Saturday, January 4, 2014

A Resurgent al-Qaida in Iraq Highlights the Folly of Obama's Non-intervention Middle East Policy

It will not come as a great surprise to Middle East observers to learn that al-Qaida-linked militants control much of the Iraqi city of Fallujah and other nearby towns, fighting off efforts by troops with air support to regain control, according to eyewitnesses. Al-Qaida fighters have seized military equipment provided by the US Marines to Fallujah police, whose headquarters were seized, according to Uthman Mohamed, a local reporter in Fallujah in Iraq’s western Anbar province. The reporter spoke by phone to Bloomberg News and AP. He confirmed rumors already current : "There’s no sign of government forces inside Fallujah, and most of the fighting is taking place on a highway that links the city to Baghdad," he said. Halima Ahmed, a health official in the province, said in a phone interview that the death toll in Fallujah in the past three days of fighting is 36, mostly civilians killed by army shelling. The military also has carried out air strikes targeting suspected al-Qaida fighters, according to Al Jazeera reports. Fallujah became notorious when insurgents in 2004 killed four American security contractors and hung their burned bodies from a bridge. Nearly 100 US Marines were killed and hundreds wounded in the battle of Fallujah in 2004. Fallujah, the provincial capital Ramadi and other cities were repeated battlegrounds until 2007, as sectarian bloodshed mounted. The town also became a focus of the successful 2007 “surge” of US forces. The BBC reports that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki sent reinforcements on January 1 to dislodge militants from Fallujah and Ramadi. According to the BBC, fighting erupted after troops broke up a protest camp by Sunni Arabs in the city of Ramadi last Monday. The Sunni consistently have accused the Shia-led government of marginalizing them and have been angered by what they feel to be discrimination by the Maliki government. They also say their minority community is being targeted by anti-terrorism measures implemented to stem the surge in sectarian violence. The recent fighting in Fallujah and Ramadi has pitted government troops against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis), which is affiliated with al-Qaida, and Sunni tribesmen, looking to al-Qaida for help in their battle with Maliki, on the other. The Fallujah fighting is part of an escalation of violence in Iraq in 2013, which saw the greatest number of civilian casualties in the last five years because of the sectarian violence between Sunni and Shiite Moslems that also has raged in Syria and Lebanon. The war to depose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a member of the Alawite offshoot of Shiite Islam backed by Iran, is being fought by Sunni rebels, now overshadowed by al-Qaida Isis fighters called in to help them when western powers followed Obama's non-intervention decision. But the rebels are still supported by Saudi Arabia, the region’s biggest Sunni power. The US has stepped up arms supplies to help Maliki’s Shiite-led government suppress the group, agreeing to send helicopters, missiles and surveillance drones. While President Barack Obama continues to refuse to intervene directly in the Syrian war, the US may come under increasing pressure to contain the fallout from Obama's decision if al-Qaida militants gain a foothold in western Iraq. Ryan Crocker, US ambassador to Iraq from 2007 to 2009, said in a recent interview : “If al-Qaida manages to really take hold of western Iraq, that’s a pretty substantial base on Arab territory, where they’d have security and the space to start thinking about operations wherever they want to think about,....It’s exactly what they had in Afghanistan before 9/11.” There is little support in the US for renewed military involvement in Iraq, where 4,489 Americans were killed and 51,778 wounded in action after the US invaded the country 11 years ago. Obama has listed ending the war in Iraq as one of his main accomplishments. But Iraq has paid a high price for the Obama-engineered American withdrawal. Civilian fatalities in Iraq, including police, totaled 7,818 last year, with 18,000 wounded, according to the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq. A Pentagon spokesman, Army Colonel Steve Warren, told reporters in Washington on Friday that the US is “keeping an eye on the situation.” He said the US is providing assistance to Iraqi authorities in accordance with the security framework agreement between the countries, without giving details. So far, the violence hasn’t affected Iraq’s major oil fields, the country’s main source of revenue. Output rose by 100,000 barrels a day last month to 3.2 million barrels, the most since August, according to a Bloomberg survey. Iraq is the second-biggest producer in OPEC after Saudi Arabia. ~~~~~ Dear readers, it was Henry Ford who said, "If you do what you've always done, you'll get what you've always gotten." And to Albert Einstein is attributed the important addition : "The definition of insanity is dong the same thing over and over and expecting different results." ~~~~~ The indecisiveness of President Obama - and his outright refusal to defend either territory or friendly governments or suffering people - has led to a massive resurgence of al-Qaida and the Taliban in the Middle East. What would have been the relatively straightforward task of defending controlled ground has become, because of his withdrawal and attempts to make a virtue of abandoning allies and fledgling democratic movements, a major crisis. Where can Obama and the US now draw a defensive line in the Middle East? Afghanistan? The Karzai deal with the Taliban is all but signed in the blood of American soldiers and Afghan civilians who will once more be under the Taliban whip. Iraq? Perhaps, but it raises the prospect of beginning again with all the gearing up and loss of life needed to regain what had once been secured if America had just held on in Iraq. And Iraq will now be a two or three front war, with Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas eager to use terrorist attacks against their enemies, America, Israel and Saudi Arabia. And let us not be fooled by Obama's self-serving words about Iraqis and Afghans now being able to save themselves. It is not true. One has only to look at the swiftness with which al-Qaida, the Taliban and their jihadist allies have become the dominant forces in Afghanistan, which threatens a weak nuclear Pakistan and its neighbor, India, to the east - and in Iraq and Syria, which threatens Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, to the west and south. AND, if Obama refuses to stand up and be counted, we may be sure that the US military, NATO, Europe and Turkey and its military, as well as Vladimir Putin and his military concerning the Caucasus and the Russian southern tier, all of them are even now strategizing about how to keep the al-Qaida radical islamist terrorists at bay. Because, make no mistake, their next goals are Turkey, a weakened Greece, the Balkans and the Moslem areas of southern Russia. ~~~~~ But, you can sleep well, Mr. Obama. It will not all blow up before you and your naive and dangerously Chamberlainesque White House are gone forever, leaving us to clean up the dispicable mess you will have left behind.

