Degrading Iraq, not ISIS

I understand debate over whether military involvement in Iraq was advisable. Honest people can disagree over that. But making George Bush into some kind of bloodthirsty dictator is way over the line. He was responding to a threat that was growing in the region, and he took out a dictator who was hoping to rule the entire Middle East. Further, he acted on what was the best intelligence at the time with respect to chemical weapons, and he certainly didn’t lie so that American soldiers would die.

American soldiers did die, and the hope was that their deaths would be worth something in the long run, like a stable Iraq. Now, all of that has been overturned as ISIS has taken over most of those cities that Americans died to free. This is a travesty, especially when the Obama administration and the military brass say the taking of Ramadi is “no big deal.”

Pass It On

President Obama’s promise that he would “degrade” ISIS rings hollow. They are growing in strength and influence, making him and his minions appear to be no better than “Baghdad Bob,” the Saddam Hussein mouthpiece who said there were no American troops anywhere while the Hussein regime was, in fact, on the verge of being toppled. It’s not ISIS that’s being degraded; it’s something else.

Degrade Portion

No matter what credible criticism one can level at President Bush over his Iraq policy, he did achieve a fledgling Iraqi nation that was at least stable at the time. Even President Obama acknowledged this as he prematurely—and against the advice of his military commanders—pulled out the remaining American forces. The new “stability” is not something to be proud of:

Stable Iraq

So as Iraq descends into chaos and ISIS is poised to control the entire country, Obama wants us to believe he is not responsible for this turn of events:

Didn't Build That

Frankly, he really doesn’t care much what happens over there. He’s never considered a war on terror to be all that legitimate. Instead, he thinks global climate change is where we need to focus.

Biggest Security Threat

As I’ve said before, his ideological blinders have created a new territory called Obamaworld, a fantasyland of his own making.

Merely Tactical Setbacks

In a Memorial Day speech yesterday, President Obama said we should rejoice because for the first time in a long time American troops are not fighting in an overseas war. He even mentioned Afghanistan, where 10,000 Americans are still on active duty. The news report I was watching also commented that 3500 American military personnel continue to work with the Iraqi army.

So how is that a testimony to complete withdrawal from overseas conflicts? He did what he does so often—make a blatant statement of supposed fact that is at odds with the facts.

Even this late—more than six years into his presidency—he still acts like all the problems in the Middle East are due to George W. Bush. You can criticize Bush’s policies, and I think there is ground for criticism, but a direct comparison of the two presidents’ actions show rather stark differences:


If you think Bush was mistaken in toppling Saddam Hussein, and that the aftermath of that was particularly messy, one thing to remember is that when he left office, he also bequeathed to Obama an Iraq on the verge of stability. Obama’s decision to pull out all troops, despite the advice of the military, has led to the chaos that is ISIS.

One wonders what, in fact, his overall strategy really is. Look the other way and pretend that everything is fine?


Since he is so adept at comparing himself with his predecessor, here’s another apt comparison:


At least George Bush recognized when his strategy needed to be altered, based on the situation. Obama just waltzes along as if all is great. Three of the four major cities in Iraq now under the control of ISIS? No problem. Our strategy is working, he assures us. The latest disaster is merely a tactical setback, not a failure of strategy. How long will he keep saying that?

Tactical Setback

Far-fetched? I’m not so sure.

Obama’s Constant Flow of Silly Comments

I wasn’t going to write anything about President Obama today. Really, I wasn’t. But he’s just too hard to ignore when he’s so clueless and/or so ideologically blind that he almost forces me to address his constant flow of silly and destructive comments.

I’ve got three examples. First, the whole Obamacare fiasco. His administration continues to claim it’s a success despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Covering More People

The company running the website has withdrawn (the second one to do so). Hopefully, the Supreme Court will rule against the federal exchanges (since they were not in the bill at all) and some of those remaining state exchanges are in deep financial trouble.

