View Article
28

After President Obama bombed Libya into submission I wouldn’t have expected to hear anyone calling him an isolationist but according to Dick Cheney that’s exactly what he is. 

John McCain’s not exactly happy with the President either; he’s upset with Obama for not doing more in the Ukraine.

But the isolationist who’s done the most to rile what we’ll call the ‘International’ wing of the Grand Old Party up in arms isn’t Obama – it’s Rand Paul, who got taken to the woodshed by Rick Perry after saying he had his doubts about sending his son (or anyone else’s) back to Iraq.

After a decade of wars with unhappy endings a little peace and quiet seems like a relief but, then again, Cheney says if we don’t straighten out the mess in Iraq we’ll have terrorists landing on our doorstep and McCain adds that Putin’s such a varmint if we don’t tie a knot in his tail right now in the Ukraine there’ll be hell to pay.

It’s all troubling and eerily familiar.

A decade ago when Cheney and company believed we should invade Iraq they said Saddam Hussein was such a villain we had no choice but when the smoke cleared it turned out it was something they hadn’t said that mattered: They’d promised victory would be easy and swift, that we’d whip Saddam with 150,000 men and a few smart bombs and barely break a sweat.  General Colin Powel warned them that, yes, we would whip Saddam’s army but after we’d conquered Iraq we’d own it (and 30 million quarrelsome Iraqis) and then 150,000 men wouldn’t be enough.

It wasn’t.

Fast forward a decade and now we’ve got many of the same folks arguing we have to save the rebels in Syria and stop the rebels in Iraq and put the kibosh on Putin but whipping Putin’s going to be a lot tougher proposition than whipping Saddam Hussein – so next time a politician starts talking about anything like sending in the Marines and promises, This will barely hurt at all, let’s run the scoundrel out of town on a rail before he does any real harm. 

 

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (2) RSS comment feed |

Comments

Choo
# Choo
Monday, July 28, 2014 3:46 PM
As to the first part, Obama isn't an isolationist, nor is he a hawk. To understand what he does you must first understand his motivations. He can be both isolationist and Hawk, depending on which at the time most benifits Obama. To think he makes any decision with any other motivation is pure foolishness. As to General Colin Powell's remark about, "if we break it we own it". We quit winning wars and the only way to ever win another one is to really own it. Iraq should have been the second State of the United States not attached to the north american continent. We really don't own any place we war with and that is a mistake. Yes the left would say it was all about the oil, but when they were paying $0.99 per gallon at the pump they would get over it and the sound and fury would end.
jack-of-all-thumbs
# jack-of-all-thumbs
Friday, August 01, 2014 7:28 AM
Well spoken Mr. Wrenn. And I'm on the other side of the aisle.

Post Comment

Only registered users may post comments.
Copyright (c) Talking About Politics   :  DNN Hosting  :  Terms Of Use  :  Privacy Statement