Looks like Baghdad imploding

[Oldstyle]

Iraq has to learn to stand on it own some day....

How did abandoning it to ISIS work out, Moon? Telling nations they need to stand on their own might sound good in an abstract way but the practical results SUCK!

abandoning Iraq got the USA out of Iraq

I hate to break this to you, Rosie but we're right back IN Iraq!

 

[irosie91]

Iraq has to learn to stand on it own some day....

How did abandoning it to ISIS work out, Moon? Telling nations they need to stand on their own might sound good in an abstract way but the practical results SUCK!

abandoning Iraq got the USA out of Iraq

I hate to break this to you, Rosie but we're right back IN Iraq!

I am aware----but Obamoid did claim that we were getting out---I was glad----we never should have gotten in----we should have sent a bullet into the head of saddam in -----<ARE YOU READY?????> 1964

 

[Moonglow]

Iraq has to learn to stand on it own some day....

How did abandoning it to ISIS work out, Moon? Telling nations they need to stand on their own might sound good in an abstract way but the practical results SUCK!

Iraq had the frickin' largest army in the area, all provided free of charge, how did we know they would throw down their arms and run like cowards?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

How did Bush tie Obama's hands?

Bush agreed in the SOFA to remove all US troops from Iraq cities like Fallujah and Mosul by July 2009. That tied Obama's hands because Sunni cities became hotbeds for Sunni resistance to the Shiite, Iran friendly Iraq government and U.S. Troops were could not go in. Bush also agreed in the SOFA that either side could terminate the SOFA at any time this forcing US troops to leave Iraq immediately. So if Obama violated the No troops in cities agreement - a rapid withdrawal could be demand by Iraq.

Bush also agreed in the SOFA that all US military offensive military operations had to be approved by the Iraqi government.

Bush handcuffed his successor in Iraq.

Why didn't Bush get a ten year deal on USA preferred terms?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldstyle, post: 14928403

I hate to break this to you, Rosie but we're right back IN Iraq!

Yes we were in Iraq on Bush's orders to force UN inspectors out and start a massive air and ground invasion to find hidden massive stockpiles of WMD. Bush's mistaken and disastrous WMD war, as Trump now calls it, was over in 2013. 4000 plus U.S. Troops died, ten times that were wounded in Bush's WMD war.

Now our troops are in Iraq and flying over Iraq to assist a US led global coalition in the war against ISIS. One US warrior has given his life in the mission.

Do you oppose the current war against ISIS in Iraq?

 

[Oldstyle]

How did Bush tie Obama's hands?

Bush agreed in the SOFA to remove all US troops from Iraq cities like Fallujah and Mosul by July 2009. That tied Obama's hands because Sunni cities became hotbeds for Sunni resistance to the Shiite, Iran friendly Iraq government and U.S. Troops were could not go in. Bush also agreed in the SOFA that either side could terminate the SOFA at any time this forcing US troops to leave Iraq immediately. So if Obama violated the No troops in cities agreement - a rapid withdrawal could be demand by Iraq.

Bush also agreed in the SOFA that all US military offensive military operations had to be approved by the Iraqi government.

Bush handcuffed his successor in Iraq.

Why didn't Bush get a ten year deal on USA preferred terms?

Every President is responsible for making their own deals depending on what's taking place during their time in office. When Bush signed his agreement with Iraq it was done with the goal of getting US troops out of Iraq at a future date that seemed achievable. So Bush leaves office and in comes Obama. At that point HE is responsible for policy and HE is responsible for adapting to changing situations. Obama's Joint Chief's recommend a slower withdrawal from Iraq then initially anticipated when Bush signed the original SOFA...fearing too quick an exit would create a power vacuum that might be exploited by extremists. Obama doesn't want to hear that however because he's going to be running for reelection on a "I'm the guy who got us out of Iraq" narrative! He want's nothing to do with an extension of US combat troops in Iraq and he's in no way interested in negotiating a new SOFA because he has no intention of keeping troops in Iraq. The expiration of the existing SOFA is one more excuse to leave.

