Obama’s ‘300’ In Iraq: It Won’t Be Like Thermopylae Because We Aint Sparta And Obama Definitely Aint Leonidas

The story is so dramatic and heroic: 300 Spartans, inserting themselves into a pass, held off a million Persians.

My Rottweiler’s version was of 300 Rotts withstanding an attack by over a million vicious Chihuahuas.

Anyway, “Obama’s 300” isn’t going to be a repeat of Thermopylae, let me assure you.

For one thing, let me assure you that Sparta never would have been Sparta if they’d been forced to fight under the same morally idiotic rules of engagement that our warriors are expected to employ.

Spartans fought to win.  The 300 men they sent weren’t “advisors”; they were hard-core warriors who were there to fight to the death.

That aint how we fight anymore.  We fight with political correctness so as not to make Obama feel sad.  You know, if we fight at all.

And anybody who wants to compare Obama with Leonidas – other than to point out what a worthless chump Obama is, as I do here – needs to be put in a straight jacket and locked in a rubber room.

We had a chance to win in Iraq; scratch that, WE HAD ALREADY WON IN IRAQ.  All we had to do was remain with a small force to keep what we had won safe.

Obama pissed our victory away.  Just like he pissed our health care system away with his socialist hijack.  And now it’s up to Obama’s 300.

One of the biggest reasons the 300 Spartans were successful was that they arrived before it was too late and there was still a chance to fight.  Obama’s 300 are way to few, worse, they are way, way, WAY too late.

Tags: , , , ,

4 Responses to “Obama’s ‘300’ In Iraq: It Won’t Be Like Thermopylae Because We Aint Sparta And Obama Definitely Aint Leonidas”

  1. Kip Says:

    The only way to avoid what’s happening in Iraq right now would be to have never invaded them in the first place.

  2. Michael Eden Says:

    “I am very optimistic about — about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You’re going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You’re going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government.” — Joe Biden

    Kip,

    That is so beyond dumbass I can’t believe you actually would THINK it, let alone say it.

    It was OBVIOUS we had won a great victory in Iraq when Bush handed over office to Obama. So much so that Obama, Biden, et al in the White House were DECLARING a safe, stable Iraq and CLAIMING credit for that safe, stable Iraq. Had Obama run saying, “It might appear that Iraq is safe and stable, but it really isn’t, and under my presidency it will all go to hell” we never would have elected this disgrace. So this is you hypocrite slime Democrats trying to have it both ways.

    I remember when Obama predicted – stupidly and wrongly – that the surge of US troops would fail. And after it succeeded, what did Obama do? Double down on being a fool by saying it wasn’t the US troops who won the victory, but the “Anbar Awakening.”

    Well, if Obama was right we’ve got nothing to fear. Because those sheiks who supposedly “woke up” are STILL THERE to wake up. Unlike our troops that Obama yanked out in his cut and run. What’s funny is that you literally ADMIT Obama was lying because you’re now admitting that there WON’T be any “awakening.” Because it was the SURGE OF US TROOPS THAT WON THE DAMN WAR, YOU WICKED LIAR. Just as keeping our troops there AFTER we’d won would have KEPT our victory.

    All we needed to do is remain there, the way we remained in Germany and Europe after we won, the way we remained in Japan after we won, and even the way we remained in South Korea after we TIED, to have kept Iraq stable. ISIS never would have had a chance to metastasize had we kept the residual force that anyone with common sense (I understand that excludes both you and Obama) knew that we should have kept in Iraq.

    I am so sick of you fools.

    When we attacked Iraq, we did what Bill Clinton said we should do. We did what Hillary Clinton said we should do. We did what John Kerry said we should do. We did what Harry Reid said we should do. We did what 60% of the Democrats in the United States Senate at the time said we should do.

    When Barack Obama listened to YOUR fool advice, he did what the military told him was going to result in disaster. Our experts told Obama if we didn’t keep a force in Iraq that al Qaeda and Iran would come in. They were right on both counts. That is simply a fact of history now. http://www.ipsnews.net/2009/02/us-iraq-generals-seek-to-reverse-obama-withdrawal-decision/

    Now we have the disaster that comes with having a fool for a president and like a fool Obama can’t accept responsibility for anything just like he’s never accepted responsibility for anything in his fool life. But the fact remains that George Bush WON the Iraq War and left behind a safe and stable Iraq. Barack Obama not only acknowledged that Iraq was safe and stable but praised his policies for continuing to keep what was safe and stable safe and stable. Iraq has fallen apart under OBAMA’S watch because Obama is an idiot. Period.

    Why don’t you follow your own advice and bury your head in the sand because that way no one will ever mess with you? Because that’s what you would have America do: bury it’s head in the sand believing that no terrorist will ever come and no aggressor will ever attack us if we just don’t do anything anywhere to stand up for ourselves against anything. The fact of the matter is that every time America buries its head in the sand somebody kicks our ass so hard that our testicles shoot out of that “open mind” of ours. But liberals are as immune to history as they are to every other form of truth.

  3. L86 Says:

    Of course one could argue this had little to do with Obama OR Bush. The Iraqis had a cold hearted tyrant as leader for a reason. They’re clearly not ready for democracy, Al-Malaki’s incompetence was just the icing on the shit sandwich.

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    L86,

    On one level, you’re completely right. I agree. Islam ITSELF has never produced a SINGLE democracy in its entire history. Islam is a totalitarian political system masquerading as a religion, in many aspects. The only difference between Islam and communism is that communism is the replacement of God with the State and Islam is ruling over every aspect of life and the state in the name of “Allah.” You end up getting to the exact same outcome with a (actually rather slightly) different rationale for how you got there. And once you’re “there” you rule the exact same way.

    That acknowledged, it nevertheless remains true that Bush left a safe, stable Iraq WITH al Maliki in power. All Obama had to do was to leave a small force there to help keep it that way. And it was AFTER he removed all the forces that al Maliki began to move closer and closer to Iran for his source of protection. Which of course was what Iran really wanted all along.

    At this point – and it so pisses me off to say this it is beyond unreal – by far and away the very biggest winner in the defeat of Saddam Hussein was IRAN.

    I would also say this: if there was ONE place in the ENTIRE Middle East where a counter-insurgency approach to win the hearts and minds could possibly work, it was Iraq. For one thing, the country’s terrain is so much better for American military power than a country like Afghanistan it is unreal: flat plains where our air, armor and artillery can dominate versus a labyrinth of caves and mountains and where would YOU rather fight the armored warfare that the U.S. does better than anybody on the planet bar none??? But the people were also more educated than other Middle Eastern countries, women had more freedom. It was just the BEST place to try to create a stable democracy.

    Now what we need to do to have any hope of winning any war on terror is to CREATE terror in the hearts of our enemies. And the only way to do that is to basically go back 60 years or so to our mentality during WW2. We didn’t agonize over the death of one German or one Japanese civilian: we FIREBOMBED whole cities.

    The ONLY alternative to trying to create stable democracies is to create giant holes in the ground where countries used to be.

    But that is – I believe history proves – precisely what the Islamic world needs to end terrorism. Because we end a few nations and a few hundred thousand lives along with it, and the terrorist approach won’t seem quite so viable any more. Just like it wasn’t viable to Middle Eastern Muslim states until we imbibed the “liberal” principles of fearing war rather than fighting war and giving our enemies more rights than we give our own citizens.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: