Obama is of course a Muslim, progressive, and anticolonialist who hates America and wishes to see America defeated, but allowing Ramadi, and indeed Iraq, to be lost was pretty sensible.
The underlying Bush theory was that Iraq would become a well run democracy, like Switzerland, where the Shia majority elected nice moderate progressives, thereby counterbalancing the dangerous influence of the Shia religious crazies in Iran. The middle east would become moderate progressive, rather than Muslim.
As it worked out the elected government Shia government in Iraq was oppressive and intolerant, its primary function being to distribute goodies to voting blocks. The populace conspicuously failed to throw flowers at our troops. The Sunni murderously hated us for removing them from power. The Shia hated us for revealing to the world their incapacity to rule. The influence of Iran keeps them saner – well, less insane – than they would otherwise be.
Progressives, including Obama, misremembered Bush as saying “We will go in to steal their oil”, and so believed that when they were running things, instead of Bush, then the locals would throw flowers at us and elect nice moderate progressives. Thus, “Arab Spring”, which was Bush on steroids with double the already grating optimism. They then discovered that the Iraqi willingness to elect moderate progressives was proportional to US willingness to kick ass, and the locals figured the progressives had no will to kick ass.
Tunisia is perhaps proceeding to democratic progressivism, as originally envisaged in Arab Spring. Morocco is undemocratically proceeding to progressivism because the King commands progressivism. The rest of the countries of the Arab spring were disasters.
The past history of progressive kings is that usually King gets violently overthrown, is remembered as an incredibly brutal reactionary, and is replaced by a horrifying tyranny, but so far Tunisia and Morroco are working out OK – for progressives. Rest of the progressive plan is going to hell.