Obama Admits Administration Failure: Says Overestimated Iraq Army, Underestimated I S I S

[Plasmaball]

Everyone but the No-Information Right knows that Bush's best buddies, the House of Saud, are behind ISIL!!!!!

Thank God for the Saudis ISIS Iraq and the Lessons of Blowback - The Atlantic

The Free Syrian Army (FSA), the “moderate” armed opposition in the country, receives a lot of attention. But two of the most successful factions fighting Assad’s forces are Islamist extremist groups: Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the latter of which is now amassing territory in Iraq and threatening to further destabilize the entire region. And that success is in part due to the support they have received from two Persian Gulf countries: Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Qatar’s military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra, to the point that a senior Qatari official told me he can identify al-Nusra commanders by the blocks they control in various Syrian cities. But ISIS is another matter. As one senior Qatari official stated, “ISIS has been a Saudi project.”

ISIS, in fact, may have been a major part of Bandar’s covert-ops strategy in Syria.

Obama has been President for almost 6 years so blaming Bush doesn't work any more.

Carter has not been president for more than 25 years, but that didn't stop the Right from blaming Bush's housing crash on Carter and Clinton. Bush owns everything that goes wrong for the next 19 years.

Carter and Clinton share the blame for signing the bills that created the housing bubble. Bush deserves criticism for being unable or unwilling to reverse those bills.

Facts don't lie!

oh its a little more complicated than Clinton and carter

Since you apparently only read one sentence in a post I will repost the second sentence just for you.

Bush deserves criticism for being unable or unwilling to reverse those bills.

its a little more complicated

 

[EconChick]

I recall that you people wouldn't allow us to blame Bush for the disaster of Iraq, no WMD's etc., because you claimed it was an intelligence failure that Bush cannot be held accountable for.

Can we apply this argument to Obama?

Are you saying you want it both ways, or is it Obama's fault?

Or was is not Bush's fault?


Which one?

LOL, it's like trying to teach children that 2+2=4 over and over and over, isn't it....

The NeoCons in GWB's cabnet (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Wolfowitz) and his brother Jeb all signed the Statement of Principles for the PNAC. Since one of the above claims to have been party to negotiations with Iraq, we can let her explain why they wanted to invade Iraq in 1997.

I did, idiot????? LOL. I said I spent a lot of time negotiating with Iraqis. Your reading comprehension is so pathetic, LMAO. How does "negotiating with Iraqis" become "party to (THE) negotiations with Iraq??? LOL

The reason you don't know the difference is you're so egregiously uneducated about what went on over there.

LOL.

Nevermind, some of you libs are just hopelessly stupid.

 

[EconChick]

Bush could have changed it, he didn't.

Bush hasn't been President for a real long time.

WWII started and finished in less time than your hero Obama's been President

neither has Clinton and carter but you guys keep bringing them up as if you have a serious mental problem

Well now THERE's a fair post (minus the "serious mental problem).

You other libs....at least Plasma's trying to have a real discussion. Take notes.

 

[EconChick]

I recall that you people wouldn't allow us to blame Bush for the disaster of Iraq, no WMD's etc., because you claimed it was an intelligence failure that Bush cannot be held accountable for.

Can we apply this argument to Obama?

Are you saying you want it both ways, or is it Obama's fault?

Or was is not Bush's fault?


Which one?

LOL, it's like trying to teach children that 2+2=4 over and over and over, isn't it....

The NeoCons in GWB's cabnet (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Wolfowitz) and his brother Jeb all signed the Statement of Principles for the PNAC. Since one of the above claims to have been party to negotiations with Iraq, we can let her explain why they wanted to invade Iraq in 1997.

You can ignore your flub about The National Home Ownership Foundation but it's right there for all to see.

You are a partisan and you won't even admit your own mistakes. I'm glad you're retired. Society is better off with you not ******* things up anymore.

SOOOOOOOOOOOOO Well PUT. LOL

 

[EconChick]

Obama being a dumbfuck is too stupid to realize most people know he ignored the military and CIA warnings about leaving Iraq too soon, but he thinks he can blame them for his mistakes.

Only the shit-eaters like we see on this board believe his lies and finger-pointing.

