RUSH: Here is Tom in Oklahoma City. Hi, Tom. Glad you waited. Great to have you on the program.
CALLER: Thank you, Rush. I want to come back to the Iraq bombing thing if I could. I disagree with the Washington Post. I think there is a strategic vision in place and that the bombing is a part of that. I think it's a holding action against ISIS to keep them in check until after the November elections, 'cause after that this president doesn't need the base anymore; it's gloves off.
I think the chairman of the joint chiefs, knowing this, went in and said, "Look, they're getting a little further, a little faster. We're gonna have to do something if you're really going to wait 'til November." So these bombings are under the guise of humanitarian efforts, are to keep ISIS in check until we can do the real work. I think there's been kind of some hints at that.
RUSH: Well, now, what is "the real work" after November? When you say that "all bets are off," what do you mean? What's gonna happen?
CALLER: Boots on the ground. Boots on the ground. You know, if you --
RUSH: Oh, you think Obama will recommit to another invasion in Iraq after the election?
CALLER: I do, and here's why I say that. If you take out the Bill Clinton parsing tool and you apply it to the statements he's made over and over about this, he's saying, "Look, I can't do anything while there is not an inclusive government in place that respects both the Sunnis and Shi'ites. But when they have that, then we can provide all of the support necessary."
RUSH: Interesting. I've gotta take a break. I'm out of time. I literally have no more segundos.
RUSH: No disrespect meant to Tom in Oklahoma City who just called and predicted that he disagrees with the Washington Post. The Washington Post has an editorial claiming that Obama's Iraq strategy is incoherent, it's slapstick, and it has expectations foundation. He disagreed. He thinks that Obama's biding time, trying to keep ISIS in check until after the midterms.
He says Obama's base and the people the Democrats need to turn out in November will not do that if there is a full-fledged Iraq operation now. That may be true. But then he said what's gonna happen half the midterms, then Obama's gonna go in there and commit boots on the ground and wipe ISIS out. That's where I just don't see it. I must respectfully disagree.
I will turn to Syria, in part, as evidence. But before getting there, let me ask a question: What does Obama care about Iraq? Look, folks. (chuckles) I've really tried to rein myself in today. A s frantic and as fast paced as this program has been today, it hasn't even scratched the surface about the anger I really feel about all this. I don't need to recount it. You've been here all program.
I mean, in the first two hours I've given you every detail about why this all ticks me off, the fraud that was the five years from 2003 to 2008 leading into the Obama campaign. In all that time, and since Obama became president, can anybody find for me one sample, one example, one bit of evidence that says Obama even cares about the place? It's intelligence guided by experience.
Barack Obama cut his bones on thinking Iraq is worthless, meaningless, and has no value whatsoever to the United States. The Iraqi war was unjust and it was immoral. It was uncalled for. We had no business there, and he was gonna get us out -- and after he got us out, the world was gonna love us! Our enemies would become our friends and respect for the US would be restored, and there would be a kumbaya utopia all over the world, brought to us by Obama.
He cut his bones delivering a speech in 2002, suggesting that paying any attention to Iraq after 9/11 was a waste of time and a waste of money, it was irrelevant, it didn't matter. There's no evidence in the public record that Obama cares a whit about Iraq. I don't think he would care if it went under. The last thing... In fact, don't forget, everything these people do is political. The last that Obama wants is a stable Iraq!
That would make the Bush policy look like it made some sense, and the Bush policy cannot be allowed to be seen as making any sense. Obama now cannot claim that his policies have lead to a stable Iraq because it isn't stable. Today he's blaming Bush. Saturday he blamed Bush. He's gonna continue to blame Bush for the deteriorating situation in Iraq. So there is no Iraqi success story.
That's exactly the way he wants it.
Not just Obama. The Democrat Party. Folks, you don't spend five years with your buddies in the media every day trashing everything about Iraq if you care about the place. You just don't do that. They don't care about it. Iraq's value to them is a constant reminder of Republican failure. That is the value of Iraq to the Democrat Party, to the American media, and to Barack Obama.
A stable, functioning Iraq is not in the Democrat Party's best interests, and they're not doing anything to bring about a stable, functioning Iraq.