Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
...but the Congress and Senate refused to authorize military action and Obama had to change tactics. Had the Republicans given the go-ahead, it's entirely possible the coalition forces would have cleaned Assad his murders out of Syria completely, but just like your supposition, we'll never know.
The chaos that followed was far worse than leaving Saddam there. He had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact is seems likely he held down any terrorism in Iraq.
True I understood the reasons given at the time and the circumstances and hindsight is always 20/20 the problem is we handle the military part of these conflicts very well it's the post dictator part we never think through.Presidents from both parties have a bad habit of wanting to jump into conflicts in the Middle East without thinking it through Bush did it with Iraq and Obama did it with Libya and Syria.
Well, I generally agree with you but the September 11 attacks changed everything. There was fear that Saddam might provide terrorists with the means to launch an even greater terrorist attack in the U.S. After all, he had BANNED inspectors from doing their jobs. The French, of course, were vehemently opposed to it because, as we learned later, much of their leadership was involved in secret sales of embargoed items to Saddam.
That was all clearly made up. There is no evidence of that.The chaos that followed was far worse than leaving Saddam there. He had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact is seems likely he held down any terrorism in Iraq.
Correct and that's why we should have let the Shiites deal with it. Anyway, there was a fear that Saddam had or was creating WMD's that would be given to terrorists to be used in the U.S. Saddam was certainly capable of doing so and had the motive as well.
Yes, the war that some Democrats voted for but ALL Republicans voted for....that one.You mean that war HILLARY voted for (and even made a speech before Congress encouraging other Democrats to support)???All that was possible thanks to the Iraq war. You are pretty braindead if you can't see that.Maybe we should start calling you "Braindead"...Well he started that little Iraq war. That threw the whole middle east off. Then that lead to ISIS and that lead to the Syria war. Without the Iraq war none of this happens.And lets not forget Bush started It all.
What did Bush have to do with Syria?
What started the war in Syria was Obama's attempt to overthrow Assad by arming "rebel" groups (including ISIS)...
He then sent our troops into Syria in an ILLEGAL (since it was NEVER approved by Congress) and ineffective attempt to straighten out the mess HE created...
Thank God Trump was able to defeat ISIS...
THAT WAR???
Gee, aren't you glad she lost, before she got us involved in any other messes!!!
I'm no great fan of Obama, but he never did anything to betray the nation the way Trump has - repeatedly. And each and every time, the main beneficiary of his stupidity is Russia. Fancy that.
That was all clearly made up. There is no evidence of that.
We took over the whole country and found out that wasn't true. Stick with the facts. I am aware those were the false claims at the time. But they were proven false.That was all clearly made up. There is no evidence of that.
Saddam had a history of WMD's, a history of using them and had banned U.N. inspectors. Those are all facts. It wasn't beyond the realm of possibility that Saddam had or was creating WMD's.
Had Bush not invaded and, had Saddam smuggled a device that was detonated in New York, you would have been screaming for Bush's head. Bush's intent was to prevent such an occurrence.
True I understood the reasons given at the time and the circumstances and hindsight is always 20/20 the problem is we handle the military part of these conflicts very well it's the post dictator part we never think through.
We took over the whole country and found out that wasn't true. Stick with the facts.
You keep using the intelligence failures like they were true. The fact is the he had no WMDs and no connection to terrorism. It is likely he was holding down terrorism actually as nobody was there till after the war.We took over the whole country and found out that wasn't true. Stick with the facts.
I am "sticking with the facts". What statement of fact did I make that isn't true?
Yes, Iraq was a catastrophic intelligence failure. Nevertheless, in my OPINION, taking out Saddam was the right move. Reasonable people can disagree.
You keep using the intelligence failures like they were true.
The inept leadership part is without question.True I understood the reasons given at the time and the circumstances and hindsight is always 20/20 the problem is we handle the military part of these conflicts very well it's the post dictator part we never think through.
Well, at the time we were withdrawing I was incredulous that we were not going to maintain a MAJOR military base(s) in Iraq. In my view, we should have dumped NATO and put forces where they are most likely to be needed, which is the mideast and Iraq in particular. I think American "leadership" has been ridiculously inept for a long time.
Here you go:You keep using the intelligence failures like they were true.
Quote where I did that.
You suggest it wasn't out of the realm of possibility that he was creating WMD's. Well yes it was because we know he wasn't.
You claim he might have had a device smuggled in by terrorists. And again he didn't have a device, and there was never any connection to terrorists.
Yes that was the BS we were fed. But we now know that they weren't. Again, stick to the facts.You suggest it wasn't out of the realm of possibility that he was creating WMD's. Well yes it was because we know he wasn't.
You claim he might have had a device smuggled in by terrorists. And again he didn't have a device, and there was never any connection to terrorists.
Yes, it was a POSSIBILITY that Saddam MIGHT give an WMD to a terrorist organization to use against us. That was the primary fear that motivated the invasion and overthrow of Saddam. I never said it was a FACT that Saddam had an WMD or that he was DEFINITELY going to use one on us or anyone else.
Your reading comprehension needs improvement.
The same could be said about both of the Bush boys..Well that was pointless in the extreme.
It was "pointless"? Obama supported an insurgency that resulted in massive destruction, death and MILLIONS of refugees that has cost the west BILLIONS of dollars.
Had Obama stayed out, it's quite possible that Syria would be stable today and they, themselves could have protected their own borders from ISIS.
There isn't a single credible person that will come out and proclaim what Obama did as good policy.
You cannot tolerate any criticism of Obama. For you, everything Obama did and said was golden.
Yes that was the BS we were fed. But we now know that they weren't. Again, stick to the facts.
The same could be said about both of the Bush boys..
See post #56The same could be said about both of the Bush boys..
In what way?