Obama being a dumbfuck is too stupid to realize most people know he ignored the military and CIA warnings about leaving Iraq too soon, but he thinks he can blame them for his mistakes.

Only the shit-eaters like we see on this board believe his lies and finger-pointing.

Did Limbaugh or Hannity tell you President Obama ignored the military and CIA? Maybe you ought to widen your source(s) of information, since no one but the President and those closest to him know what influenced his decision to bug out of Iraq. It might have been something so simple as reading the daily causualty reports, the failure of the Iraqi Government and their unwillingness to guarantee immunity to our military personnel.

.

overestimating the Iraqi Army.
Really? After 12 years of training and supplying the Iraqi Army, the US over estimated Iraqi Army?
Were our trainers blind? Absolutely no excuse for this oversight

We can tell you libs till we're blind in the face but you won't get it. It was about their commanders abandoning them.

Does it matter if it was the officers or the enlisted men, our trainers should have been able to pick up on that. Either way it was a major mistake on our part.

The mistake was Obama pulling out and not leaving anyone there to hold the gains we made.

 

[EconChick]

Obama has been President for almost 6 years so blaming Bush doesn't work any more.

Carter has not been president for more than 25 years, but that didn't stop the Right from blaming Bush's housing crash on Carter and Clinton. Bush owns everything that goes wrong for the next 19 years.

Carter and Clinton share the blame for signing the bills that created the housing bubble. Bush deserves criticism for being unable or unwilling to reverse those bills.

Facts don't lie!

True, facts don't lie: "The National Home Ownership Foundation was established in 1968 under the Housing Act. The National Home Ownership Foundation was intended to encourage both private and public organizations to provide opportunities for home ownership for low-income families in urban and rural communities"

Guess who was president when this was established? It wasn't Clinton, It wasn't Carter --- drum roll please --- it was Richard Nixon.

1968, LBJ was the President. Nixon was elected. Nixon did not take the office until late January 1969. Nice try to revise history.

Besides the issues went further back than that.

The issue did go further back, I didn't write that Nixon Signed the bill, for a better example of my meaning read:

"The upshot of the Warren controversy was that Nixon undercut Romney and supported the efforts by Warren and other suburbs to exclude subsidized housing for minorities. In
doing so, however, Nixon affirmed the understanding that HUD's obligation was affirmatively to further equal housing opportunity “on a metropolitan areawide basis.

"The President's statement on equal opportunity in housing, issued on June 14, 1971,
stated:

"Based on a careful review of the legislative history of the 1964 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts . . . I interpret the “affirmative action” mandate of the 1968 act to mean that the administrator of a housing program should include, among the various
criteria by which applications for assistance are judged, the extent to which a proposed project, or the overall development plan of which it is a part, will in fact open up new, nonsegregated housing opportunities that will contribute to decreasing the effects of past housing discrimination. . . . [This] does mean that in choosing among the various applications for Federal aid, consideration should be given to their impact on patterns of racial concentration. In furtherance of this policy, . . .[HUD and all] other departments and agencies administering housing programs . . .will administer their programs in a way which will advance equal housing opportunity for people of all income levels on a metropolitan areawide basis."

"Established" (meaning a policy) under Nixon and his appointee Romney. You are correct, LBJ passed the law and my post was misleading but not entirely inaccurate.

Link: http://www.prrac.org/pdf/RoismanHistoryExcerpt.pdf

A post where a liberal acknowledged being misleading (but not entirely inaccurate.) I give you points for that.

 

[bendog]

W blamed the intell too. Still, I'd have more respect for Obama if he just came out and said as long as Al-ah-Mucky was running Iraq like his private shiaa milita, democracy was a joke, and the thing would turn out badly. So, aside from doing the politician shuffle, I can't really fault Obama. Bushii regieme changed once, and if you do it twice it ceases being regieme change and turns into Diem/Thieu. But, imo, it is fair to blame him for just washing his hands, and walking away. He might have publically and loudly called for Iraq to form a unity govt ... or at least done so even more loudly than he did.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I recall that you people wouldn't allow us to blame Bush for the disaster of Iraq, no WMD's etc., because you claimed it was an intelligence failure that Bush cannot be held accountable for.

