Looking at Obama's Failures Differently

Source: AP Photo/Michael Sohn

Article by Joel Goodman in "Townhall":

Right Wing media usually portray Obama’s actions with Iran as being a diplomatic failure, initiated because he wanted a Nuclear Deal as part of his legacy; but if we ascribe his intentions towards Iran differently, then we are left with an entirely different perspective from which to view the current situation.

If we couple a description of Obama’s actions to the results of his actions we could say that what he did was helpful to Iran’s military objectives.

One might even be able to conjecture that the recent Iranian attacks against US assets are being spurred on by the likes of John Kerry and Barack Obama as a way to create a war scenario, which would be detrimental to Trump’s re-election.

We already know that Obama appointees from the highest levels of government are involved in undermining the Trump presidency, and there’s no reason not to believe that the sabotage that started in the Obama White House is now being continued from outside the White House.

While an all-out war would be detrimental to Trump’s re-election, I believe the President’s prime concern is that it would be detrimental to the U.S. That having been said, I don’t believe Trump will allow a ground war.

I can foresee an escalation leading to a destruction of Iran’s military infrastructure, its missile development and deployment sites, its nuclear program development sites, and its petroleum manufacturing infrastructure.

With Russia and China giving even limited military assistance to Iran, our air groups, if manned aircraft are used, may suffer losses; but as war goes, that would be far less hurtful than losing thousands on the ground.

The Bush Iraq War removed Saddam Hussein, the only true obstacle to Shiite Iranian hegemony over Shiite Iraq. Whether or not Iraq will allow itself to become a Shiite controlled religious state, is for the Iraqis to decide. But, with the removal of U.S. forces, Iran will have almost unfettered ability to terrorize Iraqis just as they terrorize their own people.

Regardless of our limited military presence, the loss of Iraq to Iran was becoming more inevitable each day because of the growing Iranian support inside Iran. This continuing growth of Iranian supported Militias within Iraq should make us ask if Obama’s policies are responsible for this in one way or another – either with past specific help or current long term assurances?

If we look at recent past events in the Middle East, and don’t look at Obama’s financial largesse towards Iran as a way to bring them to the table and halt nuclear proliferation, but instead look at it exactly as it appears, then his policy was a way of supporting and emboldening a better funded and more militarily expansive Iran.

The entire basis for giving Iran $1.3 billion cash on the tarmac in the middle of the night was based on a lie. The additional $150 billion return of confiscated assets was simply a gift.

The reflexive unified Democratic Party and corporate media rebuke of the president’s actions against Soleimani, adds to the already existing world wide concern for a continuing Trump presence in the White House past 2020. Coupling the domestic difficulties the president is having with certain world leaders because of the impeachment to any “promises” given by Kerry, could lead Iran to actions that it may not have taken were there no possibility of a reversion to Obama’s policies within the next several years. The Democrats are now looking to curb the president's power as commander in chief.

No time in our history has the existence of a fifth column, populated by government officials from inside and outside the government, posed a greater threat to our national security than it does now.

As Haaretz reported in January 2018, Israel was prepared to take out Soleimani in 2015 but the Obama administration alerted Iranian officials. This was not the first time a radical Muslim leader was spared final judgment. Susan Rice, then President Clinton’s National Security Council senior director for African affairs, vetoed a Sudanese offer to turn bin Laden over to the US.

It hasn’t always appeared that Obama had the best interests of the US at heart. The US is in the way of the very people who gave him his rise, people like George Soros. Without getting too deep in the weeds about globalism, it was Obama’s team that brought down Viktor Yanukovych in the Ukraine, bringing in a more pro - EU government there – the very globalist oriented organization from which the UK has just extricated itself.

The policies of the Trump administration are antithetical to the policies of the Obama administration.
Obama and his administration people are still actively involved in organizing groups on many issues, from gun control to redistricting. Not only has Obama remained in Washington, but several of his offshoot organizations send out organizing and fundraising emails by the hundreds each month. The most numerous come from AOTL – “all on the line” / redistrictingaction.org, with messages from Obama, from Eric Holder and many former members of Obama’s administration. Obama is not through with fundamentally changing the US.

I have no reason to believe that Kerry went to Iran to merely visit. I can only conjecture that what he discussed was something that he didn’t want to share on a telephone call or via an email.

Just how many current and former officials are working in every level of government to destroy Trump’s agenda remains unknown. But, as we clearly see, our national security is being jeopardized not only at the Southern border but throughout many areas of our entire republican structure of government. The former president being involved in hamstringing the current president’s ability to act as an effective commander in chief is not beyond the realm of possibility.

https://townhall.com/columnists/joelgoodman/2020/01/06/looking-at-obamas-failures-differently-n2558978