Did you Support War in Iraq??

[surada]

, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA

What conditions on the ground and In legal and sovereignty terms were different in 2008 with respect to SOFA when Bush was a negotiator and 2009 when Obama became a negotiator and needed to stick to the deadlines abd conditions that Bush agreed to.

The conditions we should be looking at is when the deadline came up....so 2011. The conditions were certainly better....but not perfect.

The main condition that changed in 2011, was that it was an election year for Obama and Xiden and they needed something to campaign on since, they couldn't really campaign on domestic success given the double digit UE they created, their failed "stimulus" and bailing out donors...so they campaigned on the false narrative they were winning or had won the war on terror.

2011? Egypt, Libya and Syria all went to hell in 2011.

 

[JoeB131]

they rose to power because obama pulled troops out to soon and told them when we’d be out.


why did obama lie?

Because that's what we wanted to hear. The thing is, we wanted to be out of Iraq, and the Iraqis wanted us gone. Everything else was a Kabuki dance.

ISIS rose to power because the power-sharing agreement that we had worked out before we left was abandoned by Maliki. He didn't need the Kurds and Sunnis, so he stopped giving them any share of the oil wealth.

 

[JoeB131]

I woudn't say I am an expert....I mean I just follow the basic news.

Yes, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA....announced we were leaving, and ISIS, and other terrorist ran wild....and we had to go back in...but here's the kicker...not just in Iraq...but all over the Middle East...great job Xiden and Obama

No one wanted a SOFA. We wanted out, the Iraqis wanted us gone.

anyone that doesn't support terrorist and brutal dictators like Saddam certainly does

Uh, guy, we created Bin Laden and Saddam. The CIA put both of them into power.

1) those reasons were from Congress, in their authorization for war. Not from Bush. All legit reasons.
2) No I am not wrong...Bush was successful in taking out Saddam...he was somewhat successful in helping building the nation, but didn't have enough time, instead the idiot Obama Xiden got elected and dropped the ball.

Uh, guy, let's get real. Iraq was a profound failure because the generals told Bush that he needed 500,000 troops to secure the country. he said, "Naw, it'll be fine". and went in with only 135,000, and then disbanded the Iraqi Army, creating a whole pool of guys who could make up the new militias that kept up the fight. The point is, we were STILL fighting five years after Bush declared "Mission Accomplished".

Boy, that didn't age well!

3)yeah it took a lot of troops...like I said, that wasn't my first choice...not sure if my first choice would have worked or not..but it wasn't my first choice...but nonetheless didn't mean it wasn't a success until Obama and Xiden wasted all we gained with their failed leadership.

Uh, no, Iraq was a profound failure. We went to war over a lie, lost all the sympathy of the world we had gained after 9/11, and left the country in a half-ass way. The fact is, most of the troops had been withdrawn by the time Obama got there, with a plan to get most of the rest out.

We didn't want to be there, the Iraqis didn't want us there.

4) yes, I am pleased...that was the main goal...I was sad though when ISIS Mosul...kind of a kick in the face to our servicemen to see Obama and Xiden turn their back on all that gained.

Mosul wasn't our to keep. The real problem was, Bush spent all that money propping up a new Iraqi Army, and they saw a bunch of guys in pickup trucks approaching, and ran away.

5) I am not sure what my faith has to do with anything, and why you continue to bring it up...your anti-Catholic bigotry is noted and nothing new in regards to the Dems...sadly

Uh, guy, your POPE denounced the Iraq War.

CNN.com - Pope condemns any war on Iraq - Jan. 13, 2003

www.cnn.com

 

[NotfooledbyW]

1) those reasons were from Congress, in their authorization for war. Not from Bush.

1441 was drafted by the Bush ADMIN and the UNSC voted unanimously for it to go into effect in NOVEMBER 2002. All Nations understood the casts belli in it and there was no deadline stipulation for SADDAM HUSSEN to lose his FINAL OPPORTUNITY given to comply. Bush agreed to go the the UNSC. as per the AUMF and the 1441 inspection regime entered Iraq in DECEMBER.

You say “Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.

Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.

That is a lie. Because as I stated.

Violating 1441 was the only reason for War.

To Which George W BUSH committed the United States of America to PER the AUMF that Congress passed.

because a ground invasion through the IRAQI desert would debilitate the troops and their vehicles Bush wanted to set a deadline for ending the three months of cooperation with 1441 inspectors on March 17 2003 or wait until September.

Some say a September launch of Preemptive War would not give enough time to bring the victorious glorious military victors to come marching home and set up the greeted as liberators victory for Iraqis with photo ops for the 2004 re-elect Bush Cheney campaign.

So BUSH pulled the USA OUT of 1441 and basically attacked Without much of the world behind it.

 

[surada]

I woudn't say I am an expert....I mean I just follow the basic news.

Yes, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA....announced we were leaving, and ISIS, and other terrorist ran wild....and we had to go back in...but here's the kicker...not just in Iraq...but all over the Middle East...great job Xiden and Obama

No one wanted a SOFA. We wanted out, the Iraqis wanted us gone.

anyone that doesn't support terrorist and brutal dictators like Saddam certainly does

Uh, guy, we created Bin Laden and Saddam. The CIA put both of them into power.

1) those reasons were from Congress, in their authorization for war. Not from Bush. All legit reasons.
2) No I am not wrong...Bush was successful in taking out Saddam...he was somewhat successful in helping building the nation, but didn't have enough time, instead the idiot Obama Xiden got elected and dropped the ball.

Uh, guy, let's get real. Iraq was a profound failure because the generals told Bush that he needed 500,000 troops to secure the country. he said, "Naw, it'll be fine". and went in with only 135,000, and then disbanded the Iraqi Army, creating a whole pool of guys who could make up the new militias that kept up the fight. The point is, we were STILL fighting five years after Bush declared "Mission Accomplished".

View attachment 487214
Boy, that didn't age well!

3)yeah it took a lot of troops...like I said, that wasn't my first choice...not sure if my first choice would have worked or not..but it wasn't my first choice...but nonetheless didn't mean it wasn't a success until Obama and Xiden wasted all we gained with their failed leadership.

Uh, no, Iraq was a profound failure. We went to war over a lie, lost all the sympathy of the world we had gained after 9/11, and left the country in a half-ass way. The fact is, most of the troops had been withdrawn by the time Obama got there, with a plan to get most of the rest out.

We didn't want to be there, the Iraqis didn't want us there.

4) yes, I am pleased...that was the main goal...I was sad though when ISIS Mosul...kind of a kick in the face to our servicemen to see Obama and Xiden turn their back on all that gained.

Mosul wasn't our to keep. The real problem was, Bush spent all that money propping up a new Iraqi Army, and they saw a bunch of guys in pickup trucks approaching, and ran away.

5) I am not sure what my faith has to do with anything, and why you continue to bring it up...your anti-Catholic bigotry is noted and nothing new in regards to the Dems...sadly

Uh, guy, your POPE denounced the Iraq War.

CNN.com - Pope condemns any war on Iraq - Jan. 13, 2003

www.cnn.com

Struth, stop and think. Joe is right on every point.

 

[surada]

I woudn't say I am an expert....I mean I just follow the basic news.

Yes, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA....announced we were leaving, and ISIS, and other terrorist ran wild....and we had to go back in...but here's the kicker...not just in Iraq...but all over the Middle East...great job Xiden and Obama

No one wanted a SOFA. We wanted out, the Iraqis wanted us gone.

anyone that doesn't support terrorist and brutal dictators like Saddam certainly does

Uh, guy, we created Bin Laden and Saddam. The CIA put both of them into power.

1) those reasons were from Congress, in their authorization for war. Not from Bush. All legit reasons.
2) No I am not wrong...Bush was successful in taking out Saddam...he was somewhat successful in helping building the nation, but didn't have enough time, instead the idiot Obama Xiden got elected and dropped the ball.

Uh, guy, let's get real. Iraq was a profound failure because the generals told Bush that he needed 500,000 troops to secure the country. he said, "Naw, it'll be fine". and went in with only 135,000, and then disbanded the Iraqi Army, creating a whole pool of guys who could make up the new militias that kept up the fight. The point is, we were STILL fighting five years after Bush declared "Mission Accomplished".

View attachment 487214
Boy, that didn't age well!

3)yeah it took a lot of troops...like I said, that wasn't my first choice...not sure if my first choice would have worked or not..but it wasn't my first choice...but nonetheless didn't mean it wasn't a success until Obama and Xiden wasted all we gained with their failed leadership.