The leadership in Iraq at that point does not want US troops to leave but they can't request a new SOFA that would keep US troops in country because they know Obama won't let that happen. So out we go...and in comes ISIS. Millions of people are killed or have to flee for their lives causing a massive refugee problem in Europe and ISIS becomes a well funded terror "magnet" attracting radical Islamist's from around the globe.

I'm sorry, Notfooled...but that failure of policy isn't on Bush...that failure of policy falls squarely on the shoulders of one Barack Obama!

 

[Oldstyle]

Oldstyle, post: 14928403

I hate to break this to you, Rosie but we're right back IN Iraq!

Yes we were in Iraq on Bush's orders to force UN inspectors out and start a massive air and ground invasion to find hidden massive stockpiles of WMD. Bush's mistaken and disastrous WMD war, as Trump now calls it, was over in 2013. 4000 plus U.S. Troops died, ten times that were wounded in Bush's WMD war.

Now our troops are in Iraq and flying over Iraq to assist a US led global coalition in the war against ISIS. One US warrior has given his life in the mission.

Do you oppose the current war against ISIS in Iraq?

I don't oppose military action against ISIS anywhere. What bothers me is the naive policy decisions that were made by this Administration that made ISIS a problem not just in Syria but throughout the world. We allowed ISIS to become a power player and now we're going to have to work twice as hard to get rid of them.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldstyle, post: 15100545

What bothers me is the naive policy decisions that were made by this Administration that made ISIS a problem not just in Syria but throughout the world

What policy decisions would those be? Be specific.

I know about Bush's policy decision to convert Iraq from Sunni to Shiite control in 2003, which contributed to the rise of AQI and ISIS and the Sunni insurgency against the Bush planted Iranian influence in Baghdad.

What else do you have?

 

[Oldstyle]

Oldstyle, post: 15100545

What bothers me is the naive policy decisions that were made by this Administration that made ISIS a problem not just in Syria but throughout the world

What policy decisions would those be? Be specific.

I know about Bush's policy decision to convert Iraq from Sunni to Shiite control in 2003, which contributed to the rise of AQI and ISIS and the Sunni insurgency against the Bush planted Iranian influence in Baghdad.

What else do you have?

Bush attempted to convert Iraq from a dictatorship run by the Baathist Party to Democratic rule. Al Queda existed before we even went to war with Iraq. ISIS grew out of the Syrian conflict...which Bush had nothing to do with but Obama and Clinton made much worse with their "Red Line in the Sand" declaration and then subsequent "Oh, you thought I was serious about that? diplomacy. I don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about when you claim there was a "Bush planted Iranian influence in Baghdad". Iran and ISIS moved into the power vacuum left behind when Obama went against the recommendations of his military leaders and pulled out American combat troops.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldstyle, post: 15106352

Bush attempted to convert Iraq from a dictatorship run by the Baathist Party to Democratic rule.

As Trump tells you, Bush lied us into a quagmire war in Iraq. He really lied to you and you are a sucker if you believe Bush invaded Iraq to create Demicratic rule. He invaded to find large stockpiles of WMD.

Would you support getting 4864 dead US soldiers to create Democracy in a Muslim country.

There was no Al Qaeada in Iraq prior to Bush's idiotic invasion and incompetent occupation. That is the point. Saddam and Baathist Sunnis in Iraq would never have allowed AQ operate in Iraq.

The invasion and subsequent political vacumn allowed AQ to come in. ISIS formed there in 2004 as part of AQ.

Bush did not defeat them. They moved to Syria an during the Bush surrender SOFA negotiations in December 2008, Bush gave AQI a public date for the withdrawal of all U.S. Troops, starting with cities within the first six months of Obama's term.

Now you probably will vote for Trump who says Bush lied us into the whole mess we currently now have seen the past two years.

But our side is defeating ISIS without US bloodshed. Yet you cannot compliment our current president who is getting it done using the men doing the fighting and dying that live there.

