Posted on 12/06/2015 6:50:30 PM PST by Louis Foxwell
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.
Americans used to laugh at the bereted Iraqi Information Minister screaming, âI triple guarantee you, there are no American soldiers in Baghdadâ, even while they could be seen moving into the city.
Now Baghdad Bobâs rhetoric has been transplanted over from Baghdad to Washington D.C.
Last year, Obama said, âI want to be clear: the American forces that have been deployed to Iraq do not and will not have a combat mission.â A good way to get stinking drunk is to drink a shot every time Obama precedes a blatant lie with an âI want to be clear.â And this time was no different.
The year before that he told the American people, âI will not put American boots on the ground in Syria.â
No word on whether soldiers in the "Specialized Expeditionary Targeting Force" will be wearing sandals or slippers as they carry out raids into Syria to free hostages and capture ISIS terrorists.
Obama had assured Americans that the mission âwill not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil.â Did he annex Syria and Iraq as new states while Congress was in recess?
Not to be outdone, Hillary Clinton recently said that putting troops on the ground is a ânon-starterâ. She told CBS that she âcannot conceive of any circumstances where I would agree to do that.â Then she condemned Republicans for calling for âthousands of combat troopsâ.
As opposed to the 3,000 that were sent there under Obama.
But officially there are no American soldiers in Iraq. There are American advisers in Iraq. Democrats send thousands of heavily armed advisers. Itâs the Republicans who are crude enough to send soldiers. Republicans start wars. Democrats have police actions, peacekeeping missions and weekend retreats.
Sometimes they have No-Fly Zones. Hillary Clinton used a No-Fly Zone to invade Libya, kill its leader and turn over half the country to Muslim terrorists leading to the murder of an American ambassador.
But that wasnât a war. It was an âinterventionâ. Like the kind you have for a compulsive liar who canât stop lying, stealing and starting wars and then lying about them.
Now Hillary Clinton wants a No-Fly Zone for Syria. When asked what she would do if Russian planes violate it, she responded, âThat would not happen, because we're going to put up a no-fly zone where the Russians are clearly kept informed.â
In the condescending space of liberal foreign policy, the Russians violate airspace because they havenât been âclearly informedâ. Itâs inconceivable that they would violate it after being informed.
And maybe handed a shiny new Reset button.
The Russians probably violated Israeli and Turkish airspace because they werenât informed where the borders were. This summer they flew over to the California coast and radioed saying, "Good morning, American pilots. We are here to greet you on your Fourth of July Independence Day.â
Probably Putin probably hadnât been âclearly informedâ where California was.
What happens if Putin decides to violate Hillaryâs No-Fly Zone? Either our pilots will have authorization to shoot down Russian planes or the No-Fly Zone becomes a Pretty Please Donât Fly Here Zone.
This is a problem since American âadvisersâ are being embedded with militias that are targeted by Turkey and Russia. If they come under attack, will Hillary authorize air support? Or will they be left to die on the ground just like the Americans in Benghazi were while she polishes her talking points?
Considering the way the war has been fought so far, expect a No-Fly Zone in which everyone goes on flying and bombing while President Clinton II talks up her successful zone that everyone ignores. Just as she talks up her fake Hamas truce and her work âbringing peaceâ to Northern Ireland.
There will be American soldiers fighting on the ground who wonât officially exist. There will be a No-Fly Zone that will exist, but that everyone will violate. And we will go on flying a lot of missions against ISIS on paper while the vast majority of the time the pilots will be prevented from actually bombing ISIS.
That means the American soldiers who officially donât exist may not have air support when fighting ISIS.
Meanwhile if any of the Shiite terrorist groups working for Iran decide to kill or kidnap American soldiers, as they have tried to do in the past, their fighters will have air support from the Syrians and the Russians. But if American soldiers do die, Hillary will find a YouTube video somewhere to blame.
