BUSH DID IT (Page 9) DEEP_acheleg: to be fair, obama puled out of iraq because the interim government in iraq demanded that us troops be held to sharia law- it was more of a diplomatic failure than a strategic, military failure. as far as iraq splitting, this split was recommended by top us generals, in order to avoid the civil war which we are now seeing. as far as sending troops to iraq in the first place- BUSH DID IT  davidk14: . I agree with you statement. I believe our troops were not going to have immunity from prosecution. I agree that it was a dismal foreign policy snafu...deadly. As far as dividing the country up, I just do not know. .  wayne elliott: And lets not forget that there were nations like Britain and Australia who jumped on the war horse. The Coalition of the Willling...  davesdatahut: David, before we get onto the lies that led us into the Iraqi war and the gilded chicken-shits who got us into that entirely predictable mess.....what evidence is there that Saddam Hussein sent his alleged WMDs to Syria? Weren't Syria and Iraq enemies, especially after Syria was among the countries that booted Hussein out of Kuwait after he invaded that country? They didn't even have diplomatic relations, if I recall correctly, while Hussein was in power. Why do you think Hussein sent his weapons to Syria before we could get at them?  orangemoon8: What lies?, Bush was going in to iraq all along, you didn't know this?, potential WMD's. Iraq was aligned with Syria all along, their Baathist gov'ts go all the way back to WW 2 when Saddam's Uncle was a Gruppenfuher with the Nazi SS. We.... booted Iraq out of Kuwait no one else except Britian and maybe Australia was militarily involved. Where was Syria when Iraq invaded Iran in 1980? This whole mess started when Iraq accused Kuwait of drilling sideways from Kuwait into the Rumahlia oil fields inside Iraq, while Iraq was drilling in the Neutral Zone between Saudi and Iraq & Kuwait During this war, Saddam's army invaded Kafji in Saudi ,(a major oil refinery town... ARAMCO? ) he already had American oil workers in Kuwait hostage......he attacked Israel with Scud missiles, Khobar towers in Saudi were hit with Scuds killing Americans. When Saudi decided to let Americans fly from a base there, and base an army there, that drove Osama bin Laden crazy, I'm sure you remember that guy? he then was exiled and planned his revenge against the US and Saudi. The Iran -Iraq war lasted 8 yrs, with what result? during the year 2003, Saddam was paying families(Palestinians)......or some of them, $25K who ever sent anyone strapped with bombs into Israeli stores, restaurants, buses etc, and just blow themselves up. A lot of Americans living in Israel and others were killed when they did this. Most of these were kids..... families sending their kids to blow themselves to get $25K from Saddam. What kind of ppl are these that do this? He gassed the Kurds, I'm surprised the Kurds, from Turkey, Iraq and Syria, didn't go after him with wave after wave of suicide bombers. Saddam should have been taken out in 1991. These so-called dictators are cowards, Saddam was pulled from a hole in the ground in a backyard in Tikrit, Qadaffi was pulled out of a sewer pipe, Osama was hiding in a house in Pakistan, where is everone else hiding? That whole region is like a gigantic chess board, everyone moving their pieces into position, preparing for something big. If we need to be anywhere right now, it's in N Iraq in Kurdistan, help them create their own state. Other than Israel, Kurdistan is one of the most stable regions.......for now. This area is basically in the middle of this Mid-East chessboard. If you control the 4 center squares of a chessboard, you control the other 60 squares. All we have to do is control it from the sky, for now. Peaches(Obama) said he was pulling out of these regions by Aug 31, 2009 when he was elected, funny that we are still there. When Peaches was elected and got briefed on what was going on, he then realized he was gonna break alot of campaign promises. What does HE do?.......blame Bush. This is Peaches' problem now.  chronology: Deep. The U.S. withdrawl was not connect to U.S. troops being forced to accept Sharia Law, it was based on a timetable set by Mr Bush in 2008, he made the commitment the same time as an Iraqi Journalist threw his shoes at the President. The U.S. offered every assistance possible to the Iraqi Government in the years after 2008 and up to U.S. departure in 2011 but the Iraqi Government could not agree on the agenda for American security support. 'Bottom line is, the Iraqi's are very nationalistic people and they do not want any foreign troops at all on their soil' said one person in Washington. The Pentagon was pessimistic back in 2008 of the results of withdrawing American servicemen and women. The Pentagon offered training for Iraqi Services in America and assistance with equipment, but the Iraqi's again refused American offers. There are around 5000 highly trained Private Contractors in Iraq at the moment, perhaps one way to assist Iraq would be to increase those numbers as quickly as possible. But that would see the U.S. Army loosing the 'best and the brightest' of it's personnel. davesdatahut: Orange et al... Bush is to blame because he started this war under entirely false pretenses - WMDs, Saddam was responsible for 9/11, he was a threat to the world, and blah blah bullshit. It was a tissue of lies that the dumbass American populace bought hook, line and sinker amid the post-9/11 frenzy while the media went along for the ride and never questioned exactly what the hell we were there for and what the hell we were going to do once the easy part, capturing Saddam and his government, was done. If the simpleton, draft-dodging Bush and his war mongering, neo-con cronies had actually tried to explain to the masses that the only real problem was that Saddam was a destabilizing force in a region that we needed to control because they have what we need - oil to run our buildings and power our SUV behemoth vehicles - then the public may not have gone along for the ride. If he had said we are sending our soldiers in their to protect the oil supply, without any clear idea of what happens after the initial capture, that might have sat differently with people. And those dead and maimed soldiers may not have become dead and maimed, while tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens (you know, those AYrabs we like to look down on?) might still be alive, with families intact. But no, Bush, Cheney and their clan were itching to kill Saddam, beat their chicken chests and finish the job that Bush Sr. wisely cut short. So this band of bombers used 9/11 as a ruse to do it, while we had more important OTHER priorities at the time. Like busting up the Taliban and Al Queda, killing Bin Laden and recovering from 9/11 (and dealing with huge issues here at home, like education, infrastructure, economic rebuild etc). And then we smugly went in there with UTTERLY no plan to deal with the fact that this country is a stitch-up of antagonistic religious and ethnic factions who want to kill each other. Or that this part of the world is largely unmanageable and doesn't want us there (or hates us, if you wanna go that far). Or that this part of the world simply does not think like us because our culture is anathema to them and they do not trust us to build or rebuild anything that is theirs. We didn't think much about that. Nope. That's messy. And we don't like messy. As a result, we ended up with what we have today - a civil war. Not to mention the disgusting prospect that our soldiers gave of themselves for this result. To think we were going to dump Saddam and "nation build" was laughable beyond belief. This was a predictable disaster from the moment Saddam was captured. So, yes, blame Bush. And thank Obama for pulling out of this fiasco and not wanting to dump more lives into it. Peaches, indeed. PS: For those who think going back in there is a good idea, why don't you sign up and go? And pay the tax increase needed to pay for it. Oh and while I am at it, who was it that finally DID kill Bin Laden? Peaches, indeed. (Edited by davesdatahut) chronology: Data. Bottom line is since U.S.withdrawal, Iraq had refused all offers of U.S. military assistance, and has procrastinated about how to arrange it's defenses . All the world can do is urge all sides to enter negotiations. If Iraq had listened to the U.S. it would be negotiating from a position of strength, not expediience. davesdatahut: Chron, if only Iraq had listened to wise and worldly US of A. If, indeed. The problem is, they don't want to listen to us. There is too much about us they find intolerable and offensive. So they don't listen/can't listen/have too little interest in what we think. This is part of the problem with this cockamamie notion of ours that we can fix the mountain of problems they have over there. We can't. (Edited by davesdatahut) orangemoon8: This is why Iraq will not have to worry about this too much longer as it will split into 3 different nations. This nonsense has been going on since.......forever. these ppl will forever fight. Bush senior should have take out Saddam in 1991. If he did then, what would the mid-east look like now?, I really don't care. Who said Saddam was responsible for 9/11?..I know he wasn't. The left always wants to blame Bush, his dad Cheney.....whatever, let's see what happens the next 2 1/2 yrs while Peaches is in office. By the way....draft-dodging Bush?, While I respect everyone who fought in Korea and Vietnam, everyone who was "drafted" in these 2 wars had their Constitutional rights violated. We were not directly invaded by these countries, why was anyone drafted? It figures that is was 2 liberals that did this......Truman and LBJ.
