Rep. Jason Chaffetz: No evidence of wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Chaffetz could take the House to a new level of crazy.

However impossible that might seem.

 

[Dad2three]

Chaffetz could take the House to a new level of crazy.

It must IF it's to implode...

Chaffetz could take the House to a new level of crazy.

And...

Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS | Truth...
www.truthrevolt.org/news/leon-panetta-obama...created-isisCached
... USA Today posted a video interview with Leon Panetta, former Obama CIA ... Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS . ... that the Obama-caused lack of ..
Which did more damage?...

HOROWITZ HUH? LMAOROG


PANETTA'S OPINIONS HUH?





Leon Panetta, who was Obama’s defense secretary from July 2011 to February 2013, wrote in his 2014 book, “Worthy Fights,” that as the deadline neared “it was clear to me — and many others — that withdrawing all our forces would endanger the fragile stability” in Iraq. As a result, the Obama administration sought to keep 5,000 to 10,000 U.S. combat troops in Iraq, as Sullivan said in his statement.

But negotiations with Iraq broke down in October 2011 over the issue of whether U.S. troops would be shielded from criminal prosecution by Iraqi authorities. Panetta wrote that Maliki insisted that a new agreement providing immunity to U.S. forces “would have to be submitted to the Iraqi parliament for its approval,” which Panetta said “made reaching agreement very difficult.”

Very difficult, but Panetta wrote it was not impossible.

Panetta said the Obama White House did not press hard enough to reach a deal — a point that Bush makes in his speech. Panetta wrote that the U.S. “had leverage” and could have “threatened to withdraw reconstruction aid” if Iraq didn’t agree to “some sort of continued U.S. military presence.”
Bush, Clinton Play Blame Game in Iraq

SO DUBYA INVADING ON FALSE PREMISES HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RISE OF ISIS RIGHT??? LOL

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Rep. Jason Chaffetz: No evidence of wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood"

Obviously he's a RINO.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And yet Planned Parenthood does not need federal money to survive..

So why does the far left want to keep funding it?

Because the far right has failed to find any 'evidence' of wrongdoing.

Typical of most conservatives: seek to disadvantage an organization innocent of wrongdoing for purely subjective, partisan reasons.

The reprehensible right, indeed.

 

[Vigilante]

Chaffetz could take the House to a new level of crazy.

It must IF it's to implode...

Chaffetz could take the House to a new level of crazy.

And...

Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS | Truth...
www.truthrevolt.org/news/leon-panetta-obama...created-isisCached
... USA Today posted a video interview with Leon Panetta, former Obama CIA ... Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS . ... that the Obama-caused lack of ..
Which did more damage?...

HOROWITZ HUH? LMAOROG


PANETTA'S OPINIONS HUH?





Leon Panetta, who was Obama’s defense secretary from July 2011 to February 2013, wrote in his 2014 book, “Worthy Fights,” that as the deadline neared “it was clear to me — and many others — that withdrawing all our forces would endanger the fragile stability” in Iraq. As a result, the Obama administration sought to keep 5,000 to 10,000 U.S. combat troops in Iraq, as Sullivan said in his statement.

But negotiations with Iraq broke down in October 2011 over the issue of whether U.S. troops would be shielded from criminal prosecution by Iraqi authorities. Panetta wrote that Maliki insisted that a new agreement providing immunity to U.S. forces “would have to be submitted to the Iraqi parliament for its approval,” which Panetta said “made reaching agreement very difficult.”

Very difficult, but Panetta wrote it was not impossible.

Panetta said the Obama White House did not press hard enough to reach a deal — a point that Bush makes in his speech. Panetta wrote that the U.S. “had leverage” and could have “threatened to withdraw reconstruction aid” if Iraq didn’t agree to “some sort of continued U.S. military presence.”
Bush, Clinton Play Blame Game in Iraq

SO DUBYA INVADING ON FALSE PREMISES HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RISE OF ISIS RIGHT??? LOL

So Obuma GAVE UP, and didn't use the LEVERAGE he had, and THUS ISIS was created! Thanks for making it clear to everyone, what a FUCK UP this Obumanation is!

What false pretenses did "W" have? The 17 BROKEN U.N. resolutions, The U.S. planes being shot at in the NO FLY zone, or the PAY OFF of Russia, Germany, France, and The U.N. Sec. General by Saddam with the "OIL FOR FOOD" program?

 

[JimBowie1958]

WASHINGTON -- Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said Thursday that the GOP's investigation into Planned Parenthood's use of federal funds hasn't turned up anything.

"Did I look at the finances and have a hearing specifically as to the revenue portion and how they spend? Yes. Was there any wrongdoing? I didn't find any," he said during a Judiciary Committee hearing on the family planning provider.

Chaffetz, a candidate for House speaker, grilled Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richardsduring a five-hour hearing last week. He questioned her salary, asked about the organization's expenses and revenues, and pressed Richards on why the group had revenue of $127 million last year if it's a nonprofit. (Nonprofits put their revenues back into their programs.)

But after all that, he concluded that Planned Parenthood isn't doing anything sketchy with its money. "Did we find any wrongdoing? The answer was no," Chaffetz said.

More: GOP Probe Into Planned Parenthood Funding Comes Up Empty

Gee, I wonder why Chaffetz is trying to act sane now - after what he put Cecile Richards through. Could his quest to be House Speaker have anything to do with his change of attitude?

Well, the guy is honest to a fault, apparently and this is going to hurt his chances of getting the Speakership.

But I respect his integrity for saying this to the public before the vote.

 

[Dad2three]

It must IF it's to implode...

And...

Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS | Truth...
www.truthrevolt.org/news/leon-panetta-obama...created-isisCached
... USA Today posted a video interview with Leon Panetta, former Obama CIA ... Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS . ... that the Obama-caused lack of ..
Which did more damage?...

HOROWITZ HUH? LMAOROG


PANETTA'S OPINIONS HUH?





Leon Panetta, who was Obama’s defense secretary from July 2011 to February 2013, wrote in his 2014 book, “Worthy Fights,” that as the deadline neared “it was clear to me — and many others — that withdrawing all our forces would endanger the fragile stability” in Iraq. As a result, the Obama administration sought to keep 5,000 to 10,000 U.S. combat troops in Iraq, as Sullivan said in his statement.

But negotiations with Iraq broke down in October 2011 over the issue of whether U.S. troops would be shielded from criminal prosecution by Iraqi authorities. Panetta wrote that Maliki insisted that a new agreement providing immunity to U.S. forces “would have to be submitted to the Iraqi parliament for its approval,” which Panetta said “made reaching agreement very difficult.”

Very difficult, but Panetta wrote it was not impossible.

Panetta said the Obama White House did not press hard enough to reach a deal — a point that Bush makes in his speech. Panetta wrote that the U.S. “had leverage” and could have “threatened to withdraw reconstruction aid” if Iraq didn’t agree to “some sort of continued U.S. military presence.”
Bush, Clinton Play Blame Game in Iraq

SO DUBYA INVADING ON FALSE PREMISES HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RISE OF ISIS RIGHT??? LOL

So Obuma GAVE UP, and didn't use the LEVERAGE he had, and THUS ISIS was created! Thanks for making it clear to everyone, what a FUCK UP this Obumanation is!

What false pretenses did "W" have? The 17 BROKEN U.N. resolutions, The U.S. planes being shot at in the NO FLY zone, or the PAY OFF of Russia, Germany, France, and The U.N. Sec. General by Saddam with the "OIL FOR FOOD" program?

You mean OPINION Panetta had?

Yeah, Dubya STILL went to Iraq on a case built on lies under false premises and created Isis, glad you agree Bubba

 

[JimBowie1958]

And yet Planned Parenthood does not need federal money to survive..

So why does the far left want to keep funding it?

Because the far right has failed to find any 'evidence' of wrongdoing.

Typical of most conservatives: seek to disadvantage an organization innocent of wrongdoing for purely subjective, partisan reasons.

The reprehensible right, indeed.

You pretend like they have a right to receive federal funding, moron, BUT THEY DO NOT have such a right.

