DIA chief: US less safe than “several years ago”

posted at 3:21 pm on July 28, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

What happened since “several years ago” that have made the US less safe? The outgoing chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) doesn’t specify his starting point, but Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn’s message underscores the fact that the world has gotten significantly more dangerous over the last few years. Flynn warns that the US had better “reorganize” to meet the emerging threats, too:

The United States is now less safe than it was years ago, in part because a brutal terrorist group has been able to gain power in Iraq after the post-war government there “blew it,” a top U.S. intelligence official said Saturday.

The frank words came from Lt. Gen Michael Flynn, the outgoing head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, at a national security forum in Aspen, Colorado, where over several days top current and former counterterrorism officials warned of several simultaneous threats to the United States emanating from the Middle East and Africa.

Asked if the United States is generally now safer than it was two or even 10 years ago, Flynn said, “My quick answer is we’re not.”

But at least “core al-Qaeda is on the run,” right? Wrong:

Flynn also took a different view over whether “core al Qaeda” is on the run, as many U.S. officials have claimed. Flynn said he believes “core al Qaeda” is the ideology, not any individuals associated with it, and that is “not on the run.”

“That ideology … sadly feels like it’s exponentially grown,” he said.

If Flynn took aim at the messaging from the White House, he appeared to give them a little more room on the crisis in Iraq and Syria. Flynn blamed the rise of ISIS on the government in Iraq under Nouri al-Maliki. The US knew that ISIS was gaining momentum, but had no idea how badly the Iraqi military would respond to their aggression. Like many in the West, Flynn put the blame for that collapse on the sectarian policies of Maliki and his Iranian-leaning Shi’ite coalition, saying that “they blew it.”

That’s a fair interpretation, but it’s incomplete. Maliki and his coalition had wanted at least some continuing US engagement in Iraq, if for nothing more than logistical support. The Sunnis who threw in with Maliki and the US in the Anbar Awakening wanted the US to stay to guarantee their access to political power and to lean on Maliki. The Kurds wanted the US to stay to keep a civil war from opening up between the other two factions. Instead, Barack Obama decided not to seriously pursue a continuing US military presence in Iraq, which then allowed Maliki to tilt decisively toward Tehran and freeze out the Sunnis and the Kurds.

One could also blame this on the decision to invade in 2003. Certainly the Christians of Nineveh — excuse me, formerly of Nineveh — put the blame on George W. Bush, and others still argue that this was the proximate cause of the vacuum that opened up in Syria and Iraq. However, we would have had to disengage from Iraq at some point and allow Saddam Hussein to re-emerge as a bloodthirsty tyrant and destabilizer in his own regard. The US and UK had tens of thousands of forces tied to a crumbling no-fly zone and embargo on Hussein, one being undermined by some of the same countries who opposed a resolution of the 12-year standoff, and one that had made Hussein much more wealthy and powerful than before it started.

Even if the decision in 2003 was a bad one, though, the abandonment of Iraq only looks worse because of it. If we broke Iraq that badly, then it was incumbent on the US to stay long enough to allow the country to reunite, and to pressure the Maliki government to deliver on its promises to the Sunni tribal chiefs from the Awakening that ended the civil war in 2007-8. The vacuum left by our departure ended up accelerating the exact same conflicts that drove the 2006-7 civil war, only this time with a vacuum in Syria left from the West’s feckless Arab Spring policies of undermining dictators without boots on the ground to shape outcomes. It turned Libya and Syria into failed states, and nearly created a radical Islamist state in Egypt until the military seized control again.

That’s why Flynn’s interpretation is incomplete. If it was just Iraq, then his criticism of Maliki as the prime driver of the collapse would make sense. The wreckage of Syria and Libya and near-miss with Egypt shows that the issue goes beyond Maliki. The seeming surprise of US-EU leadership to Russian aggression under Putin and the debacle of Ukraine and Crimea shows that the issue isn’t limited to the Middle East. We’re less safe because, as Flynn notes by refuting the risible “core al-Qaeda is on the run” slogan, the US and EU refuse to recognize the extent and scope of the threats, and would rather tell fairy stories about the world than deal with reality.

Update: Fred Hiatt has a pretty good idea of what “several years” means:

We have witnessed as close to a laboratory experiment on the effects of U.S. disengagement as the real world is ever likely to provide.

Obama openly and deliberately adopted a strategy, not of isolationism, but of gradual withdrawal, especially from Europe and the Middle East. He argued that America should concentrate on “nation-building here at home.” He espoused a pivot to Asia, on the grounds that the Pacific region was the world’s most dynamic and deserving of U.S. military and diplomatic attention. …

Obama’s determination to gear down in Europe and the Middle East, regardless of circumstances, guaranteed that the United States would not respond strategically to new opportunities (the Arab Spring) or dangers (Putin’s determination to redraw the map of Europe). …

To be sure, there are no true laboratory experiments in international relations. Even with different U.S. policies, the Arab Spring might have fizzled and the Iraqi army might have crumbled. No one can say for sure what would have happened if the United States had not signaled its exhaustion with foreign affairs, downgraded its interest in Europe and the Middle East, abandoned Iraq and stayed aloof from Syria.

But we can see what followed each of those strategic choices. Obama thought he could engineer a cautious, modulated retreat from U.S. leadership. What we have gotten is a far more dangerous world.

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

This is not mere incompetence, this is on purpose.

jukin3 on July 28, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Would that be almost six years ago..?

d1carter on July 28, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Didn’t someone in the administration just announce that the world is safer than it has ever been.

RickB on July 28, 2014 at 3:25 PM

We’ve been getting “less safe” every year since 2008.

dentarthurdent on July 28, 2014 at 3:26 PM

Yes, but you see, the world is more safe and stable than when Obama found it. So it balances out.

/

Good Lt on July 28, 2014 at 3:26 PM

Barack, coff, coff, Hussein, Coff, coff, Obama Coff, coff

rbj on July 28, 2014 at 3:27 PM

What we have gotten is a far more dangerous world.

A change (for the worse) that you can believe in….

Athos on July 28, 2014 at 3:27 PM

So, who’s going to break that news to the Shanker-in-Chief? Because he’s been lying about that very thing for 6 years now.

So, in reality, we can just take everything Oblablah says, and know that pretty much the EXACT OPPOSITE, will nearly ALWAYS be the truth.

Seems about right.

Meople on July 28, 2014 at 3:28 PM

AQ has “exponentially grown,” not “on the run.”

Among other things exponential.

Judge_Dredd on July 28, 2014 at 3:28 PM

Didn’t someone in the administration just announce that the world is safer than it has ever been.

RickB on July 28, 2014 at 3:25 PM

That was just because King Putt may have improved some on his bad slice to the left….

dentarthurdent on July 28, 2014 at 3:28 PM

Can we let Obama assume the presidency early so he can get to work fixing this idiot’s screw-ups?

rogerb on July 28, 2014 at 3:29 PM

I thought that the world was more ‘tranquil’ since the Chicago Messiah blessed us with his presence. What happened??? /

Resist We Much on July 28, 2014 at 3:30 PM

Does “exponentially grown” include the arms and stinger missiles Obama gave Al Qaeda prior to the Benghazi attack?

Meople on July 28, 2014 at 3:30 PM

Come on! I guarantee you Onero has cleared every golf course he has ever played of AQ.

NotCoach on July 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM

Per the NYT:

“All American forces were to leave Iraq by the end of 2011, the departure date set in an agreement signed by President George W. Bush and Mr. Maliki in 2008. Even so, Mr. Obama left the door open to KEEPING TROOPS IN IRAQ to train Iraqi forces if an agreement could be negotiated.

Convening a videoconference on Oct. 6, 2010, Mr. Biden and top American officials reviewed the options. The vice president favored a plan that would keep Mr. Maliki as prime minister, but which involved installing his main rival, Mr. Allawi, leader of the Iraqiya bloc, near the top of the pyramid. To make way for Mr. Allawi, Mr. Biden suggested that Mr. Talabani, an ethnic Kurd, be shifted from the presidency and given another position. “Let’s make him foreign minister,” Mr. Biden said, according to the notes of the meeting.

