Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Sympathetic toward Obama

June 27, 2014

Though not a supporter of President Obama, I sympathize with the dilemma facing him concerning Iraq....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Jun-28-14 8:51 PM

Neither Bush nor Obama have the fortitude to do what is required with these Islamist animals.....crush them and Brea their spirit.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 3:57 PM

How dare you have sympathy for Barack Hussein? Next thing you know you have Sympathy for the Devil. Haven't the mass media outlets taught you to hate him?

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 11:14 AM

Yes 2003 until present, maybe not 13 years but enough time in my opinion. I just don't feel putting our men and women in harms way any longer is gong to do anthing but incite these radicals. Let them figure it out. Peace in that part of the world will take much more than intervention by the US. When these groups become a direct threat to the US then I agree with military action.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 10:35 AM

LauriH, 13 Years? We went in in 2003 and we left in 2011. We broke it and we did not fix it so in some people's minds, we abandoned them. I personally don't see it that way. We gave them every chance at freedom, but they don't have the mindset for it. Sad but true. I have mixed feelings about what's going on now. We owe them nothing, but if these terrorist take over that would be very bad for us. It's a very bad position we've left ourselves in. Don't blame me, I didn't think invading Iraq was a good idea. I favored taking out Iran. That would have solved a lot of problems, but now we don't have that opportunity.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 10:33 AM

Lauri, I agree. The only thing the U.S. should try and do now is work with the Iraqi government and instill in them the importance of allowing the Sunni's back in leadership in order to reestablish control of the regions that were taken by the ISIS. When we left, the Sons of Iraq and Sunni leadership was able to secure that region against terrorism. It wasn't until the Iraqi government dismantled that leadership which allowed the ISIS to move in from Syria and take control. We have no business getting involved with our military and no, Obama did not create this mess, they brought it on themselves through a corrupt government that was left in charge. Ironic, we go into Iraq to remove a corrupt government, only to leave with another corrupt government in place. The same thing is happening in Afghanistan and it's time to get out of the region and allow them to work it out themselves with possible political intervention by the UN.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 9:43 AM

Abandoned Iraq? So we the United States are now responsible to govern Iraq also? We have been there for 13 years,our military was there also to train and help them establish their own military, in which many threw down their weapons and gave up. How is that again our problem? This part of the world will never be at peace,haven't been. So why, unless a direct threat to the United States should we stay? These terrorist groups know that the US has a presence in the middle east and it has not stopped them,what is different now? I actually think it puts a bigger target on the United States being overly involved.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 9:27 AM


like respect women, children, foreigners, religions, etc.

The over-arching governmental body would have a central currency, minimal taxing capability, and regulate/govern the infrastructure that benefit across all three states, ie. water supply/desalination/transmission, electrical power transmission, shipping ports/access/development, oil/gas transportation pipelines, railways, and national highways. Concerning military, I see it more of a national border patrol.

Private enterprise/business development would still be encouraged in agriculture, manufacturing, banking, wholesale/retail, local transportation/trucking, power generation, oil field development, gas plants, shipping, etc.

My thoughts.......I am sure there are holes in this but it is a starting point.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 9:26 AM

My solution for Iraq is to divide it into three different strong government regions (like states) but have an over arching governing body with limited power that promote the economic interdependencies between them.

The three states boundaries would generally mimic the religious/ethnic populations of the Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiites. The Kurd State would be in the northern areas east of the Tigris (Kirkuk, eastern Mosul, Erbil, Sulaymaniyah, Halabja), the Shiite State would be in the south/east (Basra, Karbala, Najaf, Nasiriyah). The Sunni State would be in the center of the country and west of the Tigris River in the north (Baghdad, Tikrit, western Mosul). Each would have their own form of government (probably a mix of representative/elections with religious inner-twinings). They would each have their own leader, representatives, judicial, police, economic development, etc. They would develop their mix of laws and justice. Hopefully they would modernize in some aspects like respe

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 9:12 AM

At this point, since the President abandoned Iraq, I say let the locals sort it all out. If a Muslim caliphate forms in the aftermath and poses a threat to us, then we go after them militarily.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 8:29 AM

The sad thing is Saddam Hussein was rightly condemned for his mass extermination of the Kurds, but the present government is basically allowing the same thing to happen to the Sunni's and the Kurds, they are just allowing the ISIS to do their dirty work.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 8:20 AM

Good luck with this one Phil!

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 8:15 AM

The current government in Iraq, while corrupt is no threat to us, but the ISIS bunch are terrorists who want to kill us. -Enigma

Enigma, the situation could have been contained. The militant gains in Mosul and other cities of the north and Anbar are the direct result of the removal of the Iraqi security forces commanders and local Sons of Iraq leaders who had all but eliminated al Qaeda in 2007-2008. Those commanders who had a reason to secure and hold territory in the north were replaced with al-Maliki loyalists from Baghdad who, when the terrorists returned, had no interest in dying for Sunni and Kurdish territory. And when the commanders left the battlefield, their troops followed. It's really that simple. The Iraqi government caused this uprising and you can't expect the Sunni's to once again step to the plate to wipe out the ISIS when their own government abandoned them.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 7:37 AM

"Limited assistance will prolong the situation and will be seen as taking sides in what is essentially a struggle between religious factions that existed in Iraq and most of the Middle East long before we got involved." - Phil

No Phil, any action we take now would be self defense. The current government in Iraq, while corrupt is no threat to us, but the ISIS bunch are terrorists who want to kill us. For us, this is not about religion, but survival. It is a sticky situation, but the parameters are not what you think.

2 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 7:30 AM

Mr Underwood, Barack Obama was aware of the political, religious, and military situation in the Middle East and the United States involvement when he applied for the president's job.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 7:29 AM

I agree with the letter, but I believe Phil will take a thrashing from the Obama haters in this forum.

7 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 6:34 AM

The current problems in Iraq were caused by the Iraqi government that all but dismantled the Sons of Iraq that was made up primarily of Sunni's; the same Sons of Iraq that turned the tide against al Qaeda in 2007-2008. The U.S should not get involved in helping a government that encouraged the removal leadership of the very same people that helped stabilize the violence in that country. If anything, the U.S should be calling for the removal of the Iraqi President and to assist in talks to reestablish Sunni leadership within the government.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 5:21 AM

I disagree with the concept of the Iraq problem at the present is the fault of Obama's predecessor. Obama created a vacuum when he pulled our support out of Iraq. This current problem is laid at Obama's feet.

9 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 4:36 AM

President Obama wanted to use the might of the US military to support ISIS in Syria 9 months ago.

Now, President Obama wants to use the might of the US military to oppose ISIS in Iraq.

The perfect illustration of President Obama's absolute incompetence as a leader.

11 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-14 4:27 AM

I'm not completely convinced that the Iraq war was a mistake. We toppled a ruthless dictator, and the intelligence at the time had WMD's there that could have easily been sold to terrorists by Saddam Hussein. I've not seen concrete proof, but I still believe that the WMD's were moved to Syria prior to our invasion.

11 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 19 of 19 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web