Uh, no, Iraq was a profound failure. We went to war over a lie, lost all the sympathy of the world we had gained after 9/11, and left the country in a half-ass way. The fact is, most of the troops had been withdrawn by the time Obama got there, with a plan to get most of the rest out.

We didn't want to be there, the Iraqis didn't want us there.

4) yes, I am pleased...that was the main goal...I was sad though when ISIS Mosul...kind of a kick in the face to our servicemen to see Obama and Xiden turn their back on all that gained.

Mosul wasn't our to keep. The real problem was, Bush spent all that money propping up a new Iraqi Army, and they saw a bunch of guys in pickup trucks approaching, and ran away.

5) I am not sure what my faith has to do with anything, and why you continue to bring it up...your anti-Catholic bigotry is noted and nothing new in regards to the Dems...sadly

Uh, guy, your POPE denounced the Iraq War.

CNN.com - Pope condemns any war on Iraq - Jan. 13, 2003

www.cnn.com

Struth, stop and think. Joe is right on every point.

Yep.. the Brits cranked up Operation Mass Appeal in 1997 to sell the war on Iraq per Bibi's Clean Break Strategy.. Not every country fell for it.

 

[surada]

Operation Mass Appeal - Wikipedia

Operation Mass Appeal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Operation Mass Appeal was an operation set up by the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) in the runup to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It was a campaign aimed at planting stories in the media about Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction.

The existence of the operation was exposed in December 2003, although officials denied that the operation was deliberately disseminating misinformation. The MI6 operation secretly incorporated the United Nations Special Commission investigating Iraq's alleged stoc

 

[struth]

they rose to power because obama pulled troops out to soon and told them when we’d be out.

Who died and made you an expert on the rise of ISIS when you refuse to acknowledge the fact that when Bush left office There were 160,000 US Troops on the ground in IRAQ and Iraqis could not tell them to pack their shit up and go home the next day. And they were permitted to patrol in US cities.

Fast forward to June 2009 under Obama and Bush‘s SOFA where you also refuse to acknowledge the fact that were still 160,000 US Troops on the ground in IRAQ but the role was about to change. Iraqis could now tell them to pack their shit up and go home the next day. And they were NOT permitted to patrol in US cities.

Of course Iraq was more stable than it was from 2004 through 2007 and Obama was correct to recognize that.

But the US Military was on its way out to meet BUSH’s deadline and troops could not operate in Sunni Cities where terrorist cells were forming as early as 2010.

The terrorists could not breathe a breath of life in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was in power.

And you think you can blame Obama for the rise of ISIS. You are a dumb ass because of that.

I woudn't say I am an expert....I mean I just follow the basic news.

Yes, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA....announced we were leaving, and ISIS, and other terrorist ran wild....and we had to go back in...but here's the kicker...not just in Iraq...but all over the Middle East...great job Xiden and Obama

Wasn't so free or stable in 2009. I was still counting sabotage events.

How do you "renegotiate" a ratified agreement?

Oral History - Richard Cheney | The Gulf War | FRONTLINE | PBS

Oral History - Richard Cheney | The Gulf War | FRONTLINE | PBS

Cheney: I told King Fahd that the Iraqis were amassed on his border and we briefed him on the intelligence in terms of the size of the force that the Iraqis had already used in Kuwait.

Obama said it was free and stable.

Obama was being gracious towards Bush.. Do you think every administration should break all previous agreements or keep their word?/

how was he being gracious? He was lying? Why would he leave Iraq then? So you think he left knowing the country was in danger and knowing the rise of terrorist and Iranian threats was there? why?

 

[struth]

I woudn't say I am an expert....I mean I just follow the basic news.

Yes, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA....announced we were leaving, and ISIS, and other terrorist ran wild....and we had to go back in...but here's the kicker...not just in Iraq...but all over the Middle East...great job Xiden and Obama

No one wanted a SOFA. We wanted out, the Iraqis wanted us gone.

anyone that doesn't support terrorist and brutal dictators like Saddam certainly does

Uh, guy, we created Bin Laden and Saddam. The CIA put both of them into power.

1) those reasons were from Congress, in their authorization for war. Not from Bush. All legit reasons.
2) No I am not wrong...Bush was successful in taking out Saddam...he was somewhat successful in helping building the nation, but didn't have enough time, instead the idiot Obama Xiden got elected and dropped the ball.