ISIS will be driven out of Iraq by years end and Iraqis will keep them out. Unlike Bush, Obama has put the onus of defending themselves on them.

Your heroes are losing their caliphate under Obama.

Your heroes laid in waiting once Bush announced the date for complete withdrawal.

ISIS is completely on the Bush legacy.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldstyle, post: 15106352

Al Queda existed before we even went to war with Iraq.

Of course they did. But they were not in Iraq until after the invasion. AQI was the terror seed that split off from AQ. AQI become ISIS. That ISIS evolved in Iraq not Syria. Bush had every thing to do with it. No invasion in 2003 - no ISIS in Iraq, ever. Baathists were too secular to put up with the threat that AQ and an ISIS could have imposed on Saddam's regime.

If you don't believe me perhaps you'll believe your Republican nominee:

“Maybe don’t go into Iraq originally. We should have never, ever gone in,” Trump, who supported invading Iraq, said at a February town hall in Bluffton, S.C. “But we did. So we made a mistake. The country made a big mistake, and started all of this horrible thing that you see taking place, including ISIS.”

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldstyle, post: 15106352

ISIS grew out of the Syrian conflict...which Bush had nothing to do with but Obama and Clinton made much worse with their "Red Line in the Sand" declaration and then subsequent "Oh, you thought I was serious about that?

What was the Red Line in reference to? The redline had nothing to do with stopping ISIS. It had nothing to do with ISIS at all.

ISIS grew out of the invasion of Iraq. All Saddam's Iraqi military officers that Bush didn't capture became leaders of ISIS. They were not Syrian. Baghdadi, ISIS's supreme leader is Iraqi.

Don't you read anything of a factual and historical nature?

 

[Oldstyle]

I'm actually a history major. I read things of a historical nature quite often actually.

If you knew the history of ISIS you'd know that before 2009 it was an organization dominated not by Iraqis but by extremists from Jordan and Egypt. It wasn't until Barack Obama was in office and announcing the time table for his pull out of American combat troops that ISIS began to concentrate on filling that power vacuum in Iraq. The truth is...when George W. Bush was leaving office ISIS was in serious decline...not growing at all.

 

[Oldstyle]

The Red Line was in reference to Assad using chemical weapons against the Syrian opposition. Obama threatened a US military response if Assad crossed that "Red Line" but when it was shown that Assad had indeed gassed Syrian's who opposed him, Obama walked that threat back...proving to our enemies that he doesn't have the stomach for a "boots on the ground" conflict and would let them do things like cross hundreds of miles of open desert with large numbers of armored vehicles and troops without a military response. Obama's weakness emboldened ISIS and led to the fall of major cities in Iraq as well as major oil fields. It's what put ISIS on the map as a terror power.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldstyle, post: 15109204

It wasn't until Barack Obama was in office and announcing the time table for his pull out of American combat troops that ISIS began to concentrate on filling that power vacuum in Iraq.

Bush beat Obama to announcing a time table for withdrawal. Bush set the timetable in stone with the SOFA when he surrendered to Maliki and Muqtada Al Sadr in December 2002. Iraq became a sovereign nation while Bush was in office. Obama could never undo that sovereignty. All US SOFA's require immunity for US military personnel from the courts and laws within the country in which they serve. Bush signed a deal with sovereign Iraq promising to have US troops out of cities in six months and completely gone in three years.

I can't believe you ever read the historical documents related to Iraq, so here are some pertinent parts:

U.S.-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement, 2008

Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq
On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization
of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq

Recognizing the performance and increasing capacity of the Iraqi Security Forces, the assumption of full security responsibility by those Forces, and based upon the strong relationship between the Parties, an agreement on the following has been reached:

1. All the United States Forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory no later than December 31, 2011.
2. All United States combat forces shall withdraw from Iraqi cities, villages, and localities no later than the time at which Iraqi Security Forces assume full responsibility for security in an Iraqi province, provided that such withdrawal is completed no later than June 30, 2009.
3. United States combat forces withdrawn pursuant to paragraph 2 above shall be stationed in the agreed facilities and areas outside cities, villages, and localities to be designated by the JMOCC before the date established in paragraph 2 above.
4. The United States recognizes the sovereign right of the Government of Iraq to request the departure of the United States Forces from Iraq at any time. The Government of Iraq recognizes the sovereign right of the United States to withdraw the United States Forces from Iraq at any time.
5. The Parties agree to establish mechanisms and arrangements to reduce the number of the United States Forces during the periods of time that have been determined, and they shall agree on the locations where the United States Forces will be present.

