Under Obama the middle east is a COMPLETE DISASTER

[HUGGY]

That is a fact and it can not be denied. Bush was bad, Obama is horrendous.

Has there been a time since the Crusades that the Middle East hasn't been a complete disaster?

Going in there to teach them "sand *******" a lesson has been a much repeated mistake over the last 2000 years.

Thankfully we have a president that does not keep making the same mistakes over and over.

We just don't have the resources any more to keep up this crazy American adventurism.

 

[jan]

We just don't have the resources any more to keep up this crazy American adventurism.

No...we don't. Shoot, I don't know of any country these days who has the financial resources to sustain these wars over in the Middle East. The banks are going broke! Just yesterday I read that the Bank of England probably doesn't have enough cash to remain solvent. Who's gonna prop them up when they are on the verge?

Bottom line is we just can't keep throwing cash away to fight senseless wars when it's hard enough these days to make our National interest payments to other nations! Crazy stuff!

What ever happened to living within a budget?

 

[Stephanie]

Obama on Foreign Policy, worse than Jimma Carter...

But Obama seems to be enjoying it

we better get prepared here at home and over seas...we already saw a beginning with the 9/11 attacks against us that got American citizens killed

 

[JoeB131]

That is a fact and it can not be denied. Bush was bad, Obama is horrendous.

Has there been a time since the Crusades that the Middle East hasn't been a complete disaster?

Going in there to teach them "sand *******" a lesson has been a much repeated mistake over the last 2000 years.

Thankfully we have a president that does not keep making the same mistakes over and over.

We just don't have the resources any more to keep up this crazy American adventurism.

Meeeeh, not so much.

Obama has shown he has just a much of propensity to stick our dicks in the Hornet's nest as his precedessors. Libya for instance.

 

[candycorn]

Pull our troops out. Watch sand turn into glass.

So pulling our troops out of Afghanistan will make everything better in Syria, Jordan, Gaza, Lebanon, Libya, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Oman, etc...?

Are you just making asinine posts by habit or are you working hard at it?

Oh I'm an ass but my posts reflect reality. Yes, pull our fucking troops out. Obama promised too but I understand as an Obama supporter you have to pretend that never happened.

Yes, you are an ass. The Middle East will always be a mess. Pulling troops out of Afghanistan (which he is doing by the way) will contribute as much to regional stability as fumigating your trailer would increase the Chief's chances of winning a 2nd game. I totally support your plank on this...there is no "win" there. But one has zero to do with the other.

 

[Jroc]

chickens coming home to roost...

who pushed elections in gaza?

who destabilized the middle east by getting rid of the one element that countered iran?

who got rid of a relatively secular regime in iraq to get a radical religious regime entrenched?

who made israel back down against hezbollah?

You have a point about the Iraq war but the rest is bullshit.

the rest is true.

and the iraq war led to everything else.

when daddy bush was running Gulf I, his state department told him not to go to Baghdad.. .that it would destabilize the country and everything would be FUBAR. daddy bush, being smarter than his son, listened to his state department.

you know what his son did... and what the result was... EXACTLY what the state dept said it would be.

that destabilization led to where we are,,,,

forcing elections in Gaza left us with hamas...

making israel stop going after hezbollah made israel look beatable for the first time...

you might not like those things.. but they are what they are.

The Gaza elections were a mistake, I said it at the time so were the elections in Egypt. They both should have been postponed until the opposition had time to organize, although you’re seeming fondness for Saddam Hussein heartwarming. The hundreds of thousands he massacred would probably not agree


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FQVUZMyoss]Halabja: Iraqi Genocide Against Kurd - YouTube[/ame]

"Israel should have been allowed to respond to scuds in the first Gulf war" your earlier statement, also stupid as there was no need, only an idiot would think differently

If only.....

Jimi Carter would have not supported the Iran revolution...If only

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH8Cd44buZ4]Iranian Revolution 1979 - YouTube[/ame]

if only Clinton's "peace Talks" would have succeeded in giving away half of Israel there would be peace...if only

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c0BfTghUNo]Camp David 2000 Clinton w/ Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Chairman Yasir Arafat - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xddAUHvuSfI]Hillary Clinton kisses Mrs Arafat after Terrorist Speech - YouTube[/ame]

If only Clinton wold have killed Bin-Laden when he had the chance..If only
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asw8fhpz0wA]PATH TO 9-11: The scene they didn't want you to see - YouTube[/ame]


See how we can play this game? I do believe you hate Bush more than you hate the terrorist who slit the throats of babies in the middle of the night… You’re pathetic

 

[JoeB131]

Hey, JRoc, the Reagan Administration had no problem with Saddam when he was slaughtering the Kurds.

Daddy Bush just got upset when he took the Emir's Oil Fields after April Glaspie told him he could.

 

[Jroc]

Hey, JRoc, the Reagan Administration had no problem with Saddam when he was slaughtering the Kurds.

Daddy Bush just got upset when he took the Emir's Oil Fields after April Glaspie told him he could.

Neither does Jillian I guess Bush did

 

[JoeB131]

Hey, JRoc, the Reagan Administration had no problem with Saddam when he was slaughtering the Kurds.

Daddy Bush just got upset when he took the Emir's Oil Fields after April Glaspie told him he could.

Neither does Jillian I guess Bush did

Bush didn't give a fuck about the Kurds. The Kurds really got fucked again thanks to pappy Bush. He called on them to rise up against Saddam with the promise of support, and when they did, Saddam slaughtered the shit out of them.

Oh, wait. We'll do a no-fly zone. That ought to do it.

 

[Desperado]

What the Fuck? Under Obama the middle east is a COMPLETE DISASTER
Where have you been? Under any Administration the middle east has always been COMPLETE DISASTER
More news for you, the middle east will always be COMPLETE DISASTER by US standards.
Nothing we can do to change that, so we shouldn't even try.

