Obama’s Vacation Wars

AP_barack_obama_iraq_jt_140809_16x9_992Obama has a way of starting wars while on vacation.

During the Libyan War, Obama declared from Martha’s Vineyard that, “Tonight, the momentum against the Gaddafi regime has reached a tipping point.”

Then he went to play golf and accompanied Valerie Jarrett on a visit to the home of the CEO of Comcast.

It was August and the Libyan War had been going on for months. NATO planes were conducting hundreds of sorties. But their commander was on vacation.

That was only fitting since Obama had begun the Libyan War while hanging out in sunnier climes.

His ponderous announcement, “Today I authorized the Armed Forces of the United States to begin a limited military action in Libya” may have had an American flag in the background as stage dressing, but it was actually delivered from a Brazilian convention center.

Obama’s war announcement was made on the first day of his Latin American trip as if he had either made the decision to bomb Libya at the very last minute or he didn’t care enough to postpone a foreign trip for a day to be able to make the announcement from the White House.

The Egyptian military seemed to have picked up on Obama’s priorities when it decided crack down on his Muslim Brotherhood allies while the great man was vacationing in August at Martha’s Vineyard.

Obama had headed off on his vacation even though Egypt was burning. As the New York Times put it, “Mr. Obama was briefed on the situation by his national security adviser, Susan E. Rice. But he appeared determined not to allow events in Egypt to interrupt a day that, besides golf, included cocktails at the home of a major political donor, Brian Roberts.”

Brian Roberts is the aforementioned CEO of Comcast. By the time Obama could tear himself away from golf and his Comcast sugar daddy, hundreds were dead and it was all over but the shouting.

This August, Obama at least had the good grace to announce belated air strikes against ISIS from Washington D.C. before flying off to Martha’s Vineyard for yet another vacation.

Vacations have become the framework for Obama’s wars. As soon as he goes to war, he gets as far away from the White House as he can and heads in the direction of the biggest beach he can find.

These vacation wars only add to the sense of unseriousness surrounding his military efforts.

Obama’s wars begin with an announcement that he is “weighing” or “considering” his options. This is a process that can, as in the case of Syria, continue indefinitely.

It’s entirely possible that while vacationing at Martha’s Vineyard in August 2015, Obama will suddenly put down his slice of blueberry cake at the Beach Plum Restaurant and startle the CEO of Comcast along with other patrons by announcing that we begin bombing Damascus in 5 minutes.

Congress and the public are left out of the loop in these weighty deliberations which seem to consist of Obama holing up with Susan Rice, Valerie Jarrett and a bunch of Washington Post and New York Times editorials to decide whom he should bomb and whether he should bomb anyone at all.

Meanwhile his targets have had months and sometimes years to prepare for being bombed.

George W. Bush was accused of being an irresponsible cowboy, but it’s Obama who seems to go to war on a whim.

Obama was talked into bombing Libya by Hillary Clinton, but she couldn’t talk him into bombing Syria. He dithered endlessly over Afghanistan, sending mixed signals and replacing generals. In Iraq, he proved every bit as indecisive when it came to extending the presence of US forces. Each time he committed to a war, it was only after prolonged dithering and for unserious reasons.

Why did Obama finally decide to begin bombing ISIS? The New York Times quoted a senior administration official as saying that he was worried about the political impact of another Benghazi.

That’s not leadership, but it’s also nothing new from a politician who came up with ObamaCare out of a last minute need to have something to show off for progressives. Whether it’s gay marriage or illegal alien amnesty, Obama has a track record of suddenly committing to a culture war after years of pressure out of fear that if he doesn’t do something, everyone will realize that he has no idea what he’s doing.

His wars follow the same pattern.

Obama rarely goes to war on his own initiative. Instead after he gets hit with enough criticism from the Washington Post and the New York Times, he finally signs off on air strikes against someone.

Once the air strikes begin, the enemy discovers that Obama likes the idea of minimal force. Kerry promised that the air strikes on Syria would be “unbelievably small” in response to Assad’s violation of Obama’s WMD red line. But if your air strikes are going to be unbelievably small, why even bother?

Bill Clinton also had a penchant for useless unbelievably small strikes that accomplished nothing. These strikes didn’t stop Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein or Al Qaeda because Bill Clinton, as he admitted on the day before the September 11 attacks, was too worried about collateral damage.

The collateral damage from Clinton’s failure to take out Osama bin Laden however ended up being thousands of American lives and countless numbers of Afghans.

Now Obama is launching his unbelievably small strikes against ISIS’ borrowed armor while neglecting targeted strikes against its leaders. The Pentagon has already admitted that the air strikes will not have a significant impact on ISIS, possibly preventing it from advancing further, but without rolling it back.

In Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, Obama gave the impression that he wanted to keep his distance from any war even while risking American lives. Going away right before a war is one of his ways of avoiding any association with the conflict.

Obama will show up for the victory dance when the war is over, but if things change then he just as quickly disavows his part in the war.

Or even in the ending of a war.

After building his 2008 campaign around pulling out of Iraq and his 2012 campaign around patting himself on the back for eventually doing it, Obama has now shifted over to blaming Bush for his own withdrawal from Iraq. If Obama can’t even take credit for his signature anti-war policy once it becomes even a little bit controversial, it’s obvious that he will do anything to avoid being held accountable for the pursuit of an actual war.

That is the mindset from which “unbelievably small” air strikes and vacation wars come from.

Obama’s failure to keep the pressure on Al Qaeda in Iraq after the withdrawal allowed ISIS to regroup and emerge at the head of a Sunni coalition. Obama claimed that Al Qaeda in Iraq, despite having killed countless American soldiers over the years, was just a JV team. And so he left ISIS free to operate until it was actually a day away from committing genocide. Then the air strikes and the vacation began.

If ISIS is beaten, then Obama will cheerfully come back from vacation to take credit for it. His perpetual campaign will issue commemorate mugs and shirts. If ISIS isn’t beaten, it will turn out that Bush snuck into the White House and ordered air strikes on ISIS while Obama was golfing at Martha’s Vineyard.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • wileyvet

    Another slam dunk in BOs face from Daniel Greenfield.

  • BMS

    …A president more concerned with his vacations, celebrity friends and fundraising can’t be bothered with a world in turmoil, Islamist (oops mustn’t ever use that word according to our leader) terrorists, and crisis on America’s southern border. What don’t you people understand about that?

  • Docs357

    He’s not anything close to a leader he’s a Demonic Christ hater Jew hater and he hates America most of all impeach arrest he needs to be removed from office . He’s as evil as his jihad brothers. He has never lifted a finger to stop the murder of any innocent victims he’s as guilty as they are ungodly as well .

  • poest
  • Harif58

    Commander in Chief are you kidding, if I was in the military today would have to quit knowing my commander does not have my back.

  • Crassus

    The most dangerous place to be in the world is not on that mountain in Iraq or on the battlefields of Gaza but between Barack Obama and his favorite golf course.

  • nancinger

    The average Democrat voter will not be affected by any of the information in the article above. They don’t even care where Obama is as long as he tells them the good stuff they want to hear. We who know what’s going on just keep banging our heads against the wall waiting for someone to wake them up. There are too many of them now, and what’s amazing is that lots of them are Jewish. Mind boggling..

  • Cappy1437

    Thank you Daniel Greenfield. You always present the truth. What we have in Barack Hussein Obama is hypocrisy and greed. He is just plain evil. I cannot express my disgust. It is overwhelming. His whole administration needs to be kicked out.

    • Hktony

      It’s worse, far worse because a large proportion of Americans still support him and his lies. The problem is not odumbo but the dumbos who still support socialism. Just like the removal of bin laden the organization replaces him. Remove odumbo and we get another clown!
      America is finished if the dumb bastards keep voting this way, as is Europe. Ironically the only solution could be islam and the muzzies who may force the western world to unite against their rage and beheadings, crucifixions and other godly Muslim peaceful actions of allah.
      The result is we get rid of muzzies and hopefully deport liberals to a sandpit to enjoy their miserable lives

      • Cappy1437

        I know a couple of these people who support him. They’re Union people. One is a carpenter and the other a plumber. They vote Democrat. I vote Republican. One is recently retired and the other is in his 70′s and retired some years back. They’re both relatives. They don’t educate themselves except for their own hobbies and interests. They only read a local newspaper and watch ABC news or NBC news. They think Obama is doing a good job. When I try to talk to them they don’t want to listen. When I try to explain what is happening that they’re not even aware of they don’t want to listen. They think Fox News is awful. They’ve never watched it but they think of Fox News as the enemy spewing lies and hatred. They don’t watch Hannity or O’Reilly. They’ve heard of them and they can’t believe I watch them and that I respect them and appreciate the fact that they are telling us the truth. They think I need to “get a life” and stop watching the Fox channel. I thank God for the Fox Channel and Hannity, O’Reilly and Megan Kelly. I’ve read many, many books over the past years of political authors that Hannity and O’Reilly have had on. Excellent information but they’re not interested in reading any of it. They are truly the dumbed down, low information voters that are in control of everything. It has to be the Unions. They spew all this negative propaganda against Conservatives and Fox News and they control these people. Unions are truly controlling and destroying our country. I don’t know how you get these “dummies” to understand that. They won’t listen. It is beyond frustration. It makes me angry. God help us.

  • DES

    He’s good at vacationing, it’s work that he sucks at, Some people think he’s just a lazy elitist. He is however a conniving autocrat who is working hard to destroy the America we love and turn us into a 3rd world country. Supposedly, he is embarrassed by our success.

    • Americana

      Oh, yeah, this is spot on. That’s why he saved the American financial system — because he wanted to cause the destruction of the U.S. If he’d wanted to cause our destruction, he could have just let the financial system go to pot and we would have instantly and perhaps, if we were lucky, only temporarily gone to Third World status for a few decades.

      • Pete

        It is debatable as to whether TARP saved America or merely delayed the reckoning.

        Michelle Bachman did not want TARP. People were herded into it by fear mongering. TARP gave Obama money to control for political patronage and a slush fund

        “Roughly 6% of the stimulus money has been spent. Obviously, rushing the Recovery legislation over one weekend was such a joke….Obama told us that the world was going to end if they failed to pass this law.

        Meanwhile, 5 months later, more than 90% of the money has not been spent. Obama used the words “jumpstart” the economy. That implies something will occur quickly.”

        askville.amazon.com/TARP-money-spent-pull-back-reduce-deficit/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=53514392

        • Americana

          If the TARP money was not all spent, that would indicate government restraint and cautious dispensing of TARP funding rather than unrestrained, wacko toss it by the handful out the trains spending, no?

          • Pete

            If it is not spent a year or 2 later than you can reprogram that money so as to not raise taxes or give a tax rebate.

            They want the money in the kitty, because since it has been “obligated” to be spent, they will spend it at a later date for something else – whatever they damn well please.

      • DES

        TARP was started during the Bush admin. It sucked but was forced on everyone because of the sinking economy due to the housing crisis that was started by Carter and increased by Clinton. BHO did not save it, he put Gov in charge of things that should remain private. The system(capitalism) would have self righted itself. Don’t invest in bad ideas. Same with GM and Chrysler. Should have let them go bankrupt and reorganize and we’d all be better off, including GM and Chrysler might still be an American brand.

      • Soxtory

        Wait until he seizes the Roth IRAs. Currently in the works.

    • Soxtory

      He would like for us to be another France, taxes, Muslims, summer vacations, guaranteed jobs, small military and all.

  • AbuShy

    “…a politician who came up with ObamaCare out of a last minute need to
    have something to show off for progressives. Whether it’s gay marriage
    or illegal alien amnesty, Obama has a track record of suddenly
    committing to a culture war after years of pressure out of fear that if
    he doesn’t do something, everyone will realize that he has no idea what
    he’s doing.