Even absent any financial wrong doing, there is no valid reason to provide federal funding to an abortion mill. There are plenty of other womens health clinics to give funding to, funding a baby killing mill is totally unnecessary.

But of course its the killing of these innocent babies that gives you the thrill. Libtards like you just love evil of every variety, from Roman Polanski to Mao and Pl Pot.

The day the Earth sees the last of cretins like you, the angels will sing.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Finally got a picture of Vigilante. He is rather stupid.

 

[JimBowie1958]

And...

Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS | Truth...
www.truthrevolt.org/news/leon-panetta-obama...created-isisCached
... USA Today posted a video interview with Leon Panetta, former Obama CIA ... Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS . ... that the Obama-caused lack of ..
Which did more damage?...

HOROWITZ HUH? LMAOROG


PANETTA'S OPINIONS HUH?





Leon Panetta, who was Obama’s defense secretary from July 2011 to February 2013, wrote in his 2014 book, “Worthy Fights,” that as the deadline neared “it was clear to me — and many others — that withdrawing all our forces would endanger the fragile stability” in Iraq. As a result, the Obama administration sought to keep 5,000 to 10,000 U.S. combat troops in Iraq, as Sullivan said in his statement.

But negotiations with Iraq broke down in October 2011 over the issue of whether U.S. troops would be shielded from criminal prosecution by Iraqi authorities. Panetta wrote that Maliki insisted that a new agreement providing immunity to U.S. forces “would have to be submitted to the Iraqi parliament for its approval,” which Panetta said “made reaching agreement very difficult.”

Very difficult, but Panetta wrote it was not impossible.

Panetta said the Obama White House did not press hard enough to reach a deal — a point that Bush makes in his speech. Panetta wrote that the U.S. “had leverage” and could have “threatened to withdraw reconstruction aid” if Iraq didn’t agree to “some sort of continued U.S. military presence.”
Bush, Clinton Play Blame Game in Iraq

SO DUBYA INVADING ON FALSE PREMISES HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RISE OF ISIS RIGHT??? LOL

So Obuma GAVE UP, and didn't use the LEVERAGE he had, and THUS ISIS was created! Thanks for making it clear to everyone, what a FUCK UP this Obumanation is!

What false pretenses did "W" have? The 17 BROKEN U.N. resolutions, The U.S. planes being shot at in the NO FLY zone, or the PAY OFF of Russia, Germany, France, and The U.N. Sec. General by Saddam with the "OIL FOR FOOD" program?

You mean OPINION Panetta had?

Yeah, Dubya STILL went to Iraq on a case built on lies under false premises and created Isis, glad you agree Bubba

ISIs existed prior to Bush being President, so how could he have created them? He went back in time Like Dro Who?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Now you are saying ISIS existed before we invaded Iraq?

Ok.

Links.

 

[BluesLegend]

So its okay for Obama to throw a tantrum and threaten to shut down the government if he doesn't get everything is own way and Republicans should just cave on everything? Seriously I thought congress was an equal branch of government and in control of the purse strings? It sounds like they should just vote Obama speaker.

 

[kiwiman127]

Yes, ONE Republican's OPINION is FACT and shall be run up the poll along with Kevin McCarthy's OPINION! The JakeAss probably won't understand the similarity!

Oh, conventionally, you forgot to mention the 6 states who's investigations also found no wrong doings.
But considering the nothing but hyper-partison blogs you visit 24/7 wouldn't mention any real truth to their followers, it's no surprise you have no clue about reality.

ALL DemocRAT Attorney Generals! Isn't THAT interesting! We have PP doctors discussing the sale of parts, and bartering PRICE!!! And an independent forensic agency that says the video's were tampered with, unlike the DemocRAT donor forensic agency that said they were manipulated!

See, you have no concept of reality and your ignorance is so astounding, that I search for your posts, just so I can have a good chuckle.
Indiana has a Democratic AG? Florida has a Democratic AG?
Georgia has a Democratic AG?
South Dakota has a Democratic AG?
Who knew?
Good one Vagisil and WRONG again. Have you no shame of showing your ignorance and as this exchange again proves, you are clearly ignorant
from constantly visiting hypernon-partisan blogs.
Ignorance is bliss, you must one blissful guy!

