Saturday, June 14, 2014

Long may she wave...

Happy 239th Birthday U.S. ARMY...
A grateful nation thanks you...

Former presidential nominee Mitt Romney slammed the Obama administration’s foreign policy tactics during his annual “ideas summit” Friday in Utah. The comments came on the same day as President Obama’s announcement that the United States will not send troops to Iraq.

As reported by the Associated Press:
"Tragically, all we've fought for in Iraq, all that 4,500 American lives were shed to gain, is on the cusp, potentially, of vanishing," Romney said….. 
In his 15-minute address to about 300 former campaign donors and supporters, Romney pointed to a number of global hot spots, noting that Syria is in its third year of civil war, North Korea has carried out nuclear missile tests and Russia has captured Crimea.
Romney rejected the notion that the crisis in Iraq was caused by factors outside of the United States’ control, during an interview on Fox News Thursday:
“America is the leader of the free world, America has the potential to shape events, to help guide history in the way that is most fortuitous for the people of the world and for America. And unfortunately the president has not taken the action necessary, has not had the foreign policy necessary to protect our interests overseas or in various parts of the world.”
Romney also chided former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for claiming the release of the five Taliban leaders do not pose a threat to America, but rather to Afghanistan and to Pakistan. Watch Romney's full comments attacking the Obama/Clinton foreign policy approach here.
Night Watch

Japan-China: Update. Japan rejected a Chinese accusation that a Japanese Self-Defense Force aircraft buzzed a Chinese aircraft over the East China Sea.

Pakistan: Musharraf gets a break. Today, the Sindh (Province) High Court ordered Mr. Musharraf's name to be removed from the government's Exit Control List (ECL), but suspended execution of the order for 15 days to allow the government to appeal it.

Musharraf's attorney said, "The court has allowed our appeal and ordered to strike down Musharraf´s name from the Exit Control List. The order will be executed after 15 days."

Comment: The government placed Musharraf on the ECL to ensure his appearance at his treason trial.

The order means that the Court agreed with the arguments of the appellant, Musharraf. Those were that Musharraf's heart condition required specialist treatment that could only be obtained abroad and that he needed to tend to his ailing mother who is in Dubai. Musharraf has promised to return to Pakistan for trial because he wants to clear his name.

The Court's ruling provides an opportunity for the government to reduce the threat of an Army takeover of the government by declining to appeal the ruling and, thus, allowing Musharraf to go into exile. For months the Chief of Army Staff has made public comments that convey the Army leadership's strong opposition to the trial of a former Chief of Army Staff for treason.

Musharraf's presence in Pakistan has polarized political interests and caused strain in the Army's relationship with the government. He has been a distraction from the many pressing internal security challenges. The Sindh court has created a chance for reconciliation. If the government challenges the order, internal security will worsen and the threat of another military coup d'├ętat will increase.

Afghanistan: For the record. The Presidential run-off election between Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani will be held on 14 June. Abdullah is the front runner.

Iraq: ISIS declares a caliphate. Reports from Mosul stated that the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) announced that it had formed an Islamic State. A leaflet said, "We took on our shoulders bringing back the glories of the Islamic caliphate and stop oppression against our brothers and to cut the Shiite snake that reached the necks of the people."

The new regime outlawed unauthorized gatherings under penalty of death; ordered people not to communicate with the government in Baghdad; and warned women to dress modestly and stay at home. It also restored water and power.

Iran intervenes, maybe. Unidentified Iranian security sources said that Iran deployed units of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to fight the ISIL militants in Iraq.

The only reason liberalism survives is because there's usually a good bit of lag between when a policy is being implemented and the time when the American people get to see the results. If Americans could somehow magically see what would happen in a decade or two after a liberal policy has passed, there would be no liberals left. Instead, back in the real world, liberals create or exacerbate disasters with their policies, blame everyone other than themselves, and then demand more government action to fix the problem they screwed up in the first place.

