Trump: Middle East Would Be Better Off With Saddam, Gaddafi

[NYcarbineer]

He's right insofar as what has happened after obama. Iraq was stable until obama pulled the rug out and wasted the lives and limbs of all of those soldiers of ours.
Obama is a creepy killer.

Now that is bizarrely revisionist history.

What Trump was saying is directly attributable to the invasion of Iraq under George Bush. ISIS formed during Bush's presidency, and the vast majority of U.S. soldiers who died in Iraq died while Bush was their commander in chief.

Senator Obama ran on a platform of extricating American troops from Iraq- and he followed through on his campaign promise. The government of Iraq wanted U.S. troops out and demanded that American troops be subject to Iraqi law if they stayed. Iraq was indeed stable- and lost that stability due to the corrupt and partisan Iraqi government.

The invasion of Iraq and the destruction of Libya were the products of incredible American ignorance .. and the people of those nations and region paid the bill.

The invasion of Iraq is on us.

...s.

You know, Saddam could have taken steps to ease tensions with the most powerful nation in the world.

Hell, France could have NOT undermined sanctions, leading to their collapse and the need for a new policy.


But predictably, you single out the US for blame.

We were to blame. The Iraq war was not necessary, and unnecessary wars are inexcusable atrocities.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump supported both actions, Iraq and Libya.

He is now lying about both in typical, pathological fashion.

Carb to have changed positions over the years as we have become more informed is not lying. I was gung ho for us to go into Afghanistan and eradicate the Taliban and start nation building.

I've had my mea culpa moment a few years back when I realized that our NATO forces were allowing men to continue to have their bacha bazi as respecting their "culture" among other issues and that our governments were allowing the leaders to literally steal millions of dollars instead of bettering the Afghan people.

We've not made things better. We've made them worse. To realize one's mistakes is not lying. It's coming to terms with the facts and realizing that the former opinion was freaking out to lunch.

To change positions just because you're a partisan sheep who's trying to follow your flip flopping leader is of no merit.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm guessing that if you put an unlabeled map of Africa in front of Trump,

he couldn't find Libya.

 

[g5000]

More and more people are agreeing with Trump every day. Still think nobody's gonna vote for him?

It's true there are a lot of retards out there. No doubt about it.

Trump is making more shit up. He's saying Hussein was a great guy who killed terrorists, which is the exact opposite of the truth. Hussein was a sponsor of terror. He had terrorist training camps in Iraq.

It's unbelievable how many of you Chumps line up to drink Trump's piss when he is telling gigantic whoppers like that.

It is not a complete whopper- but Trump of course is broadly ignorant about the Middle East.

Saddam Hussein did sponsor terrorism- but in a very limited fashion and he kept it under his own control- what Saddam did was stamp out radical Islamists in Iraq. He wasn't killing 'terrorists'- he was killing anyone who could be a threat to his dictatorship- especially anyone who might be a radical Islamist.

Removing Saddam from power- and removing the entire infrastructure and army that Saddam had built up left a power vacuum that was exploited by Iran, allowed Iraq to become a rallying ground and training area for terrorists, and allowed ISIS to be created.

You have a funny definition of "limited fashion". Just in the four years prior to the 2003 invasion alone, he trained 8,000 terrorists in his camps at Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak.

That is literally more people than graduated from Harvard in the same period.

And Trump has the balls to say Iraq is the "Harvard of terrorism" now.

The man is seriously deluded.

Saddam Hussein didn't kill terrorists. He MADE them. And he was very good at it.

 

[Correll]

Says the man planning to vote for Iraqi War supporter Hillary Clinton.

Yes sadly trump is aweful on everything else.

Oh? REally? YOu support using Third World Labor to undermine US worker wages?

Because HIllary does and Trump does not.

Really? Trump uses third world labor. That is supporting moron.

We already discussed his crazy tariff ideas and you couldn't come up with any support. History says they are bad.

Trump usED third world labor.

HIs policy platform is about changing the rules to fight that.

HIllary is all about continuing the policy of allowing employers to use Third World Labor to undermine US wages.


There is nothing crazy about tariffs.

Unless you believe those same economists that predicted that Free Trade would make US industry more competitive and lead to a rebound in jobs and wages.

I believe history which shows they are bad. Take your steel tariff. It cost the US more manufacturing jobs than the steel industry employs. Bad idea. But if you have some support for them let's see it.

Your support for that claim was many years after the fact. And yet you used it, and ignored when I pointed that out originally.

Nation after nation has rebuilt themselves or built themselves on the vast wealth we have been fountaining all over the rest of the world, while our working class and middle class have been getting fucked, for generations now.


Somehow having a massive trade surplus benefited them while having a massive trade deficit greatly harmed US.

The natural conclusion is that if we reduce or reverse the trends in trade surplus/deficits, that we will reverse the trends for the working and middle class here.

 

[Correll]

He's right insofar as what has happened after obama. Iraq was stable until obama pulled the rug out and wasted the lives and limbs of all of those soldiers of ours.
Obama is a creepy killer.

Now that is bizarrely revisionist history.

What Trump was saying is directly attributable to the invasion of Iraq under George Bush. ISIS formed during Bush's presidency, and the vast majority of U.S. soldiers who died in Iraq died while Bush was their commander in chief.

Senator Obama ran on a platform of extricating American troops from Iraq- and he followed through on his campaign promise. The government of Iraq wanted U.S. troops out and demanded that American troops be subject to Iraqi law if they stayed. Iraq was indeed stable- and lost that stability due to the corrupt and partisan Iraqi government.

The invasion of Iraq and the destruction of Libya were the products of incredible American ignorance .. and the people of those nations and region paid the bill.

The invasion of Iraq is on us.

...s.

You know, Saddam could have taken steps to ease tensions with the most powerful nation in the world.

Hell, France could have NOT undermined sanctions, leading to their collapse and the need for a new policy.


But predictably, you single out the US for blame.

Last I checked we invaded Iraq- not Iraq invading us. Our invasion of Iraq was by choice.

And I say that as someone who was quite pleased when Saddam was executed- he was a foul putrid excuse for a human.

I hate to give credit to Trump for anything- but he is right regarding both Saddam and Qaddafi in that the Middle East would be more stable if they had stayed in power.

Again, like I said, kudos to you for your honestly in admitting that you agree with Trump on an issue.

That being said, my points from my previous post stands.

Saddam could have taken steps to ease tensions with the most powerful nation in the world.

Hell, France could have NOT undermined sanctions, leading to their collapse and the need for a new policy.


But predictably, you single out the US for blame.

 

[Correll]

Now that is bizarrely revisionist history.

What Trump was saying is directly attributable to the invasion of Iraq under George Bush. ISIS formed during Bush's presidency, and the vast majority of U.S. soldiers who died in Iraq died while Bush was their commander in chief.

Senator Obama ran on a platform of extricating American troops from Iraq- and he followed through on his campaign promise. The government of Iraq wanted U.S. troops out and demanded that American troops be subject to Iraqi law if they stayed. Iraq was indeed stable- and lost that stability due to the corrupt and partisan Iraqi government.

The invasion of Iraq and the destruction of Libya were the products of incredible American ignorance .. and the people of those nations and region paid the bill.

The invasion of Iraq is on us.

...s.

You know, Saddam could have taken steps to ease tensions with the most powerful nation in the world.

Hell, France could have NOT undermined sanctions, leading to their collapse and the need for a new policy.


But predictably, you single out the US for blame.

Last I checked we invaded Iraq- not Iraq invading us. Our invasion of Iraq was by choice.

And I say that as someone who was quite pleased when Saddam was executed- he was a foul putrid excuse for a human.

I hate to give credit to Trump for anything- but he is right regarding both Saddam and Qaddafi in that the Middle East would be more stable if they had stayed in power.

Dems have been saying that for years. Nice repubs are finally admitting they were wrong.

you just implied that you agree with Trump.

And yet, you are going to vote for the candidate that was part of the decision to go to war and kill Saddam AND gaddafi.

 

[Correll]

"It's not even a contest."

Donald Trump said Sunday that the Middle East would be more stable if Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and Libyan autocrat Muammar Gaddafi were still in power.

When asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he thought the region would be "safer" with Hussein and Gaddafi ruling Iraq and Libya, respectively, the real estate mogul and ersatz Republican presidential candidate replied, "It's not even a contest."

Trump reasoned that had the United States not forced Hussein out of power in Iraq, the Islamic State would not have come into existence.

More: Donald Trump: Middle East Would Be Better Off With Saddam, Gaddafi

Amen! I totally agree! Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool.