 

[Dad2three]

And...

Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS | Truth...
www.truthrevolt.org/news/leon-panetta-obama...created-isisCached
... USA Today posted a video interview with Leon Panetta, former Obama CIA ... Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS . ... that the Obama-caused lack of ..
Which did more damage?...

HOROWITZ HUH? LMAOROG


PANETTA'S OPINIONS HUH?





Leon Panetta, who was Obama’s defense secretary from July 2011 to February 2013, wrote in his 2014 book, “Worthy Fights,” that as the deadline neared “it was clear to me — and many others — that withdrawing all our forces would endanger the fragile stability” in Iraq. As a result, the Obama administration sought to keep 5,000 to 10,000 U.S. combat troops in Iraq, as Sullivan said in his statement.

But negotiations with Iraq broke down in October 2011 over the issue of whether U.S. troops would be shielded from criminal prosecution by Iraqi authorities. Panetta wrote that Maliki insisted that a new agreement providing immunity to U.S. forces “would have to be submitted to the Iraqi parliament for its approval,” which Panetta said “made reaching agreement very difficult.”

Very difficult, but Panetta wrote it was not impossible.

Panetta said the Obama White House did not press hard enough to reach a deal — a point that Bush makes in his speech. Panetta wrote that the U.S. “had leverage” and could have “threatened to withdraw reconstruction aid” if Iraq didn’t agree to “some sort of continued U.S. military presence.”
Bush, Clinton Play Blame Game in Iraq

SO DUBYA INVADING ON FALSE PREMISES HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RISE OF ISIS RIGHT??? LOL

So Obuma GAVE UP, and didn't use the LEVERAGE he had, and THUS ISIS was created! Thanks for making it clear to everyone, what a FUCK UP this Obumanation is!

What false pretenses did "W" have? The 17 BROKEN U.N. resolutions, The U.S. planes being shot at in the NO FLY zone, or the PAY OFF of Russia, Germany, France, and The U.N. Sec. General by Saddam with the "OIL FOR FOOD" program?

You mean OPINION Panetta had?

Yeah, Dubya STILL went to Iraq on a case built on lies under false premises and created Isis, glad you agree Bubba

ISIs existed prior to Bush being President, so how could he have created them? He went back in time Like Dro Who?

Did the Bush Invasion of Iraq “Create” ISIS?

How to Create a Jihadi Insurgency

In the aftermath of the 2003 invasion and toppling of the Socialist Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein, the Bush White House sent a civilian official to take charge of post-invasion Iraq named Paul Bremer


Paul Bremer’s first step was Provisional Authority Order Number 1, issued on May 16th. Order Number 1 banned the Sunni-dominated Baathist Party which had run Iraq for decades. The previous temporary governor of Iraq, General Jay Garner, and his staff were appalled by the decision and warned Bremer “It was too deep.” One of Garner’s staff recalled saying “if you do this, you're going to drive 30,000 to 50,000 Ba'athists underground by nightfall. And the number's closer to 50,000 than it is 30,000."[2] The CIA Station Chief in Baghdad agreed with the number of 50,000 Baathists being driven underground and said “In six months you will regret this.”[3] By banning the Baathist Party, which had as many as 700,000 members who were used to being in power, Bremer turned this mass of powerful leaders and their dependents against the US occupation overnight.[4]

The majority of those to be disenfranchised with Order Number 1 were of course Sunni Muslims who had held the grip on power in the country for five centuries. This act had a negative impact on everyone from civil servants to the technocrats who ran government ministries. In some Sunni areas, such as Fallujah, there were no schoolteachers left after Order Number 1 was promulgated because most of them were fired as members of the Baath party. Far from helping to stabilize Iraq, this act led to unemployment and economic hardship for tens of thousands of Iraqis who had joined the Baath party often just to get a job.