Barack Obama is a perfect example of how this works. This is a man who basically had carte blanche to do anything he wanted for the first two years of his presidency since Democrats controlled Congress by a large margin. Since then, Obama has probably gotten his way more than any President in modern history, even though he had to break and ignore so many laws that he created a constitutional crisis in the process.

So, how has all that unbridled liberalism worked out? Is Barack Obama wildly popular or his popularity plunging? Are Americans congratulating Obama for all of his policy successes or are they baffled by how anyone could screw things up so badly? Are Democrats taking credit for all of Obama's wonderful policies or are they still trying to pass the blame to George W. Bush who left office 5 1/2 years ago?

Barack Obama may be good at campaigning and great at shifting the blame, but when it comes to governing, he can't do anything right. If you want to see what happens when a politician ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS puts raw politics and ideology above what's good for the country, take a look at just some of the disasters Barack Obama has created for America.

1) Setting a Timeline And Not Getting a Status of Forces Agreement in Iraq: George W. Bush may have had a tough time in Iraq overall, but his surge was wildly successful and the country had largely been pacified when he left office. In other words, Barack Obama didn't have to "win" the war in Iraq because it had already been won. All he had to do was not screw up the peace. Instead, for purely political reasons, he set a timeline for when we were going to pull out. Then he didn't even bother to get a status of forces agreement with Iraq, which would have helped to stabilize the country and improve its training with very minimal risk to American forces. Keep in mind that we STILL have soldiers in Germany, Japan, and South Korea, but none in Iraq, which desperately needed our help and advice to keep the country stable. Now, the entire nation is in danger of devolving into civil war and/or falling to Isis/Al-Qaeda outright because Barack Obama wanted to be able to tell his base that he got us "out" of Iraq. Well, we are "out" of Iraq, but now ISIS/Al-Qaeda is in because of Obama. Great job squandering all the sacrifices our soldiers made in that country, Obama!

2) Obamacare: Barack Obama genuinely deserves to be impeached not just once, but twice for Obamacare. From top to bottom, the entire program was sold on lies. Obama claimed that if people liked their plans they could keep their plans. He claimed that if they liked their doctors, they could keep their doctors. He claimed that Obamacare would cut costs for the average family by $2,500.

Obamacare could have never passed if the American people had known those promises were baldfaced lies. Since the bill became law, Obama has illegally altered it more than 20 times to try to delay the damaging political impact to the Democrat Party. Meanwhile, the law has cost millions of Americans their insurance and has driven medical costs into the stratosphere. Seldom has so much been promised to so many who've been so bitterly disappointed with what they received.

3) Breaking The Law To Give Amnesty To Young Illegals: We've already had a "one time" amnesty for illegal aliens in this country, but Barack Obama is willing to flagrantly break the law in order to have another one. So essentially, he has ordered the border patrol to stop deporting ANYONE other than SOME of the worst criminals and gang members. Contrary to the law on the books, younger illegal aliens are being flat out told they won't be deported and are being given work permits. Unsurprisingly, as word of this got out, it created a flood of illegal aliens at the border. In past years, roughly 6,500 unaccompanied children have crossed the border. This year, the number is projected to be around 90,000 and the Obama Administration STILL isn't deporting them, which will make our illegal immigration problem worse, spur even more children to come here and will lead to countless kids being robbed, raped and murdered on their way to the United States. This has been called "Cloward-Piven at the border" and that's exactly what it is: a deliberate attempt to subvert the law and hurt the country.

4) The Failed Stimulus: Including interest, Obama spent more than a TRILLION dollars "stimulating" the economy. "Stimulating" is in quotes because there's very little real evidence that frittering away all that money we borrowed actually did anything to help the economy. That's actually an even bigger deal than people might think since the CBO estimated that over the long haul, the "stimulus" would actually create so much new debt that it would REDUCE OUR ECONOMIC GROWTH. In other words, we didn't grow in the short term, we're going to grow less in the long term, and we added a TRILLION DOLLARS worth of debt. Do you know what we could have bought with 1.2 trillion dollars in stimulus?
Think of it like this: in today’s dollars, the stimulus bill will cost more than the war in Korea and the war in Iraq — combined! It will cost about the same amount as FDR’s New Deal AND the war in Vietnam combined! It’ll cost far more than the Marshall Plan, the Louisiana Purchase, and putting a man on the moon — combined!
Instead, we might as well have taken a trillion dollars, weighted it down and dumped it into an active volcano for all the good it did.