Uh, guy, let's get real. Iraq was a profound failure because the generals told Bush that he needed 500,000 troops to secure the country. he said, "Naw, it'll be fine". and went in with only 135,000, and then disbanded the Iraqi Army, creating a whole pool of guys who could make up the new militias that kept up the fight. The point is, we were STILL fighting five years after Bush declared "Mission Accomplished".

View attachment 487214
Boy, that didn't age well!

3)yeah it took a lot of troops...like I said, that wasn't my first choice...not sure if my first choice would have worked or not..but it wasn't my first choice...but nonetheless didn't mean it wasn't a success until Obama and Xiden wasted all we gained with their failed leadership.

Uh, no, Iraq was a profound failure. We went to war over a lie, lost all the sympathy of the world we had gained after 9/11, and left the country in a half-ass way. The fact is, most of the troops had been withdrawn by the time Obama got there, with a plan to get most of the rest out.

We didn't want to be there, the Iraqis didn't want us there.

4) yes, I am pleased...that was the main goal...I was sad though when ISIS Mosul...kind of a kick in the face to our servicemen to see Obama and Xiden turn their back on all that gained.

Mosul wasn't our to keep. The real problem was, Bush spent all that money propping up a new Iraqi Army, and they saw a bunch of guys in pickup trucks approaching, and ran away.

5) I am not sure what my faith has to do with anything, and why you continue to bring it up...your anti-Catholic bigotry is noted and nothing new in regards to the Dems...sadly

Uh, guy, your POPE denounced the Iraq War.

CNN.com - Pope condemns any war on Iraq - Jan. 13, 2003

www.cnn.com

Struth, stop and think. Joe is right on every point.

Not really

 

[surada]

There is too much evidence that supports the deliberate lies that led up to Bush's invasion of Iraq.. and plenty of evidence that it was in part orchestrated by the dual citizen neo-cons of the PNAC. These are the same people who opposed the Iran nuclear agreement.

BBC NEWS | UK | MI6 ran 'dubious' Iraq campaign

 

[surada]

they rose to power because obama pulled troops out to soon and told them when we’d be out.

Who died and made you an expert on the rise of ISIS when you refuse to acknowledge the fact that when Bush left office There were 160,000 US Troops on the ground in IRAQ and Iraqis could not tell them to pack their shit up and go home the next day. And they were permitted to patrol in US cities.

Fast forward to June 2009 under Obama and Bush‘s SOFA where you also refuse to acknowledge the fact that were still 160,000 US Troops on the ground in IRAQ but the role was about to change. Iraqis could now tell them to pack their shit up and go home the next day. And they were NOT permitted to patrol in US cities.

Of course Iraq was more stable than it was from 2004 through 2007 and Obama was correct to recognize that.

But the US Military was on its way out to meet BUSH’s deadline and troops could not operate in Sunni Cities where terrorist cells were forming as early as 2010.

The terrorists could not breathe a breath of life in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was in power.

And you think you can blame Obama for the rise of ISIS. You are a dumb ass because of that.

I woudn't say I am an expert....I mean I just follow the basic news.

Yes, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA....announced we were leaving, and ISIS, and other terrorist ran wild....and we had to go back in...but here's the kicker...not just in Iraq...but all over the Middle East...great job Xiden and Obama

Wasn't so free or stable in 2009. I was still counting sabotage events.

How do you "renegotiate" a ratified agreement?

Oral History - Richard Cheney | The Gulf War | FRONTLINE | PBS

Oral History - Richard Cheney | The Gulf War | FRONTLINE | PBS

Cheney: I told King Fahd that the Iraqis were amassed on his border and we briefed him on the intelligence in terms of the size of the force that the Iraqis had already used in Kuwait.

Obama said it was free and stable.

Obama was being gracious towards Bush.. Do you think every administration should break all previous agreements or keep their word?/

how was he being gracious? He was lying? Why would he leave Iraq then? So you think he left knowing the country was in danger and knowing the rise of terrorist and Iranian threats was there? why?

Unless he wanted to install 500,000 peacekeepers I think Obama had to hope for the best. Bush was saying we won when we couldn't even secure the road from Baghdad to the airport.

There is too much evidence that supports the deliberate lies that led up to Bush's invasion of Iraq.. and plenty of evidence that it was in part orchestrated by the dual citizen neo-cons of the PNAC. These same people opposed the Iran nuclear agreement.

BBC NEWS | UK | MI6 ran 'dubious' Iraq campaign

 

[struth]

I woudn't say I am an expert....I mean I just follow the basic news.

Yes, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA....announced we were leaving, and ISIS, and other terrorist ran wild....and we had to go back in...but here's the kicker...not just in Iraq...but all over the Middle East...great job Xiden and Obama

No one wanted a SOFA. We wanted out, the Iraqis wanted us gone.

anyone that doesn't support terrorist and brutal dictators like Saddam certainly does

Uh, guy, we created Bin Laden and Saddam. The CIA put both of them into power.

1) those reasons were from Congress, in their authorization for war. Not from Bush. All legit reasons.
2) No I am not wrong...Bush was successful in taking out Saddam...he was somewhat successful in helping building the nation, but didn't have enough time, instead the idiot Obama Xiden got elected and dropped the ball.

Uh, guy, let's get real. Iraq was a profound failure because the generals told Bush that he needed 500,000 troops to secure the country. he said, "Naw, it'll be fine". and went in with only 135,000, and then disbanded the Iraqi Army, creating a whole pool of guys who could make up the new militias that kept up the fight. The point is, we were STILL fighting five years after Bush declared "Mission Accomplished".

View attachment 487214
Boy, that didn't age well!

3)yeah it took a lot of troops...like I said, that wasn't my first choice...not sure if my first choice would have worked or not..but it wasn't my first choice...but nonetheless didn't mean it wasn't a success until Obama and Xiden wasted all we gained with their failed leadership.

Uh, no, Iraq was a profound failure. We went to war over a lie, lost all the sympathy of the world we had gained after 9/11, and left the country in a half-ass way. The fact is, most of the troops had been withdrawn by the time Obama got there, with a plan to get most of the rest out.

We didn't want to be there, the Iraqis didn't want us there.

4) yes, I am pleased...that was the main goal...I was sad though when ISIS Mosul...kind of a kick in the face to our servicemen to see Obama and Xiden turn their back on all that gained.

Mosul wasn't our to keep. The real problem was, Bush spent all that money propping up a new Iraqi Army, and they saw a bunch of guys in pickup trucks approaching, and ran away.

5) I am not sure what my faith has to do with anything, and why you continue to bring it up...your anti-Catholic bigotry is noted and nothing new in regards to the Dems...sadly

Uh, guy, your POPE denounced the Iraq War.

CNN.com - Pope condemns any war on Iraq - Jan. 13, 2003

www.cnn.com

1) nope..neither US officials or the Iraqis expect Obama to do what he did Despite Difficult Talks, U.S. and Iraq Had Expected Some American Troops to Stay (Published 2011)
2) we didn't create them...we certainly supported Saddam against Iran, and Iran against Saddam during the Iraq-Iran war...which turned into a Cold War proxy with the Soviets...ad we funded freedom fighters in Afgan against the Soviet invasiion...but we didn't create them
3) nah...we took out Saddam, and Obama was given a free and stable Iraq
4) Saddam was out, and a free and stable Iraq was given to Obama
5) No it was the Iraqis....until Obama let ISIS take it, Trump helped give it back to the Iraqis
6) Cool....I expect the Pope to be for peace...he's the leader of a Church.

 

[struth]

1) those reasons were from Congress, in their authorization for war. Not from Bush.

1441 was drafted by the Bush ADMIN and the UNSC voted unanimously for it to go into effect in NOVEMBER 2002. All Nations understood the casts belli in it and there was no deadline stipulation for SADDAM HUSSEN to lose his FINAL OPPORTUNITY given to comply. Bush agreed to go the the UNSC. as per the AUMF and the 1441 inspection regime entered Iraq in DECEMBER.

You say “Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.

Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.

That is a lie. Because as I stated.

Violating 1441 was the only reason for War.

To Which George W BUSH committed the United States of America to PER the AUMF that Congress passed.

because a ground invasion through the IRAQI desert would debilitate the troops and their vehicles Bush wanted to set a deadline for ending the three months of cooperation with 1441 inspectors on March 17 2003 or wait until September.

Some say a September launch of Preemptive War would not give enough time to bring the victorious glorious military victors to come marching home and set up the greeted as liberators victory for Iraqis with photo ops for the 2004 re-elect Bush Cheney campaign.

