Obama bombing more countries than Bush?!

Obama and Bush were both Establishment Presidents.

Of course Obama did some things that many Establishment Presidents would not do - namely, withdraw from Iraq (2011); the Iran Nuclear Deal (2015); not overthrow the Syrian Government (2011 - 2016) - in spite of this, Obama has, like Bush, agreed with the ideology of regime change.

Herein lies Obama's problem in foreign policy. Regime change is the biggest cause for increase in terrorism - we saw this after Bush invaded Iraq in 2003. The lessons from Bush's Iraq War have not been learnt by Obama in Yemen, Libya and Syria. And this is unacceptable.

For Yemen, Libya and Syria are the 3 additional conflicts Obama is bombing, added to Bush's bombing of 4 countries - namely, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Somalia. These 3 additional conflicts are, in essence, being bombed because the dominant powers in those countries run counter or ran counter to United States' interest.

In Yemen, the Houthis threaten to rip Yemen from Saudi Arabia's vice grip. The Houthis threaten the Al-Qaeda stronghold in Yemen. For Saudi Arabia, this is unacceptable, and America is assisting Saudi's war on Yemen, while also continuing drone strikes in the country against Al-Qaeda - which, I might add, help more than hinder Al-Qaeda's recruitment there.

In Libya, Moammar Al-Gidaffi had been on America's list of regime change for decades. The Arab Spring provided the Obama Administration with an opportunity for regime change there, overthrowing Gidaffi and replacing him with squabbling militias.

From these squabbling militias ISIS made its footprint in Derna and more recently in Sirte. The Obama Administration decided that bombing ISIS in Libya was a great idea, though had Gidaffi never been removed in the first place, ISIS would not exist in Libya. Again, Obama's campaign against ISIS in Libya helps more than hinders the spread of terrorism in Libya.

Syria is worst of the 3. To Obama's credit, he did not remove Bashar Al-Assad, but he still funded rebels, the majority of whom have more in common with ISIS than America. Now he is involved in an ISIS campaign that would not have existed in Syria had he but stayed out of Syria and not supported the rebels there.

Thankfully, Obama's ISIS campaign in Syria has not been helping recruitment there - it has been genuinely helpful in eradicating terrorism from Syria.


In the Trump Administration, expect a lot more productive intervention in the majority of the 7 countries the United States is currently bombing. Expect Trump to end the conflict in Syria by ending Obama's policy of 'Assad must go' and of funding Syrian rebels. Expect Trump to end much of the conflict in Iraq by 'taking their oil' (namely, increasing oil relations with Iraq over and above Saudi Arabia and Iran, to economically benefit Iraq). Expect Trump to install dictator Haftar Al-Khalifa in Libya, ending militias squabbling and restoring stability there.

Expect also Trump to withdraw from Afghanistan. It is true that America would likely return to Afghanistan 3 - 5 years after withdrawal, but Trump understands that spending much longer in Afghanistan is wasted effort. There are more immediate battles in the war on terror that require US' attention than Afghanistan.

Sadly, it is unlikely Trump would stop American bombings in Pakistan, Somalia or Yemen. Yet the ending of 3 - 4 conflicts in the Middle-East would greatly improve America's standing in the region.