Bremer’s second step compounded matters and might have been a play from a manual on how to ignite an insurgency. His second step was Order Number 2 which disbanded the Iraqi army on May 23rd 2003. This step went against the suggestions of a group of security experts at the National Defense University who had also warned against “top down de-Baathification.” This group had warned that the Iraqi military was one of the rare unifying institutions in Iraq that stressed national identity. According to this group of experts “To tear apart the army in the war’s aftermath could lead to the destruction of one of the only forces for unity within the society.”[5]

The Iraqi military, which consisted of 385,000 men in the army and 285,000 in the Ministry of Defense, was a much respected institution in Iraq and its disbandment shocked Iraqi society. The tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers who had taken their weapons home instead of fighting the American invasion felt betrayed when they were fired. This created a recruitment pool of armed, organized and disaffected soldiers. In one fell swoop these Iraqi soldiers lost their careers, their paychecks, their pensions and their source of pride. General Daniel Bolger would claim that de-Baathification “guaranteed Sunni outrage.”[6] One American colonel was to subsequently recount the almost simultaneous ramp up in violence following the firing of the Sunni-dominated army as follows: “Who knows how many [Iraqi army] folks got disgruntled and went to the other side? I will tell you this, 72 hours after the decision was made, the first major attack from the airport road took place. And I got two of my military police killed. And it's sort of been downhill from there.”[7]

Another Army colonel said “When Bremer did that, the insurgency went crazy. May was the turning point.”[8] The US military, CIA and State Department were all against these Neo-Con-inspired policies and one US general furiously said, “You guys just blindsided Centcom. We snatched defeat from the jaws of victory and created an insurgency.”[9] Another expert on Iraq stated “We made hundreds of thousands of people very angry at us and they happened to be the people in the country best acquainted with the use of arms.”[10]

Prior to this act, the US military had hoped to work with the Iraqi military to rebuild Iraq. Their aim was to provide thousands of Iraqi soldiers with jobs, pride and a stake in building a new Iraq. That option was now gone.

Combined together, Orders Number 1 and 2 essentially fired and disenfranchised/disempowered two million people who had weapons, respect and built-in communication networks

Did the Bush Invasion of Iraq “Create” ISIS?

 

[Dad2three]

Now you are saying ISIS existed before we invaded Iraq?

Ok.

Links.

They were created a few years before Dubya's invasion on false premises, but were tiny without followers until Dubya's reign of error

 

[JimBowie1958]

Now you are saying ISIS existed before we invaded Iraq?

Ok.

Links.

They were created a few years before Dubya's invasion on false premises, but were tiny without followers until Dubya's reign of error

Lol, Calling Bush control of Iraq a 'Reign of error' is to put the blame on the pacifying forces. It was Haliburton that was calling the shots there, methinks, as Bush left the country to be run by the mercenaries he put in charge there to deBaathicize the country.

Why do you libtards have to twist everything to blame Bush? That it happened on Bushes watch is about the full extent of his blame worthiness.

And you admit that Bush did not create ISIS, so what's you point now that I disagreed with? That Bush was a dick? I readily admit that.

 

[JimBowie1958]

And...

Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS | Truth...
www.truthrevolt.org/news/leon-panetta-obama...created-isisCached
... USA Today posted a video interview with Leon Panetta, former Obama CIA ... Leon Panetta: Obama Policies Created ISIS . ... that the Obama-caused lack of ..
Which did more damage?...

HOROWITZ HUH? LMAOROG


PANETTA'S OPINIONS HUH?





Leon Panetta, who was Obama’s defense secretary from July 2011 to February 2013, wrote in his 2014 book, “Worthy Fights,” that as the deadline neared “it was clear to me — and many others — that withdrawing all our forces would endanger the fragile stability” in Iraq. As a result, the Obama administration sought to keep 5,000 to 10,000 U.S. combat troops in Iraq, as Sullivan said in his statement.

But negotiations with Iraq broke down in October 2011 over the issue of whether U.S. troops would be shielded from criminal prosecution by Iraqi authorities. Panetta wrote that Maliki insisted that a new agreement providing immunity to U.S. forces “would have to be submitted to the Iraqi parliament for its approval,” which Panetta said “made reaching agreement very difficult.”

