Barack Obama was quite insulting in his assessment of President George Bush's handling of U.S. activities in the Middle East. Obama has always been arrogant and overconfident in his abilities, and now his ineptitude or perhaps his darker motives, are creating a maelstrom of destruction and infighting that far outstrip anything Bush ever could have done in Iraq.
Obama's actions could very well usher in World War III, and he is also destroying previously cordial relationships with NATO allies such as Turkey. All the while, his inaction and poor leadership has invited Russia into the arena and expanded the power and influence of both Russia and Iran. Pretty impressive for a peace and consensus builder. In fact, Obama has bumbled the crises in Syria so badly over the past five years that Turkey says they are giving up on the “boy who would be king” and will wait and deal with the new administration after Obama leaves office. Now that is a true vote of confidence, though it is doubtful that Obama even recognizes the snub for what it is.
That is not to say, however, that the tangle in Syria is an easy one to resolve. The U.S. would prefer to see Bashar Al-Assad, the Syrian leader and brutal strongman, step down. The question is who will replace him if that happens. The U.S. had a chance to exercise more influence in the region but dithered, which allowed ISIS to gain significant power, and it also allowed Russia and Iran to come into the game, purportedly to support Assad and to put down the world threatening ISIS. But the vacuum left by American inactivity allowed Russia and Iran to greatly expand their power and footprint in the region, which would not have happened if the U.S. had stepped up and taken the lead as the leading world power.
More confusion in Syria, page 2: