The Bush-era is back, and it’s driving Obama’s supporters insane

posted at 10:41 am on June 17, 2014 by Noah Rothman

Among the many triumphs President Barack Obama’s supporters credited themselves with in the wake of the freshman Illinois senator’s historic primary and presidential victories in 2008 was that they had demonstrated that any support for military intervention in Iraq was a political career killer. The return of catastrophic violence to Iraq, after that violence spilled over the Syrian border, has proven especially vexing for Obama’s backers. This crisis has revealed that George W. Bush’s pro-interventionist allies not only failed to exile themselves following Obama’s ascension to the White House, but they remain unrepentant. And that’s driving the left mad.

Iraq War opponents have fumed in recent days, not because of the sacking of Iraqi cities by Islamic jihadists who are going about systematically executing Shiites and imposing Sharia Law on the survivors, but over the fact that a variety of prominent Iraq War supporters are back in the news.

“NBC and ABC’s Sunday news shows turned to discredited architects of the Iraq War to opine on the appropriate U.S. response to growing violence in Iraq, without acknowledging their history of deceit and faulty predictions,” Media Matters’ Emily Arrowood opined, citing specifically the return to the airwaves of former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and The Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol (who never really disappeared from the talk show circuit in the first place).

“If you were asked to identify a single moment that best captures the failure of elite media outlets to act as agents of accountability, you could do worse than David Gregory asking Paul Wolfowitz on “Meet the Press” this weekend what we should do, “as a policy matter,” to deal with the deteriorating situation in Iraq,” Salon’s Simon Maloy vented.

Maloy goes on to rend garments over the gall of The Wall Street Journal daring to provide former head of the Iraqi occupation authority L. Paul Bremmer space in the opinion pages to weigh in on the crisis.

“Their argument for taking them seriously is to ignore everything they’ve said up to this point,” the Salon columnist continued. Finally, Maloy questions why American society has not whisked these and other prominent figures of the Bush-era off to the Leper Caves.

There are no consequences for being so wrong all the time. Kristol and Wolfowitz and all the other people responsible for dragging us into Iraq should be pariahs who labor under the expectation of doing some measure of atonement for their stubborn and wrongheaded pursuit of a disastrous policy. Instead they get invited on to Sunday shows to discuss what we should do next in Iraq.

“[P]eople who both supported the invasion, and believe further military involvement is the right course now,” The New Republic’s Brian Beutler wrote, crafting a slightly more thoughtful version of the Maloy’s take. “They should be regarded with incredible skepticism, and not simply because of the magnitude of their initial mistake.”

[I]t’s crucial for everyone to recognize that double-down interventionists have much more on the line than a desire to provide accurate, dispassionate risk assessments, and to price that into their arguments. We should set the bar for those arguments very high. Unfortunately, the substantive dispute about Iraq still lies on a largely partisan axis, and because the country elected and re-elected a president who was right in the first instance, the “opposition” is now composed of people who blew it over a decade ago. And so they’re the ones getting calls from reporters and network news producers looking for a fresh take today.

At least Beutler took a stab at informing his readers as to why they should be skeptical of the pronouncements of the Iraq War’s architects, but that is not the same as a case for their self-censorship.

These and others who populate social media with similar self-assured sermons denouncing the Iraq War architects’ self-assuredness are so utterly convinced that Bush allies should disappear in disgrace that they often fail to assert why.

“Why?” they bristle. There is no need to even dignify such an impertinent question with a response. History itself has repudiated the Iraq War’s supporters, they claim. Majority opinion in virtually every major institution in American – from government, to entertainment, to media, to academia – all are quite convinced that the Iraq War was folly from beginning to end, and cutting America’s losses was the only option available to Obama.

In fact, this consensus among America’s influencer caste has dulled the arguments of those whose very political identities were shaped amid the debate over Iraq. The Iraq War’s architects were self-evidently wrong, the closed circle assures itself. That fact alone should relegate them to the black list.

And the Iraq War architects issued many a faulty prediction, but wrongness alone on the complex issue of post-war Iraqi security is not really a disqualifier for this crowd. Obama, too, crafted and applied a demonstrably failed post-war model for Iraq.

As Mary Katharine Ham observed on Monday evening, Obama’s December, 2011 speech at Fort Bragg announcing the completion of the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq is riddled with “mission accomplished” moments.

“We’re leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people,” Obama insisted. He contradicted himself just last week when he scolded Nouri al-Maliki’s administration for excluding the country’s Sunni minority from enjoying full representation.

“And around the globe, as we draw down in Iraq, we have gone after al Qaeda so that terrorists who threaten America will have no safe haven, and Osama bin Laden will never again walk the face of this Earth,” Obama added. According to Obama’s former acting CIA director Mike Morell, among ISIS’s goals is the formation of a state-like entity secure enough to facilitate the planning and execution of attacks on Americans in the United States.

On Sunday, the president informed Congress that he was sending nearly 300 combat-ready American troops back to Iraq to provide security for American embassy staff. They are considering additional measures which include airstrikes and an insertion of special forces to provide Iraqi troops with training. While the mission is circumspect, the promise Obama made to the American people to extricate them from Iraq’s domestic affairs is a failed one by any objective measure.