Can we apply this argument to Obama?

Are you saying you want it both ways, or is it Obama's fault?

Or was is not Bush's fault?


Which one?

LOL, it's like trying to teach children that 2+2=4 over and over and over, isn't it....

The NeoCons in GWB's cabnet (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Wolfowitz) and his brother Jeb all signed the Statement of Principles for the PNAC. Since one of the above claims to have been party to negotiations with Iraq, we can let her explain why they wanted to invade Iraq in 1997.

I did, idiot????? LOL. I said I spent a lot of time negotiating with Iraqis. Your reading comprehension is so pathetic, LMAO. How does "negotiating with Iraqis" become "party to negotiations with Iraq??? LOL

The reason you don't know the difference is you're so egregiously uneducated about what went on over there.

LOL.

Nevermind, you libs are just hopelessly stupid.

Your claims of being in Iraq are both irrelevant, and because they can't be proven, meaningless.

 

[EconChick]

W blamed the intell too. Still, I'd have more respect for Obama if he just came out and said as long as Al-ah-Mucky was running Iraq like his private shiaa milita, democracy was a joke, and the thing would turn out badly. So, aside from doing the politician shuffle, I can't really fault Obama. Bushii regieme changed once, and if you do it twice it ceases being regieme change and turns into Diem/Thieu. But, imo, it is fair to blame him for just washing his hands, and walking away. He might have publically and loudly called for Iraq to form a unity govt ... or at least done so even more loudly than he did.

Yes, I like the ending of your post.

It's analogous to leaving Korea after the Korean War. Had we pulled out and left no one there to help keep the gains and left them to themselves, it would've been a mess.

 

[EconChick]

I recall that you people wouldn't allow us to blame Bush for the disaster of Iraq, no WMD's etc., because you claimed it was an intelligence failure that Bush cannot be held accountable for.

Can we apply this argument to Obama?

Are you saying you want it both ways, or is it Obama's fault?

Or was is not Bush's fault?


Which one?

LOL, it's like trying to teach children that 2+2=4 over and over and over, isn't it....

The NeoCons in GWB's cabnet (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Wolfowitz) and his brother Jeb all signed the Statement of Principles for the PNAC. Since one of the above claims to have been party to negotiations with Iraq, we can let her explain why they wanted to invade Iraq in 1997.

I did, idiot????? LOL. I said I spent a lot of time negotiating with Iraqis. Your reading comprehension is so pathetic, LMAO. How does "negotiating with Iraqis" become "party to negotiations with Iraq??? LOL

The reason you don't know the difference is you're so egregiously uneducated about what went on over there.

LOL.

Nevermind, you libs are just hopelessly stupid.

Your claims of being in Iraq are both irrelevant, and because they can't be proven, meaningless.

LOL, there are libs on here that know I was there. They've seen pictures. I know because I monitored them looking.

Now go back to playing with yourself in the basement, which is the epitome of irrelevant to knowing anything about Iraq and therefore meaningless.

You libs are dead. You know it. We know it. Your boy has screwed up so royally that even dum dums are tuning him out now.

But I do appreciate the fight you're putting up....as worthless as it is....because how else would the thread get bumped, LOL.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Are you saying you want it both ways, or is it Obama's fault?

Or was is not Bush's fault?


Which one?

LOL, it's like trying to teach children that 2+2=4 over and over and over, isn't it....

The NeoCons in GWB's cabnet (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Wolfowitz) and his brother Jeb all signed the Statement of Principles for the PNAC. Since one of the above claims to have been party to negotiations with Iraq, we can let her explain why they wanted to invade Iraq in 1997.

I did, idiot????? LOL. I said I spent a lot of time negotiating with Iraqis. Your reading comprehension is so pathetic, LMAO. How does "negotiating with Iraqis" become "party to negotiations with Iraq??? LOL

The reason you don't know the difference is you're so egregiously uneducated about what went on over there.

LOL.

Nevermind, you libs are just hopelessly stupid.

Your claims of being in Iraq are both irrelevant, and because they can't be proven, meaningless.

