Obama’s Surrender in Iraq


Pages: 1 2

You’ve got to hand it to President Obama. To be able to look the camera square in the eye and declare that retreat from Iraq is victory, failure is success, and emboldening an implacable enemy is in our national interest, is a feat worthy of a snake oil salesman.

What the president is selling, however, is a far more potent and deadly poison: the nonsensical belief that the vital interests of America should be subsumed to the nebulous doctrine that Iraq — and by extension the rest of the Middle East — will be a better, more secure place without American troops. This, despite ample evidence that the influence of Iran will be unchecked in what is still a nascent democracy, struggling with divisions and factions that leave it particularly vulnerable to the machinations of the mullahs in Tehran.

In short, the president thought it more important to keep a campaign promise than protect the hard-fought gains of our military, ignoring facts on the ground and even the private pleas from Iraqi leaders in the process.

Now those hollow words and sentiments spoken by the president at a snap news conference called last Friday are going to be put to the test by history. And one needn’t be an expert to envision how, in going against the advice of his generals on the ground (something he railed against President Bush for doing during the 2008 presidential campaign) to maintain a strong US military presence in Iraq, the president’s blunder will lead to an unmitigated disaster to US strategic interests in the region.

Unnecessarily, the president has elevated Iranian prestige to new heights, cheering Tehran’s allies in Syria and Turkey who see any retreat by America in the Middle East as a boon to their hegemonic designs. And while Saudi Arabian ambivalence toward the Shia majority government in Iraq is hard to miss, the Saudis nevertheless fear Iranian designs on their oil fields, and the large Shia minority that inhabits that area of the kingdom. Other Sunni-majority Gulf states look with equal trepidation on an emboldened Iran. The retreat of American troops from Iraq is as much a disaster for them — even if they would never admit it publicly — as it is for the Iraqi people.

An independent Iraq will not survive the president’s perfidy — a betrayal of those who fought, those who died, and those who worked so long to build a civil society shattered by war and sectarian conflict. It is breathtaking in its totality. With one stroke, the administration has assured an enemy who will almost certainly possess nuclear weapons in the near future, a base from which its terrorist proxies will be able to operate. The Iraqi government, which already has demonstrated it can’t — or won’t — resist Iranian interference in its internal affairs, will now achieve full satellite status; an appendage of Iranian policy no more independent than a Medieval vassal state.

The question that we should be asking is how serious was the president in his negotiations with Baghdad to keep a sizable force to train the Iraqi army, and help protect the country from being overwhelmed by the Iranians? According to Josh Rogin at Foreign Policy’s Cable blog, a deal was to be had on the touchy subject of immunity for our soldiers from the capriciousness of the Iraqi justice system, but the administration bungled the negotiations. Rogin quotes Marisa Cochrane Sullivan, managing director at the Institute for the Study of War, as saying, “From the beginning, the talks unfolded in a way where they [were] largely driven by domestic political concerns, both in Washington and Baghdad. Both sides let politics drive the process, rather than security concerns,” she said.

Pages: 1 2

  • Lefty Patriot

    two critical comments were posted and both deleted. this says so much about this publication and the author.

    • Herman Caintonette

      It does. After all, David Horowitz is forever whining about having his POV censored in the public square. Free speech for thee, but not for me? Hillel's one-legged exposition of the Torah applies.

      • Guest

        If I am not mistaken, this is a site owned by an individual not a public entity. Of course, I wouldn't really expect a looney liberal lacky to understand.

        • trickyblain

          Horowitz hollers when private universities declines to host his spittle-flecked ravings. Just fyi…

          • Western Canadian

            He for the most part lectures at colleges and universities that receive government funding, so your reference to ‘private’ is rather amusing. As for your sickeningly dishonest smear about ‘spittle-flecked ravings’, you should be ashamed of your dishonesty. But you won’t be.

  • Annie

    The refusal of the Iraqi government to grant immunity to US soldiers has sealed their fate. Let the Iraqis become quivering slaves, bowing and licking the feet of their Iranian overlords!

  • DogWithoutSlippers

    Obama's lust for re-election dishonors the shed blood of our American Troops!
    He will do anything to reel in the Liberals who voted to get him elected. This is
    just another indication that America is being destroyed from within!

  • Big Irish

    this pathetic – do-nothing – islamic pandering disgrace of a president has to be booted so far out of washington…along with his teleprompters….good riddance!….God Bless America.

