Obama wrong on maintaining presence in Iraq

Just prior to my son bringing something to my attention that I will write about in my next post as soon as I'm finished writing this one and publish tomorrow, I came across this article about Barack Obama.

In case you don't feel like clicking on links today, it's a Yahoo News article written by Maxim Kniazkov about how Obama "vowed Monday not to seek permanent US military bases in Iraq and reiterated his pledge to pull out the bulk of US forces by mid-2010."

It seems to me that one of the main reasons for going into Iraq in the first place was to create a U.S. military presence right in the middle of where all the conflict is in the Middle East. That way we can kind of keep an eye on things.

However, with Obama being of the crowd of democrats that believe an American presence at different places around the world is something that makes America look too arrogant (click here for a further explanation of Obama's vision of a world order). To me, that explains why he does not want to do this.

However, I think this would be foolish. I would like to quote columnist Cal Thomas, as he wrote in the book he co-wrote with Bob Beckel, "The United States was once feared and respected. A major reason the world is in such turmoil with so many simultaneous threats is that we have not done enough recently to instill fear in those who would harm us."

Man, I love that quote. In fact, I'm going to say it again:

"The United States was once feared and respected. A major reason the world is in such turmoil with so many simultaneous threats is that we have not done enough recently to instill fear in those who would harm us."

I don't understand why Obama would want to just give away what the U.S. has worked so hard to obtain.

One thing we as Americans have to realize. The Iraqi people were incapable, or a better way of stating it too scared to fight for their own freedoms. So we did it for them. And polls show they are happy with their new found freedoms, and are now willing to fight for them.

For our efforts, we deserve to maintain a presence in that region, even if it is a small one. Just enough of a presence to remind thugs that we aren't going to mess around anymore. If you want to mess with the Iraqi people, if you are harboring terrorists, if you have thoughts about destroying Israel or attempting more terror on America or any of its allies, watch out brother.

We cannot be worried about the feelings of these radical Muslim thugs who wish to kill us. Why? Because their God says that we must be destroyed. Their God says that all the land of the world is "rightly" theirs, and that we have taken it in the name of our God. We, therefore, are the enemy.

These people do not comply with the rules of warfare. They chop off heads and dunk heads in water and electrocute and hang and rip hands off if that's what it takes to get what they want. Better yet, they kill and maim to get what they want. They do not think twice about terrorizing others in the name of their God.

As Cal Thomas writes:

"If we seek to fight this war with the same tactics we have used in previous wars, we will lose. That's why it is ludicrous to be concerned about 'torture' and human rights with people who practice one and ignore the other. The most often heard criticism is 'we can't behave like them.' I agree. We must be worse than them and so humiliate,
decapitate, and eradicate them that those who remain will not think of trying anything like this for centuries to come."

And yet Barack Obama has the audacity to say that we will not maintain a presence in Iraq. Why the hell not?

Oh, I know why, because he's afraid of being seen as arrogant. I'm sorry, but when we have thugs who hide in churches and behind school children with their weapons aimed at their own fellow citizens, Americans and America's allies, America must have a presence in that region if the opportunity presents itself.

I know that the Iraqi people may resist. And I know there will have to be some tough talk to negotiate a deal with the Iraq and the U.N. so we can maintain a presence in the Middle East. Something that will be absolutely pertinent to winning the overall War on Terror -- a war that many democrats simply view as "a bumper sticker slogan."

I have no problem with Obama's desire to pull out troops by 2010. However, if this decision should be made because the Generals, the military officials, have declared that area safe for us to leave. Again I state: the decision to pull out troops from Iraq should not be made by politicians in Washington, of which Obama, Bush, McCain all are.

To further this argument, our next president needs to stay the course of the "Bush Doctrine" of keeping an eye on the terrorists and getting them before they get us. We need to stay on the offense.

That means that we cannot go over there and negotiate with these people.

It cannot be like this: Okay, we don't want to be seen as too arrogant. So, we will go talk to the terrorist leaders or totalitarian dictators who have a history of harboring them. We want to be seen as nice and good. We want to be seen by the world that we can be a decent country. So, here, lets negotiate. We will give you this piece of land, and you stop terrorizing.

"Deal?" U.S. President offers hand.

"Deal." Terrorist or dictator shakes hand that is offered, with the other hand behind his back -- fingers crossed.

So, while we are all happy and the world is happy, those thugs will continue to build their weaponry, and train their little terrorists, and will eventually build up their forces stronger than ever. And they will strike us when the opportunity presents -- in the name of their God.

These are not normal people we are dealing with here. They want us off their land. They don't care if we die. And, it's because of his lack of insight about the threat that faces America, that I have my doubts about Barack Obama.

However, he could prove me wrong.