5) "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs" or "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs" lost? Barack Obama has put a number of policies in place which were supposed to create jobs. Rather famously, his stimulus bill was supposed to drop unemployment to 5.6% or below by 2012. Nancy Pelosi said Obamacare would create 4 million jobs. Obama has loaned (and lost) countless billions of dollars to Chrysler, GM, and green energy companies like Solyndra to create jobs. Obama has publicly "pivoted to jobs" 19 times since he was first elected. Liberals, including the Obama Administration tell us that Barack Obama has been FANTASTIC at creating jobs.

Yet, there are a MILLION LESS AMERICANS WORKING TODAY than there were the day Obama took office. If you go back to 2007, before the economic crash there are "3.2 million fewer full-time employed persons" working. On top of that, median household income is down by close to $2300 per family since Obama took office. Put another way, there are less people working than when Obama took charge and the people who are working are making less money on average. It's all well and good for Obama to keep encouraging as many people as possible to get welfare and disability, but he seems to have forgotten that we need to have some people left working to pay for that along with the rest of the big government programs he advocates.

ISIS chief to USA: “Soon we will be in direct confrontation, and the sons of Islam have prepared for such a day”

/ Jihad Watch
AbuBakralBaghdadi“The sons of Islam have prepared for such a day”? Surely, if there was ever a time when our sterling moderate Muslim leaders — Faisal Abdul Rauf, Ibrahim Hooper, Nihad Awad, Reza Aslan, Ahmed Rehab, Salam al-Marayati and all the rest of them — to straighten out the many among their coreligionists who misunderstand their peaceful, tolerant religion, it is now. Surely they must be on their way to Mosul now, where they can get a meeting with Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi — Dr. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who has a doctorate in Islamic studies from Baghdad University — and explain to him how he is getting Islam all wrong, wrong, wrong.

“ISIS Leader to USA: ‘Soon We Will be in Direct Confrontation,’” by Terence P. Jeffrey,, June 13, 2014 (thanks to Pamela Geller):
( – Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), issued a rare audio message back on January 21 in which he flatly stated his group’s intention to march on Baghdad and move into “direct confrontation” with the United States.
“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,” Baghdadi said. “So watch, for we are with you, watching.”
When the House Foreign Affairs Committee held a hearing on February 5 on al Qaida’s resurgence in Iraq, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iran and Iraq Brett McGurk presented written testimony explaining the agenda of ISIS (also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL), and discussed Baghdadi’s audio message to Americans.
ISIL, McGurk said, focuses on “an aim to carve out an Islamic caliphate stretching from Baghdad to Lebanon.”
“ISIL has also made its intentions clear: move from a new base of operations in Fallujah to Baghdad–a distance of under 30 miles,” McGurk said in his written testimony. “Its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, had this to say in a rare audio statement issued on January 21: ‘As for ISIS in Iraq: Be in the frontlines against the Shia, and march toward Baghdad and the South, keep the Shia busy in their own areas. Know that the entire Sunni population and the brothers in Syria are watching you.’”
McGurk then noted that Baghdadi went on to conclude his audio statement by issuing a direct threat to the United States. Specifically, Baghdadi said: “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.”
“We take such threats seriously and through cooperation with this committee and the Congress, we intend to help the Iraqis in their efforts to defeat ISIL over long term,” McGurk told the committee in his spoken testimony.
The day before McGurk appeared in the Foreign Affairs Committee, CIA Director John Brennan testified at the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence’s annual hearing on “Worldwide Threats.” Discussing Jabhat al Nusra, which is the al Qaeda affiliate in Syria, and ISIL, Brennan warned that al Qaeda may develop the capability to “use Syria as a launching pad” for attacks on the West, and that al Qaeda already had training camps both in Syria and Iraq where it was developing capabilities that could threaten the West.
“There are three groups of people [operating in Eastern Syria] that are a concern, from an extremist standpoint; Ahrar Asham, Jabhat al-Nusra, which is the Al Qaida element within Syria, and the Islamic state of Iraq and Levant,” said Brennan. “It’s those latter two I think are most dedicated to a terrorist agenda.
“We are concerned about the use of Syrian territory by the Al Qaida organization to recruit individuals and develop the capability to be able not just to carry out attacks inside of Syria, but also to use Syria as a launching pad,” he said.
“So it’s those elements–Al Qaida and ISIL–that I’m concerned about, and especially the ability of these groups to attract individuals from other countries, both from the West, as well as throughout the Middle East and South Asia, and with some experienced operatives there who have had experience in carrying out a global Jihad,” Brennan continued.
“There are camps inside of both Iraq and Syria that are used by Al Qaida to develop capabilities that are applicable, both in the theater, as well as beyond,” the CIA director testified.
House Intelligence Chairman Mike Rogers asked Brennan: “Do you believe that that ungoverned space presents a real threat to the United States of America, via al Qaida operations, or the West?
“I do,” said Brennan.
On Feb. 2, al Qaeda had issued a statement on inline disassociating itself from ISIL, which had tried to take over al Nusra Front, which al Qaeda had designated as its official affiliate in Syria. In his Feb. 5 testimony, McGurk discussed this break between al Qaeda and ISIL.
“ISIL and al Nusra were both kind of came out of Al Qaida in Iraq,” said McGurk.
“ISIL, basically, is al Qaida in Iraq. It’s leader was the al Qaida and Iraq leader since 2010. Nusra was a bit of an offshoot and is focused more on Syria. As you said, there’s now this message, which seems from [al Qaida leader] Zawahiri, saying that ISIL is no longer affiliated with Al Qaida central.”

Sunni vs. Shia Explained

 Pamela Geller / Atlas Shrugs

For those who don’t know or fully understand the millennial war between Sunni and Shia – the unending battle to prove who are the true Muslims — the preeminent scholar on Islam Robert Spencer explains it fully at Aleteia.

Follow me on Twitter here. Like me on Facebook here.
The Fall of Iraq
Jihad between Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims is raging hotter now than it has in centuries. Robert Spencer, Aletheia, June 12, 2014
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has just seized the Iraqi cities of Mosul and Tikrit, and is close to taking control of the nation’s largest oil refinery — indicating that the jihad between Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims is raging hotter now than it has in centuries, and isn’t going to die down anytime soon.