Hard to believe I agree with trump. Harder to believe repubs support him after years of them supporting those wars.

Says the man planning to vote for Iraqi War supporter Hillary Clinton.

Yes sadly trump is aweful on everything else.

Oh? REally? YOu support using Third World Labor to undermine US worker wages?

Because HIllary does and Trump does not.

Really?

Trump hires foreign workers for his Florida resorts- instead of American workers.

Doesn't seem like he is working for U.S. worker wages.

HIs policy platform is that he will.

Hillary is openly planning to maintain the status quo of using Third World Labor to undermine US wages.


If you are against that policy, you have a choice between someone who might reverse it (trump), and someone who will certainly NOT reverse it (hillary).

 

[Brain357]

Yes sadly trump is aweful on everything else.

Oh? REally? YOu support using Third World Labor to undermine US worker wages?

Because HIllary does and Trump does not.

Really? Trump uses third world labor. That is supporting moron.

We already discussed his crazy tariff ideas and you couldn't come up with any support. History says they are bad.

Trump usED third world labor.

HIs policy platform is about changing the rules to fight that.

HIllary is all about continuing the policy of allowing employers to use Third World Labor to undermine US wages.


There is nothing crazy about tariffs.

Unless you believe those same economists that predicted that Free Trade would make US industry more competitive and lead to a rebound in jobs and wages.

I believe history which shows they are bad. Take your steel tariff. It cost the US more manufacturing jobs than the steel industry employs. Bad idea. But if you have some support for them let's see it.

Your support for that claim was many years after the fact. And yet you used it, and ignored when I pointed that out originally.

Nation after nation has rebuilt themselves or built themselves on the vast wealth we have been fountaining all over the rest of the world, while our working class and middle class have been getting fucked, for generations now.


Somehow having a massive trade surplus benefited them while having a massive trade deficit greatly harmed US.

The natural conclusion is that if we reduce or reverse the trends in trade surplus/deficits, that we will reverse the trends for the working and middle class here.

Of course it was years after the fact. That is how you study the results of economic changes. How dumb are you?

Do you have any links supporting your crazy?

 

[Brain357]

Hard to believe I agree with trump. Harder to believe repubs support him after years of them supporting those wars.

Says the man planning to vote for Iraqi War supporter Hillary Clinton.

Yes sadly trump is aweful on everything else.

Oh? REally? YOu support using Third World Labor to undermine US worker wages?

Because HIllary does and Trump does not.

Really?

Trump hires foreign workers for his Florida resorts- instead of American workers.

Doesn't seem like he is working for U.S. worker wages.

HIs policy platform is that he will.

Hillary is openly planning to maintain the status quo of using Third World Labor to undermine US wages.


If you are against that policy, you have a choice between someone who might reverse it (trump), and someone who will certainly NOT reverse it (hillary).

If you want the government dictating wages a min wage increase is a much better option.

 

[Correll]

I'm guessing that if you put an unlabeled map of Africa in front of Trump,

he couldn't find Libya.

Says the man who agrees with Trump but will still vote for the woman who voted for War.

 

[Syriusly]

Oh? REally? YOu support using Third World Labor to undermine US worker wages?

Because HIllary does and Trump does not.

Really? Trump uses third world labor. That is supporting moron.

We already discussed his crazy tariff ideas and you couldn't come up with any support. History says they are bad.

Trump usED third world labor.

HIs policy platform is about changing the rules to fight that.

HIllary is all about continuing the policy of allowing employers to use Third World Labor to undermine US wages.


There is nothing crazy about tariffs.

Unless you believe those same economists that predicted that Free Trade would make US industry more competitive and lead to a rebound in jobs and wages.

I believe history which shows they are bad. Take your steel tariff. It cost the US more manufacturing jobs than the steel industry employs. Bad idea. But if you have some support for them let's see it.

Your support for that claim was many years after the fact. And yet you used it, and ignored when I pointed that out originally.

Nation after nation has rebuilt themselves or built themselves on the vast wealth we have been fountaining all over the rest of the world, while our working class and middle class have been getting fucked, for generations now.


Somehow having a massive trade surplus benefited them while having a massive trade deficit greatly harmed US.

The natural conclusion is that if we reduce or reverse the trends in trade surplus/deficits, that we will reverse the trends for the working and middle class here.