“Thanks a lot, Joe,” Mrs. Clinton said, noting that Mr. Biden had cast the Foreign Ministry as a consolation prize.

Mr. Biden also predicted that the Americans could work out a deal with a government led by Mr. Maliki. “Maliki wants us to stick around because he does not see a future in Iraq otherwise,” Mr. Biden said. “I’LL BET YOU MY VICE-PRESIDENCY MALIKI WILL EXTEND THE SOFA,” he added, he added, referring to the Status of Forces Agreement the Obama administration hoped to negotiate.

James B. Steinberg, the deputy secretary of state, questioned whether Mr. Biden’s plan would make the already inefficient Iraqi government more dysfunctional.

Admiral Mullen sent a classified letter to Mr. Donilon that recommended keeping 16,000 troops.

The attempt by Mr. Obama and his senior aides to fashion an extraordinary power-sharing arrangement between Mr. Maliki and Mr. Allawi never materialized. NEITHER DID AN AGREEMENT THAT WOULD HAVE KEPT A SMALL AMERICAN FORCE IN IRAQ TO TRAIN THE IRAQI MILITARY AND PATROL THE COUNTRY’S SKIES. A plan to use American civilians to train the Iraqi police has been severely cut back. The result is an Iraq that is less stable domestically and less reliable internationally than the United States had envisioned.”

In the end, Biden’s plan was rebuffed by the Iraqis and the SOFA was not extended.

Resist We Much on July 28, 2014 at 3:34 PM

I hope everyone is on good terms with people in your neighborhoods.We will be defending our own when one of these army’s makes the move on this country.

docflash on July 28, 2014 at 3:34 PM

brutal terrorist group has been able to gain power in Iraq

Gee? How did that happen? Jugears thinking about politics.

“core al Qaeda” is the ideology, not any individuals associated with it, and that is “not on the run.”

Have any of Obozo’s ME policies worked to make that region more stable? How can one person do so much so wrong? Even his signature legislation has been getting pummeled in the courts.

The worst president in history.

Patriot Vet on July 28, 2014 at 3:35 PM

America had made sure that AQ has new homes all over the world. Just this morning I heard that we are trying to “help” the rebels in Syria. It took a lot of will power not to destroy my screen.

Yes American foreign policy is schizophrenic, but that schizophrenia has been a staple of this country foreign policy for decades and I just wish it would stop.

coolrepublica on July 28, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Hillary: Hamas Hides Their Rockets In Civilian Areas Because Gaza Is So Small…

Via Breitbart:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Fusion TV’s Jorge Ramos that part of the reason Hamas hides rockets in schools and civilian areas is “Gaza is small.”

“I’m not a military planner but Hamas puts its missiles, its rockets in civilian areas, part of it is Gaza is pretty small and its densely populated,” she said as neglecting the question of whether or not Hamas should have rockets in area to begin with.

Video here…

Leftists, always making excuses for those that would kill them.

Resist We Much on July 28, 2014 at 3:36 PM

Obama succeeded where Osama failed.

Methods are everything.

profitsbeard on July 28, 2014 at 3:38 PM

Pelosi: U.S. Must Work With Qatar On Gaza Cease-Fire Because They Told Me Hamas Is A “Humanitarian Organization”…

From the same totally batshit-crazypants-loon who claimed Assad was a ‘reformer’!

Article 7 of the Hamas Charter states:

‘The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!’

And, people wonder why the world is so much more dangerous? With these kind of lunatics running the world’s sole superpower, is there any question?

Resist We Much on July 28, 2014 at 3:39 PM

So is the affair that this guy had, that is going to come to light any minute, going to have any impact on his statement or his credibility?

Cindy Munford on July 28, 2014 at 3:39 PM

Last time I looked, al Qaeda was “on the run” … toward Baghdad

J_Crater on July 28, 2014 at 3:42 PM

Yes American foreign policy is schizophrenic, but that schizophrenia has been a staple of this country foreign policy for decades and I just wish it would stop.

coolrepublica on July 28, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Just click your heels together three times and say “I wish it would stop, I wish it would stop, I wish it would stop”.

darwin on July 28, 2014 at 3:42 PM

. . . and Obama is wandering aimlessly without a compass or a map.

rplat on July 28, 2014 at 3:43 PM

darwin on July 28, 2014 at 3:42 PM

Nothing on the news suggests that that worked.