True, Obama might not have been drawn back into Iraq if the 2003 invasion had never occurred, though we are so removed from that event that any number of other factors could have intervened in the interim. History alone suggests that it unlikely that Obama would have been the first president since Reagan to avoid military conflict with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. But it’s just as true that, had the president executed strikes on Syria in 2013 to pursue his stated aim of containing that conflict, Obama’s current predicament in Mesopotamia may also have been avoided.

Obama’s obviously failed approach to Iraq does not lead Obama’s supporters to demand his exile. The demand that people like Kristol and Wolfowitz disappear is not based in a noble regard for realist foreign policy. It is an expression of the increasingly desperate effort to hold on to a formative weltanschauung, one which was forged in Iraq and is now dying there.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Perhaps they should cue up Pat Dollards Young Americans trailer from time to time.

Bmore on June 17, 2014 at 10:45 AM

Any time you douchebags want to resurrect your never-ending anti war marches with the signs, horns, bells, paper-mache heads, please feel free because no one is stopping you.

Wassat? What? It was more about being anti Bush than anti war?

Oh.

Bishop on June 17, 2014 at 10:46 AM

If by ‘Bush” era, you meant that the people who were wrong about the efficacy of invasion and occupation as a means of establishing Western-friendly states in the Middle East are–against all reason–being asked their opinion again by a media that realizes isolationism don’t fill segments..then yeah you are correct.

And while I’ve always been part of the anti-war Left, and therefore am supremely pissed to see another Democrat cave to neoconservative pressure, I’m pretty tickled to see all the posters who claimed “there was always anti-war sentiment on the Right!” revealed for the liars they are. Especially the Paulnuts who have entirely disappeared and allowed the neocons to have the spotlight despite their supposed belief in “true” conservatism and an isolationist foreign policy. I’m officially done claiming alliance and coalition with those folks, they do not have the strength of their convictions. Thankfully, Rand Paul himself is still showing courage, but that’s about it.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM

It’s come to this, huh.

22044 on June 17, 2014 at 10:48 AM

And while I’ve always been part of the anti-war Left, and therefore am supremely pissed to see another Democrat cave to neoconservative pressure.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM

I’m pretty sure it isn’t any of those mythical neo-cons who sent the troops into Bagdad this morning.

Tater Salad on June 17, 2014 at 10:50 AM

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM

I’m sure all we have to do to stop this is send Obama and Kerry over to explain why all this fighting is not in their best interest.

Tater Salad on June 17, 2014 at 10:52 AM

I’m pretty sure it isn’t any of those mythical neo-cons who sent the troops into Bagdad this morning.

Tater Salad on June 17, 2014 at 10:50 AM

That isn’t the sentence I wrote. But you’re wrong. This thing called “neoconservatism” is 100% bipartisan, or are you forgetting that Democrats were too cowardly to oppose war and occupation in 2002 and 2003? And that they were aided by the “embedded” cheerleading media.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:52 AM

And while I’ve always been part of the anti-war Left, and therefore am supremely pissed to see another Democrat cave to neoconservative pressure

ROFL

The “NeoCons” forced Dog Eater to do the deed in Libya, did he? Forced him to increasingly scatter innocent brown people across the landscape via Hellfire missile, forced him to provide ever more weapons across the globe, forced him to put boots on the ground here there and everywhere?

Five and half years, sister, five and a half years; when does Dog Eater plan on taking responsibility for ANYTHING?

Bishop on June 17, 2014 at 10:53 AM

If by ‘Bush” era, you meant that the people who were wrong about the efficacy of invasion and occupation as a means of establishing Western-friendly states in the Middle East are–against all reason–being asked their opinion again by a media that realizes isolationism don’t fill segments..then yeah you are correct.

And while I’ve always been part of the anti-war Left, and therefore am supremely pissed to see another Democrat cave to neoconservative pressure…

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM

Funny, you dumbass libs never protested any of Clinton’s military exercises.

Remember “Operation Desert Fox?” You remember, that’s when Clinton bombed Iraq, claiming that Hussein was developing WMD’s. I don’t remember any protests then but, then again, you libs were probably smoking weed all day to be bothered.

Kingfisher on June 17, 2014 at 10:53 AM

I’m pretty tickled to see all the posters who claimed “there was always anti-war sentiment on the Right!” revealed for the liars they are.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM

It certainly helps to not be a SHEEPLE and believe everything the Democrat party tells you is based in fact.

A great man once said, “Trust but verify.”

You honestly believe that the only problem conservatives ever had with Bush was the corrupt crony capitalism?

A sucker is born every day of the week especially in the Democrat party.

Jayrae on June 17, 2014 at 10:54 AM

The Bush-era is back, and it’s driving Obama’s supporters insane

Reality (and math) are hard for the Libs.

Dr. ZhivBlago on June 17, 2014 at 10:54 AM

This applies to the US, as well:

Tony Blair May Be Mad, But He’s Got A Point

All this suggests that however much we might enjoy a drawn out discussion about what happened in 2003, Tony Blair’s credibility, and what the origins of this mess might be, we might more usefully consider what we might do to prevent the West looking even less powerful than it already does. Barack Obama has said no ground troops. We have said…not a hell of a lot. It certainly doesn’t seem to preoccupy our politicians overmuch, to judge by last week’s PMQs. “There are things that we have got wrong that we have to learn from,” William Hague said on the Today programme this morning, but there’s little sign of learning from what we are getting wrong right now and not a decade ago.

“Someone else’s problem” is the message of the day. It’s the Iraqi government’s job to fix it all, says Mr Hague. Small wonder, when the Syria vote showed that we have no appetite for any of this. Meanwhile, Iran’s General Suleimani is in Baghdad with his Quds force and the power balance in the area is shifting fast. We can hope it might all go away or be someone else’s problem. But when David Cameron talks about British values, does he know he’s talking about ISIS and what’s happening several thousand miles away? Loathe Tony Blair as much as you like, he is right to connect the dots and to say loudly that we face a direct challenge to our values not just here but across the world. If we can trouble to pause in our endless recriminations about events 12 years ago, we should start by acknowledging that at least.

I read Mr Brogan as arguing not that we again put boots on the ground in Iraq, but, rather, that we all must simply acknowledge that the establishment of an ISIS-created state, which would quite obviously provide a safe haven to other terrorist organisations, would be catastrophic and pose a severe risk to the West. And, it seems that too few are willing to acknowledge the reality of this truth.

I could care less about Iraqis, but I do care about the establishment of a Caliphate, which is the stated goal of ISIS and other groups. If they were going to establish Fortress Caliphate where they stayed there and left the rest of us the hell alone, I would tell Obama & Co to par-tay on. Unfortunately, their reason for forming a Caliphate is NOT to create some Islamic Garden of Eden. A significant reason is its stated desire to establish a staging ground for attacks on the rest of us. That’s not my opinion, per se. That’s not conspiracy shit. That’s what they have said.

As the New York Daily News‘ Editorial Board wrote, ‘ ISIS chief Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and his fighters marched into Obama’s vacuum, seized territory in southern Syria and proclaimed in January that he planned to create his own domain by taking ground in Iraq, including the capital Baghdad. He also made clear that he had a larger target, saying on an audio recording:

‘Our last message is to the Americans. Soon we will be in direct confrontation, and the sons of Islam have prepared for such a day. So watch, for we are with you, watching.’

You can’t say that we haven’t been warned.

As I frequently tell others, when someone tells you that they want to kill you, BELIEVE THEM.

How much different would the world have been if people had not only read Mein Kampf, but took Hitler at. his. word?

Resist We Much on June 17, 2014 at 10:54 AM

Driving them insane!? Nah, they’ve been insane for quite awhile already. This kinda stuff just brings it out in public display for all to see.

hawkeye54 on June 17, 2014 at 10:56 AM

Speaking of libfree:

The Bush-era is back, and it’s driving Obama’s supporters insane

That is not a drive, it is not even a 3 foot putt.

F X Muldoon on June 17, 2014 at 10:56 AM

Haha, neoconservatives? This is 100% incompetent Democrat.
I don’t know who the hell the “neocons” are but I’m pretty sure this administration acts without conservative thought, without any thought except maybe about the next tee time.

ORconservative on June 17, 2014 at 10:56 AM

It certainly helps to not be a SHEEPLE and believe everything the Democrat party tells you is based in fact.

A great man once said, “Trust but verify.”

You honestly believe that the only problem conservatives ever had with Bush was the corrupt crony capitalism?

A sucker is born every day of the week especially in the Democrat party.

Jayrae on June 17, 2014 at 10:54 AM

None of those sentences responded to anything I wrote in that post but…OK sure, whatevs.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:56 AM

Troops to Iraq by Bush: Bad.
Troops to Iraq by Obama: Wonderful.

albill on June 17, 2014 at 10:57 AM

the ‘NY DAILY NEWS’ a very, very liberal newspaper 6-17-2014 headline says it all:

“AL QAEDA NATION IS BEING BORN BEFORE THE WORLD’S EYES. THE WORLD IS REAPING WHAT OBAMA HELPED SEW”

Further labeling Kerry’s negotiations with Iran as “dealings with devils.”

MaiDee on June 17, 2014 at 10:58 AM

Do not blame obama….you’ve been warned
-Valerie

cmsinaz on June 17, 2014 at 10:58 AM

I don’t know who the hell the “neocons”
ORconservative on June 17, 2014 at 10:56 AM

Which explains the supreme idiocy you spewed in the remainder of the post. Neoconservatism is a thing. I suppose the new Republican talking points are to pretend it was Obama’s idea to invade Iraq?

but I’m pretty sure this administration acts without conservative thought, without any thought except maybe about the next tee time.

ORconservative on June 17, 2014 at 10:56 AM

1. How can you “act with thought” do they not teach syntax in Oregon charter schools?
2. If you mean classic conservative foreign policy, you are correct, but neither do any Republicans. But again, for you not to know what neoconservatism is means that you’re already far too ignorant to understand me.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:59 AM

the ‘NY DAILY NEWS’ a very, very liberal newspaper 6-17-2014 headline says it all:

Hahahahahahaha, Jesus, you people are idiots.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 11:00 AM

Socialists like brainfree were already mad to begin with.

That’s why they tend to hide within college faculties and blame the real world which has rejected them.

viking01 on June 17, 2014 at 11:01 AM

history of deceit and faulty predictions

Project, project, project.

John the Libertarian on June 17, 2014 at 11:01 AM

O/T, but somebody on this thread needs to read this:

Confirmed: Las Vegas Cop Killers Were Members of Far Left #Occupy Movement (Photos)

Another meme bites the dust
Another meme bites the dust
And another one gone, and another one gone
Another meme bites the dust
Hey, I’m gonna get you too
Another meme bites the dust

Resist We Much on June 17, 2014 at 11:02 AM

2006: Dubya approves enhanced drone strikes against terrorists, left claims that doing so will only create more terrorists.

2007: Dubya surges troops in Iraq, lefties such as libfree go ballistic.

2008: Dog Eater promises no more foolishness in the mideast wars, says the troops will come home. Libfree votes for him.

2009: Dog Eater takes office to much fanfare, is awarded Nobel Peace Prize for actions he will take in the future or something.

2010: Dog Eater surges troops in Afghanistan.

2011: More U.S. troops than ever are being killed in Afghanistan.

2012: Libfree suffers temporary memory-loss, forgets about troop surge by Dog Eater, votes for him again.

2013: Dog Eater increases drone strikes in mideast, fortunately his Nobel Peace Prize keeps such actions from creating more terrorists.

2014: Libfree blames everyone BUT Dog Eater for pretty much everything Dog Eater has done.

Bishop on June 17, 2014 at 11:02 AM

It’s “settled history” you neocon deniers!

rhombus on June 17, 2014 at 11:02 AM

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:59 AM

Thank you!

ORconservative on June 17, 2014 at 11:03 AM

1. How can you “act with thought” do they not teach syntax in Oregon charter schools?
2. If you mean classic conservative foreign policy, you are correct, but neither do any Republicans. But again, for you not to know what neoconservatism is means that you’re already far too ignorant to understand me.

Before you go full grammar Nazi and calling people ignorant, “professor”, you might want to take note that one does not begin sentences with conjunctions (I am making the giant leap that you even know what a conjunction is).

F X Muldoon on June 17, 2014 at 11:04 AM

Finally, Maloy questions why American society has not whisked these and other prominent figures of the Bush-era off to the Leper Caves.

There are no consequences for being so wrong all the time.

Exactly my thoughts about you crapweasel mental midgets on the left.

Midas on June 17, 2014 at 11:04 AM

Hahahahahahaha, Jesus, you people are idiots.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 11:00 AM

Agreed, we are nowhere near your high intellect.

What part of “the federal government pays 100% of the costs and the state pays 10% of the cost in ten years” do you not understand?

libfreeordie on August 28, 2013 at 3:13 PM

Bishop on June 17, 2014 at 11:05 AM

Hahahahahahaha, Jesus, you people are idiots.

If you think otherwise about the ‘Daiy News’ Bloomberg apologist and non-stop gun control, NRA-hating paper, then, you sir, are an idiot.

MaiDee on June 17, 2014 at 11:06 AM

O/T, but somebody on this thread needs to read this:

Confirmed: Las Vegas Cop Killers Were Members of Far Left #Occupy Movement (Photos)

Another meme bites the dust
Another meme bites the dust
And another one gone, and another one gone
Another meme bites the dust
Hey, I’m gonna get you too
Another meme bites the dust

Resist We Much on June 17, 2014 at 11:02 AM

Good report. Not surprising.

22044 on June 17, 2014 at 11:07 AM

But again, for you not to know what neoconservatism is means that you’re already far too ignorant to understand me.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:59 AM

The Kool-Aid is heavy with this one.

viking01 on June 17, 2014 at 11:07 AM

But again, for you not to know what neoconservatism is means that you’re already far too ignorant to understand me.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:59 AM

“Ima two smart fer yu!”
*The Prefesser…………….

VegasRick on June 17, 2014 at 11:08 AM

“AL QAEDA NATION IS BEING BORN BEFORE THE WORLD’S EYES. THE WORLD IS REAPING WHAT OBAMA HELPED SEW”

MaiDee on June 17, 2014 at 10:58 AM

If that is the true headline, someone needs to go back to school.

Barred on June 17, 2014 at 11:08 AM

Is Cindy Sheehan going to camp outside the Spite House now?

ConstantineXI on June 17, 2014 at 11:09 AM

This thing called “neoconservatism” is 100% bipartisan, or are you forgetting that Democrats were too cowardly to oppose war and occupation in 2002 and 2003?

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:52 AM

Yeah, those Democrats were so “cowardly”, they voted against the war and then angrily demanded a re-vote so they could vote for it?

What time do the triple moons rise on your world?

F-

Del Dolemonte on June 17, 2014 at 11:09 AM

Five and half years, sister, five and a half years; when does Dog Eater plan on taking responsibility for ANYTHING?

Bishop on June 17, 2014 at 10:53 AM

He will never be held responsible. The soft bigotry of low expectations will carry him through the rest of his life.

Fallon on June 17, 2014 at 11:09 AM

Watching it squirm is quite schadenfreude I must confess.

Bmore on June 17, 2014 at 11:09 AM

Hahahahahahaha, Jesus, you people are idiots.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 11:00 AM

Wow, didn’t take you long to go Full Alinsky on us, did it?

ALINSKY+

Del Dolemonte on June 17, 2014 at 11:10 AM

Barred Sorry my typo.

MaiDee on June 17, 2014 at 11:11 AM

OT: Global warming is having an effect in Montana

ConservativePartyNow on June 17, 2014 at 11:11 AM

The Bush-era is back, and it’s driving Obama’s supporters insane

Speaking of idiots.

Obama wants the ‘It’s Bush’s Fault’ squirrel to cover up the ‘Obama gave Iraq to Al Qaeda’ reality.

It’s working.

faraway on June 17, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Watching it squirm is quite schadenfreude I must confess.

Bmore on June 17, 2014 at 11:09 AM

Most pleasing to see the shapes libfree will contort herself into trying to justify the actions of a warmonger, mathematically-speaking I didn’t know such shapes were even possible.

Bishop on June 17, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Speaking of Bush……loved that he and his Daddy were such big proponents of effectively open borders with Mejico.

…..and is the US government now importing 21st century “slaves” like they did in the early 1800′s from West Africa?

I mean we’ve got an economic engine here in the US that needs fuel……are we going to eventually start recruiting peeps from South America too?

Viva Booooosh and zee open bohdurs.

PappyD61 on June 17, 2014 at 11:14 AM

Remember “Operation Desert Fox?” You remember, that’s when Clinton bombed Iraq, claiming that Hussein was developing WMD’s. I don’t remember any protests then but, then again, you libs were probably smoking weed all day to be bothered.

Kingfisher on June 17, 2014 at 10:53 AM

Are you going to answer Kingfisher’s questions? And what about Libya?

Ward Cleaver on June 17, 2014 at 11:17 AM

As soon as Iraq figures out that global warming is its greatest security threat, I think things will be OK.

MistyLane on June 17, 2014 at 11:17 AM

MaiDee on June 17, 2014 at 11:11 AM

No problem. Not trying to be a grammar Nazi.

Barred on June 17, 2014 at 11:17 AM

The Obamassiah’s “foreign policy” is coming home to roost. And since The Chosen One makes no mistakes, the fault obviously lies elsewhere.

GarandFan on June 17, 2014 at 11:17 AM

I might actually go along with libfree if she would agree that if we could somehow get all the Sunni’s to kill the Shia and the Shia to kill all the Sunni’s, the world may be a better place

Tater Salad on June 17, 2014 at 11:17 AM

Watching it squirm is quite schadenfreude I must confess.

Bmore on June 17, 2014 at 11:09 AM

No kidding. Rare form, quite a bit of feverish foaming at the mouth for libbie today, much more froth than usual.

Midas on June 17, 2014 at 11:18 AM


MaiDee on June 17, 2014 at 10:58 AM

Did they really spell the headline that way? SEW = SOW? Or did you?

HomeoftheBrave on June 17, 2014 at 11:18 AM

Nuke the site from orbit…

Midas on June 17, 2014 at 11:19 AM

I’d still like to see GWB come out of retirement to defend his administration and legacy from the renewed onslaught of leftist attacks. Fat chance, I know.

joekenha on June 17, 2014 at 11:19 AM

The Indigestible Rate of Obama’s Foreign Policy Fiascoes

Was it only 10 months ago that President Obama capitulated on Syria? And eight months ago that we learned he had no idea the U.S. eavesdropped on Angela Merkel ? And seven months ago that his administration struck its disastrous interim nuclear deal with Tehran? And four months ago that Chuck Hagel announced that the United States Army would be cut to numbers not seen since the 1930s? And three months ago that Russia seized Crimea? And two months ago that John Kerry’s Israeli-Palestinian peace effort sputtered into the void? And last month that Mr. Obama announced a timetable for total withdrawal from Afghanistan—a strategy whose predictable effects can now be seen in Iraq?

Even the Bergdahl deal of yesterweek is starting to feel like ancient history. Like geese, Americans are being forced to swallow foreign-policy fiascoes at a rate faster than we can possibly chew, much less digest.

Yet when it comes to leadership, we have our very own Clement Attlee at the top, eager to subtract the burdens of international responsibility so he can get on with the only thing that really animates him, which is building social democracy at home. Actually, that’s unfair to Attlee, who could count on a powerful ally to pick up England’s dropped reins, rescue Europe, stop the Soviets. Mr. Obama’s method is to ignore a crisis for as long as possible, give a speech, impose a sanction, and switch the subject to climate change or income inequality.

America’s retreat needn’t end in tragedy, and even the Obama presidency is a survivable event. But the strategic blunders and international disasters are accumulating at an unsustainable pace. This is what the real post-American world looks like.

Resist We Much on June 17, 2014 at 11:19 AM

I’m sure all we have to do to stop this is send Obama and Kerry over to explain why all this fighting is not in their best interest.

Tater Salad on June 17, 2014 at 10:52 AM

But, ISIS has to allow gay marriage as well. Then we can give them all of iraq.

txdoc on June 17, 2014 at 11:19 AM

Wassat? What? It was more about being anti Bush than anti war?

Oh.

Bishop on June 17, 2014 at 10:46 AM

Yes, that’s it.

By electing Obama, the Dems/Left/Progs believed they’d somehow conquered (and, in that, eradicated) fundamental common sense about what to do with the Middle East-Iraq-TheOngoingMess.

Just like how violent crime and especially crime by Blacks, Hispanics, et al, the Democrats in other words, Obama voters, surged after Obama was elected: electing him was considered some sort of eradication of Things Before, especially about Bush’s respect for and by the military and deployments.

Lourdes on June 17, 2014 at 11:20 AM

All I know, it’s not Dear Leader’s fault….

d1carter on June 17, 2014 at 11:20 AM

Regarding the headline. That’s not a drive, it’s a putt.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2014 at 11:20 AM

The O regime wanted to take credit for the victory in Iraq while at the same time distancing themselves from the raison d’etre for the intervention in the first place. A fundamentally deceitful bit of political posturing, but it did make them look like near-competent adults while it lasted…

But now, to paraphrase the racist and deranged “holy man” O claimed to have never heard: “O’s chickens have come home to roost”…

Pest on June 17, 2014 at 11:20 AM

“Ima two smart fer yu!”
*The Prefesser…………….