7 comments:

  1. What does anyone expect from an inexperienced man who became President???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What I expect is for him to learn and grow into the office. he is not the first man to come to the Presidency with little or no understanding or ability to perform his duties. But he is certainly the most destructive and dangerous. He make Jimmy Carter look like an experienced, well intentioned foreign policy expert.

      And isn't it somewhat funny they have both failed pathetically in the same region of the world. Islamic Understanding 101 wasn't a good course for them.

      Delete
  2. We should grasp the fact that in the very near future the entire Middle East will be the radical, terrorists, fundamentalist world of government by Sharia Law and al-Qaida and the Taliban vs Israel and silently Saudi Arabia (you know that oil rich kingdom that is an expert at silently being nearly western and outwardly being Islamic).

    There is some positives in that situation.

    1. The US will develop it's oil reserves out of necessity and ridiculous high prices for their oil.

    2. The US will finally have a clear picture of who we defend in the region

    3. Russian oil becomes instantly popular and expensive in the Euro Zone

    4. War in the Middle East will be easier to understand for the likes of Obama and all European fence sitters.

    5. Bombing sites in the Middle east will be clearly defined -nothing in Israel & Saudi Arabia, the rest is fair game.


    I know I like to close out with a quote, but this may upset some I apologize in advance

    "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." -
    Romans 12: 19

    ReplyDelete
  3. Report: John Kerry Proposing To ‘Offer Up’ U.S. Troops To Help Secure Borders Of “New State Of Palestine”

    Friends this sort of says it all about what Obama wants in the Middle east, and where he wants to take it from.

    Has a Secretary of State EVER refused to do the dirty dealings of the President? - not that this spineless, self appointed Viet Nam war hero ever would.

    What do you all think - "should we deprive Israel of it's territory to create something that never before existed (a sovereign State of Palestine) simply to satisfy a promise that Obama made to his people.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Has Obama gone completely nuts or are the ‘screws’ being turned tighter on him by the powers to be in the world of radical Islamic governments … Is it now payback time for Obama? Are we seriously going to be sending American troops to secure the new state of Palestine? Well, that’s seems to be a consideration within the Obama administration, albeit based on unconfirmed reports.

    Secretary of State John Kerry is proposing to offer up US troops to help secure the borders of the new state of Palestine, according to some unconfirmed news reports coming out of Israel.

    How plausible is the possibility? And would it be a good idea, or, as some military analysts argue, would the White House would be “nuts” to consider it?

    The US troops would be tasked with helping to prevent anti-Israel forces from coming out of Jordan and reaching Israel (THIS IS A GIANT EXCUSE TO GET THE TROOPS IN PLACE), according to Debkafile, an Israeli intelligence and security news service.

    We couldn’t get our act together on Syria due to this administration’s horrendously vague foreign policy; and now they want to do this! No wonder why the world can’t take us seriously anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  5. A Staunch ConservativeJanuary 5, 2014 at 9:55 AM

    Is there a lack of a Middle East policy at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. or is this newest revaluation of American troop to protect the yet defined borders of the new Sate of Palestine the real and ever present policy.

    Has this been the aim, the end game all along for Obama. Does he see his legacy not in the United States and accomplishments here, but rather what he does for his homeland - the World of Islam and the destruction of Israel.

    Will this Congress actually allow American troops to be sent to the borders of the New State of Palestine in order to die, be disfigured, and be wounded in the name Obama. And possibly once there be asked to turn 180 degrees and point their weapons in the direction of Israel?

    All is possible in the name of Obama, Kerry, Jarrett, and Clinton(s) ?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Isn't Obama actually conducting a form of "Intervention" in Syria, Libya, Iran, Iraq and various other smaller North African states that are all suffering from civil wars and genocides by merely not prevailing on the side of those that under any other US President we would have in the past?

    According to Webster Intervene – “to get involved or take some action in something in order to change what is happening”. What is happening is the people in many Middle east & N. African countries are rising up against the barbaric leadership that is ruling them via Sharia law. So Obama has elected to sit on the side lines in order not to disrupt the plans of the likes of the Muslin Brotherhood, Taliban, al- Quaid, etc.

    I know I’m being absurd. But I’m trying to prove a point about the Obama administration by absurdity. These people (including Obama) around the president have NO idea what to do or what they are doing. They need to walk down a street of a village in one of these countries and see the death and anguish that their present governments are exposing them to in the name of a 2000 year old book of law.

    Is the Obama Administration taking some form of intervention – YES? The deadly, most destructive kind possible – supporting and encouraging the cause of the chaos.

    To paraphrase a song from “The Music Man” … We‘ve got trouble right here in the USA, it starts with O and ends with A … OBAMA

    ReplyDelete