Cindy Munford on July 28, 2014 at 3:44 PM

Obama’s on it, yo!

claudius on July 28, 2014 at 3:44 PM

Mm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said that all must lend a hand
To make this country strong again
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said we must be fair today
Equal work means equal pay
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said that we must take a stand
To make sure everyone gets a chance
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said red, yellow, black or white
All are equal in his sight
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

Yes!
Mmm, mmm, mm
Barack Hussein Obama

Hello, Mr. President we honor you today!
For all your great accomplishments, we all doth say “hooray!”

Hooray, Mr. President! You’re number one!
The first black American to lead this great nation!

Hooray, Mr. President we honor your great plans
To make this country’s economy number one again!

Hooray Mr. President, we’re really proud of you!
And we stand for all Americans under the great Red, White, and Blue!

So continue —- Mr. President we know you’ll do the trick
So here’s a hearty hip-hooray —-

Hip, hip hooray!
Hip, hip hooray!
Hip, hip hooray!

(((((SPIT)))))

bimmcorp on July 28, 2014 at 3:46 PM

Yes American foreign policy is schizophrenic, but that schizophrenia has been a staple of this country foreign policy for decades and I just wish it would stop.
 
coolrepublica on July 28, 2014 at 3:35 PM

 
At least Guantanamo is closed and the oceans stopped rising, though.

rogerb on July 28, 2014 at 3:47 PM

Yes American foreign policy is schizophrenic, but that schizophrenia has been a staple of this country foreign policy for decades and I just wish it would stop.

coolrepublica on July 28, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Hasn’t been that way for decades, just whenever foreign policy is run by leftist, Chamberlain Dims.

The only people that hated Republican foreign policy, were terrorist organizations, and DimocRats.

Meople on July 28, 2014 at 3:47 PM

Obama lied, Americans will die.

BuckeyeSam on July 28, 2014 at 3:48 PM

So is the affair that this guy had, that is going to come to light any minute, going to have any impact on his statement or his credibility?

Cindy Munford on July 28, 2014 at 3:39 PM

No need. The MSM won’t cover this and Obama cultists will say it’s a typical militaristic overreaction.

If you like this foreign policy and its results, you’ll love Rand Paul.

Meremortal on July 28, 2014 at 3:48 PM

He is a malicious narcissist and he will not stop until he is stopped.

It’s as plain as that mole on his face – he hates America and all She stands for. He should be ousted and dropped over the city of Chicago in a parachute emblazoned with his logo. Hopefully into a dumping ground or perhaps in the middle of Southside in the middle of the night. See how long he survives.

Bastige.

Key West Reader on July 28, 2014 at 3:49 PM

You know what’s important? Voters ignored his radicalism, his anti-Americanism, his lack of experience, and his lack of accomplishment because it was just so awesome to get a supposedly cool black guy in the White House.

BuckeyeSam on July 28, 2014 at 3:50 PM

No-Fly / Restricted Fly Zones for US Airliners….

The world is getting smaller because of the small man residing in the Oval Office….

How’s Detroit and GM doing these days?

Athos on July 28, 2014 at 3:56 PM

“There is a war coming in Europe…”

The Shocking Reason Putin Isn’t Worried About The $50 Billion Yukos Ruling

Having $50 billion of assets under potential seizure is enough to make anyone whince. However, despite a quickly worded statement on the Yukos award, Vladimir Putin seems less than anxious to find a resolution. We think we know why, and it’s very concerning.

As The FT reports confirming our earlier comments:

The award is a landmark not just for its size – 20 times the previous record for an arbitration ruling. The tribunal also found definitively that Russia’s pursuit of Yukos and its independently-minded main shareholder, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a decade ago was politically motivated.

