Barack Obama Did Not Ignore the Islamic State; He and Congress Grew It!

The headline at Drudge Report last night said, “Obama administration knew Islamic State was growing but did little to counter it…” So I clicked on it and came to this McClatchy report: “

Like the rest of the world, the U.S. government appeared to have been taken aback last month when Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, fell to an offensive by jihadis of the Islamic State that triggered the collapse of five Iraqi army divisions and carried the extremists to the threshold of Baghdad.

A review of the record shows, however, that the Obama administration wasn’t surprised at all.

In congressional testimony as far back as November, U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials made clear that the United States had been closely tracking the al Qaida spinoff since 2012, when it enlarged its operations from Iraq to civil war-torn Syria, seized an oil-rich province there and signed up thousands of foreign fighters who’d infiltrated Syria through NATO ally Turkey.

The testimony, which received little news media attention at the time, also showed that Obama administration officials were well aware of the group’s declared intention to turn its Syrian sanctuary into a springboard from which it would send men and materiel back into Iraq and unleash waves of suicide bombings there. And they knew that the Iraqi security forces couldn’t handle it.

Saying that the administration was “closely tracking the al Qaida spinoff” is like saying that the administration had foreknowledge that Mexican drug cartels were acquiring U.S. guns. No, in both cases, we gave the arms to them!

Notice the time frame: supposedly we were tracking this dangerous radical group in Syria from 2012. Yet in December 2013, the Washington establishment was openly discussing to stop supporting the alleged “moderate rebels” in Syria and to support the radical Islamists to overthrow Bashar al-Assad. Of course, this discussion was really an attempt to see if the establishment could admit what had really been going on all along: we supported radical Islamists in Syria. As I wrote then:

Notice how much has changed since less than a week ago when the Islamic Front’s seizure of Free Syrian Army warehouses containing US gear was a reason to freeze aid. Then, we described the Islamic Front as “an al Qaeda-inspired union of six major rebel groups.” I repeat: al Qaeda-inspired. It is convenient that they have not yet been listed as a terrorist organization. But they are still basically the same group that we blame for hijacking planes and crashing them into the World Trade Center and Pentagons.

How is it possible for the US to claim to be the leader of the “free world” and support such terrorists? How can the American people allow a secular ruler who protects religious minorities, including Christians, to be conquered by Jihadists who are every bit as cruel and murderous as he is—and who want to also terrorize the United States?

And who, it turns out, were going to invade Iraq.

I have already argued that ISIS is 100 percent the fault of the U.S. Government several times. I won’t repeat it all here. All those tortured and killed Christians are going to be brought down on our heads (or at least the heads of our government; pray that God decides to avoid civilian casualties!). And the responsibility is completely bipartisan. It wasn’t just Barack Obama, but also John McCain and many other Republican politicians (see the link above).

The real question I have is: Did the powers that be want to destabilize Iraq. If they knew it was going to happen, and empowered ISIS to do it, then what else could they have wanted?

The McClatchy story gives us some hints. Of course the hints are buried in nonsense like this:

Some experts argue that Obama committed a key error in 2012 by rejecting calls from top national security aides, lawmakers and others to train and arm a moderate rebel force to fight Assad.

Wake up and smell the chemical weapons! There was no moderate force to train or arm. Like it or not, the moderates—the secularists who want a pluralist and tolerant state—are on the side of Assad! This testimony is just garbage sent into the media to confuse people. (So are the ridiculous assertions that we failed to arm Syrians when the newspapers reported long ago that we were arming them with the help of the Muslim Brotherhood.)

But then this admission is made:

A review of the record shows, however, that support for the anti-Assad movement also hampered U.S. action to quash the Islamic State, which until earlier this year rebels considered an ally in the push to topple Assad.

And then this:

In testimony in November, McGurk said that one of the reasons the United States had not granted Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki’s request for assistance against the Islamic State was Maliki’s refusal to close Iraqi airspace to Iranian planes flying arms to Assad’s military.

So there you have it. The Shiite dominated government that we put in place in Iraq was a natural ally to Shiite Iran. We are destroying Iraq in revenge for their refusal to be our sock puppet government in the region. We’re basically doing to Maliki what we did to Gaddafi in Libya and what we have been trying to do to Assad in Syria.

So no, it is not enough to say that Obama knew it was going to happen. Many knew and many enabled it and many wanted it. It is a bipartisan slaughterhouse where Christians are getting crucified.