VegasRick on June 17, 2014 at 11:08 AM

Reminds me of that line spoken by Eros in Plan 9 From Outer Space:

“Because of death. Because all you of Earth are idiots.”

Ward Cleaver on June 17, 2014 at 11:20 AM

But again, for you not to know what neoconservatism is means that you’re already far too ignorant to understand me.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:59 AM

Sigmund Freud would have a devil of a time trying to understand you, Princess.

bimmcorp on June 17, 2014 at 11:21 AM

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM

Does it bother you at all that Obama armed the Syrian rebels, and now those arms are being used by ISIS in their conquest of Iraq?

Does it bother you that Obama involved the U.S. in a bombing campaign in Libya, without congressional approval, and that the rebels who benefited from the bombing attacked us in Benghazi?

TarheelBen on June 17, 2014 at 11:21 AM

Nuke the site from orbit…

Midas on June 17, 2014 at 11:19 AM

It’s the only way to be sure.

Ward Cleaver on June 17, 2014 at 11:21 AM

liberals pee and moan about Bush and his wars but every day, every stinking day they wink wink and condone the death of thousands of innocent babies in the womb. I know I can be a hypocrite at times but the hypocrisy of the left leaves a putrid stench.

crosshugger on June 17, 2014 at 11:21 AM

None of those sentences responded to anything I wrote in that post but…OK sure, whatevs.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:56 AM

Obviously other than being a SHEEPLE you also have reading comprehension problems. Or is that a prerequisite to becoming a slave in chains on the Democrat plantation.

Jayrae on June 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM

Are you going to answer Kingfisher’s questions? And what about Libya?

Ward Cleaver on June 17, 2014 at 11:17 AM

Don’t forget Clintoon sending the cruise missiles into the Sudanese aspirin factory to keep Monica’s testimony out of the,er, head-lines.

viking01 on June 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM

The whole post here is really nonsensical, as are the comments that follow it. Most have little to do with the article. I am not sure how events essentially proving Iraq War critics correct with their misgivings somehow validates the Bush Era.

MKH and others point out how Obama made speeches as he pulled troops out, (according to the timeline set by Bush and the Iraqi government). Did you expect him to say we failed? No, he will say that they accomplished the mission and are acting according to plan.

Remember, the Bush Era led to the 2006, 2008, and 2012 defeat for the Republican Party.

What is obnoxious is that these underqualified political weathermen suffer zero consequences for being stupidly wrong. Just like the Cantor pollster botches the predicted results by 40+ points, so too did these Kristols, et al get things completely wrong. Yet both will probably continue to find work and make more income than 99% of HotAir.

Oh, John McCain wants to speak? By all means lets have him on! Just forget the fact he was wrong about Iraq, wrong about troop levels, wanted to arm ISIS in Syria before he was against them in Iraq, wanted to bomb Iran before he wanted to ally with them against ISIS, and so on. The only reason to have these fools on TV should be to embarrass them in front of a national audience.

antisense on June 17, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Nuke the site from orbit…

Midas on June 17, 2014 at 11:19 AM

It’s the only way to be sure.

If we had an AMERICAN President that should be the standing retaliatory policy against Mecca if the barbarians ever nuke the US or Israel.

ConstantineXI on June 17, 2014 at 11:23 AM

I’d still like to see GWB come out of retirement to defend his administration and legacy from the renewed onslaught of leftist attacks. Fat chance, I know.

joekenha on June 17, 2014 at 11:19 AM

I respect W’s policy of not speaking out in criticism, difference, to current Admin.

BUT, unlike W, Obama won’t behave like that — he’ll unfortunately insist himself and his wayward ideas upon this nation for years to come.

Lourdes on June 17, 2014 at 11:23 AM

“AL QAEDA NATION IS BEING BORN BEFORE THE WORLD’S EYES. THE WORLD IS REAPING WHAT OBAMA HELPED SEW
MaiDee on June 17, 2014 at 10:58 AM

Spelling certainly not their strong suit.

pambi on June 17, 2014 at 11:24 AM

What the Left won’t admit, or contend with, is that Obama IS involved in waging war/s. He’s just the most covert about it compared to predecessors.

Obama’s waging war against the USA and our Allies. Arming those who have vowed to destroy our nation, for starters, and contributing weakness if not attack on the USA’s strengths, for seconds.

Lourdes on June 17, 2014 at 11:26 AM

Oh, and apparently they caught the Benghazi ringleader. (No, it isn’t Obama.)

antisense on June 17, 2014 at 11:26 AM

“Their argument for taking them seriously is to ignore everything they’ve said up to this point,” the Salon columnist continued.

Shouldn’t that be applied to Susan Rice?

David Burge @iowahawkblog · Jun 1

The first question any real journo would ask Rice:
“why the F should anybody believe anything you are about to say?”

ITguy on June 17, 2014 at 11:30 AM

Obama’s supporters were already insane.

zoyclem on June 17, 2014 at 11:30 AM

every major liberal progressive institution in American – from government, to entertainment, to media, to academia – all are quite convinced that the Iraq War was folly from beginning to end, and cutting America’s losses was the only option available to Obama.