Though Russia cannot appeal against the award, Moscow said it would pursue all legal avenues for trying to get it “set aside”.

Even if the ruling stands, shareholders face a tortuous battle trying to enforce it. If Moscow refuses to pay, they must pursue Russian sovereign commercial assets in the 150 countries that are party to the so-called 1958 New York Convention on enforcing arbitration awards.

But perhaps this explains why Putin is not coming out swinging, as The FT concludes,

One person close to Mr Putin said the Yukos ruling was insignificant in light of the bigger geopolitical stand-off over Ukraine.

“There is a war coming in Europe,” he said. “Do you really think this matters?”

Resist We Much on July 28, 2014 at 3:56 PM

Yes American foreign policy is schizophrenic, but that schizophrenia has been a staple of this country foreign policy for decades and I just wish it would stop.

foolrepublica on July 28, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Hasn’t been that way for decades, just whenever foreign policy is run by leftist, Chamberlain Dims.

The only people that hated Republican foreign policy, were terrorist organizations, and DimocRats.

Meople on July 28, 2014 at 3:47 PM

I assume the fool is somewhat an expert on mental disorders, the way Barry is an expert on narcissism.

slickwillie2001 on July 28, 2014 at 3:59 PM

You know what’s important? Voters ignored his radicalism, his anti-Americanism, his lack of experience, and his lack of accomplishment because it was just so awesome to get a supposedly cool black guy in the White House.
 
BuckeyeSam on July 28, 2014 at 3:50 PM

 
He’s going to unfriend you and revoke your eligibility to have dinner with him and that Devil Wears Prada lady if you keep that up.
 
Octothorpe attackwatch

rogerb on July 28, 2014 at 4:00 PM

Al Queda is definitely on the run. They’re heading right for us!

Kensington on July 28, 2014 at 4:00 PM

To be sure, there are no true laboratory experiments in international relations. Even with different U.S. policies, the Arab Spring might have fizzled and the Iraqi army might have crumbled. No one can say for sure what would have happened if the United States had not signaled its exhaustion with foreign affairs, downgraded its interest in Europe and the Middle East, abandoned Iraq and stayed aloof from Syria.

Absurd. The “arab spring” was never a good thing and only the delusional ever thought it was.

VorDaj on July 28, 2014 at 4:02 PM

“There is a war coming in Europe,” he said. “Do you really think this matters?”

Well, WWI and WWII started when America had progressive, freedom-hating lunatics at the helm. May as well go 3 for 3.

Good Solid B-Plus on July 28, 2014 at 4:03 PM

E V E R Y T H I N G … everything that King Putt says or claims … is either an outright lie, shaded truth or has an expiration date.

Missilengr on July 28, 2014 at 4:04 PM

If invading Iraq was a bad choice, and it arguably was, why on earth did Obama invade Libya? In an even less strategic or thoughtful manner.

At least Bush left a potential coherent government in Iraq (only to watch Obama abandon it).

So was Libya sort of a controlled burn to hold back…something? I don’t get it.

PattyJ on July 28, 2014 at 4:08 PM

Israeli Leftists Have Their Peace Rally Cut Short When Hamas Starts Firing Rockets At Them…

But, but, but, all they were saying was give peace a chance!

Resist We Much on July 28, 2014 at 4:09 PM

Meremortal on July 28, 2014 at 3:48 PM

Oh well at least he got his picture on HotAir. Yeah, I don’t think Rand is my guy for POTUS.

Cindy Munford on July 28, 2014 at 4:24 PM

IS (former ISIS), via open borders, will kill you.

Schadenfreude on July 28, 2014 at 4:31 PM

The world is more safe then before like the border is more secure. Either they’re living in lala land or they’re lying.

Kissmygrits on July 28, 2014 at 4:32 PM

Absurd. The “arab spring” was never a good thing and only the delusional ever thought it was.

VorDaj on July 28, 2014 at 4:02 PM

+ 200 million

Schadenfreude on July 28, 2014 at 4:32 PM

I assume the fool is somewhat an expert on mental disorders, the way Barry is an expert on narcissism.

slickwillie2001 on July 28, 2014 at 3:59 PM

They especially dislike blacks in Alabama according to foolrepublica’s empirical evidence too.