So BUSH pulled the USA OUT of 1441 and basically attacked Without much of the world behind it.

1) Cool...and the UN said in the Resolution in one voice that Saddam was in violatin when then voted for it.
2) the US Congress said that
3) It was certainly a major reason, but not the only, as the US Congress highlighted for you

 

[surada]

I woudn't say I am an expert....I mean I just follow the basic news.

Yes, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA....announced we were leaving, and ISIS, and other terrorist ran wild....and we had to go back in...but here's the kicker...not just in Iraq...but all over the Middle East...great job Xiden and Obama

No one wanted a SOFA. We wanted out, the Iraqis wanted us gone.

anyone that doesn't support terrorist and brutal dictators like Saddam certainly does

Uh, guy, we created Bin Laden and Saddam. The CIA put both of them into power.

1) those reasons were from Congress, in their authorization for war. Not from Bush. All legit reasons.
2) No I am not wrong...Bush was successful in taking out Saddam...he was somewhat successful in helping building the nation, but didn't have enough time, instead the idiot Obama Xiden got elected and dropped the ball.

Uh, guy, let's get real. Iraq was a profound failure because the generals told Bush that he needed 500,000 troops to secure the country. he said, "Naw, it'll be fine". and went in with only 135,000, and then disbanded the Iraqi Army, creating a whole pool of guys who could make up the new militias that kept up the fight. The point is, we were STILL fighting five years after Bush declared "Mission Accomplished".

View attachment 487214
Boy, that didn't age well!

3)yeah it took a lot of troops...like I said, that wasn't my first choice...not sure if my first choice would have worked or not..but it wasn't my first choice...but nonetheless didn't mean it wasn't a success until Obama and Xiden wasted all we gained with their failed leadership.

Uh, no, Iraq was a profound failure. We went to war over a lie, lost all the sympathy of the world we had gained after 9/11, and left the country in a half-ass way. The fact is, most of the troops had been withdrawn by the time Obama got there, with a plan to get most of the rest out.

We didn't want to be there, the Iraqis didn't want us there.

4) yes, I am pleased...that was the main goal...I was sad though when ISIS Mosul...kind of a kick in the face to our servicemen to see Obama and Xiden turn their back on all that gained.

Mosul wasn't our to keep. The real problem was, Bush spent all that money propping up a new Iraqi Army, and they saw a bunch of guys in pickup trucks approaching, and ran away.

5) I am not sure what my faith has to do with anything, and why you continue to bring it up...your anti-Catholic bigotry is noted and nothing new in regards to the Dems...sadly

Uh, guy, your POPE denounced the Iraq War.

CNN.com - Pope condemns any war on Iraq - Jan. 13, 2003

www.cnn.com

Struth, stop and think. Joe is right on every point.

Not really

We invaded Iraq because that's what the Israelis wanted and it was decided before Bush was elected.. Bush had no religious training so he fell ass over tea kettle for the Scofield heresy, He claimed he was fighting Gog and Magog.

 

[struth]

they rose to power because obama pulled troops out to soon and told them when we’d be out.

Who died and made you an expert on the rise of ISIS when you refuse to acknowledge the fact that when Bush left office There were 160,000 US Troops on the ground in IRAQ and Iraqis could not tell them to pack their shit up and go home the next day. And they were permitted to patrol in US cities.

Fast forward to June 2009 under Obama and Bush‘s SOFA where you also refuse to acknowledge the fact that were still 160,000 US Troops on the ground in IRAQ but the role was about to change. Iraqis could now tell them to pack their shit up and go home the next day. And they were NOT permitted to patrol in US cities.

Of course Iraq was more stable than it was from 2004 through 2007 and Obama was correct to recognize that.

But the US Military was on its way out to meet BUSH’s deadline and troops could not operate in Sunni Cities where terrorist cells were forming as early as 2010.

The terrorists could not breathe a breath of life in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was in power.

And you think you can blame Obama for the rise of ISIS. You are a dumb ass because of that.

I woudn't say I am an expert....I mean I just follow the basic news.

Yes, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA....announced we were leaving, and ISIS, and other terrorist ran wild....and we had to go back in...but here's the kicker...not just in Iraq...but all over the Middle East...great job Xiden and Obama

Wasn't so free or stable in 2009. I was still counting sabotage events.

