Washington Times: Obama Insufficiently Grateful to Bush for Plunging US into Bloody, Costly Quagmire
The Moonie Times is upset with the President.
President Obama constantly bemoans all the troubles he says he inherited from George Bush, but has never given President Bush due credit for the U.S. victory in Iraq.
I have to ask, though: if "victory" means over 4,000 Americans dead, 30,000 wounded, several hundred thousand Iraqis killed and millions displaced — all at a cost of up to $3 trillion and counting — what does "defeat" look like? And if we’ve "won," why are we still taking casualties and why can’t we come home now?
More about that later.
Barack Obama had never shown an adequate grasp of the military situation in Iraq, and was consistently wrong about the surge strategy that brought about this victory. On Jan. 10, 2007, when the surge was announced, he said the deployment of additional troops would increase sectarian violence. It didn’t.
Does the Washington Times’ fact-checker know how to use teh Google? Sadly, no.
Finally, the Moonie editorial writer own-goals himself.
Mr. Obama will preside over the changing of the guard to Iraq, which will last almost three years, with the initial combat force drawdown lasting around 18 months. The president stated plainly that "by Aug. 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end." But others may have a say in that. Making a hard and fast deadline actually increases the political impact of insurgent attacks made after that date, because it will place the president in the position of either having to extend his deadline, or obdurately adhere to a policy that may imperil Iraq.
And here is the Great Victory that George W. Bush has bequeathed us all.
Would it kill Obama to clap a little louder?