Of course it was years after the fact. That is how you study the results of economic changes. How dumb are you?

That question was answered long ago.

The answer is VERY

 

[Correll]

Oh? REally? YOu support using Third World Labor to undermine US worker wages?

Because HIllary does and Trump does not.

Really? Trump uses third world labor. That is supporting moron.

We already discussed his crazy tariff ideas and you couldn't come up with any support. History says they are bad.

Trump usED third world labor.

HIs policy platform is about changing the rules to fight that.

HIllary is all about continuing the policy of allowing employers to use Third World Labor to undermine US wages.


There is nothing crazy about tariffs.

Unless you believe those same economists that predicted that Free Trade would make US industry more competitive and lead to a rebound in jobs and wages.

I believe history which shows they are bad. Take your steel tariff. It cost the US more manufacturing jobs than the steel industry employs. Bad idea. But if you have some support for them let's see it.

Your support for that claim was many years after the fact. And yet you used it, and ignored when I pointed that out originally.

Nation after nation has rebuilt themselves or built themselves on the vast wealth we have been fountaining all over the rest of the world, while our working class and middle class have been getting fucked, for generations now.


Somehow having a massive trade surplus benefited them while having a massive trade deficit greatly harmed US.

The natural conclusion is that if we reduce or reverse the trends in trade surplus/deficits, that we will reverse the trends for the working and middle class here.

Of course it was years after the fact. That is how you study the results of economic changes. How dumb are you?

Do you have any links supporting your crazy?

THe link I posted showed that the steel companies in question survived and thus the jobs of those factories were saved.


A study, was it 7 years later? will be influenced by other factors that might not have anything to do with a certain policy.


BTW, calling me names is not actually supporting your argument. lt is just you being a dick.

FYI.

 

[Syriusly]

Hard to believe I agree with trump. Harder to believe repubs support him after years of them supporting those wars.

Says the man planning to vote for Iraqi War supporter Hillary Clinton.

Yes sadly trump is aweful on everything else.

Oh? REally? YOu support using Third World Labor to undermine US worker wages?

Because HIllary does and Trump does not.

Really?

Trump hires foreign workers for his Florida resorts- instead of American workers.

Doesn't seem like he is working for U.S. worker wages.

HIs policy platform is that he will.

Hillary is openly planning to maintain the status quo of using Third World Labor to undermine US wages.


If you are against that policy, you have a choice between someone who might reverse it (trump), and someone who will certainly NOT reverse it (hillary).

Trump's policy has been to hire third world labor for his own benefit.

Why do you believe his words, and not his actions?

 

[Correll]

Says the man planning to vote for Iraqi War supporter Hillary Clinton.

Yes sadly trump is aweful on everything else.

Oh? REally? YOu support using Third World Labor to undermine US worker wages?

Because HIllary does and Trump does not.

Really?

Trump hires foreign workers for his Florida resorts- instead of American workers.

Doesn't seem like he is working for U.S. worker wages.

HIs policy platform is that he will.

Hillary is openly planning to maintain the status quo of using Third World Labor to undermine US wages.


If you are against that policy, you have a choice between someone who might reverse it (trump), and someone who will certainly NOT reverse it (hillary).

If you want the government dictating wages a min wage increase is a much better option.

Crafting a Trade Policy to protect American jobs from unfair "competition" is hardly "dictating wages".

 

[Syriusly]

Now that is bizarrely revisionist history.

What Trump was saying is directly attributable to the invasion of Iraq under George Bush. ISIS formed during Bush's presidency, and the vast majority of U.S. soldiers who died in Iraq died while Bush was their commander in chief.

Senator Obama ran on a platform of extricating American troops from Iraq- and he followed through on his campaign promise. The government of Iraq wanted U.S. troops out and demanded that American troops be subject to Iraqi law if they stayed. Iraq was indeed stable- and lost that stability due to the corrupt and partisan Iraqi government.

The invasion of Iraq and the destruction of Libya were the products of incredible American ignorance .. and the people of those nations and region paid the bill.

The invasion of Iraq is on us.

...s.

You know, Saddam could have taken steps to ease tensions with the most powerful nation in the world.

Hell, France could have NOT undermined sanctions, leading to their collapse and the need for a new policy.


But predictably, you single out the US for blame.

Last I checked we invaded Iraq- not Iraq invading us. Our invasion of Iraq was by choice.

