We still have a long way to go before we see an absolutely stable Iraq, but, as we assess the President’s judgment in managing the current crisis, it is clear that Republicans and the national media have once again gleefully discredited themselves as they zealously attempt to shame and discredit this President.
The yet again revelation of barbaric treatment of African Americans at the hands of police over the last few days has arrested the attention of the national media, but the media’s preoccupation just a week ago had been centered, as it usually is, on its effort to portray Barack Obama as an incompetent president, bent on bringing the nation to harm and ruin, in this case, through his insistence that there will be no utilization of U.S. combat troops as a means of addressing the latest crisis in the Republican created chaotic nation of Iraq.
The hullabaloo all stemmed from the President’s announcement on August 7, 2014:
Today I authorized two operations in Iraq -- targeted airstrikes to protect our American personnel, and a humanitarian effort to help save thousands of Iraqi civilians who are trapped on a mountain without food and water and facing almost certain death.
Much with the instinct of a quickly raised head of a pooch on a front porch, the Right-Wing and the news media, even at this juncture, became readied for an all out Obama assault. The President continued:
Let me explain the actions we’re taking and why….
First, I said in June -- as the terrorist group ISIL began an advance across Iraq -- that the United States would be prepared to take targeted military action in Iraq if and when we determined that the situation required it. In recent days, these terrorists have continued to move across Iraq, and have neared the city of Erbil, where American diplomats and civilians serve at our consulate and American military personnel advise Iraqi forces.
To stop the advance on Erbil, I’ve directed our military to take targeted strikes against ISIL terrorist convoys should they move toward the city. We intend to stay vigilant, and take action if these terrorist forces threaten our personnel or facilities anywhere in Iraq, including our consulate in Erbil and our embassy in Baghdad. We’re also providing urgent assistance to Iraqi government and Kurdish forces so they can more effectively wage the fight against ISIL.
Second, at the request of the Iraqi government -- we’ve begun operations to help save Iraqi civilians stranded on the mountain. As ISIL has marched across Iraq, it has waged a ruthless campaign against innocent Iraqis. And these terrorists have been especially barbaric towards religious minorities, including Christian and Yezidis, a small and ancient religious sect. Countless Iraqis have been displaced. And chilling reports describe ISIL militants rounding up families, conducting mass executions, and enslaving Yezidi women.
But wait, what was this about no combat boots on the ground?
I know that many of you are rightly concerned about any American military action in Iraq, even limited strikes like these. I understand that. I ran for this office in part to end our war in Iraq and welcome our troops home, and that’s what we’ve done. As Commander-in-Chief, I will not allow the United States to be dragged into fighting another war in Iraq. And so even as we support Iraqis as they take the fight to these terrorists, American combat troops will not be returning to fight in Iraq, because there’s no American military solution to the larger crisis in Iraq. The only lasting solution is reconciliation among Iraqi communities and stronger Iraqi security forces.
1, 2, 3…. All hell breaks loose:
Republican Senator John McCain would quickly rush before the cameras to inform all who would listen that he would use this opportunity to start a war in the Middle East on several fronts:
I would be launching airstrikes not only in Iraq, but in Syria against ISIS.
The voice of Gene Wilder from
Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory would be effectively appropriate at this juncture:
You get nothing! You lose! Good day sir!
But it’s doubtful even this forceful rebuke of McCain would halt his proclivity for warmongering:
I would be rushing equipment to Irbil. I would be launching airstrikes not only in Iraq, but in Syria against ISIS. They have erased the boundaries between Iraq and Syria. I would be providing as much training and equipment as I can to - as I said, to the Kurds, and I would do a lot of things that we cannot have to wait for Maliki to leave there. And I would be giving assistance to the Syrian - the Free Syrian Army, which is on the ropes right now because we failed to help them. And this all goes back to a number of steps the president took, including a failure to leave a residual force in Iraq.
Empasis, diarist....
Still, beyond the usual and predictable rantings of John McCain, there were other voices who scolded the President as somehow lacking understanding of the pertinent issues involved in this crisis, such as former U.S. ambassador Marc Ginsberg, who appeared on MSNBC’s the Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell to offer one of the most startling and ridiculous characterization of a military foe ever used to shock a nation into being desirous of a military campaign:
I think it’s important for our viewers, Lawrence, to understand, this is the Ebola virus of terrorism that is now striking the Middle East. I hate to bring that analogy in but let’s understand, not only has ISIS been able to consolidate control in Northern Syria, not only in Northern Iraq, but it has now started a conflict with the Lebanese military, the Jordanians are particular worried about their own border, and, at this point in time, the Kurds, the Peshmerga force, doesn’t have the military capability, the armored personnel carriers , the tanks that ISIS has already captured, which forced the Peshmerga, the Kurdish forces to retreat.
And so in effect what you have is no military option, and when the President gets on TV and says tonight, ‘No boots on the ground.’ And those people are stuck in the mountain and we know that Erbil maybe in danger because the Kurdish forces don’t have the military assistance they need. Why is he taking all of this off the table before he knows exactly what he’s getting into?
If I had ever respected Mr. Ginsberg's opinions in the past. The Ebola reference has made it almost certain that I will be more circumspect of anything he utters in the future.
MSNBC’s resident retired general Barry McCaffrey also weighed in with great dismay at “Obama’s muddled thinking” on the issue of Iraq. In responding to a question by Chuck Todd on The Daily Rundown on whether the President is doing enough, McCaffrey said:
Look, there’s a huge tragedy unfolding, 1.5 million refugees, a couple hundred thousand, just in the last few weeks...50,000 of this minority group stuck on the…up on the mountains, but these are political gestures using military power.
