HAYDEN ON OBAMA.

What caught many political minded Americans attention this week was not mostly the Iowa caucuses voting, which was obvious to be leading in the news headlines, but a scathing article by a former CIA director for President George W. Bush, Michael V. Hayden, on troops withdrawal from Iraq.

From his professional position as head of the United States Intelligence at one time, his experience and a wonderful career of serving his country in the post 9/11 years, nobody could downgrade his views on the troops withdrawal taking place in Iraq last month.

His remarks were too tangent and realistic than idealistic, that America has taken upon itself to leave troops in several volatile spots around the world, and that was a good record. It was a trend that has helped the rest of the world to observe peace and stability in more ways than one.

It was every person's wish that America could go on and do the same everywhere, but that was impossible. It has been done in Korea, in Japan and in Europe; but all that has caused the country a great deal of inconvenience and at an enormous expense.

One would be paraphrasing Rep. Ron Paul, a candidate in the Republican Party nomination race, by saying that, "Policing the world is not America's job," as well as "Nation building should not be part of U.S. foreign policy"; and that peace keeping should be left to the United Nations to deal with. In that sense, the U.S. could always make a contribution.

With regard to Iraq, President Barack Obama, besides his promise to end the war there in his 2008 campaign speeches, has found himself "between the devil and the deep blue sea", as he was facing a huge national debt of over $14 trillion dollars. In addition to that, fighting two wars with that backdrop was nothing, but preposterous, as continuing them (wars) was only making the home economy to suffer.

The president has made it abundantly clear that Iraq has been equipped with the basic political tenets of Democracy, and it was the responsibility of its people to build on them (tenets) to achieve equality among all its sectarian factions.

Mr. Hayden was not being critical of President Obama per se in his article, that troops have to be left in Iraq on a permanent basis, as some critics were advocating. He was directing his observations at the timing of the event of U.S. troops being withdrawn from that country. Even that was a moot point, as it had its pros and cons, and no one could predict the proper time frame in which to end the Iraq war.

Yet, the man in the street has also realized that some of the Iraqis themselves were foaming around the mouth and saying that the U.S. has overstayed its presence, and that they (Iraqis) were ready to run their own affairs. The Obama administration has had talks with the Al-Maliki government for a fraction of American troops staying behind; however, in the long run, that government had the final say, and so the idea did not come to fruition, when it said "No". In view of that, what should the president do?

Mr. Hayden has been loyal to his country throughout his career; but what he could not do was to force his country's hand to do the impossible.

He, Hayden, has also weighed in on Iran and Al Qaeda, but those entities would be causing trouble, no matter what any one person did, even though that person might be the most powerful individual in the world, the president of the United States.

P.S. Obama has his eyes on those two entities, and he was bound to nail them, one way or another.