LOL, there are libs on here that know I was there. They've seen pictures. I know because I monitored them looking.

Now go back to playing with yourself in the basement, which is the epitome of irrelevant to knowing anything about Iraq and therefore meaningless.

You libs are dead. You know it. We know it. Your boy has screwed up so royally that even dum dums are tuning him out now.

But I do appreciate the fight you're putting up....as worthless as it is....because how else would the thread get bumped, LOL.

You can't prove you were in Iraq and it doesn't matter anyway. Lots of idiots have been to Iraq. Lots of idiots who have been to Iraq got the whole deal wrong,

and I got it right, so having been in Iraq proves nothing.

 

[bendog]

W blamed the intell too. Still, I'd have more respect for Obama if he just came out and said as long as Al-ah-Mucky was running Iraq like his private shiaa milita, democracy was a joke, and the thing would turn out badly. So, aside from doing the politician shuffle, I can't really fault Obama. Bushii regieme changed once, and if you do it twice it ceases being regieme change and turns into Diem/Thieu. But, imo, it is fair to blame him for just washing his hands, and walking away. He might have publically and loudly called for Iraq to form a unity govt ... or at least done so even more loudly than he did.

Yes, I like the ending of your post.

It's analogous to leaving Korea after the Korean War. Had we pulled out and left no one there to help keep the gains and left them to themselves, it would've been a mess.

Well, I hadn't thought of it, but that's not a terrible analogy. S.Korea was hardly a bastion of republican thought in 1954, but in contrast to Iraq, there was an ethnically cohesive population. It's no secret that Obama told al-ah-mucky that unless he brought in the sunnis, he'd fail. Bushii told him, Petreaus told him. But I do think Obama found it convenient to use al-ah-mucky's incompetence and thugishness to do what he wanted to do, which was walk away from Iraq. Typical of US for policy. The new potus thinks he gets a fresh slate. No, they don't, not really. The better ones own up to that.

 

[EconChick]

LOL, it's like trying to teach children that 2+2=4 over and over and over, isn't it....

The NeoCons in GWB's cabnet (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Wolfowitz) and his brother Jeb all signed the Statement of Principles for the PNAC. Since one of the above claims to have been party to negotiations with Iraq, we can let her explain why they wanted to invade Iraq in 1997.

I did, idiot????? LOL. I said I spent a lot of time negotiating with Iraqis. Your reading comprehension is so pathetic, LMAO. How does "negotiating with Iraqis" become "party to negotiations with Iraq??? LOL

The reason you don't know the difference is you're so egregiously uneducated about what went on over there.

LOL.

Nevermind, you libs are just hopelessly stupid.

Your claims of being in Iraq are both irrelevant, and because they can't be proven, meaningless.

LOL, there are libs on here that know I was there. They've seen pictures. I know because I monitored them looking.

Now go back to playing with yourself in the basement, which is the epitome of irrelevant to knowing anything about Iraq and therefore meaningless.

You libs are dead. You know it. We know it. Your boy has screwed up so royally that even dum dums are tuning him out now.

But I do appreciate the fight you're putting up....as worthless as it is....because how else would the thread get bumped, LOL.

You can't prove you were in Iraq and it doesn't matter anyway. Lots of idiots have been to Iraq. Lots of idiots who have been to Iraq got the whole deal wrong,

and I got it right, so having been in Iraq proves nothing.

LOL, now that was hilarious. I'm sure you swayed a lot of people there. LOL

 

[EconChick]

LOL, it's like trying to teach children that 2+2=4 over and over and over, isn't it....

The NeoCons in GWB's cabnet (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Wolfowitz) and his brother Jeb all signed the Statement of Principles for the PNAC. Since one of the above claims to have been party to negotiations with Iraq, we can let her explain why they wanted to invade Iraq in 1997.

I did, idiot????? LOL. I said I spent a lot of time negotiating with Iraqis. Your reading comprehension is so pathetic, LMAO. How does "negotiating with Iraqis" become "party to negotiations with Iraq??? LOL

The reason you don't know the difference is you're so egregiously uneducated about what went on over there.

LOL.

Nevermind, you libs are just hopelessly stupid.

