Obama and Hillary’s Chickens Are Being Roasted…Over Iraq

In what appears to be the second hit on Obama and his handling of the Iraq War in a week, Iraqi Ambassador Lukman Faily urged the President to take a more serious interest in the situation occurring. In an interview with The Washington Times, Ambassador Lukman warned, “It (The Obama administration) cannot afford a whole town or province of Iraq falling to al Qaeda and becoming a safe haven. It’s against the U.S. strategic interest. It’s against the U.S national security to do that.”

However, it was the second half of the interview that provided perhaps the most scathing reproach of President Obama and Hillary Clintons handling of the Iraq conflict. When Ambassador Lukman was asked if he thought the White House could do more to improve the relationship with Iraq, The Washington Times quoted him as saying, “to a certain extent they can. But we are no longer in a period in which we had President Bush, who took ownership of that relationship.”

These remarks come at a time when potential 2016 presidential candidate and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton can ill afford the negative publicity. She is already being criticized along with her Commander-in-Chief, by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates in his new book, Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War. Gates asserts that he was present when Hillary Clinton admitted to Obama that her opposition to the Iraq war and strategy was largely a political move to further damage then President Bush. Obama is also accused of politically motivated leadership.

According to TPNN:

Based upon Gates’ analysis of what drove Obama’s national security decisions, sending soldiers into harm’s way for something he didn’t even believe in, was necessary in order to score the political points necessary for re-election, something that Gates said Obama constantly had on his mind with every decision, even from day one.

I am sure everyone will remember the following (very pointed) campaign ad Hillary ran in her 2008 bid to become president. It was coined as the 3am wake-up call:

Thanks to the poor response demonstrated in Benghazi under Hillary’s watch…it can fairly be argued that neither Hillary nor Obama were willing or able to answer the 3am call. The deaths of Ambassador Stevens and three other brave Americans have not been forgotten and though they may have led Hillary to exclaim, “What difference does it make?” For the rest of America, it makes a big difference who is at the helm of our nation in such perilous times.

Watching Fallujah and Ramadi fall back into the hands of al Qaeda after the sacrifice and loss of so many Americans is disheartening. News such as this has a demonstrably negative impact on troop morale and especially on those fighting in Afghanistan. Knowing your Commander-in-Chief values your life in battle only as far as it can take him in politics, is a harsh slap in the face.

Clearly, both Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton have demonstrated their complete and utter lack of experience and aptitude for the office of President. Americans may have been fooled into electing and then re-electing Obama because he made political decisions with American lives in order to further his own personal agenda, but Americans cannot afford to repeat that mistake a third time by electing Hillary “What Difference Does it Make” Clinton! Trust me, it makes a difference who answers that 3am call!