Judge_Dredd on July 28, 2014 at 4:38 PM

The world is more safe then before like the border is more secure. Either they’re living in lala land or they’re lying.

Kissmygrits on July 28, 2014 at 4:32 PM

BOTH!

jukin3 on July 28, 2014 at 4:46 PM

America had made sure that AQ has new homes all over the world. Just this morning I heard that we are trying to “help” the rebels in Syria. It took a lot of will power not to destroy my screen.

Yes American foreign policy is schizophrenic, but that schizophrenia has been a staple of this country foreign policy for decades and I just wish it would stop.

coolrepublica on July 28, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Translated: I admit the obama Administration is responsible.

hawkdriver on July 28, 2014 at 5:05 PM

America had made sure that AQ has new homes all over the world.

coolrepublica on July 28, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Including in Iraq, and they were in Iraq prior to our going in there in 2003.

Don’t believe me? Ask (Democrat) pResident Bill Clinton, whose Justice Department formally claimed that al Qaeda was in cahoots with Iraq in their 1998 Federal Indictment against bin Laden.

F-

Del Dolemonte on July 28, 2014 at 5:05 PM

America had made sure that AQ has new homes all over the world. Just this morning I heard that we are trying to “help” the rebels in Syria. It took a lot of will power not to destroy my screen.

PS, where you been, Sis? I’ve been telling you that forever.

hawkdriver on July 28, 2014 at 5:07 PM

We got “Smart Diplomacy”, because ‘the adults are in charge now!’

Putin delivers while Obama dithers.

GarandFan on July 28, 2014 at 5:08 PM

And this affects Obama’s short game, how?

nico on July 28, 2014 at 5:11 PM

I thought that the world was more ‘tranquil’ since the Chicago Messiah blessed us with his presence. What happened??? /

Resist We Much on July 28, 2014 at 3:30 PM

.
Completely terrified people (i.e. Mosul) = tranquil

tomato = tomatoe in the minds of Libs/Progs/Dims

;->

PolAgnostic on July 28, 2014 at 5:23 PM

What we have gotten is a far more dangerous world.

Not for Obama…

… He has security up the ying yang, and will for the rest of his life.

So it’s OK…

Seven Percent Solution on July 28, 2014 at 5:30 PM

We have been told the world is in a period of tranquility. Say no more..

DWoDiego on July 28, 2014 at 5:34 PM

why the insistence on “unification”? or a coalition? split off each hate-each-other ethinc group into their own: Kurdi-Stan, Shiite-Stan, Suni-Stan. they all hate each other. isolate them. then the only way they’ll ally together is to beat-up on Israel.

WaldoTJ on July 28, 2014 at 5:41 PM

Obama thought he could engineer a cautious, modulated retreat from U.S. leadership. What we have gotten is a far more dangerous world.

.
… and Rand Paul … don’t forget we have also gotten Mr. Paul’s plan is for GREATER isolationism.

You have to have an I.Q. below moron to believe the U.S. can walk away from its level of involvement pre-Obama and NOT have chaos as the direct result.

OR

The chaos is what YOU want to have happen to “redistribute” world influence more “equitably” and you are EVIL enough to let the world burn.

Note: There is a difference between the way the world is and the way we wish the world would be.

I would vastly prefer a world where American soldiers were NOT maimed or killed protecting the freedoms of others – but that is NOT the world we live in.

History will not be kind to Obama. At best, he will judged an incompetent fool. At worst, an intentional traitor to the United States and her allies.

PolAgnostic on July 28, 2014 at 5:47 PM

Flynn said he believes “core al Qaeda” is the ideology, not any individuals associated with it, and that is “not on the run.”

“That ideology … sadly feels like it’s exponentially grown,” he said.

I wonder what ideology he was alluding to. We may never know I suppose.

BL@KBIRD on July 28, 2014 at 5:54 PM

And the 911 commission recently said as much.

By Sam Stein
The Huffington Post
Jul. 22, 2014
The authors of the seminal 9/11 Commission report have produced a new study, a decade after the first, painting an often alarming picture of the country’s vulnerability to another terrorist attack.