According to the General:
If you’re going to protect refugees, 50,000 people without water and food, you don’t do two F/A-18 strikes on an artillery unit somewhere in the vicinity.
And of course, McCaffrey felt he had to tell the "incompetent" Obama that he needed to write down stuff before he goes ahead and makes a fool of himself:
It looks to me as if a lot of this is internal U.S. politics to show we’re doing something. I mean, if you’re going to use military power, you have to write down your objective and then use decisive force to meet your objective. So I’m a little dismayed at what we’re up to here.
I think we have muddled thinking on what we’re trying to achieve in Iraq.
But what would criticism of Obama look like without
Andrea Mitchell and her Republican colleagues at MSNBC lambasting the President. Here she invites former John McCain presidential campaign coordinator, and MSNBC political analyst, Steve Schmidt to tell us how the President has no clue of what the mission really is:
Our focus as a country has to be to use overwhelming military force and air power. Not necessarily the insertion of American troops--but some American troops on the ground, to be able to direct the proper deployment of the air power assets, because two 500 pound bombs being dropped by F/A-18s is not commensurate with the treat that ISIS poses and the degree to which we delay in confronting it, we will have to deal with a much bigger more dangerous threat down the road, and so the world is the way that it is, not the way we want it to be, and the administration has to recognize this at this very dangerous hour in this region.
Mitchell made sure to compliment Schmidt on his perspicacity:
That is um…I would suggest, Steve, is a fascinating political, I mean, geopolitical and military analysis.
Sure it is, Andrea....
It should be noted that despite the blather and pretense of schooling the President on how he should approach this crisis, Schmidt carefully framed his criticism while agreeing with the President that there should be no boots on the ground, or perhaps too afraid to say what he and most republicans really desire.
So, was the President wrong in his planned strategy to address the issues he outlined during his August 7 announcement to the nation? Another media insider thought so. Associate editor of the Washington Post Rajiv Chandrasekaran pretended to have a more cogent understanding of the conflict as he responded to a question from O’Donnell:
Lawrence O’Donnell: Rajiv, to you, the question of the night…these people are trapped on the top of a mountain, the President has -- as we hope -- successfully gotten them food and we hope some survival supplies in an area...we know today, the temperature is probably going to go to 106 degrees where they are on that mountain. But, at some point, they are going to have to come down. What happens then?
Rajiv Chandrasekaran: Well, where do they come down to? ISIS forces are pretty well consolidated in Sinjar where most of these individuals up on the mountain live. And who is going to fight for them? That becomes the real big question here. You know, you can continue these humanitarian aid drops but for how long? When it comes to, for instances, other elements of the Iraq fight, trying to keep these ISIS forces from Irbil, you can see how Kurdish forces who are in that city will be able to regroup and can potentially defend it.
But these Yazidis up there on the mountain, they don`t really have a militia and the Iraqi army is far, far away from them. So, this doesn`t seem to be a clear path to getting them off the mountain. You can feed, you can hydrate them, but what then?
I should note that Lawrence O'Donnell, unlike Andrea Mitchell, refrained from cosigning the comments of his guests concerning the implied lack of comprehension of the President.
During the media’s concentrated focus on the behavior of police in Ferguson, Missouri, yesterday, President Obama appeared before the camera, and, besides addressing the referenced police misconduct, said this:
Because of the skill and professionalism of our military –- and the generosity of our people –- we broke the ISIL siege of Mount Sinjar; we helped vulnerable people reach safety; and we helped save many innocent lives. Because of these efforts, we do not expect there to be an additional operation to evacuate people off the mountain, and it’s unlikely that we’re going to need to continue humanitarian air drops on the mountain. The majority of the military personnel who conducted the assessment will be leaving Iraq in the coming days.
This news simply cannot be true, what about Rajiv?
Rajiv Chandrasekaran:
But these Yazidis up there on the mountain, they don`t really have a militia and the Iraqi army is far, far away from them. So, this doesn`t seem to be a clear path to getting them off the mountain.
And retired General Barry McCaffrey?
It looks to me as if a lot of this is internal U.S. politics to show we’re doing something. I mean, if you’re going to use military power, you have to write down your objective and then use decisive force to meet your objective. So I’m a little dismayed at what we’re up to here.
And Steve Schmidt?
The world is the way that it is, not the way we want it to be, and the administration has to recognize this at this very dangerous hour in this region.
What about the naysayers on Fox News and CNN and all the so-called political experts over the past week who laid into the President for being incompetent? They are still around, either lying dormant and pretending they hadn't suggested the President's mission would be a failure, or they have recalibrated their criticism.
The President has always insisted that the crisis in Iraq be solved by Iraqis, politically, and not through the continuing intervention of U.S. combat troops. A major underpinning of his current strategy rested with Iraqis forming a more cohesive government that would enable the nation to more effectively defend against ISIS. Prime Minister Nouri Maliki has been widely viewed as a hindrance to such cohesion. On Thursday came the news:
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki has resigned, in a move observers hope will end a political crisis in Baghdad.
Haider al-Abadi, a deputy speaker of parliament, has been asked by Iraq's president to form a government. Mr Maliki's earlier refusal to resign after eight years in power had been blamed for deepening the crisis. The UN and US have welcomed his resignation.
What did John McCain say again?
I would be providing as much training and equipment as I can to - as I said, to the Kurds, and I would do a lot of things that we cannot have to wait for Maliki to leave there.
Aren’t these people tired of looking ridiculous?
Continued success, Mr. President!