Obama Has Finally Weighed His "Options"

"Yes, we have no bananas."


As the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (or Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, if you prefer) nears closer to Baghdad in those US tanks that the Iraqi army left behind in their mad flight, President Obama this week returned from his Hqs on the Western Front (Laguna Beach, UC Irvine, Rancho Mirage) and got down to business. Yesterday, he met with John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

Today, he met with Joe Biden, Martin Dempsey, John Kerry, Chuck Hagel, Jim Clapper, John Brennan, Samantha Power, Susan Rice, and probably Ben Rhodes, which probably explains why his scheduled press conference was delayed an hour. Finally, they reached a consensus. Then, after it was all typed up, the president came out and announced the following:

1 We are sending up to 300 military advisers to Iraq to gather intelligence on the march of ISIS/L toward Baghdad.

2 Said advisers will also advise and train the Iraqi army (on proper retreat tactics).

2 No air strikes.

3 No boots on the ground. (other than said advisers)

4 Prime Minister Maliki (as told by Joe Biden) needs to form a United government representing Sunnis, Shia and Kurds. (I suspect Maliki was hoping for a United Airlines flight to Miami instead.)

In addition, Obama said that we should not take sides on this sectarian conflict (which is about as close as he got to really saying what this conflict is all about). Yet, we are sending advisers to the Shia Maliki government, right?

To be fair, there are no good options. The only way to really reverse this would be to send the troops back in once again, defeat the enemy, and occupy the country again as we try to engage in nation building. Play it again, Sam. Obviously, the country has no stomach for that, and neither do I.

I might have favored some air strikes against ISIS that would have hopefully killed a few hundred or thousand  bad guys including those so-called "Western" fighters, who we fear will return from the battlefield in one piece to engage in the jihad here. That may yet happen if the advisers are there to scout out targets.

Ultimately, however, we cannot stop this carnage. Not because it is up to them to stop it as Obama said, but because it is now about a war that has been going on between Sunni and Shia for 1,400 years. In that, we should not get involved. As far as I am concerned, they can go on killing each other. That way they are not killing us- as much.

In addition, I have to agree with those who say we should not act as Iran's air force since they are going to fight ISIS on the ground in Iraq. May they also bleed themselves dry. Moreover, what do we do if we are bombing ISIS in Iraq and they retreat across the "border" into Syria? Do we bomb them there too or coordinate with Assad's army to attack them? Oh yes. We are against Assad. So we are against Iran in general, but might fight on their side in Iraq. We are against ISIS in Iraq but for them in Syria.

Does any of this make sense?

Clearly, it does not. Nor should we let our judgment be colored by energy concerns. (ISIS has apparently captured Iraq's largest oil refinery.) We need to  developing our own energy sources now. We have all we need. All we need is the will to get it.

Next on the horizon will be Jordan, our last true ally in the Arab world. Their turn is coming. Then it will be Saudi Arabia, and I will not shed tears for those duplicitous bastards, nor do I think we should shed blood on their behalf. Ultimately, I pray for a strong leader in the coming years who will stand with Israel when all these barbarians in the Arab caliphate think they are strong enough against to gang up on the Jewish state.

But in the immediate future, we should all pray that we don't see any videotaped images of American soldiers being beheaded by these animals.