Obama is Responsible for the Deaths in Iraq

ISIS, ISIL, the Islamic State or whatever it’s called today is a group of homicidal thugs, drunk on their own sense of power and bolstered by their military successes in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.

Thousands have been murdered, and not just by a bullet to the head, but decapitated while they are alive. Thousands of women and children have been slaughtered.

For those who think that the only “war-on-women” is perpetrated by Republicans who think that if women want abortifacients, they should pay for such drugs themselves, let me repeat that. Thousands of women and children have been slaughtered in exactly the same way cattle, pigs and chickens are slaughtered.

A quick, humane execution? Hardly. Decapitation is not painless. It is not humane. These are the acts of immoral psychotics who actually enjoy their abuse of a position of power.

And yet we should consider just who is responsible for the carnage. Yes, the primitive tribal mentality and a religiously based bias that is in evidence is a factor, but one must asked, “Who was it that freed these animals to act so savagely against innocents?”

And if that is not horrific enough, Yazidi women are being sold into sexual slavery. Again, how does that compare with the so-called “war-on-women” that is being decried daily by the über-feminists of the left? How does it compare with “unwanted sexual advances” on college campuses all over the Western world?

This is not to say that women raised and living in a western, Judeo-Christian based society don’t have any problems, but when compared to what Yazidi and other Kurdish and non-conforming Sunni and Shia women face, isn’t that like comparing a hangnail to a heart transplant?

And who let these animals loose? Why, the primary culprit might be viewed as our very own president. Barack Obama wanted to show how much smarter he was than George Bush. He was going to get us out of Iraq, and end “Bush’s War.” And so he did. He even went so far as to fail to negotiate a Status of Forces Agreement with the Malaki government of Iraq that would have allowed a relatively small force to remain. Had our “smartest-guy-in-the-room” been only half as smart as he thought he was, if he had a Secretary of State who was more interested in doing her job than planning to run for President herself, he might have realized that there is more to the leadership required of the president than playing golf or jetting off to fundraisers where other single-issue, narrowly focused idiots kept demanding the end to “Bush’s War” or they threatened to cut off the funds that he was going to need for his re-election campaign.

How admirable. How praiseworthy. Just declare that the war is over, and come home. Last month I wrote a piece at American Thinker calling out the idiocy of our government assuming that they could change only one variable in a situation and everything else would remain constant.

Well this situation is identical in the type of assumptions bureaucratic morons usually make. The assumption being that the removal of American forces from Iraq would have absolutely no impact, since no one else would ever change their behavior.


So the bulk of Iraq is lost, and the golfer-in-chief apparently thinks that he can have a couple of F-18’s drop a few bombs, apparently at random since there is no obvious strategic benefit, and voilà, his job (and his responsibility for the humanitarian disaster he allowed to occur) is done. Time to go on vacation with Michelle and his girls.

Not all fathers are going to get to go on vacation with their wives and daughters, Mr. President. A lot of fathers are going to collapse tonight while knowing that their wives are being subjugated by deviants from the Islamic State (or Caliphate or whatever these animals call themselves) and are being treated as slaves. Sexual slaves. Their wives, the mothers of their daughters are being treated as nothing more than a commodity. And that, Sandra Fluke, is what a real war on women looks like.

As for dads being able to at least hold their daughters and protect them from these pigs of the ISIS variety, well, that might be a problem. You see, Mr. President, not all these courageous, virile and masculine ISIS animals confine their efforts to those who are nearly equal in strength and bravery. Fighting other real men might put them in some peril themselves, and they wouldn’t want that to happen, now would they?

One father in particular will no longer be able to protect his daughter the way you think that you are protecting Sasha and Malia. Of course, he doesn’t have a small army of bodyguards, nor a rather large army of real soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines to protect his little girl. He has to do it single handedly, and as these photos show, he failed. Frankly, if this man doesn’t ultimately commit suicide, I would be very surprised. Holding what is left of his daughter has to leave him in agony that he failed to protect them. He must wrestle with the guilt that he must feel that he failed to do the one job every father is supposed to do. He failed at the one job that every male in every society has been entrusted to do for millennia – protect the children.

I don’t know the name of this poor man who has lost his wife and daughter. But I have seen pictures that first made my physically ill, and then made me wish I had my own personal B-52. Yes, Mr. President, this is the work of those you keep saying follow a religion of peace. This is the result of you preferring to get additional fundraising done rather than do the responsible thing and protect those from whom our government had taken all the police and military protections that we Americans take completely for granted. A cheery “Well, we’re finished here, so you’re all on your own now. Good luck!” is hardly what a responsible leader would say, yet that was effectively what you did.

A website called Catholic.org was brought to my attention by someone I correspond with in South Africa. It has two photos of the gentleman I’ve described, and his daughter. Take a good look at him, Mr. President. Take a good look at his daughter, and imagine that it could have been Sasha or Malia. Then, Mr. President, look in the mirror and try to tell yourself that it’s not your fault for opening the cage that might have controlled these animals.




About Jim Yardley

Retired after 30 years as a financial controller for a variety of manufacturing firms, a two-tour Vietnam veteran, and independent voter.
Gallery | This entry was posted in 2014 election, 2016 election, Barack Obama, Elections, Foreign Affairs, Freedom of Religion, Iraq, ISIL, ISIS, Islamic State and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Obama is Responsible for the Deaths in Iraq

  1. kateyleigh says:

    Horrible. And passionately written. The juxtaposition between Obama as a father with his girls, and fathers whose little girls are like those in the above photo’s is powerful. I can’t even imagine the horror.
    But here’s a thought, whether truth or not I think the question needs to be asked— and this being that the cage was deliberately opened?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s