And I say that as someone who was quite pleased when Saddam was executed- he was a foul putrid excuse for a human.

I hate to give credit to Trump for anything- but he is right regarding both Saddam and Qaddafi in that the Middle East would be more stable if they had stayed in power.

Again, like I said, kudos to you for your honestly in admitting that you agree with Trump on an issue.

That being said, my points from my previous post stands.

Saddam could have taken steps to ease tensions with the most powerful nation in the world.

Hell, France could have NOT undermined sanctions, leading to their collapse and the need for a new policy.


But predictably, you single out the US for blame.

The U.S. is to blame for attacking Iraq.

Predictably you try to blame Saddam for the actions taken by the United States, led by George Bush.

But as Trump pointed out- we- and the United States would have been better off leaving Saddam in power.

 

[Syriusly]

Yes sadly trump is aweful on everything else.

Oh? REally? YOu support using Third World Labor to undermine US worker wages?

Because HIllary does and Trump does not.

Really?

Trump hires foreign workers for his Florida resorts- instead of American workers.

Doesn't seem like he is working for U.S. worker wages.

HIs policy platform is that he will.

Hillary is openly planning to maintain the status quo of using Third World Labor to undermine US wages.


If you are against that policy, you have a choice between someone who might reverse it (trump), and someone who will certainly NOT reverse it (hillary).

If you want the government dictating wages a min wage increase is a much better option.

Crafting a Trade Policy to protect American jobs from unfair "competition" is hardly "dictating wages".

What is 'fair' competition anyway?

 

[Clintonista]

I really thought Nancy Pelosi was going to impeach Bush, which personally I think would have been a wonderful thing. He got us into the war with lies.

 

[Correll]

"It's not even a contest."

Donald Trump said Sunday that the Middle East would be more stable if Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and Libyan autocrat Muammar Gaddafi were still in power.

When asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he thought the region would be "safer" with Hussein and Gaddafi ruling Iraq and Libya, respectively, the real estate mogul and ersatz Republican presidential candidate replied, "It's not even a contest."

Trump reasoned that had the United States not forced Hussein out of power in Iraq, the Islamic State would not have come into existence.

More: Donald Trump: Middle East Would Be Better Off With Saddam, Gaddafi

Amen! I totally agree! Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool.

I hate to agree with Trump about anything- but he is right- the world in general- and the Middle East in particular- would be better off if Saddam Hussein had been left in power.

Kudos to you for having the intellectual honestly to admit that you agree with Trump on an issue.


But, you're still planning on voting for the candidate that was part of the decision to invade.

I am voting for the candidate who voted in favor of invading like the majority of both parties. I disagreed with her then and I still disagree. But she is the better of the two candidates.

Trump of course couldn't vote because he didn't care enough at the time to participate in politics.

That's a pretty big mistake to give a pass on.

How many people have to die before you consider it a big enough mistake to be relevant? 20k? 150k? 500k? a solid million?



And yes. Trump gets a NA, IE not applicable on this one.

 

[Correll]

Yes sadly trump is aweful on everything else.

Oh? REally? YOu support using Third World Labor to undermine US worker wages?

Because HIllary does and Trump does not.

Really? Trump uses third world labor. That is supporting moron.

We already discussed his crazy tariff ideas and you couldn't come up with any support. History says they are bad.

Trump usED third world labor.

HIs policy platform is about changing the rules to fight that.

HIllary is all about continuing the policy of allowing employers to use Third World Labor to undermine US wages.


There is nothing crazy about tariffs.

Unless you believe those same economists that predicted that Free Trade would make US industry more competitive and lead to a rebound in jobs and wages.

I believe history which shows they are bad. Take your steel tariff. It cost the US more manufacturing jobs than the steel industry employs. Bad idea. But if you have some support for them let's see it.

Depends on what you want tariffs to achieve.

For a large portion of American history tariff's paid for the majority of the Federal governments expenses. The problem with tariff's is that they can be counterproductive- yours is an example. They also tend to be retaliatory and political.

What Trump is proposing would result in a huge tariff war, and an inevitable worldwide Depression.

Really?

But, if the tariffs won't reduce imports, won't bring back jobs, and will just increase costs to US consumers, and/or even make US manufactures LESS competitive,


then why would our trading partners be so offended that it turns into a Trade War?