You tell me: Is it really that big a deal when the Obama Administration comes right out and admits what we all know anyway? That they really have no heart for the fight against ISIS and they're not going to make a serious commitment to winning it?
It's never been a secret that Obama's political position on this - get out of Iraq completely and never get involved again - overrides any sort of commitment to the security of that nation or of the Middle East region in general. The Iraq War was unpopular (thanks in large part to people like Obama making sure it would be) and a politician couldn't go wrong with an uncompromising commitment to get out and stay out - the consequences be damned.
So I suppose Josh Earnest didn't say anything yesterday that we - or ISIS - didn't already know. ISIS does not have to worry about fighting the United States Armed Forces as it rampages across the region, beheading and burning people alive. As long as they can defeat a jury-rigged Iraqi army including some hurriedly trained Sunni tribesmen, Iraq is theirs. No reason not to make it official:
The White House on Thursday, in no uncertain terms, put the onus on the Iraqis to fight and defeat the Islamic State -- even as a new report warned foreign fighters are flocking to the battlefield at a historic and dangerous pace.
"The United States is not going to be responsible for securing the security situation inside of Iraq," Press Secretary Josh Earnest told Fox News.
Earnest defended the administration's strategy, amid growing concerns about gains made by ISIS fighters in both Iraq and Syria. Earnest said the effort would take a "sustained commitment," but stressed that the U.S. will continue to focus on training and equipping Iraqi forces, while backing them up on the battlefield with air power.
"Our strategy is to support the Iraqi security forces in doing what we will not do for them," he said. "The United States is prepared to train them, to equip them, and to back them on the battlefield with coalition military air power as they take the fight to ISIL in their own country."
In saying the U.S. will not be "responsible" for the security situation, the White House was putting clear limits on the lengths to which the U.S. will go to reverse ISIS' gains, even as the Pentagon considers adjustments to the strategy.
The Iraqis are finding out what happens when you're a supposed "ally" of Barack Obama and things don't go well. Defense Secretary Ash Carter showed the other day that he has learned well from the boss when he blamed the Iraqis for lacking the will to fight. This coming from an administration that makes its own lack of will to fight a point of pride and a frequent political talking point.
Isolationism can be a very popular political ploy when there's no immediate price to be paid for withdrawing from the world. Naive American ears love to hear that we can bring the boys home, save billions we spend on all those military bases, stop trying to be the world's policeman, etc. The problem, of course, is that the likes of ISIS always takes advantage when America decides it's had enough of global leadership, and then we're forced to make a choice whether to remain so obstinate or take action on behalf of free people and strategic allies. Most American presidents, even the ones who prefer not to place such a heavy military footprint all over the globe, recognize that we have a responsibility as global leaders to stop monsters like this.
Not Barack Obama. He simply doesn't care. Not about Iraq. Not about the victims of ISIS. Not about our strategic interests in the Middle East. Not about any of it. His enemy is anyone who opposes the expansion of the federal government's power, and all a fight against ISIS would do is use up resources he could be devoting to the regulation of the puddle on your private property.
We. Will. Not. Fight. We won't sign a status of forces agreement, and we won't stop the butchers who have taken Mosul and Ramadi, and will surely be marching on Baghdad before long.
ISIS, Iraq is yours. Obama has better things to do.
You tell me: Is it really that big a deal when the Obama Administration comes right out and admits what we all know anyway? That they really have no heart for the fight against ISIS and they're not going to make a serious commitment to winning it?
It's never been a secret that Obama's political position on this - get out of Iraq completely and never get involved again - overrides any sort of commitment to the security of that nation or of the Middle East region in general. The Iraq War was unpopular (thanks in large part to people like Obama making sure it would be) and a politician couldn't go wrong with an uncompromising commitment to get out and stay out - the consequences be damned.