  • al Kidya

    The Kurds in the north are really going to love the US now, aren't they?
    This is the second time the US has abandoned them.

    It really makes the US look strong on the world stage. (all sarc. off!)

    • tanstaafl

      You would think that someone would remember the Kurds.

  • http://apollospaeks.blogtownhall.com/ ApolloSpeaks

    MISSION ABANDONED!

    THE PAX AMERICANA IS ENDING IN THE MIDDLE EAST

    BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA OWNS POST- "OCCUPATION" IRAQ

    • Amused

      WHAT PAX AMERICANA ??? Too many American lives lost , thousands wounded ,a trillion spent ….billions of which are totally unaccounted for , our ungratefull "ally " embracing Iran , and a people who now persecute their christian communities, and STILL have not the will to stand on their own . PAX WHAT !
      Time to wake out of your DELUSION .

  • mrbean

    Obama and the Democrats and their media poodles have proudly and publicly sabotaged the Iraq War effort since the beginning. This is not just a guess, but a clear and visible fact, openly celebrated by the Left. The Left ululates noisily over every American death — though not over the thousands of innocent civilians who are regularly blown up by Al Qaida in Iraq. But they never bother to ask, "What was that US Soldier risking his life for?" They don't want us to be reminded. They want us to think US Soldiers are fools. This is the Democrats deja vu Vietnam 1975?

  • Abdul Ameer

    After overthrowing Saddam, we should have just gotten out and let the chips fall where they may. Instead, we made sure that a pro-Iranian Islamic government came to power and that Iraq would be in the Shiite-Iranian camp. The whole notion that we could remake Iraq into a western-style democracy was doomed from the beginning because no Moslem society can be remade. We have lost thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars of our wealth because our leaders fail to understand the nature of Islam which motivates the hearts and minds of the Moslem population.
    Now we need to get out of Iraq finally and concentrate our efforts against Iran which is the source of the problem and the threat. Staying in Iraq is a hopeless endeavor. We need to disarm Iran.

  • Attila the Hun

    Finally WWi spoils of war began unraveling before our eyes. Obama is ushering the new unstable Middle East and He will be the sole owner of incoming ME mayhem and bloodshed staring with Iraqi civil war. Once Iraq disintegrates all bets are off, ME map will be changed forever.

  • Guest

    Whether or not one supports obummer, is not important for Iraq. It also doesn't matter at this point whose fault it is. I say give the country back to the barbarians. We don't owe them a thing. Let them destroy one another.

  • BLJ

    I seem to remember a certain candidate Obama being against the surge that helped turn the tide there. Now he is acting like it was his idea all along. Iraq is a counterweight to Iranian expansion and we should have told them we would be keeping some level of troops there as long as we want.

    Obama has never cared about the military. The man is a damn Marxist. This was just a political move made by a desperate politico who is in trouble.

  • Amused

    Agreed ….but "appease the left " ??? You can't be serious . Getting out of Iraq , is a matter of saving American blood and treasure on a lost cause . We toppled Saddam …that was the victory but with bittersweet consequences .Because most Iraqis are Shia , Iran is Shia , thus there will always be an affinity between the two . And even among the Shia themselves are divisions . It's a bloody free for all , that we need to get out of for practical , economic and strategic reasons ….pandering to the left ? That simplistic , and false to say the least .

    • ObamaYoMoma

      We toppled Saddam …that was the victory but with bittersweet consequences

      Actually, the consequences weren't bittersweet at all. In fact, as soon as Saddam was toppled, we should have left ASAP, hoping at the same time that the gigantic vacuum we left behind would suck in both Iran and Saudi Arabia, as Muslim on Muslim violence is bad for the Dar al Islam, but good for us in the Dar al Harb.

      Then when Iran and Saudi Arabia were totally distracted with killing each other, we should have moved in to quickly eradicate the ruling Mullahs of Iran and their nuclear weapons program. Followed by also obliterating the House of Saud, confiscating their immense unearned oil wealth, and seizing their oilfields. Otherwise, that immense oil wealth and those oilfields will inevitably be used perpetually to finance jihad against the West forever per the dictates of Islam.

      The problem is the USA is totally blinded by PC multiculturalism. Hence, it stupidly tries to divide the Islamic world between so-called moderates and so-called extremists, which is a totally false dichotomy based on PC multicultural myths. Indeed, there are four words that should be banned forever when discussing Islam and Muslims and those words are moderate, extremist, radical, and Islamist. Indeed, anytime I see a writer using any of those words, I instantly know immediately that I'm reading an article written by a mentally incompetent loon who is blinded by PC multiculturalism.

