In an effort that simultaneously seeks to eschew responsibility for the situation on the ground and to define certain limits on the scope of the US war, the White House today declared itself to be unwilling to be “responsible” for the security situation in Iraq.
Though press secretary Josh Earnest emphasized the growing problem of foreign fighters flowing into Iraq, he insisted the war itself, at least on the ground, was up to the Iraqi government to fight and win.
This comes irrespective of Pentagon efforts to dictate exactly where and when Iraqi forces launch offensives, and to try to push them into cooperative relationships with pro-US tribal factions.
Given how eager the Pentagon has been to micromanage much of the war, at least when they think things are going well, the effort to put the current situation entirely on Iraq’s shoulders speaks to US efforts to try to shift blame on a war that is going increasingly poorly.
This has been a difficult needle to thread for the administration, however, which has admitted to being deliberately value about the scope of its involvement in Iraq, and seems to change its narrative depending on who the target audience is.
The efforts at narrative management are also making life difficult for Iraqi military leaders, who have to simultaneously face public tongue-lashings from the US and private reassurances that the failing strategy just needs a few tweaks.
10 thoughts on “White House: US Not Responsible for Iraqi Security”
Now we're getting somewhere. How about applying the same principle to israel, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, Europe, etc. etc. etc.
Yet the very same WH managed in last 6-7 years destroying Syria, Libya and destroying more of Iraq by supporting Saudis-Wahhabism ideology in barbarism. Look people: the USG and EU militarism regime hand in hand with neo fascism-liberalism looking for bigger wars which would ingulf every nation in this world, these regimes simply paving the way. Obama just playing it differently.
We will make as much chaos as possible and then blame someone else.
Well, when you control ISIS your not responsible for Iraq's security.
Alabama Mothman, the situation cannot be stated any more simply and logically. You have cut to the core!
Obviously he's saying if the Islamic state(our boys) rips off a piece of Iraq and Syria,it's OK and not our fault.Which is a disgusting statement.
That said,Yankee Come Home,and take all the toys away,and let them fight or talk it out with sticks,but of course there's no profit in that.
David Brooks;The small and happy life!How many small and happy lives did that scum end with his propaganda?
I don't understand why the Iraqis don't tell Uncle Sam to take a hike. They'd be much better off to hitch their wagon to Russia and China. In spite of being ruthless authoritarian regimes like Uncle Sam, they somehow seem to have a bit more integrity and may be more reliable. But maybe that's just another illusion…
Sounds more and more like the inmates are running the asylum.
Oh, that's how we're going to be doing business with the countries in MENA? First attack and ruined them and then give them the finger and leave!
For the past three years our US Government has deliberately been providing Al Qaeda progeny (Al Nusra, ISIS and other Sunni extremist terrorists) with a "safe haven" in Syria. Now that this cancer has spread to Iraq and elsewhere, suddenly our Government takes note and denies any responsibility for its inaction against (if not positive support of) the obviously growing and expanding terrorist cells. It is disgusting to see how our Government (whether Democratic or Republican) shamelessly creates chaos in one nation after another, and then disclaims any responsibility for the damage it has done. When Martin Luther King observed in 1968 that our US Government was the greatest purveyor of violence in the world, he had no idea of what was yet to come. As Walt Kelly would say, we have met the enemy and he is US.
Comments are closed.