So any action that we make take to provide assistance to Iraqi security forces has to be joined by a serious and sincere effort by Iraq's leaders to set aside sectarian differences, to promote stability and account for the legitimate interests of all of Iraq's communities, and to continue to build the capacity of an effective security force. We can't do it for them. And in the absence of this type of political effort, short-term military action -- including any assistance we might provide -- won't succeed.
....the United States will do our part, but understand that ultimately it's up to the Iraqis, as a sovereign nation, to solve their problems.
Obama said the U.S. will rely heavily on diplomacy:
We're also going to pursue intensive diplomacy throughout this period, both inside of Iraq and across the region, because there's never going to be stability in Iraq or the broader region unless there are political outcomes that allow people to resolve their differences peacefully, without resorting to war or relying on the United States military.
He said the top priority of the U.S. is threats to our personnel serving overseas.
He said the U.S. sacrificed a lot "in order to give Iraqis the opportunity to chart a better course, a better destiny. But ultimately, they're going to have to seize it. As I said before, we are not going to be able to do it for them.
He was harsh about the Iraqi military who fled their posts when ISIS arrived:
Look, the United States has poured a lot of money into these Iraqi security forces, and we devoted a lot of training to Iraqi security forces. The fact that they are not willing to stand and fight and defend their posts against admittedly hardened terrorists, but not terrorists who are overwhelming in numbers, indicates that there's a problem with morale, there's a problem in terms of commitment, and ultimately that's rooted in the political problems that have plagued the country for a very long time.
He did not rule out an air strike, and his choice of words suggests it may be under consideration:
We want to make sure that we gathered all the intelligence that's necessary so that if in fact I do direct and order any actions there, that they're targeted, they're precise and they're going to have an effect.
But overall, he said he wants everyone to understand "this message":
The United States is not simply going to involve itself in a military action in the absence of a political plan by the Iraqis that gives us some assurance that they're prepared to work together. We're not going to allow ourselves to be dragged back into a situation in which while we're there we're keeping a lid on things and, after enormous sacrifices by us, as soon as we're not there, suddenly people end up acting in ways that are not conductive to the long-term stability and prosperity of the country.
As to what the U.S. reaction would be if ISIS gains control of the Iraqi refineries, he was less clear. He said that would be of great concern, but the goal should be that "some of the other producers in the Gulf are able to pick up the slack."
Good for Obama. Let Iran, Jordan, Israel and other countries closer to Iraq step up to help Iraq battle ISIS. ISIS is a nightmare, but it's not our nightmare. We should never have gone in the first place, and that mistake cost us an enormous amount, from the lives of our soldiers, to financial aid, military equipment and expensive training of their security and police forces.
We are not the world's police force. We should not let others cast us in the role of global holy warriors. ISIS is neither a present nor imminent threat to Americans in the U.S. Al Qaida saw us as their primary enemy, but ISIS has different fish to fry.
On a lighter note (meaning yes, this is sarcasm): If Obama changes his mind about boots on the ground, I think instead of soldiers, he should send our very own Global Holy Warriors -- the DEA. Move the agency from DOJ to the Department of Defense, change their mission, send them and their intelligence analysts from the Special Operations Division for some quick basic training, and then deploy them to Iraq.
The DEA already has 93 overseas offices, a huge intelligence operation, and lots of informants and infiltrators. Since they believe there's a terror threat behind every foreign drug organization, they'd be a perfect fit. Maybe they could catch a few ISIS recruits and kidnap them, bringing them to the U.S. to stand trial, like we do with the Somali Pirates. Or maybe they'd prefer to drop them off at Guantanamo.
Wouldn't it be better for us if the DEA helped keep us safe from fanatical global terrorists instead of running around the world creating elaborate drug stings and promising to sell traffickers make-believe missiles and weapons of mass destruction? Just a thought.
