There are many issues that Obama has staked a position that is pro-citizen and anti-cronyism.
http://im.ft-static.com/content/images/fffd6e71-3772-416e-a397-ce503b151c12.img
Iraq and Syria is not one of them.
The reason why the West is not winning in Iraq is in part due to the fact that Obama has sold out to special interests on strategy in Iraq against ISIS. He is allowing side objectives to get in the way.
What he told the American people about the objective in defeating ISIL :
"This resolution reflects our core objective to destroy ISIL."
http://www.ibtimes.com/full-text-obama-isis-war-speech-islamic-state-terrorists-are-going-lose-president-1813394
What he is not telling the American people is that his real objective is:
This resolution reflects our core objective to destroy ISIL AND maintain favorable interests in Iraq."
That means propping up the corrupt Iraqi leaders that caused this whole mess in the first place. They turned Anbar over to ISIS by not being inclusive to Sunni Arabs. Iraq has disintegrated as a result!
Obama can win or he can maintain the cronys in Iraq that are pro-USA. He can't do both.
If winning is the ultimate objective then all secondary objectives must disappear. If the only way to do that means arming and cooperating with Iranians to crush ISIS then that should be the strategy. If that means arming the Kurds to crush ISIS then that should be the strategy. If it means US ground troops in Syria then that should be the strategy. If it means nuking Raqqa then that should be the strategy. There is no middle ground in war. There is no appeasing side interests on the way to victory.
The American people deserve to know the truth that Obama doesn't want Iraq on his CV and he is leaving the decisions to the vested interests that caused the mess in the first place. That is making defeat more likely, not less.
If I was Obama, I would tell Abadi he's got 30 days to start showing some victory or Abadi is out of the picture and the coalition will fight over top of what's left of Baghdad.
Iraq and Syria is not one of them.
The reason why the West is not winning in Iraq is in part due to the fact that Obama has sold out to special interests on strategy in Iraq against ISIS. He is allowing side objectives to get in the way.
What he told the American people about the objective in defeating ISIL :
"This resolution reflects our core objective to destroy ISIL."
http://www.ibtimes.com/full-text-obama-isis-war-speech-islamic-state-terrorists-are-going-lose-president-1813394
What he is not telling the American people is that his real objective is:
This resolution reflects our core objective to destroy ISIL AND maintain favorable interests in Iraq."
That means propping up the corrupt Iraqi leaders that caused this whole mess in the first place. They turned Anbar over to ISIS by not being inclusive to Sunni Arabs. Iraq has disintegrated as a result!
Obama can win or he can maintain the cronys in Iraq that are pro-USA. He can't do both.
If winning is the ultimate objective then all secondary objectives must disappear. If the only way to do that means arming and cooperating with Iranians to crush ISIS then that should be the strategy. If that means arming the Kurds to crush ISIS then that should be the strategy. If it means US ground troops in Syria then that should be the strategy. If it means nuking Raqqa then that should be the strategy. There is no middle ground in war. There is no appeasing side interests on the way to victory.
The American people deserve to know the truth that Obama doesn't want Iraq on his CV and he is leaving the decisions to the vested interests that caused the mess in the first place. That is making defeat more likely, not less.
If I was Obama, I would tell Abadi he's got 30 days to start showing some victory or Abadi is out of the picture and the coalition will fight over top of what's left of Baghdad.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment