that he was wrong. Despite ample opportunities, he doesn't.

LTC Allen West (U.S. Army, retired) wrote on June 13th,



Obama declared the war in Iraq over but what he failed to realize is that there is a greater war against Islamism and Iraq was just a singular theater of operations — and of course, the enemy always has a vote.
A lack of strategic vision created a vacuum and it is now being filled. Our options are truly non-existent. When Obama states, there will be no “boots on the ground,” then there cannot be any effective air strikes coordinated as part of a ground assault. The enemy can only move forward on a couple of road networks, so it would be easy to halt their advance. But Obama says he is considering a counter-terrorism fund instead. [Emphasis added.]

I have to ask, why are we denying military support to the current government of Iraq, a nation-state which we helped to form, yet we gave Islamist forces military support in Libya — and in violation of the War Powers Act?

Could it be that in “pivoting away from the Middle East” Obama intentionally sought to enable Islamist forces in the region? He sent military and materiel support to Islamists in Libya along with supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt while turning his back on combating the resurgent Islamists in Iraq — talk about confusing. [Emphasis added.]

Regardless, history will detail how America turned victory into defeat on the modern battlefield against Islamic terrorism. Iran already has its al-Quds force leader in Baghdad — signs of things to come. Iraq has become a satellite state of Iran and I don’t think they’re willing to see it fall. It’s part of their regional hegemony and would give them an extension from Iran to Iraq to Syria to Lebanon. And when we flee Afghanistan, Iran will seek to extend its regional dominance to the east — of course the Iranians will have to contend with Pakistan — who already has nukes. [Emphasis added.]

Due in large part of President Obama's premature withdrawal from Iraq, we probably did not have adequate intelligence during the period leading up to the ISIS invasion. If we didn't then we most likely still don't. This June 12th interview with General Jack Keane, former Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, provides useful insights into the new Islamic Caliphate and the current Iraq clusterdunk. We have no comprehensive regional strategy to share intelligence or otherwise.

]



It should be noted that the principal ISIS leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was released in 2009 from the US-run Camp Bucca detention facility in southern Iraq.



The $10 million price [now] on his head, meanwhile, suggests that whoever released him from US custody four years ago may now be regretting it. [Insert added.]
. . . .

Well-organised and utterly ruthless, the ex-preacher is the driving force behind al-Qaeda’s resurgence throughout Syria and Iraq, putting it at the forefront of the war to topple President Bashar al-Assad and starting a fresh campaign of mayhem against the Western-backed government in Baghdad.

This week, his forces have achieved their biggest coup in Iraq to date, seizing control of government buildings in Mosul, the country's third biggest city, and marching further south to come within striking distance of the capital, Baghdad. Coming on top of similar operations in January that planted the black jihadi flag in the towns of Fallujah and Ramadi, it gives al-Qaeda control of large swathes of the north and west of the country, and poses the biggest security crisis since the US pull-out two years ago.

. . . .

[W]hen bin Laden himself was killed in May 2011, Baghdadi’s pledge to revenge his death with 100 terrorist attacks across Iraq looked like little more than bluster.

Today, he is already well past that target, thanks to a devastating campaign of car bombings and Mumbai-style killing sprees that has pushed Iraq’s death toll back up to around 1,000 per month.

“Baghdadi is actually more capable than the man he took over from,” said Dr Knights. “It’s one of those unfortunate situations where taking out the previous leadership has made things worse, not better.” [Emphasis added.]



According to this report (thus far unconfirmed elsewhere), evacuation of the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad has already begun. It has also been reported that Iranian forces are now in Iraq, fighting against the ISIS to help the Iraq government.



Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has been appealing to the White House for months for Apache helicopters and Hellfire air-ground rockets to fight terrorists. These Obama may now release, as well as considering token US drone attacks on ISIS targets in Iraq, for which he is most reluctant..
Thursday afternoon, Iran’s most powerful gun, the Al Qods Brigades chief Gen. Qassem Soleimani, arrived in Baghdad to take over the push against ISIS, in the same way as he has managed Bashar Assad’s war in Syria, and pull together the demoralized and scattered Iraqi army.

Those steps by Washington and Tehran pave the way for the US and Iran to cooperate for the first time in a joint military endeavor.

Since ISIS forces, albeit boosted by tens of thousands of armed Sunnis flocking to the black flag, are not capable of capturing Baghdad and have halted outside the city, President Obama and Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei have won a small space for deciding how to proceed.