    His wars follow the same pattern…”

    This is one dense nimrod. Affirmative Action presidency. Yet with a clear vision to destroy our nation that he carries out with abandon by simply “checking out” ($pun intended).

  • Americana

    Daniel Greenfield, I’m not sure what is so hard to understand about the fact that the Status of Forces agreement that Pres. Bush signed was not able to be altered by Pres. Obama’s subsequent discussions w/PM Nouri al-Maliki when Obama became President. The Iraqis didn’t want to continue to have us in Iraq. It’s pretty simple. We can’t continue as military squatters and pretend we’re there because we insist on being there. (I guess we could do this if we were Russian forces tho.) Just FYI, the failure of PM al-Maliki to sign a Status of Forces agreement may be one of the reasons why PM al-Maliki was just kicked out of the PM job.

    As for why Pres. Obama might choose to begin a U.S. campaign while on a foreign trip, there are many possible reasons for doing that and none of them are negative. For one thing, it’s liable to enhance the surprise factor for Pres. Obama to be away from the Oval Office.

    • Pete

      One Congress is not bound by a previous Congress, when it comes to the making new budgets.

      Similarly, once a treaty expires a current president is not bound by what a previous president negotiated in negotiating future treaties.

      • chelmer

        The fact is that Obama is not bound by anything. He has a pen and a phone. This last excuse–that he had nothing to do with the withdrawal of troops from Iraq–jumps the shark, during shark week. He’s toast.

      • Americana

        So, you’re saying that Pres. Obama simply IGNORES the Iraqi demand that the U.S. forces leave Iraq?

        • Pete

          Want I and others have said is Obama should not have 1/2 @zzed the negotiations.

          We also had similar SOFAs and assurances to what Maliki was offering.

          • Americana

            Those SOFAs weren’t signed by PM al-Maliki. Exactly what incentives would you have offered the Iraqis?

          • Pete

            We have SOFAs with other nations where U.S. personnel are subjected to civilian courts, but where the governing powers tell us that they will let the soldiers have their day in military court.

          • Americana

            It doesn’t matter what arrangements the U.S. has w/other Western nations. Those SOFAs w/Western nations (or other nations that have Western justice systems) were arrived at because those are countries where we expect our soldiers to get a reasonable day in court before a rational court under a legitimate Western justice system.

            We didn’t want American soldiers to have to face justice in Iraq for good reason. This decision came about partly because of some truly horrific crimes against Iraqi civilians by American soldiers.

          • Pete

            I didn’t say western

          • Americana

            No, you didn’t. Isn’t that smart… Considering the U.S. was still relatively unsure what was happening w/the Iraqi justice system, I can see why it is the U.S. failed to negotiate a SOFA w/which the U.S. felt comfortable.

          • Pete

            We have 300 to 395 boots on the ground now. What SOFA are they operating under. They are on sovereign Iraqi territory?

          • Americana

            I haven’t read anything about what our current status falls under, but I’m assuming it’s a temporary SOFA agreement. Who knows what will happen if the Iraqis feel they want more from us… If things get bad enough, they’ll likely cave on their qualifying demands as to a SOFA but who knows?

          • Pete

            And if Obama went in without an agreement?

          • Americana

            You’re more than implying he did go in without an agreement w/this post, right? Since PM al-Maliki was forced out, who knows whether that will expedite or delay a permanent SOFA for this new form of U.S. military presence.

            http://online.wsj.com/articles/u-s-talking-to-iraq-about-legal-protections-for-advisers-1403295670

            From the link:

            A U.S. official said Friday that negotiators in Baghdad were working to get formal legal “assurances” from Mr. Maliki to provide protections for the advisers. However, the official said, that agreement would only be temporary and a longer-term set of legal protections would require approval by Iraq’s parliament.

            In 2011, Mr. Maliki failed to win parliamentary approval for a status-of-forces agreement with the U.S. The failure to get legal protections for U.S. forces caused the Obama administration to decide against leaving a residual force in Iraq.

            Officials said because Mr. Maliki had invited the U.S. to send advisers, it was a clear indication he was willing to provide legal protection.

            Adm. Kirby said the U.S. doesn’t need a formal status of forces agreement with Iraq to provide legal protections for the advisers.

            U.S. forces typically don’t operate in a partner or allied country without an agreement that provides at least some legal protection, for actions they take while on duty. The Pentagon typically insists that unlawful acts done by on-duty personnel will be covered by the military justice system, not local courts.

          • Pete

            So, so far Obama has gone weeks almost months without an agreement.

            With all the Jet fuel Kerry has burned up, CO2 created and jaw jacking he has done, you would have thought he could have got that done.

            Wow, events never cease to amaze.

          • Pete

            What truly horrific crimes?

            You must not have read about WW2.

            Different day Same shat.

            Americans were actually better in Iraq than the were in WW2 and definitely better than many other countries in WW2.

            Rape was part of official French policy in WW2.

            But you are such a sweetheart, you wouldn’t know that.

          • Americana

            It doesn’t matter if you don’t consider the crimes horrific if the Iraqis considered them horrific. Perhaps one of the most obscene crimes was a sexual psychopath killer who enticed four members of his platoon into a sexual killing and group murder of a 14-year old girl and her family. I find it hard to believe this guy managed to get all his platoon buddies to go along w/him on the rape and killing mission but he did. The U.S. definitely didn’t want a SOFA that left this guy to the Iraqi legal system…

            As for what was legal or overlooked in other wars, that’s neither here nor there. We are talking about the Iraq War and a SOFA agreement between the U.S. and Iraq. After some of the crimes committed by U.S. soldiers in Iraq, the Iraqi government wasn’t about to let American soldiers be spirited away and allowed to escape justice.

            As for being a sweetheart and so being ignorant of what went on during WW II, since my father and two of his brothers were in WW II and my mother’s oldest brother died having been gut shot at El Alamein, I’m not as ignorant as you seem to think. My father also was in on the liberation by his U.S. Signals Corps. unit of one of the Belgian concentration camps. Ignorant? No.
            _____________________________________________________

            http://www.amazon.com/Black-Hearts-Platoons-Descent-Triangle/dp/B008SLEQF8

            Hit by near-daily mortars, gunfire, and roadside bomb attacks, suffering from a particularly heavy death toll, and enduring a chronic breakdown in leadership, members of one Black Heart platoon—1st Platoon, Bravo Company, 1st Battalion—descended, over their year-long tour of duty, into a tailspin of poor discipline, substance abuse, and brutality.

            Four 1st Platoon soldiers would perpetrate one of the most heinous war crimes U.S. forces have committed during the Iraq War—the rape of a fourteen-year-old Iraqi girl and the cold-blooded execution of her and her family. Three other 1st Platoon soldiers would be overrun at a remote outpost—one killed immediately and two taken from the scene, their mutilated corpses found days later booby-trapped with explosives.

            Black Hearts is an unflinching account of the epic, tragic deployment of 1st Platoon. Drawing on hundreds of hours of in-depth interviews with Black Heart soldiers and first-hand reporting from the Triangle of Death, Black Hearts is a timeless story about men in combat and the fragility of character in the savage crucible of warfare. But it is also a timely warning of new dangers emerging in the way American soldiers are led on the battlefields of the twenty-first century.

          • Pete

            Spirited away?

            No, he faced justice. He did not escape scot free.

            My only problem is that unlike WW2, we have not executed people for stuff like that.

            The Left has made us soft.

          • Americana

            He faced U.S. justice. He wasn’t left in Iraq to face Iraqi justice. That is what the Iraqis were scared of having taken out of their hands…

          • Pete

            We have American soldiers in foreign jails in Korea and Japan.

            They are doing hard time. No ACLU lawyers for them.

            Other than lacking the will to have a death penalty. There is not much wrong with military courts.

          • Americana

            I never said there was anything wrong w/military courts.

          • Pete

            Nice link

            amazon.com/Black-Hearts-Platoons-Descent-Triangle/dp/B008SLEQF8

            So General Americana, the beneficent, wanted to turn over the rapists to the Iraqis as well as anyone else accused of a crime to the Iraqis, who at the time were in the process of building a government. If they are building a government, they probably are in the process of reconstituting their judiciary. No matter that the Al Qaeda, Sadr, the Iranians had spies and toadies all over in the police and army. I’m sure the judiciary was not penetrated.

            If the government was not fully reconstituted( it was an interim government (start date 28 June 2004) & there was lot of hard fighting in 2007. You would know this because you were there.). The best place for a trail, the only place for a trial, would have been a military court. The sad thing is that they did not get the death penalty, because of TARDs like the ACLU and others.

            ***

            “In 2010, according to the Failed States Index, Iraq was the world’s seventh most politically unstable country.”

            en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq#2003-present

          • Americana

            I didn’t state my opinion was that American soldiers should be turned over to the Iraqi justice system. I wrote that was ONE FACTOR among the many contentious issues in the U.S. failure to negotiate a new SOFA agreement w/the Iraqi government under Pres. Obama. The Iraqis wanted U.S. soldiers to face Iraqi justice and the U.S. didn’t. We all can see why that would be…

            The U.S. didn’t want to have American forces on the ground liable to face Iraqi justice when the situation was still unstable. U.S. forces were still in firefights and were taking prisoners, arresting people in their homes, etc. There was lots of room for errors in handling of Iraqis by American soldiers. There were some egregious actions by American soldiers in both their military actions and their private actions in Iraq. The Iraqis were justifiably concerned about allowing the U.S. to handle such incidents.

          • Pete

            Or as I think Heinlein might say. A whole lot of palaver and not much action. There were people elected, nominated and paid to get the SOFA done and to secure world peace. They failed; now we have The Deluge. Going on like a debate team isn’t doing much.

          • Americana

            You’d like to draw distinct party lines of success and failure for each party and each President in the Middle East but the Islamic world and the jihads can’t be so readily contained. As for whether individual small-scale successes and failures (like securing a SOFA w/Iraq), would have stopped the deluge, obviously not. A SOFA w/Iraq wouldn’t have stopped the Islamist push in the region, it simply would have shifted its initial locations chosen for its push. Then we’d likely be trying to decide what role to play in Syria and elsewhere.

          • Pete

            The Mosul bank haul, the reputation for success attracting more jihadis, the equipment captured makes no difference for the future course of events.

            Before these events Assad was wining in Syria. It was slow but he was winning. which means he was grinding the jihadis down. Now it looks bleak. I don;t like Assad and we owe him a great deal of ill will, but now is not the time to deal with him. We need to be more afraid of ISIS/ISIL/IS…

          • Pete

            So you are as much of a soldier as I am a farmer. Nice

          • Pete

            There was a rape in Iraq you say? The locals were mad? And? There were for more during WW2. Rape was official policy among more than 1 country.

            The only problem with the courts martial in the Iraqi rape case is that society has been subjected to assault by bleeding hearts for 4 or 5 decades. There was no DP.

    • Pete

      “As for why Pres. Obama might choose to begin a U.S. campaign while on a foreign trip, there are many possible reasons for doing that and none of them are negative.” – Americana

      Assertion, but no proof.

      • Americana

        I don’t have to provide proof when the point is there are strategic reasons for going about the international business of the U.S. President while letting the U.S. armed forces get about their business of being the U.S. armed forces.

        • Pete

          ” and none of them are negative.” – Americana

          Assertion without proof.

          • Americana

            Oh, please, if you can provide some negatives as to what has happened w/Pres. Obama taking a vacation and conducting his business while the U.S. armed forces conduct theirs, I’d like to see the proof.

