Would Iran be in it's position to dominate the ME if the US had not attacked Iraq?

[Stephanie]

I would bet this Op wasn't even born yet during Carter. They'd have to find another excuse for Iran then.

man oh man does anyone in the Democrat base think outside a DNC talking point?

 

[Steinlight]

Obiw11053767

And he wants to let them have nukes, ....

Find one quote or policy by Obama that would support your wild fantasy.

And what position is Iran in today? This is who caused it:

President Bush Meets with His Eminence Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, Leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq

President George W. Bush welcomes Sayyed Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, Leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, to the White House Monday, Dec. 4, 2006. Said the President, "I appreciate so very much His Eminence's commitment to a unity government. I assured him the United States supports his work and the work of the Prime Minister to unify the country." White House photo by Eric Draper

The guy with the idiot grin photographed on the left brought Sayyed Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, (Leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq) in from Tehran including Hakim's Quds trained militias known as the Badr Brigade. They came with tanks to Baghdad right behind the American ones. The a Badr Brigades are part of the Shiite ground force that has the Daesh terrorist scum surrounded in Tikrit - but now needs the US fighter pilots again to do some air strikes for them.

Whom are you trying to fool with your lack of knowledge about Iraq Iran and two US Presidents?

I have heard James Baker is in the more pro-Iranian camp and is more hostile to Zionist control of US foreign policy.

One of the only upsides I could potentially see from a Jeb Bush administration is mitigating some of the fracture created by Obama with the Shias(In Iraq, Syria, and Yemen to name a few), and bring in Iran as more of a partner to fight ISIS.

Right now, Obama is aiding Saudi Arabia in their attack on the pro-Iranian Houthis, who fight Al Qaeda in Yemen. So Obama, is more or less aiding those who are on the front lines fighting Al Qaeda. The US should be arming the Houthis in their fight against Al Qaeda in Yemen, which is one of the greatest threats to the US at the moment, and condemning Saudi Arabia's aggression in Yemen.

 

[bluedog1]

That's right. The US changed the balance of power. The US meddled. And look what happened. I'll bet I get very few honest answers from the right on this one!

No.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

DT 11054188

There is a way to win the war and not use US troops.

That's not what right-wingers were saying just a few months ago. Have you given up on asking Americans to die on the ground fighting side by side with the Badr Brigade - the militia that came with the dude that Bush is holding hands with in the photo below:

President Bush Meets with His Eminence Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, Leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq

President George W. Bush welcomes Sayyed Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, Leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, to the White House Monday, Dec. 4, 2006. Said the President, "I appreciate so very much His Eminence's commitment to a unity government. I assured him the United States supports his work and the work of the Prime Minister to unify the country." White House photo by Eric Draper

Your judgment that Republicans are better at fighting terrorist is not worth much is it? Is the goon Cruz or Jeb Bush going to think up something better?

The idiot grinner photographed above set a very low standard for Republican ability to defeat terrorists.

 

[Steinlight]

Eat 11054188

There is a way to win the war and not use US troops.

That's not what right-wingers were saying just a few months ago. Have you given up on asking Americans to die on the ground fighting with side by side with the Badr Brigade - the militia that came with the dude Bush is holding hands with in he photo below:

President Bush Meets with His Eminence Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, Leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq

President George W. Bush welcomes Sayyed Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, Leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, to the White House Monday, Dec. 4, 2006. Said the President, "I appreciate so very much His Eminence's commitment to a unity government. I assured him the United States supports his work and the work of the Prime Minister to unify the country." White House photo by Eric Draper

Your judgment that Republicans are better at fighting terrorist is not worth much is it? Is the goon Cruz or Jeb Bush going to think up something better?

The idiot grinner photographed above set a very low standard for Republican ability to defeat terrorists.

What the fuck does "Eat 11054188" mean?

 

[deltex1]

Eat 11054188

There is a way to win the war and not use US troops.

That's not what right-wingers were saying just a few months ago. Have you given up on asking Americans to die on the ground fighting with side by side with the Badr Brigade - the militia that came with the dude Bush is holding hands with in he photo below:

President Bush Meets with His Eminence Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, Leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq

President George W. Bush welcomes Sayyed Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, Leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, to the White House Monday, Dec. 4, 2006. Said the President, "I appreciate so very much His Eminence's commitment to a unity government. I assured him the United States supports his work and the work of the Prime Minister to unify the country." White House photo by Eric Draper

Your judgment that Republicans are better at fighting terrorist is not worth much is it? Is the goon Cruz or Jeb Bush going to think up something better?

The idiot grinner photographed above set a very low standard for Republican ability to defeat terrorists.

Stop with the lying. Stop the cherry picking. Stop with the editing. Get a new act foo...or I'll sick Spin on your ass.

 

[Obiwan]

Stein light
I don't know what it means either. Maybe a special Lib diet, like Monkey Chow?

 

[deltex1]

Foo has even keeping files for a decade...he eventually will write a book, titled..."how did I get it so wrong"

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Stop with the lying. Stop the cherry picking.