ISIS, a Sunni group, according to the Washington Post now “effectively governs a nation-size tract of territory that stretches from the eastern edge of the Syrian city of Aleppo to Fallujah in western Iraq — and now also includes the northern Iraqi city of Mosul.”
What’s more, it has the resources to outlast its foes in a long conflict. ABC News reports that the jihadists “looted $429 million from Mosul banks, making them richer than some small countries.”
However, Iraq’s Shi’ite Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, has vowed to retake the city, blaming its fall on a “conspiracy” and adding: “Today, the important thing is that we are working to solve the situation. We are making preparations and we are regrouping the armed forces that are in charge of clearing Ninevah from those terrorists.”
Maliki may indeed be able to clear the region of the Sunni jihadists, for behind him stands the power of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which also backs the Alawite Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria. But it is unlikely that they will be able to achieve total victory, for Sunni jihadists from all over the world have flocked to Syria in order to fight against Assad, and Maliki has accused Saudi Arabia and Qatar of supporting the Sunni jihadists in Iraq.
American analysts had naively hoped that both Sunnis and Shi’ite would have been able to put all this behind them. Then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice complained in January 2007: “There’s still a tendency to see these things in Sunni-Shia terms. But the Middle East is going to have to overcome that.”
Seven years later, they still haven’t. In fact, the idea that the Sunni-Shi’ite divide, which is 1,400 years old and goes all the way back to the murky origins of Islam, is something that can without undue difficulty be “overcome” is a sterling manifestation of the general superficiality of Washington’s analysis of the Middle East, during both the Bush and the Obama administrations.
Unbeknownst to the analysts and policymakers who have influenced Washington policy for decades now, the Sunni-Shi’ite divide cannot be bridged by negotiations, or by bribes (“aid”), or by anything but the full surrender of one group to the other — which is not going to happen. This is because the divide has enough roots in each side’s differing understandings of Islam for hardliners in both camps to label the other “unbelievers,” and thus people who can lawfully be killed.
Islamic tradition holds that after Muhammad died (which is supposed to have happened in 632 AD), the Muslim community chose his companion Abu Bakr to succeed him as caliph, or successor of Muhammad as the military, political and spiritual leader of the Muslims. But one group among them thought that the leadership belonged by right to Ali ibn Abi Talib, Muhammad’s son-in-law and one of his first followers, and after him to a member of the prophet’s household.
Ali finally did become caliph after Abu Bakr had been succeeded by two other companions of Muhammad, Umar and Uthman, but was assassinated only a few years later. Then in the year 680, his son Hussein was killed in battle with the caliph Yazid I at Karbala in Iraq, and the split between those who believed that the caliph should be the best man in the community (the Sunnis) and those who believed the Muslims should be led by a relative of Muhammad (the Shi’ites) became formal, bitter and everlasting.
There is not much doctrinal difference between the two camps, but since each believes that the other has departed from the truth of Islam, and each (particularly the Shi’ites) nurses centuries-old grudges over ancient wrongs done to them, this split is not going to be “overcome.” Saddam Hussein kept a lid on it in Iraq by brute force, but now that he is gone and a Shi’ite government is in power there, the Sunnis are determined to wrest control back from them, and the Shi’ites and their Iranian patrons are just as determined to keep it.
It is a recipe for endless warfare, until the Mahdi returns and reveals whether he has come as the Sunni or the Shi’ite version. In the meantime, the strength of ISIS, the Shi’ites’ determination to win back the territory they have lost, and the very real possibility that Sunni-Shi’ite war could engulf the entire Middle East, are grim monuments to the price of Washington’s faulty analysis.
The post Sunni vs. Shia Explained appeared first on Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs.

ISIS winning in Iraq despite being greatly outnumbered by 15 to 1

Bare Naked Islam 

The seizure of Iraq’s second largest city by a group too ruthless to make it in core al Qaeda represents the culmination of years of history and a U.S. foreign policy that has failed to properly conceive of and counter the Al Qaeda movement at its most basic level.


Breitbart  Long War Journal recently produced an excellent GEOINT model of ISIS’s gains across Iraq and Syria; though ISIS’s control of the towns and cities in question is not universal or uniform, neither is the Iraqi or Syrian government’s respective control of their own space. Including recent gains, Al Qaeda now controls a space roughly the size of Syria.


From a tactical standpoint, ISIS’s recent assault fits squarely within traditional special operations doctrine; in fact, it is almost as if Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, has read William McRaven’s master’s thesis. ISIS forces moved swiftly to remove Iraqi army and national police forces from Mosul and other cities under control, outpacing national forces’ ability to react and respond accordingly, despite larger numbers and better equipment.


ISIS2According to STRATFOR, a private intelligence and geopolitical analysis firm, Iraq’s 30,000-strong military presence in Mosul was caught by surprise, retreating against a much weaker force and regrouping only near Samarra, 100 miles north of Baghdad. For perspective, ISIS forced more than a full division of the Iraqi army—once the fourth largest in the world—into a 200-mile retreat, all the while suffering a reported numerical disadvantage o15 Iraqi soldiers for every single ISIS jihadist.