          • Pete

            Given that you made an ‘absolute‘ statement, I would only have to find one example to disprove your assertion.

            Given that you have been disproved so often before, it would seem you would have more to prove than I. At least judging form poster feedback

            Given that you plaster this forum with inanities day in and day out like you have a Tommy gun it is hard to keep up.

          • Americana

            You’ve hardly ever disproved anything of mine, Pete. The fact you plaster this forum w/your inanities day in and day out like you have a Tommy gun, it is hard to keep up.

    • chelmer

      The notion that any agreement with any foreign power is not subject to adjustment based on facts on the ground is so fatuous as to be embarrassing. But that is, as I like to say, an issue between you and your self-respect. No one else is buying it. Obama will not recover from that ridiculous and petulant response, because massive numbers of people have started to die due to his feckless and childish simulacrum of “leadership”. Shame on you. You’re capable of more.

      • Yehuda Levi

        “You’re capable of more.”

        I am not sure about this. She is a revisionist that distorts history to defend Palestinian Arabs and then agrees with Obama’s defense that getting out of Iraq was all Bush’s fault.

        There is not much left after these two irrational positions.

        • Americana

          You’ve gotta show me where “I’ve distorted history to defend Palestinian Arabs.” As for how it is that the U.S. didn’t simply tell the Iraqis to go to helllll about the SOFA agreement, the U.S. is staying here,” I’m not quite sure how you think that all would have played out. But then, you’re the irrational one who think that simply by claiming the Palestinians are “Fakestinians” that this helps the Israeli cause rather than isn’t seen as duplicitous and self-serving.

    • RIckuh

      PBS’ Frontline had an episode about Iraq beginning with Bush’s invasion and continuing through the withdrawal of U.S forces under Obama. Very good episode. Their reporting shows that Obama is the only one responsible for our failure to get a Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq.

      • Americana

        Why is that? Because we had effectively concluded our mission in Iraq. From here on out, large numbers of U.S. forces would have been seen as an occupation force.

      • Yehuda Levi

        We all know that Obama bragged about getting out of Iraq and made no mention of being ‘forced’ to. We needed to keep a stabilizing force there.

        Only his lackeys would believe his new story for anymore than a second.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      You mean the way we’re squatting in Iraq with 1,000 men now?

      • Americana

        That very limited number of U.S. troops is not a U.S. military occupation. Large numbers of U.S. forces equate to a military occupation as far as most of the Middle Eastern countries think, as you well know.

        It will be interesting to see if and when the Iraqis try to persuade the U.S. into sending large numbers of troops.

      • hiernonymous

        You’re avoiding the point. Staying on in Iraq was not an option available to Mr. Obama. Mr. Bush had signed an agreement with the Iraqi government to have U.S. military forces leave the country by 2011, and the Iraqis were not going to back off of that date. Mr. Maliki assumed that he was in a position of sufficient strength to be able to reshape Iraq in favor of his Shi’a constituency and wanted no interference from the U.S.

        It has been that uncompromising policy that has further alienated the Sunnis. It is only on the realization that the entire Shi’a enterprise could still be lost that an Iraqi government is willing to reconsider material military involvement by the Americans.

        One of the flaws in your ‘analyses’ is your persistent inability to distinguish between events that are largely shaped by U.S. policy and events that are not. Mr. Mubarak, for example, was not overthrown by the Obama administration, and America’s ability to influence that situation was minimal. Yours is the approach of convenient omnipotence – the U.S. is all-powerful when it is politically convenient to you to portray it as such. Believe it or not, other actors are in play.

  • Pete

    “I see the coming conflict as remaining within the confines of the Middle East.”
    - General Americana

    Experts Warn of Terrorism Blowback From Iraq Air Strikes
    time.com/3096348/isis-iraq-barack-obama-blowback/

    “Terrorist groups like ISIS/Islamic State do not need an excuse to launch terror attacks. But recent attacks from U.S. forces on ISIS forces may force them to respond in order to show to their followers that they are not “impotent” in the face of the U.S. military. Where they may launch such “reprisal attacks” is still unknown …. but I would wager that it will happen somewhere in the Middle East.”

    http://warnewsupdates.blogspot.com/2014/08/expect-terrorism-blowback-from-us-air.html

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/if-genocide-wont-unite-iraq-nothing-will/#comment-1537865357

    • Americana

      Are you choosing to ignore the very last sentence in your above post?

      Here it is again if you misunderstood it the first time around:
      “Where they may launch such “reprisal attacks” is still unknown …. but I would wager that it will happen somewhere in the Middle East.”

      • Pete

        I gave 2 links with 2 different people’s expectations.

        All these people have to do is to strike west of Turkey or Egypt and it is outside of the middle East.

        There are plenty of assets in the Mahgreb. I do not consider that the Middle East.

        there are plenty of European volunteers to Al Qaeda. some have returned. they could strike anywhere.

        • Americana

          Frankly, I allow for a lot of ‘slop’ in the geographic limits of the various nations and regions in the Middle East. Why? Because the Islamic area of control has waxed and waned over the centuries and under this latest incarnation, which was crafted by Western governments, it’s difficult to see what role a Caliphate could ever play given the rise of nationalism in all Arab/Muslim states.

          As for what I mean by “the war not coming to the U.S. any time soon,” I’m speaking strictly of a large-scale war. I take for granted that we’ll have a rise in jihadi terrorism if things continue as they are. (We should have as many people as possible preparing themselves by taking first aid courses and disaster courses so they’re ready to assist if needed.) For now though, most American Muslims seem content to leave the U.S. and fight elsewhere. They may denigrate the U.S. in their suicide videos but they’re there and not here — for now. They’re rather odd individuals if you look at them and their videos. If you’re going to sling the psychobabble around, some of these folks would be more interesting subjects. Look at this guy who did a suicide bombing in Syria:

          http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/31/us/suicide-bomber-from-us-came-home-before-attack.html

          • Pete

            Frankly, I allow for a lot of ‘slop’ in the geographic limits of the various nations and regions in the Middle East.