When you’ve lost those fluffers at HuffPo Barack….well you know.

CW on July 28, 2014 at 6:15 PM

Yes American foreign policy is schizophrenic, but that schizophrenia has been a staple of this country foreign policy for decades and I just wish it would stop.

coolrepublica on July 28, 2014 at 3:35 PM

This actually is a rather good summation.

With Carter, the Shah fell and Iran took American hostages. Reagan, immediately rescued them and despite the continual Sedition by the Kennedy wing of the Congress, Reagan was able to rout Communism out of our hemisphere.

Then George H Bush got to watch the Berlin Fall, but promptly screwed up all of the SDI that was put into place by Reagan.

Clinton followed and opened doors to the Communist Chinese and Muslim terrorist drug smugglers, while unilaterally disarming the US for the cheap approval of the former Soviets.

George W comes in and there is another snap reversal of foreign policy and organizes global coalitions to fight whatever the heck the War of Terror was supposed to be.

Hussein enters the scene and destroys every healthy relationship with every ally, while pouring gasoline all over Europe and the Middle East.

It is worse than schizophrenic, we are in the category of Dr. Jeckle and Mr. Hyde. Its freakishly unnatural.

Of course, with scourges comes opportunities – if only the GOP were patriotic and not so milk toast. (so this is really just academic at this point)

We know that the Progressives have a cinch lock on the Gimmedat vote which is swelled up to over half the voting population now. We also know that money buys votes, both legitimate and from alternate sources like Disney characters, dead relatives, family pets and illegal aliens. Getting their vote requires money too to buy vote judges and the Secretary of State.

Pretty much no sane country would trust the US ever again in terms of foreign policy – look at the way Ukraine got anal raped because they trusted a Clinton.

So the next political candidate needs to be quite clear about how US money is going to be dolled out. Guns, tanks, bombs, cyber-attacks, drones, nukes, high tech stuff that makes Buck Rogers look like the pitchfork guy in American Gothic.

Make Japan, Europe, Israel, Saudi Arabia and other nations understand perfectly clear that all of this can be theirs if they simply keep the Progressives out of office.

Coffers will fill with international money – just as it has for several election cycles with the Demoncats. For countries that aren’t particularly wealthy but are morally flexible, I’m sure they can find underhanded ways to monkey wrench the Progressive campaigns.

Obviously Rand Paul is a non-starter. We need someone who would scare the hell out of Jack Bauer and even Chuck Norris. THEN we can actually compete against the jackals that are working to destroy this country.

Reuben Hick on July 28, 2014 at 6:35 PM

What you get when a bunch of pro-Commie theorists and America haters who think the basic rules of human behavior don’t apply to their Ivory Tower theories are put in charge of the foreign policy of the US in a still dangerous world.

formwiz on July 28, 2014 at 6:39 PM

invading Iraq was a bad choice, and it arguably was, why on earth did Obama invade Libya? In an even less strategic or thoughtful manner. At least Bush left a potential coherent government in Iraq (only to watch Obama abandon it).

So was Libya sort of a controlled burn to hold back…something? I don’t get it.

Libya, if you recall, was sold on the idea that Gadaffi was about to massacre his own people. It wasn’t just Obama – the invasion drums were beaten by folks like McCain, Graham, Lieberman – and and the Europeans also wanted to go.

Obama invaded for political reasons: he was frightened that if did not invade and Gadaffi caused a huge massacre, the Conservative war caucus (McCain, Graham etc.). Moreover, any war that the Brits, French and the rest of NATO actually *wanted* to fight in must have sounded good for a change. It was a chance to test out his international coalition and lead-from-behind ideas.

Also, you can’t really say Obama did not learn from Iraq. He prosecuted Libya as a no-boots-on-the-ground war. Even the Benghazi attack was an example of that, with a minimal presence.

As a result, while Libya has gone to hell just like Iraq, the price has so far been different: four American warriors and diplomats dead, instead of 4,487 US soldiers dead and 32,223 wounded (plus another 245 dead US contractors).