The Iraqi military relies on U.S. equipment and training and maintains a relationship with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), but it still turned tail as soon as ISIS made any show of gain. If you can’t win with 15:1 odds, American equipment, years of U.S. training, and guidance from Iran’s Qods force, you probably are not very long for this world.


SYRIAN-CIVIL-WAR-07Irregular warfare such as that we are seeing in Iraq is almost always a dual-sided affair involving (1) a clandestine political entity that seeks to build support and “out-govern” the enemy, and (2) a militant organization designed to intimidate locals, seize space, then weaken and occupy the enemy until a larger political goal can be enforced. For the Viet Cong, this was practiced by what the U.S. government called the “Viet Cong Infrastructure” which was covertly supported by Hanoi.


The same strategic principles apply in Islamist forms of insurgency; ISIS and the larger Al Qaeda apparatus are militant organizations that seek establish political control. To this effect, ISIS’s assault has opened up the door for ISIS to put down roots in new neighborhoods, broadening their foothold in a region that is neglected if not ignored by Baghdad and at odds with the state on sectarian terms.


139302221739433102744624History is determined by the people who care enough to make it happen. ISIS, like the rest of Al Qaeda, is not merely composed of well-armed young men but also of seasoned strategists who have read Mao, McRaven, and Lenin, not just the Qu’ran and Hadith.


Arab nation-states, the basic building blocks of any kind of regional peace, are dying; the Shi’a governments of Iraq and Syria are now more than ever mere rumps of their former selves, barely able to project power outside of their ethnic and sectarian fiefdoms. The only reason ISIS didn’t expand into Irbil and the Kurdish region of Iraq is that autonomous Kurds met them with greater force than did the Iraqi army​.​


Iraq-ISIS-map _75475637_iraq_barchart

Al Qaeda hasn’t won the titles of Damascus and Baghdad, but it’s time to quit pretending that they have to do so before being recognized as an actual geopolitical threat that controls a huge swath of territory at the heart of the Islamic world.


Ignore every “expert” who tells you that ISIS is not al Qaeda because their leaders don’t get along. ISIS, like al Qaeda, is involved in a global press to restore a totalitarian conception of an Islamic Empire across the Muslim world, and in the absence of a clear-headed strategy by their enemies, they are winning.


Click on link for video...


Report: Released Taliban Leader Played Key Role in 9/11 Taliban Strategy
By Melanie Batley

  • e
The successful operation was a key part of the strategy to ensure that opposition to the Taliban in Afghanistan was weakened. The Taliban was preparing for an anticipated American retaliation immediately following 9/11.

A leaked Joint Task Force Guantanamo threat assessment of Fazl said that he met with Abdul Hadi al Iraqi to "immediately coordinate an attack with the Taliban against the Northern Alliance," according to the Standard. The attack was to be carried out the day after al-Qaida assassinated Northern Alliance commander Ahmed Shah Massoud in a suicide bombing so as to weaken the opposition's morale.

The Standard highlighted that the 9/11 Commission said in its final report that the mastermind of the attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, confirmed that the offensive Fazl assisted with was a key part of the strategy to execute the 9/11 attacks.

Despite Fazl's involvement, the Obama administration has insisted that none of the five detainees that were freed pose any threat to the United States and were not directly involved in the terrorist attacks on the United States.

"These five guys are not a threat to the United States," former secretary of state Hillary Clinton said during an interview on NBC News last week, the Standard noted.

"They are a threat to the safety and security of Afghanistan and Pakistan. It's up to those two countries to make the decision once and for all that these are threats to them. So I think we may be kind of missing the bigger picture here. We want to get an American home, whether they fell off the ship because they were drunk or they were pushed or they jumped, we try to rescue everybody."

Marie Harf, a State Department spokeswoman, also insisted during a June 5 press conference that none of the former detainees posed any threat to the United States. The Daily Beast reported that John Brennan, director of the CIA and previously Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser, has argued that the "Taliban Five" were primarily focused on fighting against Afghans and did not have a record of attacking Americans, the Standard reported.