How do you "renegotiate" a ratified agreement?

Oral History - Richard Cheney | The Gulf War | FRONTLINE | PBS

Oral History - Richard Cheney | The Gulf War | FRONTLINE | PBS

Cheney: I told King Fahd that the Iraqis were amassed on his border and we briefed him on the intelligence in terms of the size of the force that the Iraqis had already used in Kuwait.

Obama said it was free and stable.

Obama was being gracious towards Bush.. Do you think every administration should break all previous agreements or keep their word?/

how was he being gracious? He was lying? Why would he leave Iraq then? So you think he left knowing the country was in danger and knowing the rise of terrorist and Iranian threats was there? why?

Unless he wanted to install 500,000 peacekeepers I think Obama had to hope for the best. Bush was saying we won when we couldn't even secure the road from Baghdad to the airport.

There is too much evidence that supports the deliberate lies that led up to Bush's invasion of Iraq.. and plenty of evidence that it was in part orchestrated by the dual citizen neo-cons of the PNAC. These same people opposed the Iran nuclear agreement.

BBC NEWS | UK | MI6 ran 'dubious' Iraq campaign

Nah, he didn't have to install that many...he could have left the current number.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

No one wanted a SOFA. We wanted out, the Iraqis wanted us gone.

Its rather insignificant in the overall scheme of things, but I accept that it was down to negotiating a few thousand trainers staying in IRAQ and Obama was willing to go for that in a non combat role. But the Iraqi side passed laws that a new SOFA had to be approved in Iraq’s parliament and it was never going to pass There if giving those trainers immunity.

I would have been fine with leaving a few thousand trainers in Iraq but never without immunity which is damn near a mandatory AMERICAN policy that out trooos be given immunity.

And I recall an interview with Petraeus where he said after the ISIS Attack that a few thousand Trainers would have had no impact on that ISIS problem at all. And he explained to the reporter that Troops in Iraq were basically staying on bases and lost the contact with the Sunni population and because of that they couid not even help alter the underlying ant-Maliki sentiment that gave ISIS an easy foothold into Iraqi cities. Bush’s negotiators caused that.

Thats the kind of news that struth cannot seem to find.

 

[struth]

I woudn't say I am an expert....I mean I just follow the basic news.

Yes, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA....announced we were leaving, and ISIS, and other terrorist ran wild....and we had to go back in...but here's the kicker...not just in Iraq...but all over the Middle East...great job Xiden and Obama

No one wanted a SOFA. We wanted out, the Iraqis wanted us gone.

anyone that doesn't support terrorist and brutal dictators like Saddam certainly does

Uh, guy, we created Bin Laden and Saddam. The CIA put both of them into power.

1) those reasons were from Congress, in their authorization for war. Not from Bush. All legit reasons.
2) No I am not wrong...Bush was successful in taking out Saddam...he was somewhat successful in helping building the nation, but didn't have enough time, instead the idiot Obama Xiden got elected and dropped the ball.

Uh, guy, let's get real. Iraq was a profound failure because the generals told Bush that he needed 500,000 troops to secure the country. he said, "Naw, it'll be fine". and went in with only 135,000, and then disbanded the Iraqi Army, creating a whole pool of guys who could make up the new militias that kept up the fight. The point is, we were STILL fighting five years after Bush declared "Mission Accomplished".

View attachment 487214
Boy, that didn't age well!

3)yeah it took a lot of troops...like I said, that wasn't my first choice...not sure if my first choice would have worked or not..but it wasn't my first choice...but nonetheless didn't mean it wasn't a success until Obama and Xiden wasted all we gained with their failed leadership.

Uh, no, Iraq was a profound failure. We went to war over a lie, lost all the sympathy of the world we had gained after 9/11, and left the country in a half-ass way. The fact is, most of the troops had been withdrawn by the time Obama got there, with a plan to get most of the rest out.

We didn't want to be there, the Iraqis didn't want us there.

4) yes, I am pleased...that was the main goal...I was sad though when ISIS Mosul...kind of a kick in the face to our servicemen to see Obama and Xiden turn their back on all that gained.

Mosul wasn't our to keep. The real problem was, Bush spent all that money propping up a new Iraqi Army, and they saw a bunch of guys in pickup trucks approaching, and ran away.