Khamenei must determine whether Gen. Soleimani with the help of American weaponry can stop al Qaeda, save Maliki from collapse and prevent the fall of Baghdad, and whether it is worth sending an Iranian army division over to Iraq, our intelligence sources reported earlier Thursday. They have since entered Iraq and are fighting ISIS forces.

These moves by Tehran will determined how Washington acts in the coming hours.

President Obama is apparently going to the rescue. Sure He is:



The developments in Iraq are a stark contrast to Mr. Obama’s frequent pronouncements that al Qaeda is “on the run” and that its leadership has been decimated. In a speech at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point three weeks ago, the president backed a policy of restraint abroad and called for an end to U.S. “military adventures.”
Mr. Obama said Thursday that the crisis in Iraq underscores his approach outlined in the West Point speech — that the U.S. should rely more on partners to fight extremism in the Middle East and in Africa.

“We’re not going to be able to be everywhere all the time,” Mr. Obama said. “But what we can do is to make sure that we are consistently helping to finance, train, advise military forces with partner countries, including Iraq, that have the capacity to maintain their own security.”

He said his proposed $5 billion “counterterrorism partnership fund” would allow the U.S. “to extend our reach without sending U.S. troops to play Whac-A-Mole wherever there ends up being a problem in a particular country.”

“That’s going to be more effective,” Mr. Obama said.

. . . .

“Certainly, we need to help stabilize the country,” Rep. Jackie Speier, California Democrat, said on MSNBC. “The extent to which we can help with airstrikes and drones with no boots on the ground, I think is a good decision. Restoring stability there is in our country’s best interests.”

The president’s options in Iraq do not include troops, said White House press secretary Jay Carney.

Iran probably thinks that the less done by the United States of Obama the better.



Iran would most likely be happy to see America leave Iraq flailing in the wind. This neatly conforms to the Islamic Republic's pre-existing narratives of American reliability. Moreover, it gives the likes of Brigadier General Qassem Suleimani, the Commander of the IRGC Quds-Force (IRGC-QF), the chance to strut his stuff. Depending on prospective levels of Iranian support to Iraq in this crisis, the maxim of Suleimani's that was popularized in The New Yorker-- "'We're not like the Americans. We don't abandon our friends'" -- may once again be proven correct. After all, a photo recently emerged on Farhang News showing him holding hands with Iraqi Parliamentarian Qassem al-Araji in Iraq.

As ISIS forces get closer to Baghdad, which may well not be invincible, the Obama Administration appears to have got in step with Iran's desires, telling Iraq to solve its own problems.



The Obama administration delivered a message Friday to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, as Al Qaeda-inspired militants took control of more cities on their march toward Baghdad, reportedly leaving a trail of decapitated government forces in their wake: "Come together." [Emphasis added.]
Secretary of State John Kerry delivered the message, putting the onus on the Maliki government to "put sectarian differences aside and to come together in unity to begin to be more representative and inclusive." Republican lawmakers and military analysts are urging the administration to get more involved -- President Obama appeared to open the door Thursday to the possibility of air strikes, but no decision has been made. The president plans to make brief remarks on the situation in Iraq shortly before noon on the South Lawn.

Kerry said Friday the U.S. has "discussed a range of options including military action to provide support for the Iraqi government." He predicted "timely decisions" from the president.

The Obama Administration's position on the Israeli - Palestinian "peace process" has been similar, except that it became massively involved and sided against Israel. Perhaps Secretary Kerry will travel to Iraq and try to make his peace process --which failed in Israel and "Palestine" -- more effective there by siding with the ISIS and its friends. Unlikely, at least as long as the fighting rages.

Conlusions

The same incompetent "leader" who, for political purpose, refused to authorize a timely attempt to rescue Ambassador Stevens et al from Benghazi is now stumbling around trying -- someday -- to decide what, if anything, to do about the mess in Iraq. In all likelihood, if He ever decides what to do it will be too late. Will Iran completely displace the United States as Iraq's principal ally? It seems that she already is. The future for the entire Middle East does not look rosy as the already waning U.S. influence there approaches zero.


Great article.  What a colossal failure by our president.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63777
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #47 on: June 16, 2014, 11:05:02 AM »
A small force could have prevented this mess. If they couldn't be left in Iraq they could have stayed in the Kurdish north.

