We may as well finish up the weekend on yet another inexplicable appearance by the Commander in Chief. And this one is a doozy, picked up by Joel Gehrke at The Corner. The President, during his brief, pre-tee off time availability this weekend, chose to address what a mess Iraq currently is and whether or not our lack of presence there had anything to do with it. Well, it did, but it obviously wasn’t his fault. He never really wanted to leave in the first place.
President Obama refused to take responsibility for the lack of U.S. troops in Iraq, saying that American soldiers had to pull out due to political pressure from Iraqi leaders.
“This issue keeps on coming up as if this was my decision,” Obama retorted when asked if he had any second thoughts, in light of the terrorist force taking over regions of Iraq, about having pulled all American troops out of the country. “The reason that we did not have a follow-on force in Iraq was because a majority of Iraqis did not want U.S. troops there and politically they could not pass the kind of laws that would be required to protect our troops in Iraq,” he said.
Now, normally if we wanted to refute a statement like this, we might have to go to Fox News or some conservative bastion of record keeping to find some supporting evidence. But in this case, why don’t we go straight to the horse’s mouth and check in at the White House web site.
Not good enough? How about the White House press office?
“After taking office, I announced a new strategy that would end our combat mission in Iraq and remove all of our troops by the end of 2011,” he said. “So today, I can report that, as promised, the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year.”
The government has clearly hit the petting zoo stage of planning and execution, so let’s leave the final comment to the animals.