Meanwhile, each of the other four members of the Taliban Five were also part of the alliance with the Taliban that enabled al-Qaida to carry out the 9/11 terrorist attacks, according to the Standard.

The magazine said that the leaked files and court documents show that the U.S. government believes that Khairullah Khairkhwa was linked to bin Laden and oversaw one of al-Qaida's main training camps in Afghanistan.

Abdul Haq Wassiq served as the deputy director of intelligence for the Taliban and "was in charge of handling relations with al-Qaida-related foreign fighters and their training camps in Afghanistan," the Standard reported, citing the United Nations. The camps were a base where al-Qaida trained terrorists for its plots against America.

Norullah Noori, like Fazl, was also a Taliban military commander and coordinated operations with al-Qaida's paramilitary forces.

The leaked documents also concluded that Mohammad Nabi Omari planned attacks with al-Qaida against coalition forces.

And so it seems it was all for naught  
By: Diane Sori

"Baghdad is going to be overrun. The Green Zone is going down." – U.S. intelligence official

As Iraq is on the verge of total collapse, the U.S. stock market is tanking, and oil prices are surging due to the ongoing violence throughout the entire Middle East. And Barack HUSSEIN Obama is doing NOTHING...doing NOTHING in regards to Iraq even after the Iraqi government has asked...has begged...for help. And his lack of action...except to say "we can't and won't do it for them" and that Iraq needs to settle its own political differences...political difference he has contributed directly to...will most assuredly result in the birth of a highly dangerous islamic caliphate that will NOT only be the foreboding of a jihadist takeover of Iraq and its surrounding Arab nations, but will be one which will pose a direct threat to America and all western nations as well.

Claiming he was caught off the strength, fortitude, and determination of the extremist group the 'Islamic State in Iraq and Syria' extremely brutal al-Qaida affiliate known by its acronym ISIS and one that's under the command of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the terrorist released by Obama from Camp Bucca in 2009 and who still has a $10 million reward by the FBI on his head (notice a pattern here)...the major Iraqi cities of Mosul (which is less than one hundred miles from Syria and one that's strategically vital for funding al-Qaeda in Iraq) and Tikrit have fallen to the terrorists, all while Obama says he won't send in troops but might consider possible air strikes to help the flailing Iraqi government. 

Yet to date NOTHING has been done...NOTHING at the growing in numbers Sunni militants are advancing south towards Baghdad by the they travel on a road riddled with headless bodies of their doing. And now these newly embolden terrorists are said to be planning to bring jihad NOT only to Iraq but to Jordan, the Gaza Strip, the Sinai, and to Lebanon as well.

And what are the U.S. trained Iraqi government forces doing...they're turning and running away in surrender. But it's NOT that they want to surrender, it's that Obama’s having given out the U.S. withdrawal date for all to hear made their standing and fighting a mute point for once we leave they know they do NOT stand a chance against this well-armed, well-financed jihadi army of sorts.

And to make this situation even worse than just for those Iraqis trying to fight back is the fact that Barack HUSSEIN Obama...the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces...has now made each and every America death...has made every drop of American blood shed...has made every crippling wound our troops sustained...has made it all for naught as the people and the cities they gave their lives and limbs to free have now been handed back to the very terrorist groups we fought so hard to free this country from.

More American blood on his hands as the bottom line is this...Iraq's most likely soon to be fall is directly the fault of both Barack HUSSIEN Obama and his administration who have NO...I repeat NO...idea whatsoever how both reckless and dangerous its 'supposed' foreign policy is as their foreign policy is actually NO policy in support of America or its interests at all. NO foreign policy at all for how does one free and secure a country and then turn its back and abandon it with NO plan in place to keep the hard fought for peace intact.

Simply does NOT but our beloved America under this man's watch... under this traitor's watch...NOT only turns her back on our allies and friends but on we Americans as well.