Tell us what you think is a lie. That photo is from the Bush White House archives. You have no argument against the OP. All you can do is call people liars with no explanation as to why? You mean Sptlikker the surrender monkey on Afghanistan as soon as Obama started his first term. That Spitlikker? He would show his face after siding with Code Pink by March 2009.

 

[deltex1]

Stop with the lying. Stop the cherry picking.

Tell us what you think is a lie. That photo is from the Bush White House archives. You have no argument against the OP. All you can do is call people liars with no explanation as to why? You mean Sptlikker the surrender monkey on Afghanistan as soon as Obama started his first term. That Spitlikker? He would show his face after siding with Code Pink by March 2009.

Your claim that we want americans to die fighting in Iraq against ISIS. While you want americans to die supporting Iran.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Stei 11054578

One of the only upsides I could potentially see from a Jeb Bush administration is mitigating some of the fracture created by Obama with the Shias(In Iraq, Syria, and Yemen to name a few), and bring in Iran as more of a partner to fight ISIS.

How does Jeb Bush get the GOP nomination bringing Iran in as a partner to fight The Daesh terrorist scum in Iraq and Syria?

 

[deltex1]

How is that battle in Tikrit going Foo...your coalition winning the day?

 

[deltex1]

Obabble leading aggressively?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

That's right. The US changed the balance of power. The US meddled. And look what happened. I'll bet I get very few honest answers from the right on this one!

The US? And by the US you mean the Left and obama?

Because the last time there was an American in the Whitehouse, the US was in Force on BOTH SIDES OF IRAQ... .

 

[Stephanie]

That's right. The US changed the balance of power. The US meddled. And look what happened. I'll bet I get very few honest answers from the right on this one!

The US? And by the US you mean the Left and obama?

Because the last time there was an American in the Whitehouse, the US was in Force on BOTH SIDES OF IRAQ... .

the op: another sheep/tool spewing dnc talking points. and quite a nasty little thing too. I'm about ready to put it on ignore already

like I said I'd bet they weren't born during Carter or knows anything about IRAN back then. but he's sold it's all our fault so no use wasting time

 

[hipeter924]

Better question: If the US had intervened to stop the Islamists in Iran seizing power, would we have peace in the ME?

- Iraq-Iran war would have never happened. Saddam would have never got WMDs to use on Kurds.
- Shah probably would have been deposed regardless due to public anger, probably leading towards democracy rather than the Islamic Republic sham democracy.
- Iran would never have funded terrorist groups.
- Sunnis would still have friendly relations with the most major Shiite country in the region. So no ISIS.
- Iran would be more secular, and Iran and Israel would have good relations. So no nuclear ambitions.
- Iran would have never had trade sanctions, and it would be a wealthy country like Saudi Arabia, UAE, or Israel.

Iran is in no position to 'dominate the ME', even if it manages to get rid of international sanctions:
- It is economically weak, and is simply no competition to its biggest rival Saudi Arabia.
- Iraqi Sunnis will mostly likely be alienated by Shiite militias, and would likely rebel against an Iranian backed Shiite government, even if ISIS is defeated.
- Sunni states fear Iran's ambitions, and arm their military accordingly.
- If Iran's neighbors feel they need nukes they will get them, so Iran will not win out in a nuclear arms race, should Iran get nukes.
- Iran is bogged down militarily in Syria and Iraq, and it drains them economically. It is their own 'Vietnam'.

However, the US isn't going to just sit back and let ISIS and Al Qaeda spread, as that would be a humanitarian catastrophe.

Hence, there is no sit back and let it happen response to it.

 

[EricJ]

That's right. The US changed the balance of power. The US meddled. And look what happened. I'll bet I get very few honest answers from the right on this one!

The US? And by the US you mean the Left and obama?

Because the last time there was an American in the Whitehouse, the US was in Force on BOTH SIDES OF IRAQ... .

the op: another sheep/tool spewing dnc talking points. and quite a nasty little thing too. I'm about ready to put it on ignore already

like I said I'd bet they weren't born during Carter or knows anything about IRAN back then. but he's sold it's all our fault so no use wasting time

Can't admit the truth can you? Another low-information conservative. Feel free to put me on ignore, you're nothing but a partisan hack.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

... low-information conservative.

LOL! I just adore oxymorons. Good stuff.

Tolerant Liberal!

Honest Democrat!

Sane Homosexual!

ROFL! Oh the HILARITY!

 

[EricJ]

... low-information conservative.

LOL! I just adore oxymorons. Good stuff.

Tolerant Liberal!

Honest Democrat!

Sane Homosexual!

ROFL! Oh the HILARITY!

Wow - I didn't think you could possibly appear to be more stupid. I was wrong.

 

[Obiwan]

That's right. The US changed the balance of power. The US meddled. And look what happened. I'll bet I get very few honest answers from the right on this one!

Yes, the US meddled. It was called the Arab Spring. And while Obama and his supporters cheered, the ME fractured and imploded.