Obama’s Iraq Policy Leading To Terrorist Takeover

I went on vacation last week so of course Iraq is about to fall to a group of al Qaeda dissidents and the border with Mexico is suddenly overrun with thousands of children while Obama allows gang members to cross the border freely. To top off the week, the IRS now claims that all of Lois Lerner’s emails have been lost. How convenient for the Obama administration. How convenient for the next administration. If this administration gets away with “losing” emails that may be detrimental to their story line you can bet every administration in the future will pull the same stunt.

He only left out a few paragraphs:

____________________________________________________________

The biggest issue of course is that Iraq is about to fall into the hands of an al Qaeda splinter group. As was entirely predictable, when the United States left Iraq in its entirety the democratically elected government wouldn’t be able to hold onto power. Obama has boasted about leaving Iraq, we have no soldiers there. He didn’t even leave bases from which the United States could have served as a deterrent to al Qaeda or others who had designs on overthrowing the government. Obama scored cheap political points and in doing so is on the verge of losing Iraq to al Qaeda splinter group Isis. With that sort of power base, one can only imagine the worldwide havoc that could be created by these terrorists.

So desperate for help is the Iraqi government that they’re asking Iran to help them. This can’t be good for anyone, much less the United States. Losing Iraq to Iran isn’t any better than losing it to Isis or al Qaeda. Obama obviously doesn’t care, he’ll simply blame Bush for getting involved in Iraq in the first place. In foreign policy, a President can’t simply undo what his predecessor has done and pretend it never happened. Yet this is exactly what Obama did, including taking credit for reduced violence in Iraq in 2009 and 2010 that was a direct result of Bush administration policies. Obama’s policy of ditching the country entirely and telling everyone the date of our departure is what is responsible for Iraq’s current situation.

The sad thing is that Obama is doing the same thing in Afghanistan. He’s announced a departure date, he knows the Taliban is waiting in the wings. Considering what is currently happening in Iraq, it would be utterly foolish to leave a power vacuum in Afghanistan. Most people would bet the farm Obama will do it anyone. He doesn’t have a good track record of learning from his mistakes. In the last year of his administration or the first year of the next administration odds are that the Taliban will be back in control of Afghanistan because the United States won’t be there to stop them.

Bush’s error in all of this was living in the fantasy that everyone in the world is entitled to or wants a democratically elected government. The elected governments in Iraq and Afghanistan are weak and viewed by the public as such. We would have been better off installing a supportive military dictator in both of these countries while maintaining bases and offering military aid. Such would have been a lot cheaper than playing games with insurgents and terrorists for nearly a decade. Obama’s error is even greater. He has made certain the sacrifices made by our military and taxpayers were for nothing. Isis is taking over Iraq, executing Iraqi troops as they seize power. Obama will do nothing substantial in response because to do so would be an admission that his policy failed.

This ISIL offensive has been going on in IRAQ for five months.

The mainstream media dutifully avoids covering stories that are bad for Obama.

In turn, Obama is now getting pummeled by the cumulative effect of these unaddressed issues/stories that are not being address until they are a source of rage: Fast & Furious, Benghazi, IRS, the VA and now Iraq.

We’re at the point where a problem isn’t a concern for the Obama administration until it’s headline news. And by then the first response from Obama is to deny that it is an issue.

Obama has no interest in the day to day toil of being a leader, he wants to fight straw men and impress the rest of the faculty lounge -alway has.

In other words...Che-Obama is saying that Maliki deserves ISIS. Which might be the worse thing he could say.

Let’s understand this. The terrorist group ISIS is populated by blood thirsty killers, former Bathist party members and thier sons and Bathist fugatives. They want to impose Sharia Law. BUT, this is all justified because the Maliki government could be more inclusive to Sunni’s and allow them to redress thier grievances.

Imagine if Occupy Wall Street took over lower Manhattan and beheaded 1,700 random people in business dress. Wait, sorry. Forget that analogy => Obama would support it.

I take from Obama’s statement that he is without a doubt a Sunni Muslim.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.