Very difficult, but Panetta wrote it was not impossible.

Panetta said the Obama White House did not press hard enough to reach a deal — a point that Bush makes in his speech. Panetta wrote that the U.S. “had leverage” and could have “threatened to withdraw reconstruction aid” if Iraq didn’t agree to “some sort of continued U.S. military presence.”
Bush, Clinton Play Blame Game in Iraq

SO DUBYA INVADING ON FALSE PREMISES HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RISE OF ISIS RIGHT??? LOL

So Obuma GAVE UP, and didn't use the LEVERAGE he had, and THUS ISIS was created! Thanks for making it clear to everyone, what a FUCK UP this Obumanation is!

What false pretenses did "W" have? The 17 BROKEN U.N. resolutions, The U.S. planes being shot at in the NO FLY zone, or the PAY OFF of Russia, Germany, France, and The U.N. Sec. General by Saddam with the "OIL FOR FOOD" program?

You mean OPINION Panetta had?

Yeah, Dubya STILL went to Iraq on a case built on lies under false premises and created Isis, glad you agree Bubba

ISIs existed prior to Bush being President, so how could he have created them? He went back in time Like Dro Who?

Did the Bush Invasion of Iraq “Create” ISIS?

How to Create a Jihadi Insurgency

In the aftermath of the 2003 invasion and toppling of the Socialist Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein, the Bush White House sent a civilian official to take charge of post-invasion Iraq named Paul Bremer


Paul Bremer’s first step was Provisional Authority Order Number 1, issued on May 16th. Order Number 1 banned the Sunni-dominated Baathist Party which had run Iraq for decades. The previous temporary governor of Iraq, General Jay Garner, and his staff were appalled by the decision and warned Bremer “It was too deep.” One of Garner’s staff recalled saying “if you do this, you're going to drive 30,000 to 50,000 Ba'athists underground by nightfall. And the number's closer to 50,000 than it is 30,000."[2] The CIA Station Chief in Baghdad agreed with the number of 50,000 Baathists being driven underground and said “In six months you will regret this.”[3] By banning the Baathist Party, which had as many as 700,000 members who were used to being in power, Bremer turned this mass of powerful leaders and their dependents against the US occupation overnight.[4]

The majority of those to be disenfranchised with Order Number 1 were of course Sunni Muslims who had held the grip on power in the country for five centuries. This act had a negative impact on everyone from civil servants to the technocrats who ran government ministries. In some Sunni areas, such as Fallujah, there were no schoolteachers left after Order Number 1 was promulgated because most of them were fired as members of the Baath party. Far from helping to stabilize Iraq, this act led to unemployment and economic hardship for tens of thousands of Iraqis who had joined the Baath party often just to get a job.

Bremer’s second step compounded matters and might have been a play from a manual on how to ignite an insurgency. His second step was Order Number 2 which disbanded the Iraqi army on May 23rd 2003. This step went against the suggestions of a group of security experts at the National Defense University who had also warned against “top down de-Baathification.” This group had warned that the Iraqi military was one of the rare unifying institutions in Iraq that stressed national identity. According to this group of experts “To tear apart the army in the war’s aftermath could lead to the destruction of one of the only forces for unity within the society.”[5]

The Iraqi military, which consisted of 385,000 men in the army and 285,000 in the Ministry of Defense, was a much respected institution in Iraq and its disbandment shocked Iraqi society. The tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers who had taken their weapons home instead of fighting the American invasion felt betrayed when they were fired. This created a recruitment pool of armed, organized and disaffected soldiers. In one fell swoop these Iraqi soldiers lost their careers, their paychecks, their pensions and their source of pride. General Daniel Bolger would claim that de-Baathification “guaranteed Sunni outrage.”[6] One American colonel was to subsequently recount the almost simultaneous ramp up in violence following the firing of the Sunni-dominated army as follows: “Who knows how many [Iraqi army] folks got disgruntled and went to the other side? I will tell you this, 72 hours after the decision was made, the first major attack from the airport road took place. And I got two of my military police killed. And it's sort of been downhill from there.”[7]

Another Army colonel said “When Bremer did that, the insurgency went crazy. May was the turning point.”[8] The US military, CIA and State Department were all against these Neo-Con-inspired policies and one US general furiously said, “You guys just blindsided Centcom. We snatched defeat from the jaws of victory and created an insurgency.”[9] Another expert on Iraq stated “We made hundreds of thousands of people very angry at us and they happened to be the people in the country best acquainted with the use of arms.”[10]

Prior to this act, the US military had hoped to work with the Iraqi military to rebuild Iraq. Their aim was to provide thousands of Iraqi soldiers with jobs, pride and a stake in building a new Iraq. That option was now gone.

Combined together, Orders Number 1 and 2 essentially fired and disenfranchised/disempowered two million people who had weapons, respect and built-in communication networks

Did the Bush Invasion of Iraq “Create” ISIS?

Yes, Bush created an environment that would likely spawn an insurrection, as there was no opposite side left to inforce a surrender or to surrender in the first place. So the fighting was never ordered to be stopped from the Iraqi side, an important point to the surrendering process.

You concede the point that Bush did not actually create ISIS in your following post, but just to be specific, this is from Wikipedia: "The group originated as Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad in 1999, which pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda in 2004."

So glad you now realize that Bush did not create ISIS so you will stop telling that lie now, I guess, no?

Obviously it will be 'no' as you libtards lie, lie, and lie some more whenever it damned well pleases you.

 

[Vigilante]

Now you are saying ISIS existed before we invaded Iraq?

Ok.

Links.

They were created a few years before Dubya's invasion on false premises, but were tiny without followers until Dubya's reign of error

Lol, Calling Bush control of Iraq a 'Reign of error' is to put the blame on the pacifying forces. It was Haliburton that was calling the shots there, methinks, as Bush left the country to be run by the mercenaries he put in charge there to deBaathicize the country.

Why do you libtards have to twist everything to blame Bush? That I happened on Bushes watch is about the full extent of his blame worthiness.

And you admit that Bush did not create ISIS, so what's you point now that I disagreed with? That Bush was a dick? I readily admit that.

The evil BOOOOSH gave the Iraqi the first time they were allowed to actually VOTE!

 

[JimBowie1958]

Now you are saying ISIS existed before we invaded Iraq?

Ok.

Links.

They were created a few years before Dubya's invasion on false premises, but were tiny without followers until Dubya's reign of error

Lol, Calling Bush control of Iraq a 'Reign of error' is to put the blame on the pacifying forces. It was Haliburton that was calling the shots there, methinks, as Bush left the country to be run by the mercenaries he put in charge there to deBaathicize the country.

Why do you libtards have to twist everything to blame Bush? That I happened on Bushes watch is about the full extent of his blame worthiness.

And you admit that Bush did not create ISIS, so what's you point now that I disagreed with? That Bush was a dick? I readily admit that.

The evil BOOOOSH gave the Iraqi the first time they were allowed to actually VOTE!

Yeah, libtards don't like voting unless they know it will give them a win beforehand. They much prefer the peacefulness of a Baathist dictatorship. OR a Castro dictatorship. Or a Stalinist dictatorship....etc

 

[JakeStarkey]

Now you are saying ISIS existed before we invaded Iraq?

Ok.

Links.

They were created a few years before Dubya's invasion on false premises, but were tiny without followers until Dubya's reign of error

Lol, Calling Bush control of Iraq a 'Reign of error' is to put the blame on the pacifying forces. It was Haliburton that was calling the shots there, methinks, as Bush left the country to be run by the mercenaries he put in charge there to deBaathicize the country.

Why do you libtards have to twist everything to blame Bush? That I happened on Bushes watch is about the full extent of his blame worthiness.

And you admit that Bush did not create ISIS, so what's you point now that I disagreed with? That Bush was a dick? I readily admit that.

The evil BOOOOSH gave the Iraqi the first time they were allowed to actually VOTE!

And how did that turn out? About as effectively as did the Southern states voting to leave the Union permanently.