            As for what I mean by “the war not coming to the U.S. any time soon,” I’m speaking strictly of a large-scale war.”

            Weasel Words. You were beat and you moved the goal posts. I have to ask myself, if you are a f_cking idiot or a construct, a legend. I did not serve overseas in a war zone twice to be lectured by some escapee from socialist Britain.

            I was cleaning up downloads and categorizing them for future use, because you are like a tick, stupid, dangerous and persistent. I found this:

            But now security and defence sources say that Belmokhtar has fled to Libya where he is recruiting Syria-trained jihadis.

            telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/10964077/Al-Qaeda-leader-Mokhtar-Belmokhtar-sparks-new-jihadi-terror-threat.html

            Which I am sure fly over your head at yet be more noisome to you than your own foul breaking wind.

          • Americana

            Ah, the powers that be decided to delete a post of mine in reply. I won’t bother reprising its contents in their entirety. Let’s just say I made it clear I don’t “move goalposts” just so I can win stupid on-line arguments.

            Belmokhtar’s recruitment of jihadists doesn’t “fly over my head.” Why would you think it would? It’s an important detail to me that Belmohkhtar “fled to Libya.” That indicates several things to me as it should to you.

          • Pete

            Islam has modernized, which is why churches are forbidden in Saudi Arabia,.the one church in Dubai is no outward adornment, you can’t import bibles into Turkey.

            Then there is Egypt. You are safer there as a N@ZI than as a tourist or an expat. If I were there, I would claim to be a N@ZI.

            I do not see this modernization? You can find modern Muslims, but they have less control over their nations than the Republicans have in the U.S.

            Funny but the Arabs call Libya, Algeria, Morocco the Mahgreb or the west. So it must not be in the middle such as the Middle East. Maybe Arabs are really stupid and do not know the cardinal directions or have concept of distances?

            If I called myself a N@ZI it would not be the 1st time I had been called that by others, so it might be huge lie, but it would be workable.

          • Americana

            Actually, I’d hardly call banishing other religions an attempt at “modernization.” I know some people are claiming this in order to claim there will never, ever be a Muslim reformation. The claim is that Muslims only ever become more extreme in interpretation and can only choose to return to the strictest interpretation of Islam.

            The reason churches have once again been forbidden in Saudi Arabia is because this is one of the steps the Saudis are taking to keep their Wahhabists in check. That’s also the reasoning behind the U.S. having to move its military bases and forces out of Saudi Arabia to Qatar. Osama bin Laden repeatedly claimed this as one of his primary aims.

            If you want to quibble over what countries are considered the Middle East vs what countries remain Muslim because they were part of the Muslim conquest of North Africa, you’d best argue the geographic ins and outs w/hieronymous. I can tell already we’re not going to see eye to eye over this. You do work together, right? So you’ll have ample opportunity to hash this out to your heart’s content.

          • Pete

            “Saudi Arabia is because this is one of the steps the Saudis are taking to keep their Wahhabists in check”

            It is working.

            That is also the reason why they set up the religious police. It gave them something to do where they were not attacking the monarchy.

            Keeping the Wahhabbists in check by throwing the some tidbits and bit by bit, they look like a Wahabbists regime through and through.

            Throw together the church ban, the religious police and the prosletyzing paid for by the government all over the world and what does it look like?

            A Wahhabist government.

            How is the government going to walk that back one day or out maneuver the Wahhabists?

            By appeasing the Wahhabist the government has extended its’ life but it has not made the situation better.

            I do not see many feminist sisters protesting the PATRIARCHY in Saudi Arabia. It is probably the granddaddy of them all. Code Stink will go to Egypt and traipse around pretending to do something. A few feminists spoke up around 2000 about the Taliban government. But they are all quite now. good little girls they are.

            ***
            “I can tell already we’re not going to see eye to eye over this. You do work together, right?”

            What did a German soldier say about Austria being a German Ally in WW1? Shackled to a corpse.

            “ins and outs w/hieronymous. I can tell already we’re not going to see eye to eye over this. You do work together, right?”

            No hieronymous works at an university. I do not.We do not work together. Your script is becoming confused. See your supervisor.

          • Pete

            BTW I copied your response It is classic. By your definition 1/2 of France all of Spain and the entire Balkans is part of the Middle East.

            It does not matter if you wanted to go there. You went there because you are a troll and all you know how to do is yell Banzai and ti be disingenuous.

            As someone who is not a soldier you have no concept of what a battle space is or how big it is.

            Of course you do not. You either sitting in an air conditioned office or you are just one of the d_mbest ____s I ever met.

            When you look it up look up some meteorology stuff too. if you can’t make the connection, then I would hate to see your ASVAB scores

          • Americana

            No, that’s not my point at all about what is the potential for immediate Muslim jihadi outreach from the heart of the Middle East to the fringes of Eastern and Western Europe. If there weren’t “geographic and sociological slop” in that part of the world, it would never have experienced the national ownership fluctuations it’s experienced. Those Western European nations like Spain that haven’t been under Muslim control for hundreds of years won’t succumb easily to ISIS. Those countries that are very much within the sphere of the majority Muslim countries and are geographically butting up against the Middle East have a strong likelihood of being able to be undermined by a group like ISIS either by gradual infiltration and popularization of ISIS’ aims or outright assault just as they’re doing on Iraq and Syria. As for the Balkans, they may not wish to give up their nationalities having just won their independence from Russia. Those Balkan countries also have failed to do a shout out to ISIS and congratulated ISIS on the Caliphate declaration.

            I don’t move goal posts to win arguments. The fact you disagree w/me and you choose to award yourself the tactical “win” is neither here nor there to me. We’ll find out eventually whose evaluation of ISIS and of al-Baghdadi is more accurate. I’m very much encouraged strategically that none of the remaining Muslim countries have shown interest in supporting the Caliphate. ISIS will have at least 4 different countries waging war against it within the Middle East before too long and god knows how many countries interested in crunching it from the other compass points.

            As for the Belmokhtar story, he and others like him may be gunning for big strikes against the U.S. and Western interests for a long time. The fact the U.S. may face more intense jihadi violence for some time is something I expect for the foreseeable future. I would expect that attacking the U.S. through terrorist acts to be true for ANY new jihadi group that makes the statements of the scope and kind that al-Baghdadi makes. But the fact remains, none of the other Middle Eastern countries have welcomed ISIS and the Caliphate w/open arms. Islam has “modernized” itself in some of its sociological aspects and its national ethnic aspects.

            As for foul wind viz me, you’ll have to specify whether you consider me to have bad breath while belching or being the owner of loosey goosey zzz. I’ve never been accused of bad breath and I’m not a frequent “feeper.”

          • Pete

            Eurabia

            The most popular baby name in England is Mohammed some years.

            Eurabia, baby, you cannot go home. Cheers!

      • Pete

        In July, Brett McGurk, the top State Department official for Iraq, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the 30 to 50 suicide bombers per month deployed in Syria and Iraq by ISIS “are increasingly Western passport holders,”

        http://time.com/3096348/isis-iraq-barack-obama-blowback/

        Of ocurse Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab 7 Faisal Shahzad were stopped by authorities.

        Uhmmmmmm, No. The bombs were duds. in the 1st case average citizens apprehended the bomber after the bomb failed to go off and our government had been told by Umar’s father that he was a threat.

        Will General American tell us like Janet Napolitano that the system worked?

      • Pete

        ‘They’re coming’ and ‘another 9/11 is imminent’
        posted at 8:01 pm on August 13, 2014 by Noah Rothman

        “One former aide from your White House team recently told me: It’s not just that they don’t understand. It’s that they don’t want to understand what’s happening in the Middle East. They just want it all to go away,” Khedery wrote. “But it’s only going to get worse.”

        “I know they don’t take the threat of transnational jihad seriously enough,” Khedery said

        http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/13/theyre-coming-and-another-911-is-imminent/

        In 3 days I will have a hard time finding this article. If i can;t find it being the troll you are or is it trollop since you are female, you will take it as proof that you are right.

  • wilsonsandy2

    That’s right Obama has a WAR right now with the american people! He has lied his way into our presidency and we are waking up to find he is such a narcissistic creep! His policies are never inlined with america culture.Obama is not doing a good job and he should be brutally complained
    about. His policies are not in-lined with americans and we are sick and
    tired of his aloof unconnected manner. His decisions are wrong and he is
    NOT making AMERICA BETTER! So he pays the price for not doing for
    americans. He is dumping illegals all over america without anyone’s
    consent, reduced military to dangerous numbers, forced obamacare down
    our throat, takeS so many vacations/funding raising anything but doing
    his JOB! HE is not a leadER does not have a plan, knew about ISIS long
    ago and could have made a difference but he is too concerned with his
    LEGACY ABOUT IRAQ! This is a man that is NOT qualified for the JOB! And
    he states he is MUSLIM! YES, ON TV HEARD IT FROM HIS LIPS. He will
    NEVER go to war with Islam. So is he for america? His allegiance is with
    Islam! That’s why he is complained about. You can twist all day long
    about his vacation. But he is a worthless president that needs to
    resign be impeached and arrested.

  • wilsonsandy2

    SAVE THE CHRISTIANS IN IRAQ! EVEN THOUGH YOU DON’T LIKE CHRISTIANS! BLOW IRAQ TO BITS!

  • truebearing

    If you’re looking for something profound, yet accurate, I suggest describing him as “profoundly evil.” That pretty much covers his malignant narcissism. It isn’t particularly creative, and sometimes I feel like a broken record when saying it over and over, but even truth can be monotonous.

  • truebearing

    Obama doesn’t see himself as the traditional Commander-In-Chief. He can’t even throw a baseball like a man much less inspire men in battle. He sees himself as the Enabler-In-Chief, a feminine role, whose primary purpose is to see to it that America doesn’t interfere with his definition of “progress.” It could be argued that he goes on vacation to encourage the world to see the US as weak and unserious. Clearly, he does nothing to project strength or demand respect.

    Obama is passive-aggressive, and mostly passive. His posture internationally has been decidedly submissive. The only time he shows aggression is against domestic political enemies or people he sees as the enemies of the groups who comprise his composite identity — blacks, Muslims, gays, leftists. Obama is an adult infant, a malignant narcissist, concerned only with the events happening in the world that impact his extended self — the people and ideologies he identifies with. Profoundly infantile, all of his calculations of consequence begin and end with himself. Small wonder then that he is counselled most closely by (evil) women who know how to soothe (evil) babies. It’s almost as if Satan had an infant son and decided to make him the president of the most powerful nation on earth…

    • GerriAttricks

      Man you nailed it. If satan had a wife she probably suckled him and he hasn’t left the teat yet.

    • camp7

      “Small wonder then that he is counselled most closely by (evil) women who know how to soothe (evil) babies.”

      A very astute observation, along with the rest of your text.

      I would also interject an element of moral cowardice, his inward fear to confront and correct his poor personal character. Instead he tends to insulate his neurosis with even more malevolent behavior, not only typical of narcissism, but a willful resentment of preeminent good which defines the evil part of the profile. A surreal actor on the live stage of reality. Dangerous and pathetic.

      • Americana

        It’s pretty funny thinking that Pres. Obama can’t throw a baseball like a pro and that’s got something to do w/the competency shown in his Presidency! Most men would fall on their azzes if they tried to throw a baseball like a pro pitcher. He “sees himself as the Enabler-In-Chief, a decidedly feminine role…” That cracks me up to no end that you’d phrase it that way. The harder you try to write this stuff w/a straight face, the weirder it gets.