So, basically, Obama’s failure was about 1,100 times less costly in deaths than Bush’s failure. Also, the Iraq war cost the US $2 trillion; the Libya war cost the US 800 million. So it was also almost exactly the same ratio cheaper.

So, that means that Bush was 1,100 times the failure that Obama was in foreign policy in turns of both human cost and money cost.

amalric on July 28, 2014 at 7:02 PM

Both Iraq wars were initiated by a president Bush. Both have been disasters for us. We should stay out of Mideast wars, not start them.

burt on July 28, 2014 at 7:20 PM

“Including in Iraq, and they were in Iraq prior to our going in there in 2003.Don’t believe me? Ask (Democrat) pResident Bill Clinton, whose Justice Department formally claimed that al Qaeda was in cahoots with Iraq in their 1998 Federal Indictment against bin Laden.”

There were a small number in Iraq. Now there are lots more.

I think anyone who claims that the Iraq war didn’t vastly increase the number of Jihadi terrorists is simply delusional.

The Iraq war:

- Removed Saddam, who devoted a small amount of his effort and treasure to supporting terrorists, and who had *potential* to renew his military strength.

- Vastly strengthened Iran, who did and do devote a large amount of time and treasure to supporting terrorists, by transforming Iraq’s government from Sunni-leaning anti-Iranian to Shia-leaning pro-Irania. It also strengthened Iran militarily, since Saddam had been their enemy.

- Vastly increased the number and weapons of Sunni terrorists through two streams: ex-Iraqi Saddam loyalists plus newly-radicalized Sunnis threatened by new Shia-majority governnity.

- The Iraq war was also sold as needing to be done because we apparently considered sustain the no-fly zones and so on indefinitely. Well, instead we ended up having to sustain a vastly more expensive and costly occupation… which couldn’t be sustained indefinitely. Was that smart? No.

So:

- Gains: removed Saddam and his WMD threat and support of terrorists, both of which were real but modest threats thanks to the prior wars that had degraded them from their earlier levels.

- Losses: 4,500+ US dead and 30,000+ injured (likely far more than would have been killed even if we’d left Saddam alone); 2 trillion dollars; Iran strengthened and free of the Iraqi threat for several years during which it built up its WMD, North Korea emboldened to develop nuclear weapons (as US was busy in Iraq). That’s all the problems even BEFORE Obama pulled out and the situation went even further down the crapper (the only silver lining being Iran is now having to spend some blood and money).

In essence, the Iraq war was a screw up so deeply stupid and costly that it continues to hurt the conservative cause and probably will do so for years afterward. Obama’s Libya blunders – Benghazi and all – has been only 1/1000 times as costly so far.

So far, Obama has failed to manage anything as monumentally dumb in foreign policy – his errors have largely been errors of timidity, for he knows that if he “plays defense” he can continue to Blame Bush – and, sadly, he will be right.

Bush’s foreign policy – while it had its heart in the right place – was the most dreadful mess committed by a republican in living memory. Remember what you feel toward Obama, who got four Americans killed in Libya and squandered a billion dollars. Multiply that by a thousand – that’s what you should feel toward Bush.

amalric on July 28, 2014 at 7:27 PM

“several years ago”
\

RAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST!!!!!!!!!!!

MaiDee on July 28, 2014 at 7:44 PM

So, that means that Bush was 1,100 times the failure that Obama was in foreign policy in turns of both human cost and money cost.

amalric on July 28, 2014 at 7:02 PM

One of the dumbest things I’ve read recently. Cherry-picking of statistics to try to cover up Obama’s complete foreign policy collapse.

When Bush left office, Iraq was won, Afghanistan was under control (and casualties quite low), Kaddhafy had agreed to give up his terrorism, Egypt was stable.

Now, Egypt has been through turmoil for years, Libya has collapsed, Iraq is being brutally invaded,the Taliban are resurgent, Syria is revolting, and our influence in the Middle East is at an all-time low.

But sure, let’s pretend it’s all Bush’s fault.

There Goes the Neighborhood on July 28, 2014 at 10:54 PM