Your claims of being in Iraq are both irrelevant, and because they can't be proven, meaningless.

LOL, there are libs on here that know I was there. They've seen pictures. I know because I monitored them looking.

Now go back to playing with yourself in the basement, which is the epitome of irrelevant to knowing anything about Iraq and therefore meaningless.

You libs are dead. You know it. We know it. Your boy has screwed up so royally that even dum dums are tuning him out now.

But I do appreciate the fight you're putting up....as worthless as it is....because how else would the thread get bumped, LOL.

You can't prove you were in Iraq and it doesn't matter anyway. Lots of idiots have been to Iraq. Lots of idiots who have been to Iraq got the whole deal wrong,

and I got it right, so having been in Iraq proves nothing.

You can't prove you were in Iraq and it doesn't matter anyway.






This quote's too rich!!! Gotta post it again, LOL.

 

[bendog]

Since Mudwhistle accused me of blaming bushii on the other threat, which I didn't do, I think I'll post. Bushi did not expect a total re-deal of the cards on for policy. Weak potuses do, but Bushi didn't He fckied up massively, far more than Obama could even dream of, in invading Iraq, and he threw his intel guys under the bus. But Obama wanted a total re-deal. Iraq was NOT his problem. JFK got the bay of pigs dumped on him. Nixon got Vietnam. Real potuses suck it up and do their best with what the got, even if it's not a lot, but they don't ignore stuff left on the table by the predecessor.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I recall that you people wouldn't allow us to blame Bush for the disaster of Iraq, no WMD's etc., because you claimed it was an intelligence failure that Bush cannot be held accountable for.

Can we apply this argument to Obama?

Are you saying you want it both ways, or is it Obama's fault?

Or was is not Bush's fault?


Which one?

LOL, it's like trying to teach children that 2+2=4 over and over and over, isn't it....

The NeoCons in GWB's cabnet (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Wolfowitz) and his brother Jeb all signed the Statement of Principles for the PNAC. Since one of the above claims to have been party to negotiations with Iraq, we can let her explain why they wanted to invade Iraq in 1997.

I did, idiot????? LOL. I said I spent a lot of time negotiating with Iraqis. Your reading comprehension is so pathetic, LMAO. How does "negotiating with Iraqis" become "party to (THE) negotiations with Iraq??? LOL

The reason you don't know the difference is you're so egregiously uneducated about what went on over there.

LOL.

Nevermind, some of you libs are just hopelessly stupid.

I doubt you did either, as captious as you are, and as poorly as you construct your posts, the closest you have ever come to becoming party to negotiations is when you and other RW Fools argue as to who to listen to - Hannity or Limbaugh.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I recall that you people wouldn't allow us to blame Bush for the disaster of Iraq, no WMD's etc., because you claimed it was an intelligence failure that Bush cannot be held accountable for.

Can we apply this argument to Obama?

Are you saying you want it both ways, or is it Obama's fault?

Or was is not Bush's fault?


Which one?

LOL, it's like trying to teach children that 2+2=4 over and over and over, isn't it....

The NeoCons in GWB's cabnet (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Wolfowitz) and his brother Jeb all signed the Statement of Principles for the PNAC. Since one of the above claims to have been party to negotiations with Iraq, we can let her explain why they wanted to invade Iraq in 1997.

I did, idiot????? LOL. I said I spent a lot of time negotiating with Iraqis. Your reading comprehension is so pathetic, LMAO. How does "negotiating with Iraqis" become "party to (THE) negotiations with Iraq??? LOL

The reason you don't know the difference is you're so egregiously uneducated about what went on over there.

LOL.

Nevermind, some of you libs are just hopelessly stupid.

I doubt you did either, as captious as you are, and as poorly as you construct your posts, the closest you have ever come to becoming party to negotiations is when you and other RW Fools argue as to who to listen to - Hannity or Limbaugh.

Freddo, do yourself a favor and shut the **** up

 

[JakeStarkey]

I don't think any one believes EC was in Iraq in any position more than a SP4.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I don't think any one believes EC was in Iraq in any position more than a SP4.

Doubling down on a losing bet, a Starkey tradition

 

[JakeStarkey]

Frank, it's time for your nap.