5) I am not sure what my faith has to do with anything, and why you continue to bring it up...your anti-Catholic bigotry is noted and nothing new in regards to the Dems...sadly

Uh, guy, your POPE denounced the Iraq War.

CNN.com - Pope condemns any war on Iraq - Jan. 13, 2003

www.cnn.com

Struth, stop and think. Joe is right on every point.

Not really

We invaded Iraq because that's what the Israelis wanted and it was decided before Bush was elected.. Bush had no religious training so he fell ass over tea kettle for the Scofield heresy, He claimed he was fighting Gog and Magog.

I don't fall for cheap conspiracy theories...in particular when they are based on anti-semitism.

 

[surada]

I woudn't say I am an expert....I mean I just follow the basic news.

Yes, when Obama took office he was handed a free and stable Iraq, and he failed to renegitate a proper SOFA....announced we were leaving, and ISIS, and other terrorist ran wild....and we had to go back in...but here's the kicker...not just in Iraq...but all over the Middle East...great job Xiden and Obama

No one wanted a SOFA. We wanted out, the Iraqis wanted us gone.

anyone that doesn't support terrorist and brutal dictators like Saddam certainly does

Uh, guy, we created Bin Laden and Saddam. The CIA put both of them into power.

1) those reasons were from Congress, in their authorization for war. Not from Bush. All legit reasons.
2) No I am not wrong...Bush was successful in taking out Saddam...he was somewhat successful in helping building the nation, but didn't have enough time, instead the idiot Obama Xiden got elected and dropped the ball.

Uh, guy, let's get real. Iraq was a profound failure because the generals told Bush that he needed 500,000 troops to secure the country. he said, "Naw, it'll be fine". and went in with only 135,000, and then disbanded the Iraqi Army, creating a whole pool of guys who could make up the new militias that kept up the fight. The point is, we were STILL fighting five years after Bush declared "Mission Accomplished".

View attachment 487214
Boy, that didn't age well!

3)yeah it took a lot of troops...like I said, that wasn't my first choice...not sure if my first choice would have worked or not..but it wasn't my first choice...but nonetheless didn't mean it wasn't a success until Obama and Xiden wasted all we gained with their failed leadership.

Uh, no, Iraq was a profound failure. We went to war over a lie, lost all the sympathy of the world we had gained after 9/11, and left the country in a half-ass way. The fact is, most of the troops had been withdrawn by the time Obama got there, with a plan to get most of the rest out.

We didn't want to be there, the Iraqis didn't want us there.

4) yes, I am pleased...that was the main goal...I was sad though when ISIS Mosul...kind of a kick in the face to our servicemen to see Obama and Xiden turn their back on all that gained.

Mosul wasn't our to keep. The real problem was, Bush spent all that money propping up a new Iraqi Army, and they saw a bunch of guys in pickup trucks approaching, and ran away.

5) I am not sure what my faith has to do with anything, and why you continue to bring it up...your anti-Catholic bigotry is noted and nothing new in regards to the Dems...sadly

Uh, guy, your POPE denounced the Iraq War.

CNN.com - Pope condemns any war on Iraq - Jan. 13, 2003

www.cnn.com

1) nope..neither US officials or the Iraqis expect Obama to do what he did Despite Difficult Talks, U.S. and Iraq Had Expected Some American Troops to Stay (Published 2011)
2) we didn't create them...we certainly supported Saddam against Iran, and Iran against Saddam during the Iraq-Iran war...which turned into a Cold War proxy with the Soviets...ad we funded freedom fighters in Afgan against the Soviet invasiion...but we didn't create them
3) nah...we took out Saddam, and Obama was given a free and stable Iraq
4) Saddam was out, and a free and stable Iraq was given to Obama
5) No it was the Iraqis....until Obama let ISIS take it, Trump helped give it back to the Iraqis
6) Cool....I expect the Pope to be for peace...he's the leader of a Church.

ISIS came out of the Sunni remnant of Saddam's government and military.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Nah, he didn't have to install that many...he could have left the current number.

The current number was zero. You dumb ass.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

1) Cool...and the UN said in the Resolution in one voice that Saddam was in violatin when then voted for it.

When they voted for 1441.

You dumb ass that is how legalese in international law is written.

Never the less couid you show us where the full list of grievances in the US AUMF was also included in 1441.