This is much closer to the truth.

There are no consequences for being so wrong all the time

These liberal journalists are so precious in their projection.

NOMOBO on June 17, 2014 at 11:30 AM

If by ‘Bush” era, you meant that the people who were wrong about the efficacy of invasion and occupation as a means of establishing Western-friendly states in the Middle East are–against all reason–being asked their opinion again by a media that realizes isolationism don’t fill segments..then yeah you are correct.

And while I’ve always been part of the anti-war Left, and therefore am supremely pissed to see another Democrat cave to neoconservative pressure…

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM

I’m not going to disagree with you, but we had a Dem controlled Senate and House. Did you forget that?

Libs like to act like the presidency is a dictatorship. It takes three to tango.

Deckard BR on June 17, 2014 at 11:31 AM

Oh, and apparently they caught the Benghazi ringleader. (No, it isn’t Obama.)

antisense on June 17, 2014 at 11:26 AM

I thought that film maker was already in jail??

bimmcorp on June 17, 2014 at 11:32 AM

I have a question about something that has really bothered me.

It is frequently started that the Iraq war under GWB cost about $ .7 of a trillion dollars, just under a trillion dollars.

But The Porkulus bill passed in Feb 2009 was a trillion dollars. Where did all that money go? For roughly the same amount of money we funded a 6 year war? What is wrong with this picture?

esr1951 on June 17, 2014 at 11:33 AM

“We’re leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people,” Obama insisted.

Any fool should have been able to figure out that the Shia and Sunni’s have been fighting among themselves for century’s, so why would anyone think it was going to stop just because someone was trying satisfy their political base.

Besides the fact, in my opinion, that we should never have become involved in the middle east though I realize oil was needed, our fearless leader who seemingly can only lead from behind and after the fact, should have realized that upon our departure that within a relative short period of time the two branches of that religion, I use that term loosely as a religion who enslaves people, locks women away, cuts people heads off et cetera isn’t really a religion more like a sect, but never the less, not leaving a fairly strong military presence there for a few more years was extremely short sighted. Yes, we needed to get out of that mess, but we created the mess and again in my opinion, we had a moral obligation to keep the lid on things until the Iraqi’s figured out how to govern themselves. Just wait, the other nation building exercise we are involved with will go the same way.

The English and French as well as the Italians tried for hundred of years to pacify that middle east, did a great job, didn’t they? Why should we be better? Obviously we were not.

Of course, if our fearless leader had any foresight and this probably includes Bush also, had bothered to study a little bit of history they would have realized that if the English and French could not pacify those people, it wasn’t going to happen just because the USA wanted it to. I ask the question, would not it had been better to use the money squandered in the Middle East to develop our own natural resources, IE oil and gas, rather than playing with windmills and burning up one of the worlds best supply’s of corn on desires, and put this nation in a position where via energy independence we could basically tell the Arabs to go pound sand. Without the petro dollars, and I realize they would still be coming from China and other country’s that are energy dependent, but at least we could buy oil on the spot market when a surplus developed but not be dependent on oil from that part of the world. Then when chaos occurs there we could simply fall back on our own reserves and let the world go by. Given enough time the area would fall back into decay and we could just let it happen versus keeping aircraft carriers and marines on stand by in the area.

Might be time for fearless leader to lead, at this point in time, let the chips fall as they may. Disengage and spend the time and energy to develop our own resources so we do not have to be involved. Of course, as we got involved in Iraqi in my opinion, we do have an obligation but let’s fulfill that and get the heck out of the internal politics of the middle east.

Rockman44 on June 17, 2014 at 11:33 AM

I thought that film maker was already in jail??

bimmcorp on June 17, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Obama needs a distraction right now. They could have picked him up at any time.

esr1951 on June 17, 2014 at 11:34 AM

Am I/are we supposed to be happy, that “the Bush era is back”?
.
.
What zoyclem said:

Obama’s supporters were already insane.

zoyclem on June 17, 2014 at 11:30 AM

listens2glenn on June 17, 2014 at 11:35 AM

Oh, and apparently they caught the Benghazi ringleader. (No, it isn’t Obama.)

antisense on June 17, 2014 at 11:26 AM

That isn’t exactly a difficult thing to accomplish considering the FACT that he has been giving interviews to journalists from all over the world, including those from the NYT, while drinking strawberry frappes in an outdoor cafe at a luxury hotel, since three weeks after the attack.

Resist We Much on June 17, 2014 at 11:35 AM

Kristol and Wolfowitz Susan Rice and all the other people responsible for dragging us into Iraq claiming that the Benghazi attack was the result of a YouTube video should be pariahs who labor under the expectation of doing some measure of atonement for their stubborn and wrongheaded pursuit of a disastrous policy. Instead they get invited on to Sunday shows

Fixed it.

ITguy on June 17, 2014 at 11:36 AM

Neoconservatism is a thing. I suppose the new Republican talking points are to pretend it was Obama’s idea to invade Iraq?

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:59 AM

That certainly appears to be the case this time. Gee, are you insinuating that zero is now a neo-con?

Perish the thought…

Newtie and the Beauty on June 17, 2014 at 11:36 AM

I respect W’s policy of not speaking out in criticism, difference, to current Admin.

BUT, unlike W, Obama won’t behave like that — he’ll unfortunately insist himself and his wayward ideas upon this nation for years to come.