Exactly.  There is a reason why we left troops behind in Germany and South Korea when those wars ended.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #48 on: June 16, 2014, 12:45:38 PM »


Opinions

Marc Thiessen: Obama’s Iraq disaster


June 16 at 10:21 AM
 

In 2011, the situation in Iraq was so good that the Obama administration was actually trying to take credit for it, with Vice President Joe Biden declaring that Iraq “could be one of the great achievements of this administration.”

Now in 2014, as Iraq descends into chaos, Democrats are trying to blame the fiasco on — you guessed it — George W. Bush. “I don’t think this is our responsibility,” said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, declaring that the unfolding disaster in Iraq “represents the failed policies that took us down this path 10 years ago.”



Sorry, but this is a mess of President Obama’s making.

When Obama took office he inherited a pacified Iraq, where the terrorists had been defeated both militarily and ideologically.

Militarily, thanks to Bush’s surge, coupled with the Sunni Awakening, al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI, now the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS) was driven from the strongholds it had established in Anbar and other Iraqi provinces. It controlled no major territory, and its top leader — Abu Musab al-Zarqawi — had been killed by U.S. Special Operations forces.


Ideologically, the terrorists had suffered a popular rejection. Iraq was supposed to be a place where al-Qaeda rallied the Sunni masses to drive America out, but instead, the Sunnis joined with Americans to drive al-Qaeda out — a massive ideological defeat.

Obama took that inheritance and squandered it, with two catastrophic mistakes:

First, he withdrew all U.S. forces from Iraq — allowing the defeated terrorists to regroup and reconstitute themselves.




Second, he failed to support the moderate, pro-Western opposition in neighboring Syria — creating room for ISIS to fill the security vacuum. ISIS took over large swaths of Syrian territory, established a safe haven, used it to recruit and train thousands of jihadists, and prepared their current offensive in Iraq.

The result: When Obama took office, the terrorists had been driven from their safe havens; now they are on threatening to take control of a nation. Iraq is on the cusp of turning into what Afghanistan was in the 1990s — a safe haven from which to plan attacks on America and its allies.

It did not have to be this way. In 2011, the U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III, recommended keeping between 14,000 and 18,000 troops in Iraq (down from 45,000). The White House rejected Austin’s recommendation, worried about “the cost and the political optics.” So our commanders reduced their request to 10,000 — a number commanders said might be able to work “in extremis.” But the White House rejected this as well, insisting the number be cut to between 3,000 to 4,000 troops — a level insufficient to provide force protection and train Iraqis, much less to counterbalance Iran.

Iraqi leaders saw that the United States has headed for the exits — and decided that the tiny U.S. force Obama was willing to leave behind was not worth the political costs of giving Americans immunity from prosecution in the Iraqi judicial system. So Iraq rejected Obama’s offer, and the United States withdrew all its forces. And now ISIS is taking back cities that were liberated with American blood. It has taken control of Mosul, Tikrit and Tal Afar and is nearing the outskirts of Baghdad.





ISIS is not the only U.S. enemy taking advantage of power vacuum Obama left in the region. So is Iran. A month ago, Iraqi leaders asked the United States to carry out air strikes against ISIS positions but were rebuffed by Obama. So the Iraqis have turned to Iran for help. This weekend, the brutal commander of Iran’s notorious Quds Force, Gen. Quasim Suleiman, flew to Baghdad to advise the Iraqis on the defense of Baghdad. This is the man who organized and funded the Shia militias in Iraq, and armed them with EFPs (explosively formed penetrators) — sophisticated armor-piercing roadside bombs that killed hundreds of U.S. troops. And, if you thought matters could not get any worse, the Wall Street Journal reports that Obama “is preparing to open direct talks with Iran on how the two longtime foes can counter the insurgents.” Yes, you read that right. Obama is planning to work with Iran to counter ISIS in Iraq. In other words, our troops may soon be providing air cover for the very Iranians who were killing them.

If Obama had listened to the advice of his commanders on the ground, ISIS would probably not be marching on Baghdad today, and Iran would not be stepping in to fill the void left by the U.S. withdrawal. Thanks to Obama, we may soon have a situation where we are helping our Shia extremist enemies (Iran) fight our Sunni extremist enemies (ISIS) for control of Iraq.

That’s quite an “achievement.”

Read more from Marc Thiessen’s archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook.

jjbones

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 122
Re: Obama in 2011: We are leaving behind a stable self reliant Iraq
« Reply #49 on: June 16, 2014, 03:56:36 PM »
Who is really surprised?

A.  Obama is full of shit

B.  He has failed at every aspect of his job