Yet 'We the People' did see this coming...the generals saw this coming...while Obama and crew deliberately chose to look away and ignore the warnings sounded by those of the ground. And as both political and secular violence sadly became part of the Iraqi people's daily life over this past year...Obama did little to NOTHING to train Iraqi's army to stand strong against those wanting to undo all we had done.

And again he did little because America's enemies...because our allies enemies... are indeed his friends...are the ones to whom his true allegiances lie.

And thanks to Obama's actions...or should I say lack thereof...the die for a total Middle East implosion has been cast as Iran...Iraq's old the very one who wants Israel wiped off the map...are coming to the aid of its long held thorn in its side. Now sending 150 of its infamous, highly trained, elite Revolutionary Guards (with promises to send more as the need arises) to aid the Iraqi government in its fight against the ISIS militants, the very incursion of Iran into the battle lights a fuse to disaster that NO one might be able to extinguish.

And as strategic alliances in the region are forced to change now that Iran has inserted themselves into the mix, what's left of the Iraqi army's command has turned over the defense of the all-important oil city of Kirkuk (often called the 'Kurdish Jerusalem') to Kurdish forces, who are deploying for yet another attack by the jihadists. And while the Kurds to the north gather for all-out war, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki issued an all-inclusive call-up in Baghdad for its citizens (30,000 have signed up so far) to help in defending the city against the advance of ISIS and other al-Qaeda forces that are poised to overrun and take over the city...forces that are now less than 25 miles away from the city's outskirts.

And Iraq falling will affect both the Middle East and the global stage as well. First, with Iraq being a huge oil exporter, damage to its production network will most assuredly have a negative effect on the world economy as oil prices will indeed rise and rise to its highest prices ever. Second, Jordan, a country already overrun with about a million refugees from the civil war in Syria, is concerned...and rightly so... about a possible influx of Iraqi Shiites and then following them with attacks by Sunni jihadistss crossing the Iraqi border. Third, with Mosul being just an hour's drive from the Kurdish regional capital of Erbil, Turkey's government is rife with fears that the involvement of Peshmerga (Kurdish) troops into the Iraqi conflict would embolden the Kurds to further their secessionist ambitions into disputed areas that both the Kurds and Turkey claim.

But lastly and most importantly is the Israel vs. Iran vs the U.S. scenario. We all know that Obama wants the al-Assad government gone, and to that affect he has been (ILLEGALLY as in Benghazi) transferring guns and weapons to the 'supposed' moderate Sunni (al-Qaeda supported) rebels for quite some time. But with the newest developments in Iraq, including the surprising development of Iran's siding with al-Maliki's government, a mutual interest has arisen for the U.S. and Iran as the last thing either country wants is a Sunni theocracy, gleamed from the playbook of Osama bin Laden, sitting on Iran's western border. But Iran is the chief enemy of Israel and with Obama constantly stabbing Israel in the back, what happens to Israel if Obama outwardly switches sides concerning all things Israel. Israel will NOT take kindly to that and this might just force Israel to do what it should have done years ago...and there's NO need to tell you what that is.

So as the now probable fall of Iraq brings back memories of the ghosts of Viet Nam...a war that should have been an American victory but one that turned into a hasty retreat NOT because of our brave troops fighting but because of the leaders behind the troops...weak leaders...leaders who put the enemies sensibilities before our own...leaders who did NOT know how to fight to win but only to sustain what they thought of as victory that sadly was anything but...I leave you with the words of Barack HUSSEIN Obama...delusional words by a delusional and evil man who now has the ghosts of America's dead resting squarely on his shoulders where they rightfully belong.

"The world is less violent than it has ever been. It is healthier than it has ever been. It is more tolerant than it has ever been. It is better fed then it's ever been. It is more educated than it's ever been."

And anyone who believes that is as delusional as he is...and the Iraqi people know that better than most as they have become the very delusion of which he speaks.

As we continue to work towards forcing this regime to answer to 'We the People' for high crimes and misdemeanors, we ask that you SIGN AND SHARE OUR PETITION BY CLICKING HERE...
All we need is 100,000 signatures to force this regime to address our concerns!!!