Lourdes on June 17, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Finally, someone gets it. Former presidents are supposed to act like President(s) Bush. Carter never got it, and yes, you are right, Obama won’t get it either. Carter, just an angry man. Obama, a narcissist, who will need to intrude into everything, either to blame and attack or take credit.

rlwo2008 on June 17, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Bishop on June 17, 2014 at 11:05 AM

Go easy on him, Bishop. He’s a product of Common Core.

Kingfisher on June 17, 2014 at 11:37 AM

These liberal journalists are so precious in their projection.

NOMOBO on June 17, 2014 at 11:30 AM

+1!

ITguy on June 17, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Spelling certainly not their strong suit.
pambi on June 17, 2014 at 11:24 AM

So, sew, sow…darn those homophones…

Newtie and the Beauty on June 17, 2014 at 11:39 AM

Hahahahahahaha, Jesus, you people are idiots.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 11:00 AM

Agreed, we are nowhere near your high intellect.

What part of “the federal government pays 100% of the costs and the state pays 10% of the cost in ten years” do you not understand?

libfreeordie on August 28, 2013 at 3:13 PM

Bishop on June 17, 2014 at 11:05 AM

I don’t know whut any of that means, but I lak to read words.

I lak capital bees, especially.

And aches.

Axe on June 17, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Bishop on June 17, 2014 at 11:02 AM

Ha ha ha. Awesome.

gwelf on June 17, 2014 at 11:43 AM

Finally, someone gets it. Former presidents are supposed to act like President(s) Bush. Carter never got it, and yes, you are right, Obama won’t get it either. Carter, just an angry man. Obama, a narcissist, who will need to intrude into everything, either to blame and attack or take credit.

rlwo2008 on June 17, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Bush is a class-act as a former president. There are rumors Obama will eventually end up on the Supreme Court, but I don’t think he will go for that.

antisense on June 17, 2014 at 11:44 AM

If we had an AMERICAN President that should be the standing retaliatory policy against Mecca if the barbarians ever nuke the US or Israel.

ConstantineXI on June 17, 2014 at 11:23 AM

If we had a President with a pair, that would be a standing retaliatory first response policy against Mecca if the barbarians ever nuke display any signs of state-level aggression the US or Israel.

Screw “symmetrical answer” doctrine. Make each of them rue the day when their father set his bloodshot sight on the camel that gave them life.

Rix on June 17, 2014 at 11:44 AM

The NY Daily News spelled it “sew” instead of “sow” so no-one would think Killary was involved.

viking01 on June 17, 2014 at 11:45 AM

If by ‘Bush” era, you meant that the people who were wrong about the efficacy of invasion and occupation as a means of establishing Western-friendly states in the Middle East are–against all reason–being asked their opinion again by a media that realizes isolationism don’t fill segments..then yeah you are correct.

And while I’ve always been part of the anti-war Left, and therefore am supremely pissed to see another Democrat cave to neoconservative pressure, I’m pretty tickled to see all the posters who claimed “there was always anti-war sentiment on the Right!” revealed for the liars they are. Especially the Paulnuts who have entirely disappeared and allowed the neocons to have the spotlight despite their supposed belief in “true” conservatism and an isolationist foreign policy. I’m officially done claiming alliance and coalition with those folks, they do not have the strength of their convictions. Thankfully, Rand Paul himself is still showing courage, but that’s about it.

libfreeordie on June 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM

What a joke you are.

You’ll never ally yourself with some libertarians because they’re unprincipled enough for you but you’ll still come here and protect Obama?

You are loathe to ever criticize Obama or even the Democrat party. On the very few occasions you have it was only after dragging it out of you by many many posts. Yet here you are decrying all the sheeple that you have to deign to deal with.

Ha ha ha.

Your knowledge of history is also as accurate as ever – meaning completely wrong. But we don’t expect anything different coming from you. It’s about time you posted a link to a completely discredited “news” story or a study that doesn’t actually show what you claim it does.

gwelf on June 17, 2014 at 11:46 AM

Let’s stop responding to Lib – he is dealing with the fact that the “neo-cons” were right about what would happen if we left Iraq and that Obama was wrong – in a very public way.

Reality is real. Pontification of left wing anti-war talking points is fantasy. And frequently kills lots of people.

Zomcon JEM on June 17, 2014 at 11:46 AM

Love to see this MM idiot explain how those experts were “discredited” when every single one of them has been proven right.

PJ Emeritus on June 17, 2014 at 11:46 AM

Bush is a class-act as a former president. There are rumors Obama will eventually end up on the Supreme Court, but I don’t think he will go for that.

antisense on June 17, 2014 at 11:44 AM

Bush is a fool. He should be leading a movement.

Obama will try to take over the world.

faraway on June 17, 2014 at 11:47 AM

I have a question about something that has really bothered me.

It is frequently started that the Iraq war under GWB cost about $ .7 of a trillion dollars, just under a trillion dollars.

But The Porkulus bill passed in Feb 2009 was a trillion dollars. Where did all that money go? For roughly the same amount of money we funded a 6 year war? What is wrong with this picture?

esr1951 on June 17, 2014 at 11:33 AM

Roads & bridges and golf and vacations and Barky’s pals…you know? Shared sacrifice.. We sacrifice, the Obamas get their share…

bimmcorp on June 17, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Comment pages: 1 2