Editorial: What's the point?

Seriously, what is the point of Barack Obama's Iraq 'plan'?

It's worth asking for a number of reasons -- not limited to the fact that Hillary Clinton's 'plan' for Iraq -- if forced off on America as President -- is exactly the same as Barack's 'plan.'

Billions of dollars are being wasted bombing Iraq (destroying the country and terrorizing and killing civilians) while months are being wasted with the US government doing nothing to help/push the puppet government in Iraq into being more inclusive.

Months and months are being wasted with the US government cozying up to Shi'ite militias that killed Iraqi civilians (and continue to) and that killed US soldiers (see "Well look who the State Dept woke up in bed with this time").


Nothing's being accomplished at all.


Last week, Anders Corr (FORBES) argued:


We should choose to end our part in the cycle of violence. We should call for de-escalation of all military activities in Iraq and Syria, and demonstrate our commitment through complete withdrawal.
We would not be withdrawing from fear. We could use the diplomatic, monetary, military and human resources we save, for challenges we can win. Our focus should be on finding and striking specific international terrorist cells that are, with more than lip service, preparing to attack Western or allied targets.


Is there any real plan?


How about a plan to ever leave?