“Eager to Rid Itself of Iraq”
“. . . the President’s team at the White House pushed back, and the differences occasionally became heated. … and those on our side viewed the White House as so eager to rid itself of Iraq that it was willing to withdraw rather than lock in arrangements that would preserve our influence and interests.”
No, that’s not a quote from Charles Krauthammer, Ann Coulter, or another Conservative political commentator. It’s not a quote from some politician with an “R” after his name, either.
As Jonn noted earlier today, that quote is reportedly from former SECDEF Leon Panetta’s upcoming memoir.
Panetta goes on to state his opinion that White House engagement would have resulted in an agreement for some residual level of US forces to remain in Iraq post-2011. He further states his belief that those forces would have made a critical difference in the recent situation there.
But what would Panetta know? After all, he’s only the former SECDEF and DIR CIA.
My take on this is somewhat different from Jonn’s. Panetta’s job as SECDEF wasn’t to make the decision on Iraq. Rather, his job was to advise the POTUS regarding the ramifications of either option – then to implement the decision made by the POTUS. Sounds to me like he did precisely that. My issue here is very different than Jonn’s.
The current Administration has been trotting out the “we really wanted to keep some forces there, but the Iraqi government wouldn’t let us” bunch of bullsh!t load of horsesh!t baldfaced lie whopper flight of fantasy tall tale revisionist history recently concerning the 2011 US -Iraq negotiations. With all due respect: quit trying to “rectify” history again, Mr. President. Because as they might have said where I grew up: “Now, that dog just don’t hunt.” Your attempts to “blame Bush” here are being disavowed by people who saw what your Administration actually did – from the inside. Everyone can see the attempt to “blame Bush” this time is bull.
Panetta is saying essentially the same thing here as the former US Ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker has said elsewhere. So Panetta’s account would seem to have support from someone else who was in an excellent position to know “ground truth” in Iraq.
How about you quit trying to blame the current situation in Iraq on your predecessor, Mr. President. In 2011, your hands weren’t tied. You had your chance to prevent the current problems there from developing – and your Administration consciously chose not to. Instead, you played Pontius Pilate and “washed your hands of the matter”.
Fine. But the subsequent rise of ISIL and it’s takeover of much of Iraq is a direct consequence of that “hand-washing”. That means that the situation in Iraq today with ISIL is your responsibility – yours, not someone else’s. You and your Administration are the ones who “screwed the pooch” here.
You own this. Time to “man up” and admit it – for once. (Hey, a guy can dream – can’t he?)
Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Foreign Policy, Military issues, Terror War
Earlier you were looking for another phrase to replace “screwed the pooch”.
With the current administration, I’d like to suggest you quit sugar coating it. “Fucked the dog” is what it is.
And it’s not going to get any better than that. Remember how Midas had the golden touch? Well, Obama has the fecal touch. He can’t help but turn a good thing to shit…
True, Seadog. But I do prefer to have an expression available for the idea that isn’t completely NSFW. (smile)
For now, I think I’ll stick with “fornicated Fido” or “pleasured his canine companion” unless I’m feeling unusually blunt. Then I’ll just use the old and less-family-friendly term “screwed the pooch”.
Some people…
All the good stuff? You can thank me.
Anything bad happen? It wasn’t me, it was Rogue Agents in the Bureaucracy/damn dirty Tea Party/Previous Administration/Anyone other than me.
Because that’s how civil service works, right?
I swear, what I wouldn’t give to make it mandatory to have a Drill Instructor in the room with the President at any time to make sure there is no way in hell he can avoid taking some heat…
Actually, I think that would be an amazing executive order. Sergeant Major of the White House.
Sure, you can dream all you like that the Mouth In Chief will claim responsibility, but not gonna happen, now or ever….
This nightmare WILL get worse.
Sadly, IMO you’re probably right about the current Occupant, 1600 Penn Ave, Wash DC.
I think that B. Hussein 0bama will finally admit his mistakes, misdoings, and misdeeds the day after Daniel A. Bernath admits he never has been and never will be a US Navy CPO, Honorary or otherwise as well as his other misdeeds!
“and your Administration consciously chose not to. Instead, you played Pontius Pilate and “washed your hands of the matter”.”
Hondo…thank you. Just like Pilate, Obama has the blood of many Iraqi Muslims, Christians and others ISIL has murdered on his hands. In my mind, that blood will never wash off. He’ll carry that to his grave and then to his Maker.
He also has the blood of our Countrymen murdered in Benghazi on his hands as well as that of the people murdered with “Fast & Furious” firearms and our Warriors killed overseas as a result of the Rube Goldberg-style ROE’s issued by him and his administration, and I know there are many more!
Fine, it wasn’t Panetta’s decision to make, but the HONORABLE thing to do would have been to resign in protest and publicly state the reason for his resignation. I will not cut any of these cowards ANY slack. The time to say this was back in 2011. Now, anything he says looks like straight-up CYA.
+1
It was not Mr. Panetta’s decision but if he thought it was a bad one, he should have resigned. He didn’t resign so he NOT part of the solution, he is part of the problem.
Yes, I get the part where he tried to do the best he could with the huge steaming turd on his desk. I don’t have huge retirement savings so I might have to dig out the candles and spoon — not so for Mr. Panetta.
I think he is angling for some elected position or a job in the next administration. Cynicism is not a disease you catch when you turn 65, I have been like this for a long time.
I kinda doubt Panetta is angling for another high-level position in any future Administration, Richard. He turned 76 this June. He’ll be 78 1/2+ when the next POTUS is inaugurated.
My guess is he’s doing this for posterity. He wants to go on record as having opposed the current fiasco in Iraq when it was still eminently possible for US actions to prevent it from happening. Because of that opposition, he’s hoping history will have a much kinder view of him than if he’d advocated that lunacy himself.
Panetta is a Clinton lapdog and is trying to distance her from Obama in the run up to the coming election. I’d have more respect for him if he said something while he was serving. Doing it now is just cover your ass shit. He is a weasel.