Shady Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 The problem is, that Obama was more interested in appeasing, than leading. He's more interested in bumper sticker slogans, than making hard choices. So now, in year 6 of his administration, he's essentially handed over Iraq, and soon Afghanistan to Al Qaeda and the Taliban. He's wrong on both counts, as well as being wrong on Russia. His entire foreign policy can be described and summarized as simply, wrong. And this is what his bumbling VP had to say about his Iraq decision just a few short years ago... The term facepalm doesn't do this miserable failure of an administration justice. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 The problem is, that Obama was more interested in appeasing, than leading. He's more interested in bumper sticker slogans, than making hard choices. So now, in year 6 of his administration, he's essentially handed over Iraq, and soon Afghanistan to Al Qaeda and the Taliban. He's wrong on both counts, as well as being wrong on Russia. His entire foreign policy can be described and summarized as simply, wrong. And this is what his bumbling VP had to say about his Iraq decision just a few short years ago... The term facepalm doesn't do this miserable failure of an administration justice. And do you somewhat recall exactly who got them into this mess? Quote
eyeball Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 Sectarian violence was inevitable upon Hussein's fall from power, Sectarian violence was inevitable upon Hussein's rise to power. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
GostHacked Posted June 13, 2014 Author Report Posted June 13, 2014 The term facepalm doesn't do this miserable failure of an administration justice. The failure of Iraq lies with Bush and Cheney. Quote
Shady Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 The failure of Iraq lies with Bush and Cheney. That's just not true. As even Biden acknowleges, they inherited an Iraq that was stable and secure. It was Obama and Biden that decided for political reasons, as a so-called "accomplishment" to "end the war" so they could campaign on it, and gain popular support for it. It's their doing. And Bush Derangement Syndrome won't change those facts. They were warned about what would happen, but they ignored it, and squandered what they inherited. Quote
GostHacked Posted June 13, 2014 Author Report Posted June 13, 2014 That's just not true. As even Biden acknowleges, they inherited an Iraq that was stable and secure. It was Obama and Biden that decided for political reasons, as a so-called "accomplishment" to "end the war" so they could campaign on it, and gain popular support for it. It's their doing. And Bush Derangement Syndrome won't change those facts. They were warned about what would happen, but they ignored it, and squandered what they inherited. You really buy the line it was secure and stable? We've seen weekly bombings in Iraq for the past 3+ years. Don't forget Bush declared 'Mission Accomplished' and the war was over. But it took some time to bring the troops home. Your Obama derangement syndrome won't allow you to see that it started under Bush and simply continues under Obama. Actually it goes back even farther than those two. The attempt to wipe Iraq's slate clean was a very key point in why the so called security is quite deplorable in Iraq. The army was disbanded as was most police forces. I would argue many end up going to the other side. Now you have trained veterans fighting the untrained rookies. Obviously that is going to be a problem. The security void left by the US after it's withdrawal allowed the terrorists to flourish. If that was the case then Bush absolutely failed in the attempt to rid Iraq of terrorism. ABSOLUTE failure. Let me say this again. George Bush, and Dick Cheney failed. FAILED. As you say Obama simply inherited the mess, but you seem to blame Obama for not being able to correct Bush's mistake. We will see something like this continue and actually increase in Afghanistan too. Quote
monty16 Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 Let's also not forget that as Iraq and Iran fought each other the US was involved in making sure the war was kept going. That's historical fact. The rhetoric against Obama's standing for more wars gets a little scary at times if we take them seriously. Fortunately, they aren't as serious as they sound and it's mostly just opposition to Obama for their own domestic political reasons. If there's one thing that's honest about a teabagger it's that they are concerned about their money and so if a war costs them money they might oppose. It could keep the war party under control? Quote
dre Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 That's just not true. As even Biden acknowleges, they inherited an Iraq that was stable and secure. It was Obama and Biden that decided for political reasons, as a so-called "accomplishment" to "end the war" so they could campaign on it, and gain popular support for it. It's their doing. And Bush Derangement Syndrome won't change those facts. They were warned about what would happen, but they ignored it, and squandered what they inherited. No it absolutely IS true. Everyone with more than about 5 brain cells knew this was going to happen. The invasion and occupation of Iraq was an extremely stupid idea that could lead nowhere but to where we are now. The US spent trillions of dollars to create an Iranian proxy and Sunnis in the region dont like it. And its Bush and Cheney and their hapless supporters that were warned about what would happen. And here it is! You got what you wanted! Trillions of dollars spend on getting hundreds of thousands of people killed (both Americans and Iraqis), and many more permanently maimed. A new Shia run state in the middle-east and extension of Iranian power and influence, and the birthing and nurturing of a whole new class and generation of terrorists. And the irony is... Its governments in Tehran, and Demascus that are stuck fighting these terrorist. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
marcus Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 The problem is, that Obama was more interested in appeasing, than leading. He's more interested in bumper sticker slogans, than making hard choices. So now, in year 6 of his administration, he's essentially handed over Iraq, and soon Afghanistan to Al Qaeda and the Taliban. He's wrong on both counts, as well as being wrong on Russia. His entire foreign policy can be described and summarized as simply, wrong. And this is what his bumbling VP had to say about his Iraq decision just a few short years ago... The term facepalm doesn't do this miserable failure of an administration justice. The previous administration was all about the bumper sticker slogans. It started when he prematurely claimed "Mission Accomplished". Throwing your hands in the air and blaming the doomed policy started by the previous administration on Obama is not an honest way to look at the situation. All you are doing is feeding your need to partisanship. Quote "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
waldo Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 That's just not true. As even Biden acknowleges, they inherited an Iraq that was stable and secure. the surge worked!!! Oh wait... that's right, they all just went to ground and waited things out. The U.S. clearly broke it... but at least now there's F R E E D O M! Oh wait... Quote
dre Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 the surge worked!!! Oh wait... that's right, they all just went to ground and waited things out. The U.S. clearly broke it... but at least now there's F R E E D O M! Oh wait... Its not the surge that worked, it was putting the insurgents on the payroll. Recently the US installed Iranian proxy stopped paying the sunnis, and what you see now is the result. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
marcus Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 Iraq could be on its way to being Syria #2. It looks like Iran is reaching out to the U.S. to assist them with the Al Quaeda problem. Just like they did with Afghanistan. Iran offered the same collaboration in Afghanistan after 9/11. The Bush administration blew it. Maybe this administration will make the correct decision this time. Exclusive: Alarmed by Iraq, Iran open to shared role with U.S. - Iran official Tehran is open to the possibility of working with the United States to support Baghdad, the senior official said. "We can work with Americans to end the insurgency in the Middle East," the official said, referring to events in Iraq. "We are very influential in Iraq, Syria and many other countries." For many years, Iran has been aggrieved by what it sees as U.S. efforts to marginalize it. Tehran wants to be recognized as a significant player in regional security. Quote "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
Shady Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 the surge worked!!! The surge most definitely did work. Iraq was stable and mostly secure. Obama/Biden squandered what they inherited, all for purely political reasons. GM is alive and Al Qaeda is dead! Oh wait. GM is issuing the largest recalls in the history of the automotive industry, and being looked at by congress, and Al Qaeda has conqured territory spanning through Syria and Iraq. And parts of Ukraine have been annexed by Russia. And soon, Al Qaeda and the Taliban will have similar control of Afghanisan. You start to wonder just which side Barak Hussein Obama is on. Quote
Big Guy Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 Saddam, with the help of American arms, kept Iran contained. Every few years Iran and Iraq would go to war killing hundreds of thousands on both sides. It remained a stalemate - with the help of America backing Saddam (rumored) Russia backing Iran. Some would consider this as a "stable" a situation in that part of the world as possible. The intervention of the USA greatly weakened Iraq making it vulnerable to not only Iran but other external pressures. The invasion of Iraq by the Americans was not a good idea and very poor foreign policy. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
dre Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 The surge most definitely did work. Iraq was stable and mostly secure. Obama/Biden squandered what they inherited, all for purely political reasons. GM is alive and Al Qaeda is dead! Oh wait. GM is issuing the largest recalls in the history of the automotive industry, and being looked at by congress, and Al Qaeda has conqured territory spanning through Syria and Iraq. And parts of Ukraine have been annexed by Russia. And soon, Al Qaeda and the Taliban will have similar control of Afghanisan. You start to wonder just which side Barak Hussein Obama is on. No, paying the insurgents to end the insurgency was the only reason why it was temporarily stable... As soon as they stopped paying it heated up again. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Shady Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 No, paying the insurgents to end the insurgency was the only reason why it was temporarily stable... As soon as they stopped paying it heated up again. Complete nonsense. To suggest that all of the insurgents were paid off is absurd. Quote
dre Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 Complete nonsense. To suggest that all of the insurgents were paid off is absurd. No its not nonsense at all, its a widely known and well publicized fact. 80 Thousand insurgents belonging to a number of organized groups were paid not to fight US forces or the US Backed Iranian proxy government. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
On Guard for Thee Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 Complete nonsense. To suggest that all of the insurgents were paid off is absurd. A large number of the Sunni former insurgents were hired during the Surge which served to convince them to stop associating with AQ. Then unfortunately they left Al Malaki (a Shiya) in charge, as the US left and he cut off the payments. And the rest as they say, is history. Quote
GostHacked Posted June 13, 2014 Author Report Posted June 13, 2014 The surge most definitely did work. Iraq was stable and mostly secure. No, it was not secure. Obama/Biden squandered what they inherited, all for purely political reasons. GM is alive and Al Qaeda is dead! Oh wait. What did they inherit? A huge debt, a failed war on terror and an economic crisis. You going to blame the next pres for not being able to fix Obama's failures? GM is issuing the largest recalls in the history of the automotive industry, and being looked at by congress, and Al Qaeda has conqured territory spanning through Syria and Iraq. And parts of Ukraine have been annexed by Russia. And soon, Al Qaeda and the Taliban will have similar control of Afghanisan. You start to wonder just which side Barak Hussein Obama is on. Nice deflection. Sounds like a 'you' problem. CNN headline 'Obama to Iraq: This is a you problem.' Quote
GostHacked Posted June 13, 2014 Author Report Posted June 13, 2014 Complete nonsense. To suggest that all of the insurgents were paid off is absurd. And the US does not negotiate with terrorists. Right. Quote
Argus Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 The New York times is just as full of it as any other US news source. If you people would search out an old encyclopedia from before the US gulf war on Iraq you would learn just how modern and prosperous Iraq really was under Saddam Hussein. I'm coming to the conclusion you are just what others have suggested you are and I'm being stupid even talking to you. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 The failure of Iraq lies with Bush and Cheney. The failure of Iraq lies with those who created it as a nation state, and the people who live there. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
GostHacked Posted June 13, 2014 Author Report Posted June 13, 2014 I'm coming to the conclusion you are just what others have suggested you are and I'm being stupid even talking to you. Libya was the crown of Africa before Italy got their panties in a bunch that required NATO action. How is Libya now? Quote
Argus Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 That's just not true. As even Biden acknowleges, they inherited an Iraq that was stable and secure. Was he drunk at the time? Do you have a cite? Iraq hasn't been stable and secure since before the Iran/Iraq war. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 Libya was the crown of Africa before Italy got their panties in a bunch that required NATO action. How is Libya now? Libya was a shithole run by a dictator. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.