 

[candycorn]

What the Fuck? Under Obama the middle east is a COMPLETE DISASTER
Where have you been? Under any Administration the middle east has always been COMPLETE DISASTER
More news for you, the middle east will always be COMPLETE DISASTER by US standards.
Nothing we can do to change that, so we shouldn't even try.

I think that is what Grumps is saying. The problems with him is that he always has to take a swipe at Obama. Blaming Obama for the crisis in the Middle East is much like blaming Pasteur for the steroids in pro sports.

 

[BlindBoo]

https://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-159.html

If the chief natural resource of the Middle East were bananas, the region would not have attracted the attention of U.S. policymakers as it has for decades. Americans became interested in the oil riches of the region in the 1920s, and two U.S. companies, Standard Oil of California and Texaco, won the first concession to explore for oil in Saudi Arabia in the 1930s. They discovered oil there in 1938, just after Standard Oil of California found it in Bahrain. The same year Gulf Oil (along with its British partner Anglo-Persian Oil) found oil in Kuwait. During and after World War II, the region became a primary object of U.S. foreign policy. It was then that policymakers realized that the Middle East was "a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history."(4)

Subsequently, as a result of cooperation between the U.S. government and several American oil companies, the United States replaced Great Britain as the chief Western power in the region.(5) In Iran and Saudi Arabia, American gains were British (and French) losses.(6) Originally, the dominant American oil interests had had limited access to Iraqi oil only (through the Iraq Petroleum Company, under the 1928 Red Line Agreement). In 1946, however, Standard Oil of New Jersey and Mobil Oil Corp., seeing the irresistible opportunities in Saudi Arabia, had the agreement voided.(7) When the awakening countries of the Middle East asserted control over their oil resources, the United States found ways to protect its access to the oil. Nearly everything the United States has done in the Middle East can be understood as contributing to the protection of its long-term access to Middle Eastern oil and, through that control, Washington's claim to world leadership. The U.S. build-up of Israel and Iran as powerful gendarmeries beholden to the United States, and U.S. aid given to "moderate," pro-Western Arab regimes, such as those in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Jordan, were intended to keep the region in friendly hands. That was always the meaning of the term "regional stability."(8)

What threatened American access to the region? Although much was made of the Soviet threat, there is reason to believe that throughout the cold war Washington did not take it seriously in the Middle East. The primary perceived threat was indigenous--namely, Arab and Iranian nationalism, which appears to have been the dominant concern from 1945 on.

https://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-159.html

 

[Jroc]

Hey, JRoc, the Reagan Administration had no problem with Saddam when he was slaughtering the Kurds.

Daddy Bush just got upset when he took the Emir's Oil Fields after April Glaspie told him he could.

Neither does Jillian I guess Bush did

Bush didn't give a fuck about the Kurds. The Kurds really got fucked again thanks to pappy Bush. He called on them to rise up against Saddam with the promise of support, and when they did, Saddam slaughtered the shit out of them.

Oh, wait. We'll do a no-fly zone. That ought to do it.

W. Bush idiot

 

[Jroc]

What the Fuck? Under Obama the middle east is a COMPLETE DISASTER
Where have you been? Under any Administration the middle east has always been COMPLETE DISASTER
More news for you, the middle east will always be COMPLETE DISASTER by US standards.
Nothing we can do to change that, so we shouldn't even try.

muslims and " disaster" seem to be synonymous

 

[nodoginnafight]

since when is self-determination a disaster?

 

[Oldguy]

since when is self-determination a disaster?

It's not...unless the right can attach Obama's name to it. Then, it's The End Of The World!

 

[Vast LWC]

I'm not sure if one can call the outbreak of Democracy across large swaths of the Muslim world to be a "complete disaster".

The overthrow of brutal dictators, which is what's been happening in Egypt, Libya, and perhaps now Syria, is rarely a peaceful process, especially in nations that haven't known Democracy in decades, or ever for that matter. And this appears to be no exception.

So, we can call it a big mess, I imagine, but certainly not a "complete disaster", especially since it's all happening without loss of American lives.

As far as Iran is concerned, no war with them yet, so I guess that's quite a bit better of a position than we'd be in with his Republican counterparts.

Though I will give you the fact that apparently Israel is just intentionally trying to start as much trouble as possible at the moment. Seems Netenyahu is just spoiling for a fight with somebody. I guess it's been too long since Israel's last war.

 

[Vast LWC]

Examples for comparison of similar "disasters" when the people of a region attempt to form republic-type governments by overthrowing oppressive regimes:

The American Revolution: 7 years of war, 2 different constitutions, many acts of what would today be called "Terrorism".
The French Revolution: A decade of various bloody battles, purges and insurrections, ending with Napoleon as effective dictator.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Bullshit. The Middle East has never been under any US President. We have meddled there at our own risk. And we have lost far fewer people in the Middle East during our Presidents time in office than we lost during Bush's.

all very true.we may have not lost as many people under Obama as we have as Bush,not sure about that but Obama in just his first two years in office launched more drone attacks against innocent women and children of pakistan and afghanistan than Bush did in his enitre 8 years in office.This is what Bush started and Obama has esculated.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/12/photos-pakistan-drone-war/?pid=999

 

[Vast LWC]

all very true.we may have not lost as many people under Obama as we have as Bush,not sure about that but Obama in just his first two years in office launched more drone attacks against innocent women and children of pakistan and afghanistan than Bush did in his enitre 8 years in office.This is what Bush started and Obama has esculated.

Rare Photographs Show Ground Zero of the Drone War | Danger Room | Wired.com

Whereas Bush simply bombed Iraqi cities in the Iraq war...

I guess you consider that to have been a more "humane" approach?