The Iraqis never intended to extend the immunity provided in the three year agreement that Bush signed his last full month in office. It was Bush's failure to negotiate at least a ten year deal with immunity that made the three year deal a fixed hard date that Sunni terrorists and Saddam's former military officers and fighters knew they could operate freely in Iraq's Sunni cities within five months of Obama's inauguration.

That's on Bush. Obama had no means to force sovereign Iraq to grant immunity to US Troops in 2012 and beyond. Bush locked Iraq's sovereign right to enforce Iraq's legal and political will on US Troops.

Bush's flimsy three year wimp out deal sealed Iraq's fate as Maliki used those three years to disenfranchise Sunnis and set up a crony ghost Shiite army that couldn't fight ISIS until Obama got them to fight their own fight the past 18 months.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldstyle, post: 15109254

The Red Line was in reference to Assad using chemical weapons against the Syrian opposition. Obama threatened a US military response if Assad crossed that "Red Line" but when it was shown that Assad had indeed gassed Syrian's who opposed him, Obama walked that threat back...proving to our enemies that he doesn't have the stomach for a "boots on the ground" conflict and would let them do things like cross hundreds of miles of open desert with large numbers of armored vehicles and troops without a military response.

You stated that Obama let them do things like cross hundreds of miles of open desert with large numbers of armored vehicles and troops without a military response.

Who is them? Be specific.

 

[Oldstyle]

Oldstyle, post: 15109254

The Red Line was in reference to Assad using chemical weapons against the Syrian opposition. Obama threatened a US military response if Assad crossed that "Red Line" but when it was shown that Assad had indeed gassed Syrian's who opposed him, Obama walked that threat back...proving to our enemies that he doesn't have the stomach for a "boots on the ground" conflict and would let them do things like cross hundreds of miles of open desert with large numbers of armored vehicles and troops without a military response.

You stated that Obama let them do things like cross hundreds of miles of open desert with large numbers of armored vehicles and troops without a military response.

Who is them? Be specific.

That would be ISIS moving troops, artillery and armor across open desert between Syria and the cities they were attacking in Iraq. You know...the JV team?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldstyle, post: 15109254

The Red Line was in reference to Assad using chemical weapons against the Syrian opposition. Obama threatened a US military response if Assad crossed that "Red Line" but when it was shown that Assad had indeed gassed Syrian's who opposed him, Obama walked that threat back....

Obama walked nothing back. He wanted Cingress to do its job and authorize the use of military force in Syria. During the debate in Congress a diplomatic breakthrough occurred wherein Assad and Putin agreed to destroy and get rid if it's Chem/Bio weapons arsenal in a very short period of time.

Obama achieved his redline threat through diplomacy without US boots on ground.

If only Bush had allowed the UN inspectors resolve Iraq's WMD non-existent threat in March 2003 there would never have been an AQI and eventual ISIS. Just ask Trump.

 

[Oldstyle]

Oldstyle, post: 15109204

It wasn't until Barack Obama was in office and announcing the time table for his pull out of American combat troops that ISIS began to concentrate on filling that power vacuum in Iraq.

Bush beat Obama to announcing a time table for withdrawal. Bush set the timetable in stone with the SOFA when he surrendered to Maliki and Muqtada Al Sadr in December 2002. Iraq became a sovereign nation while Bush was in office. Obama could never undo that sovereignty. All US SOFA's require immunity for US military personnel from the courts and laws within the country in which they serve. Bush signed a deal with sovereign Iraq promising to have US troops out of cities in six months and completely gone in three years.

I can't believe you ever read the historical documents related to Iraq, so here are some pertinent parts:

U.S.-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement, 2008

Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq
On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization
of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq

Recognizing the performance and increasing capacity of the Iraqi Security Forces, the assumption of full security responsibility by those Forces, and based upon the strong relationship between the Parties, an agreement on the following has been reached:

1. 
   
   
   • All the United States Forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory no later than December 31, 2011.
   • All United States combat forces shall withdraw from Iraqi cities, villages, and localities no later than the time at which Iraqi Security Forces assume full responsibility for security in an Iraqi province, provided that such withdrawal is completed no later than June 30, 2009.
   • United States combat forces withdrawn pursuant to paragraph 2 above shall be stationed in the agreed facilities and areas outside cities, villages, and localities to be designated by the JMOCC before the date established in paragraph 2 above.
   • The United States recognizes the sovereign right of the Government of Iraq to request the departure of the United States Forces from Iraq at any time. The Government of Iraq recognizes the sovereign right of the United States to withdraw the United States Forces from Iraq at any time.
   • The Parties agree to establish mechanisms and arrangements to reduce the number of the United States Forces during the periods of time that have been determined, and they shall agree on the locations where the United States Forces will be present.

The Iraqis never intended to extend the immunity provided in the three year agreement that Bush signed his last full month in office. It was Bush's failure to negotiate at least a ten year deal with immunity that made the three year deal a fixed hard date that Sunni terrorists and Saddam's former military officers and fighters knew they could operate freely in Iraq's Sunni cities within five months of Obama's inauguration.

That's on Bush. Obama had no means to force sovereign Iraq to grant immunity to US Troops in 2012 and beyond. Bush locked Iraq's sovereign right to enforce Iraq's legal and political will on US Troops.

Bush's flimsy three year wimp out deal sealed Iraq's fate as Maliki used those three years to disenfranchise Sunnis and set up a crony ghost Shiite army that couldn't fight ISIS until Obama got them to fight their own fight the past 18 months.

You continue to act as if Barack Obama's hands were tied when it came to getting a new Status of Forces Agreement, NotFooled and the truth is...he never even tried!

Obama apologists like yourself attempt to use the expiring SOFA agreement Bush had in place as the reason troops HAD to be pulled out of Iraq! If we'd had a President who wanted them to stay then the deal would have gotten done. Maliki didn't want the US out. He had a good idea what was probably coming. Obama got the Iraqis to fight the past 18 months? Really? How? By sending back combat troops? Gee, if he'd simply followed the recommendations of his military leaders ISIS wouldn't have gotten the foothold they did in major Iraqi cities and millions of Iraqis wouldn't have had to flee for their lives. Failed policy that cost the lives of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians.

 

[Oldstyle]

Oldstyle, post: 15109254

The Red Line was in reference to Assad using chemical weapons against the Syrian opposition. Obama threatened a US military response if Assad crossed that "Red Line" but when it was shown that Assad had indeed gassed Syrian's who opposed him, Obama walked that threat back....

Obama walked nothing back. He wanted Cingress to do its job and authorize the use of military force in Syria. During the debate in Congress a diplomatic breakthrough occurred wherein Assad and Putin agreed to destroy and get rid if it's Chem/Bio weapons arsenal in a very short period of time.

Obama achieved his redline threat through diplomacy without US boots on ground.

If only Bush had allowed the UN inspectors resolve Iraq's WMD non-existent threat in March 2003 there would never have been an AQI and eventual ISIS. Just ask Trump.

So after being told he faced military action if he used chemical weapons...Assad did so...got zero response from Obama...then promised to get rid of his chemical weapons...and you see that as Obama "achieving" his red line threat? That's Assad and Putin playing Barack Obama like the spineless, putz he is! The two of them were most likely laughing their asses off at how naive Kerry and Obama are.