davesdatahut: Who knows what the Middle East would look like now if Bush Sr. had taken out Saddam? Probably a lot like now, just with 10 more years of nasty warring between the different factions. I would like not to care what happens over there, but we need to because we haven't done enough to escape our need for their oil and because that part of the world incubates terrorists. In the long run, the only way out is to find other sources of energy. Take the money out of the equation for us and we can let them fight it out amongst themselves because we sure can't fix it. (Edited by davesdatahut) orangemoon8: Yep, Sunnis and Shias have been fighting for so long. We need to finish XL part of Keystone Pipeline and stop trying to kill fossil fuels. Let them wipe each other out, and choke on their own oil at the same time. You can't speculate on oil prices here if ya have a steady, ample supply. wayne elliott: Thank you Dave for mentioning George Bush Sr - I always felt that part of the exercise in the invasion was Bush Jr seeking to finish Daddys work, along with all the other excuses of course... davesdatahut: Obama not only didn't make it worse. He got us out of there. Finally, thankfully, he got us out of that fiasco and left it to the Iraqis to work out their problems, without throwing more soldiers' lives away. Our soldiers' lives are worth something, in case the blind hawks have forgotten about that. davesdatahut: Wayne, the invasion of Iraq definitely had a lot to do with Bush Jr. beating his chest and finishing what daddy was smart enough not to finish. It was one of the many crap reasons for going in there. Perhaps we will learn from this, that we cannot 'nation build' in a nation that does not want us there doing the building. This should be so plainly evident at this point. davidk14: . i agree with you dave. Iraq and Afghanistan. If we are not going to complete the mission, get the frick out of there. Sure, sure thousands, tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands will be slaughtered because of the vacuum because we left and which we all knew was and will happen. And so what? Just because ISIS has taken over control of parts of Syria and Iraq, who gives a rats fart? I feel as long as we do not have a Declaration of War, we stay the hell out. I realize that the Middle East is gonna blow, so we help Israel batten down the hatches, hunker down ourselves and let the rest of the world burn. Until....we have a Declaration of War. Then and only then, should we send major boots on the ground invasion type of war where we slaughter, burn, and raze the landscape. . chronology: david there is no such action as a 'Declaration of War' by any country. All acts of 'war' can only legally be carried with the consent of the UN. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan it was an illegal act of war, when the U.S. invaded in 2002 it was with UN approval. The Iraq War was declared legal by the UN in 2005 when the UN declared the American presence in Iraq legal, and it's actions prior to 2005 legal. The legality of wars are always complex and disputed. North Vietnam declared the U.S. had no right to be in Vietnam, the U.S. insisted it was there at the invitation of the South Vietnamese Government. the North did not recognise the South Vietnamese Government. davesdatahut: It could be that we simply have to let them fight it out in various parts of the Middle East before they can break out of their self-imposed cultural and religious traps. I don't know. This could result in a disaster but I'm not sure what the alternative is at this point. Unless and until these countries stop allowing clowns, dictators and so-called religious leaders run their shows, not much will change. And we certainly can't fix it. What we can do is continue developing alternative forms of energy while protecting the only real ally we have over there, Israel, which also happens to be the only real secular Middle East democracy not completely polluted by religion or dictators.. (Edited by davesdatahut) davidk14: . Chrono, Not sure exactly why you would make that statement. From Wiki, "...A declaration of war is a formal declaration issued by a national government indicating that a state of war exists between that nation and another...." "...The United States has formally declared war against foreign nations five separate times, each upon prior request by the President of the United States. Four of those five declarations came after hostilities had begun.[2] James Madison reported that in the Federal Convention of 1787, the phrase "make war" was changed to "declare war" in order to leave to the Executive the power to repel sudden attacks but not to commence war without the explicit approval of Congress.[3] And that's from Wiki. For you to say there is no such thing as a declaration of war? Seriously? _______________________________________ dave, I agree with you. . . . chronology: dave, the United States of America respects the United Nations Charter. A 'Declaration of war' is a threat of violence against another nation. The U.S. only acts with UN approval such as in Iraq or Afghanistan. The U.S. may follow various routes to restrain the terrorism in Iraq, but Washington will only act with UN approval. When Argentina 'declared war' on Great Britain over the Falklands, they were in clear violation of the United Nations Charter. The Argentine Government today would face Criminal Prosecution if they repeated their actions of 1982. The U.S. Actions after 911 in Afghanistan were recognised as actions of 'Self Defence' by the UN. In 2005 the UN recognised the Liberation of Iraq as 'Legal Actions', and the presence of United States Forces in Iraq as lawful. | Politics Chat Room 72 People Chatting Similar Conversations |
