Obama: Genocide In Iraq Is No Big Deal

Absolute stupidity.

SUNAPEE, N.H. – Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn’t a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.
“Well, look, if that’s the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now — where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife — which we haven’t done,” Obama said in an interview with The Associated Press.

Stopping the genocide that was already happening under Saddam in Iraq wasn’t a good enough reason to invade. Staying in Iraq until the Iraqi security forces are strong enough to prevent chaos and genocide after we leave isn’t a good enough reason to stay in Iraq. Yet still, most of the left thinks we should invade Sudan to stop the genocide in Darfur.
Doesn’t make any sense at all, does it?
Neither does Obama’s suggestion that because we haven’t yet invaded Sudan we shouldn’t be in Iraq. Is Obama actually suggesting that because we can’t use our military to intervene in all global humanitarian crisis, we shouldn’t use it to intervene in any? That’s a bit like saying that because we’ll never be able to arrest all criminals, we shouldn’t arrest any.
A completely specious argument proving once again that Senator Obama and most of his Democrat colleagues just don’t get it on Iraq. Or, rather, that they get it but don’t really care about the consequences of leaving Iraq as long as it helps them politically here at home.