O'Care Exchanges

Obamacare has not worked and never will. Don’t expect, though, that Obama will ever admit that.

He’s also constantly harping on the “privileged” in society who apparently got there only with government help and can take no credit for their successes. Then he rails against them for not helping society more, regardless of the fact that it’s those entrepreneurs that actually create jobs whenever the government gets out of the way and lets them. Above all, though, what strikes me is the utter hypocrisy of all his denunciations. Has he ever thought of applying his complaints to himself?


What really tipped the balance today, though, and made me comment on him, was the disaster unfolding in Iraq and his misplaced focus. The city of Ramadi just fell to ISIS, meaning that three of the major four cities in that country are now in the hands of this terrorist organization. What does his administration say about it? Well, that’s just a little setback. Don’t worry, our strategy is working. You call that “working”? And then who does he reach out to for help?

Little Help

I don’t think insanity is too strong a term to use here. It’s truly insane to believe that Iran will be there to “help” us.

Then, to top it off, Obama spoke at the commencement for graduates of the Coast Guard and told them that the real national security threat is—get ready for it—climate change! Not a word about terrorism or the collapse of a regime that had, at one point, been stabilized. This is beyond clueless; this is deliberate and obstinate stupidity. He needs to realize one thing:

No Finale

Sadly, I don’t expect him to realize it. We are saddled with the worst presidential administration in American history.

Lack of Intelligence Report

The latest intelligence report on terror threats to the country no longer includes either Iran or its minions in Hezbollah on the list of threats. If that seems rather unintelligent to you, don’t think you’re the one failing the intelligence test.

What would ever lead our government to come up with this assessment? Could it be because our president wants a “deal” with Iran so badly that he will do anything to show them how nice we are to them? That by removing them from the terror list, they will have a change of heart? Once again, we have the Obama worldview—skewed as it it—on full display.


Once again, he reveals his penchant for not knowing who the real enemy is:


And have you noticed who is doing the fighting against ISIS in Iraq, the nation we pulled out of the fire and tried to set on a stable course? Iraq is quickly becoming a subsidiary of Iran. What’s even worse is our government apparently applauds this development. We will keep applauding, apparently, until the country that seeks to destroy Israel and send nuclear missiles our way achieves its goal.

Simultaneously, our president and his administration give funding to an organization actively working to oust Netanyahu as the Israeli prime minister. One of Obama’s chief campaign strategists was sent over to Israel for that very purpose. This is the president who balked at inviting Netanyahu to speak to Congress because, ostensibly, it would be “wrong” to influence the upcoming Israeli elections.

This is the basest hypocrisy.

We are in this position because American voters collectively put their heads in the sand twice. We have reaped what we have sown. We are ultimately to blame.

This new “lack of intelligence” report is merely the latest evidence of Obama Fantasyland:

It's a Wash

Less than two years to go.

The Williams Lie

Brian WilliamsMy opinion of the reliability of most broadcast news is already pretty low. Then along comes the Brian Williams story. Williams, the NBC news anchor for its evening broadcast, has been caught in a lie of significant magnitude.

Back in 2003, reporting from Iraq, Williams began telling the tale of how a chopper he was riding in was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade and how he was very fortunate to still be alive after that harrowing experience.

This week, he performed an on-air mea culpa about the incident, apologizing for making a “mistake.” It seems his helicopter wasn’t hit after all. He had simply mixed up the facts. It’s all a mistake, folks—no real story here.

Mistakes are mistakes. They are understandable. But to tell a blatant untruth for more than a decade and then simply say, “Whoops, got it wrong,” doesn’t really answer the questions. Even his sort-of apology has now been challenged by those who were there. Williams’s revised story says it was the chopper in front of his that got hit, yet the pilot of his chopper says it was a second set of choppers going the other way that were attacked—Williams’s own group never was in the line of fire.

Why did he finally try to wiggle out of his former story, the one he held to for years? Was he going to be outed anyway, so the best strategy was to get in front of the issue?

Sorry. It doesn’t pass the test. He can’t be suffering from trauma. After all, he was never hit. Isn’t it reasonable to question how anyone can confuse the facts in a case like this? I mean, if I had been in a chopper that was hit by an RPG, I would probably remember, wouldn’t you? And if that had never happened, most of us wouldn’t suddenly think it had.

This is ludicrous.

The silliness of it all was captured by the Media Research Center, which had some fun with Williams yesterday. It decided to enhance his resumé further. Did you know we owe Williams a debt of gratitude for the American Revolution?

Brian Williams-Delaware

Yes, he was there, reporting on the scene that crucial night when Washington crossed the Delaware and took the Hessians by surprise.

Then, of course, there were his contributions in WWII:

Brian Williams-Philippines

Brian Williams-D-Day

It’s nice to know Brian Williams is always there, giving us the facts.

Any news organization concerned about its credibility would dismiss someone who has done what Williams did. But we’re talking about NBC, the parent of that unbiased source of “news” called MSNBC. Don’t expect any real action. They’re so used to spinning the news for partisan purposes, this will hardly matter to them in the long run. What’s one more lie, even if it is tellingly more blatant than usual?

Intelligence Failures

ISIS forces closing in on a city in Syria. Our bombing has done nothing to stop them. Baghdad, in Iraq, also threatened. Our bombing seems ineffective. An astounding 70% or so of Americans in a recent poll saying ground troops may be needed. Everyone is getting the point—except the one person who ought to get it.

Former Obama secretary of defense Leon Panetta has come out with his book. In it, he details how Obama rejected his and other military officials’ view that it was imperative to leave a residual force in Iraq to avoid a repeat of terrorism in that country. Apparently, Obama had only one thing on his mind:


With blinders like that, our president could see nothing else. He lives in his own little world where things work the way he thinks they should. Unfortunately, the rest of us live in the real world.

We’re now told that Obama attended only 42% of his daily intelligence briefings. I guess he can’t be bothered with boring things like that.

Sunday Edition

When confronted with his gross miscalculation with respect to the ISIS threat, he does what he always does so well—blame others:

Duck Stops Here

Yes, there was an intelligence failure, but not the one he described:

Intelligence Failure

He’s far more interested in what he considers to be the “real” war that is waging within the U.S.

War on Women

Of course, this all began with a different type of intelligence failure—on the part of the American voter:


We need a return to intelligence this November. Will we see it?

Million Times

God forgive us for 2008 and 2012. Please have mercy in 2014, even though we don’t deserve it.

An Enemy’s Strategy

You want to know why I have no confidence that President Obama really takes the terrorist threat seriously? I have some political cartoons that express my concerns quite well.

First, despite being daily briefed on ISIS for over a year, he didn’t pay much attention to them. This comes back, I believe, to his underlying worldview that is sympathetic to practically all forms of Islam, no matter how extreme. Now he wants us to believe he will arm Syrian rebels (who are scattered, unorganized, and woefully inadequate for the job) and all will be well. Right.


Color me unconvinced.

Next, he also wants us to believe he has garnered a “broad coalition” of nations eager to work with America to wipe out ISIS. How is that proceeding? Well, Britain and France have declined to help with any bombing. Arab nations have offered scant assistance, and certainly no “boots on the ground.” What a mighty coalition he has assembled!

Broad Coalition

Then, repeatedly, he insists America will not send combat troops to help our erstwhile ally, the Iraqi government. However, he has no hesitation sending troops to Africa to aid in combating Ebola. Really? Is that what the American military is supposed to be doing, especially at a time when he has decimated our military force? Is Ebola the greatest national security threat we face?


An enemy couldn’t have devised a better strategy overall for ruining our nation’s future. Then again, maybe an enemy has devised this strategy, and it’s been homegrown at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.