        The day truebearing makes a “very astute observation” about Pres. Obama while bearing the banner, business card and laptop of Psychotherapist-In-Chief is not a day I see coming down the pike anytime soon…

        • camp7

          One of the reasons I’m attracted to this site is to gain and share the thoughts of freethinkers. That includes Frontpage journalists and commenters.

          Like most people, my time is valuable to the extent that I prioritize my visits to ecom websites. It is the modum of social exchange and deserves some discretion in an environment of growing cyber distractions.

          That being said, I spent a career hiring, training, evaluating and placing individuals in positions that required split second decisions involving millions in resource costs with life and safety the main overall objective. In short, I learned to assess individual aptitude and skill to coordinate teams to meet a common goal. I know, big deal.

          Everyone has something to contribute. Whether they realize that in a positive or negative way doesn’t change the concept of a growing absolute based on relative importance. The analogy I developed is the degree of perspective people possess modeled on a 360 degree azimuth diagram of a compass. Some may have the insight of 90 degrees, some 180, while others more or less. The circular face of a compass, I believe, is analogous with the design of a universal pattern and repetend.

          Your criticism of truebearing is unmerited. My senses tell me he is perceptive, refreshingly articulate and acute in his diagnose. You on the other hand strike me as rather superficial for the sake of confrontational argument to defend an artificial portrayal of political idealism that doesn’t exist in the context of subjects you defend. Namely, Obama and his protocol for destructive radical statism, and a generational transition from higher moral values to the lower enabled selfism that he truly represents.

          While I respect your opinion, and have tried to glean some benefit from your comments, I can only surmise that you are attracted here to learn from this forum and at the same time insist your paling position in an agonizing transformation of growth. Good for you, and Cheers!

          • Webb

            That’s a good way to put it about Americana. Another is that she’s an odious insane Jew-hating murderous satanic hag. I like my way better.

      • truebearing

        Well said.

        Yes, he is very dangerous. His need for adoration is a bottomless pit, but his desire to destroy America makes him unpopular with the people he pretends to lead. An unresolvable dilemma for a malignant narcissist. Sure, the morons still think he’s great, but he’s lost the Independents and now some Democrats have figured out he has a few screws loose. Even some blacks are criticizing him over his disastrous immigration scam. People with Obama’s level of narcissism don’t handle rejection well. He will never accept the responsibility for his faults but will look for someone to blame. Paranoid and vindictive, he will rage at the criticism and seek a way to punish those who oppose him. Combine that with the historical tendency of leftists in power to need to exercise power in ruthless ways that hurt or kill those they rule, and you have the potential for a true crisis.

        Speaking of crises, I am convinced he is trying to force a constitutional crisis with amnesty.

        • camp7

          That is the consensus of many that I have talked to. It could be an immediate crisis to assume martial control, or if nothing sooner than later, a crisis of growing collateral proportion that exponentially debilitates the health of our republic. Either way, bad is bad. It’s gonna be a jungle out there.

          I’ve always liked Kipling’s take on things…

          “Now this is the Law of the Jungle — as old and true as the sky;
          And the Wolf that shall keep it may prosper,
          but the Wolf that shall break it must die.
          As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk
          the law runneth forward and back –
          For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf,
          and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.”
          ~Rudyard Kipling

  • Americana

    I don’t necessarily agree w/Newt Gingrich’s evaluation as to HOW and WHY the U.S. is failing to cope w/ISIS. I certainly wouldn’t blame it on the State Dept. and claim the State Dept. gives misleading and misinformed guidance to the President. Rather, I’d say this is indicative of just how powerful a religious political movement can become when coupled w/the right personalities. After all, the Palestinian jihad has been festering for several decades and the pretense we’ve kept the lid on all things Islam was always tenuous. The difference now is we know we never really kept the lid on all things Islamic. At least Gingrich has the guts to admit this isn’t Pres. Obama’s problem, it’s an American problem.
    __________________________________________________________________

    http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/08/opinion/gingrich-isis-boko-haram-hamas/index.html?iid=article_sidebar

    The elites in both political parties have refused to confront how serious, brutal and determined our enemies are.

    The State Department is the second most dysfunctional federal department after the Veterans Administration because its culture and structure force it to mislead and misinform every president.

    Thirteen years after 9/11, at a cost of thousands of lives, tens of thousands of wounded, and trillions of dollars, the United States is weaker and our enemies are stronger.

    This is not an Obama problem.

    This is an American problem.

    We need a new honest conversation on how we as a free people are going to defeat the forces of evil who stalk the planet.

  • fiddler

    “Obama will show up for the victory dance when the war is over, but if things change then he just as quickly disavows his part in the war.”

    It is beyond me how far the media will go to protect this man. Apparently human lives are forfeit for the sake of political advantage. Any thinking person can see that failure to hold him to account on the part of the media seals their own complicit involvement. The people deserve a dispassionate press. As I have said before, according to progressives and the leftist media, victims apparently have CONDITIONAL worth: it depends on WHO murdered them. If they are are radicals such as Hamas they are all but ignored (or the narrative becomes creative — after all they don’t blush at suggestion). If, however it can be shown that they are Israelis or American soldiers, the victim’s worth is of much more value. This is pathetic in the extreme. Only fair-minded people can see the naked reality.

  • HWGood

    Marie Antoinette: Let them eat cake!
    Barack Obama: Fore!

  • Soxtory

    In addition to Obama being such a lightweight and incompetent, the terms perfectly fit Susan Rice and Valerie Jarrett. Senator Markey, having represented Mass. for forty years despite having never lived in the state, fits also. Hard to believe Hillary may be by far the best of this group.

  • Padpaw22 .

    Maybe the US government should not have funded, trained and armed ISIS. An intelligent person would have realized that supporting terrorism in the hopes it will never be used against them would know this after Osama bin laden and al Qaeda blew up in their faces.

    Though of course the US government could be funding and supporting terrorism as justification for making war on the American people and the world