Pres. Barack Obama is slowly and ineffectively committing to a second Iraqi war after withdrawing all U.S. troops from Iraq against the advice of military advisers and generals. Obama gave notice to the world that the Americans would unilaterally stand down in Iraq by 2011; today, with the Middle East roiled by war and violent chaos, he wants to return our troops in trickling surges.

ISIS flourished after Obama's withdrawal 

A few years after Obama’s campaign-promised withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq, the Islamic State rose up from the ashes of that country’s traitor-infested, crumpled military to become the preeminent most powerful Islamic extremist group to terrorize the world in modern history.

Flash forward to 2014 and #ISIS had captured great swaths of land, including major cities throughout Iraq. Now, in 2016, In its waning months, the administration is ramping up for another Iraq war to be fought long after this president is enriching himself with speaking fees between rounds of golf.

Trickle-down deployments dangerous

On Monday the Pentagon announced that it would deploy another 560 troops to Iraq, bringing the total, including temporary duty assignments, to around 6,000 – clearly not enough U.S. troops to turn the tide of war. Obama’s post-withdrawal Iraqi deployments are more trickles than surges, just enough to say he’s doing something to “contain” ISIS. Our troops are being deployed ostensibly to take back Iraq’s second largest city, Mosul, which fell to ISIS a few years after Obama withdrawal from Iraq.

Top Videos of the Day

Obama surrendered Iraq to a fledgling ISIS movement in 2011 and now he expects a relative handful of U.S. troops to un-fulfill his 2008 campaign promise to withdraw. Meanwhile, he's unleashing the worst of the worst terrorists from GITMO and they are reportedly returning to Middle East battlefields and beyond. Obama's feckless #Foreign Policy and spotty mission-creep serves up troubling images of the Vietnam War

“At every step in this campaign, we have generated and seized additional opportunities to hasten ISIL’s lasting defeat,” Army Lt. Gen. Sean MacFarland, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told several dozen service members gathered at Baghdad International Airport, using Obama’s favorite acronym for Islamic State. “These additional U.S. forces will bring unique capabilities to the campaign and provide critical enabler support to Iraqi forces at a key moment in the fight.”

The notion that deploying another 560 American soldiers as advisors to the Iraqi military will defeat ISIS in Iraq and neighboring Syria is a woefully ignorant delusion.

Mosul has a general population more than 2 1/2 million and ISIS fighters are long embedded throughout the city, and the country of Iraq. Former Pres. Lyndon Baines Johnson, another Democrat, measured the tide of the Vietnam War by body-counts and owns the record for mission creep yet he could not take Hanoi with more than 450,000 troops; In comparison, Obama’s trickle-surge may be strategically comforting to ISIS but mini-deployments of U.S. troops to Iraq will define Obama's presidency as impotent, not decisive or transforming.

“We’ve got to get into Qayyarah, we’ve got to understand what’s there, we’ve got to have the Iraqis set up a perimeter,” said an unnamed U.S. official as quoted by the WP about a recently taken airbase. “We’re just getting our feet on the ground there, but if Taqqadum is a nice example of what to compare it to, you can see a situation where weeks and months out, you are doing new missions and projecting from that location.”

Obama the 'Lil' Lyndon' of Democrat presidents

Both Carter and the unnamed “official” in the Washington Post speak of a new Iraqi war involving U.S. troops under Obama. They describe timid mission creep that lacks credibility. American troops are loyal, capable, and exceedingly brave but in this new Iraqi war, Obama must stop leading from behind or he’ll be historically tagged as the “Lil’ Lyndon” of Democrat presidents. #Democrats vs Republicans