Iraq: Obama Turning Victory into Defeat

by: douglas v. gibbs | published: 10 25, 2011

President Barack Obama has declared that the United States Military will withdraw from Iraq by year's end. Obama says he made this decision because he promised to do this during his campaign. After all, he ran as the anti-war candidate, and the announcement that the American troops in Iraq will return home was inevitable. However, what Obama, and the democrats, aren't telling you is that the withdrawal of the troops has nothing to do with the President's promises, or said successes. The troop withdraw from Iraq is the result of the Obama Administration's failure in the region. A failure that will be sure to undermine America's security interests in the Middle East for decades to come.

Previous to Barry's announcement that the troops were coming home, the Obama Administration was deep into negotiations they expected to extend the presence of a small residual American force which would support Iraqi operations. However, what wound up happening is that Obama's team found a way to destroy the good standing we had in Iraq as liberators, and instead fouled up the negotiations.

With Iran flexing its madness in the region, and with the poor negotiating skills exhibited by the Obama administration, Iraq's political leaders didn’t want to risk the political consequences of extending immunity for American troops. How could they be trusted when the president has continuously proclaimed his eagerness to withdraw from Iraq, and his unwillingness to confront Iran?

In the end, Iraq's government told the United States to basically "get out."

Obama, however, fails to reveal that aspect of his decision to withdraw from Iraq. The embarrassment is too much to bear, and he fully expects the American public not to realize the truth, and to believe his usual propaganda. Full withdrawal is a mistake in regards to the stability of the region, for our ability to contain Iran has been met with a serious blow, but the United States had no choice because of the Obama team's inability to negotiate successfully with the Iraqi government.

As a result, the Iranian influence in Iraq will increase.

Hillary Clinton spewed warnings at Iran, but what will that do? The Obama administration has already revealed its ineptitude regarding the Middle East. A vacuum has been created, and the weakened U.S. presence is going to place our ally, Israel, at greater risk. This doesn't even take into consideration the turmoil in Syria, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

The real game changer, however, is going to be Turkey, as that nation changes from an ally of The West to an Islamic republic and the new head of a rising caliphate.

In the end, our departure from Iraq will leave Iraq more vulnerable, and increase in the Middle East the problems of terrorism, sectarian conflict, and the influence of Islamism through groups like al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

All because the great negotiator has proven to be incompetent in even that.

The most amazing part of it all, however, is that by withdrawing from Iraq Obama is trying to convince everyone what a harbinger of peace he is - Never mind how he has gotten us involved in Libya and Uganda, or that he has put out assassination orders on various Muslim figures, including an American Citizen, or that he has decided it is up to him and his fellow democrats who is allowed to be the leader of a nation in that part of the world.

Of course, the democrats will drag President Bush, and his dethroning of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, as an example of a Republican doing the same. In other words, they want you to believe that a single instance of American involvement in that region where the dictator was a direct threat according to intelligence reports to the U.S. and Israel is wrong because a Republican did it, but a democrat picking and choosing who's allowed to be a national leader in that region, to the point that he even puts out assassination orders, is just fine because he's a democrat.

add a comment