This is the insane Baghdad Bob war that Obama and Hillary are fighting.
Hillary Clinton claims that sending American soldiers to fight ISIS wouldnât work because âthe best way to defeat ISISâ is âfrom the airâ and âin cyberspaceâ.
To defeat ISIS from the air, we actually have to bomb their strongholds. The French bombed Raqqa, but Obama wonât. The same way that Bill Clinton refused to take out Bin Laden in Kandahar.
The Paris attacks got Obama to sign off on bombing ISIS oil trucks after a 45 minute warning. Planes which could crush ISIS were instead reduced to buzzing trucks at low altitude and dropping leaflets "to kind of shoo people away without harming them." The âpeopleâ shooed away most likely were ISIS.
After all the recent setbacks in the fight against ISIS, Obama has firmly stated, âI am confident that we can continue building momentum and adding resources to our effort.â And once weâve built up all that momentum of effort, weâll be ready for something serious. Like fighting ISIS in âcyberspaceâ.
The Pentagon is tasked with using âcreative and agile concepts⦠across all available media to most effectively reach target audiencesâ not to sell diet soda or car insurance, the usual subjects of such advertising jargon, but to stop Muslims from joining ISIS.
While we canât actually bomb ISIS or officially fight it on the ground, we can roll out an ad campaign full of âcreative and agile conceptsâ that will somehow convince Muslims to stop joining the terror group.
And if thereâs anyone that potential ISIS recruits are likely to listen to, itâs the Pentagon. Either that or a Rabbi, a Catholic priest and Hillary Clinton.
The Pentagon has no idea how to do this because its actual job is killing enemies, not tweeting at them. As the commander of U.S. Special Operations Command put it, thereâs a gap in the, âability to operate on social media... due to a lack of organic capabilityâ.
But in this Baghdad Bob war, the Pentagon is redirected from dropping bombs to fighting with hashtags.
Thatâs fitting for a war that began with Obama insisting that ISIS was a JV team. Then claiming it was contained right before the Paris attacks. He had reduced the United States to Baghdad Bobism, to offering false claims of victory that no one believes in anymore.
âThey hold no place in Iraq. This is an illusion⦠they are trying to sell to the others an illusion," Baghdad Bob used to claim. Then it became the sort of claim Obama got used to making about ISIS.
Obamaâs party used to accuse Republicans of lying about Iraq. But lying about Iraq is his only policy.
Instead of fighting a war with guns and bombs, Obama and Hillary have been fighting it with crazy lies. And those crazy lies have a way of getting Americans killed.
The Iraqi Information Ministerâs parting remark to the press was, âI now inform you that you are too far from reality.â
The press, Obama and Hillary have joined him in an imaginary world far away from reality in which you win wars by loudly asserting that your lies are reality and reality is a lie. But war is the ultimate test of reality. Bullets donât care about your fantasies and bombs arenât interested in your ideology.
The American tanks couldnât be stopped by all of Baghdad Bobâs crazy lies. ISIS canât be stopped by any of Obama and Hillaryâs crazy lies. Not even if they tell them in âcreative and agileâ ways on Twitter.
Front Page mag - A Project of the David Horowitz Freedom Center
Daniel Greenfield Ping List Notification of new articles.
I am posting Greenfield's articles from FrontPage and the Sultan Knish blog. FReepmail or drop me a comment to get on or off the Greenfield ping list.
I highly recommend an occasional look at the Sultan Knish blog. It is a rich source of materials, links and more from one of the preeminent writers of our age.
FrontPage is, a basic resource for conservative thought. Lou
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.
Someone should notify the 101st that they are heading to Never-Never Land, because they think they are going to deploy to Iraq to REPLACE US troops already there.
Thank you, Louis.
L
I hope they are not going. Iraq has made it very clear that our troops are no longer welcome. They have even stated that our troops will be hunted down.
Our muslim leader has such wonderful effects on the world.
Mark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.