      In any event, Obama is getting out of Iraq to appease the self-hating left, which believes that 9/11 was America's chickens coming home to roost. Meanwhile, naïve neo-cons, really Wilsonian Democrats masquerading as Republicans, aren't self-hating, but they are nevertheless blinded by PC multiculturalism and thus believe in silly fantasy-based myths and assumptions. While I, in the meantime, want to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan ASAP because it is incredibly fantasy base, exceedingly counterproductive, and doomed to fail, since it is based again on PC multicultural myths and assumptions.

  • DEBANJAN BANERJEE

    It is good for Iraq that the self-respecting Malliki decided to disapprove of the term that American troops can not be tried for war crimes.

    In Germany and Japan after World War 2 these two countries did have the option of accepting permanent US bases and extra-terrestrial rights for US troops or remain sovereign countries. These two countries unwisely decided to choose bondage and slavery of American protection over independence. Now look at these two countries after 60 years of their immoral decision. They are not sovereign countries , their foreign policies are driven from Washington DC , their economies are struggling (Japan has barely grown over the last 2 decades ) and their people are not producing enough babies. All because of their decision to chase American chains over freedom.

    Iraq is an millenium-old civilization. It certainly has enough self-respect to pursue its own path independent of America. The Ameican invasion and the subsequent civil war was a catastrophy for Iraq but it has seen catastrophies like this before when the Mongol hordes of Halagu Khan overran Baghdad murdering all civilians. It recovered from that and florished later. So too , Iraq will be florishing again.

    • Mrrendone

      What utter bosh! Occupying armies always produce babies; they don't stifle population growth. The German economy is struggling? You should struggle like the German economy – it's the strongest in Europe. It has to be to support all those Greeks. Japan has barely grown over the last two decades? Let's see: 2011 – 20 = 1991. Do you remember 1991? My father was in the Occupation and he was home by 1948. In between 1948 and 1991, Japan became a roaring economic success. If Japan has stagnated since then, it's because of its incredible level of government spending and economic protectionism. As for catastrophes, Saddam Hussein was a worse catastrophe for Iraq than the American invasion and the American withdrawal will be a worse catastrophe for Iraq still. Finally, I don't like the comparison of Americans with Mongol hordes. Let's see if the Iranian hordes treat the Iraqis any better.

  • Red

    For another brief and accurate explanation of why exactly Obama is surrendering Iraq to the Iranians:
    http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/

  • A.R Momen

    Why do you hide behind republicans ?you double -nationality bearers,you Zionists,do you want more than 4400 US casualties and tens of thousands wounded to appease your exaggerated fears of Saddam's weapons.So what,do you want to empty the US treasury on overseas wars to feed the "whales "of military industry and you know them well,and when the deprived people protest in the OWS they will be absolutely "anti-semetic".

  • tanarg

    If we are attacked again (recall what these wars are all about), it will be Obama's fault.

    • ObamaYoMoma

      Actually, it will be GWB's fault because he didn't outlaw Islam and ban and reverse Muslim immigration with all its excess baggage when he had the opportunity after 9/11. GWB's problem is like you and Obama as well, he was blinded by PC multiculturalism.

  • mlcblog

    Tom Hayden still lives where he did in the 1960's — la la land. He says those words about Iraqi sovereignty without any idea what they mean or how it will manifest in reality.

  • tanarg

    Like me? I said nothing about multiculturalism. You need better aim.

  • DogWithoutSlippers

    If you really knew what was the real pulse there you'd know that many in the Iraqi leadership do not want us to forsake them in such a declared manner. Our sacrifices have been very heavy and it is an insult to those we sent there in the first place. So chickie, leave Bush out of this!

  • DogWithoutSlippers

    Are you Hermana or Herman? The frat antics of Abu Ghrabib pale in comparrison to the slaughter and beheadings by islamic mutants – but go ahead – keep blaming Bush and dishonor American blood shed there – you idiot!

  • Rifleman

    Nice fantasy world you've got there, but if we'd carved up the oil concessions we would have gotten some of them, we only restricted bathists from the government, and if we'd gone home immediately Iraq would have fragmented into three parts, two of them controlled by AQ and the mad mullahs, respectively.

    The shia in the south didn't turn from Iran until we proved to them the mad mullahs were financing, arming, and training the sunnis that were mass murdering them.