So now, BUSH caused ISIS?

[Rexx Taylor]

i have an idea. lets get the five most obvious suspects, put them in a police line-up, and then lets get the smartest woman in the world "Kellie Pickler" to pick out the culprit, and end it already.

this "Who Created ISIS" debacle is becoming more like the "Who Hired You" scandal of the clinton years.

 

[Boss]

Getting out of wars is harder than getting into them. Everyone knows this.
Bush lied. That it took this long to clean up the mess takes nothing away from that.

Like most liberals you are full of shit. Bush didn't lie, and everything Bush told you would happen is happening. No mess was made and no mess has been cleaned up... goofball.

Again, let's walk through this... Bush sought and received Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq... YOU claim that he told them lies to fool them into voting for it... Okay, at the point where those who were lied to realized they were lied to, a special session of Congress would be in order. Not only would the Authorization be repealed but Bush would probably be impeached as well. That's how our system of checks and balances work in this country.

Now over in Communist countries, maybe the president can lie and take the country to war? Perhaps that is where you're getting confused.

Uh, no, guy. The Jews weren't living in Palestine.

LMAO... No, because there has never BEEN a Palestine!

They were living in Europe....

No, they lived in Israel 4,000 years ago. It's their original homeland, they were "invaded and occupied" by radical Muslims and forced into slavery then exile by Egypt.

They settled on Palestine because they had taken it from the Ottomans and it was an easier sell.

This is just more of your Jew-hating nonsense. There has never in the history of the world been a ******* PALESTINE! Not when the Ottomans had it, Not when the Muslims had it, not when the Egyptians had it... NEVER! It is a country that has NEVER existed.

 

[flacaltenn]

Getting out of wars is harder than getting into them. Everyone knows this.
Bush lied. That it took this long to clean up the mess takes nothing away from that.

Like most liberals you are full of shit. Bush didn't lie, and everything Bush told you would happen is happening. No mess was made and no mess has been cleaned up... goofball.

Again, let's walk through this... Bush sought and received Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq... YOU claim that he told them lies to fool them into voting for it... Okay, at the point where those who were lied to realized they were lied to, a special session of Congress would be in order. Not only would the Authorization be repealed but Bush would probably be impeached as well. That's how our system of checks and balances work in this country.

Now over in Communist countries, maybe the president can lie and take the country to war? Perhaps that is where you're getting confused.

Uh, no, guy. The Jews weren't living in Palestine.

LMAO... No, because there has never BEEN a Palestine!

They were living in Europe....

No, they lived in Israel 4,000 years ago. It's their original homeland, they were "invaded and occupied" by radical Muslims and forced into slavery then exile by Egypt.

They settled on Palestine because they had taken it from the Ottomans and it was an easier sell.

This is just more of your Jew-hating nonsense. There has never in the history of the world been a ******* PALESTINE! Not when the Ottomans had it, Not when the Muslims had it, not when the Egyptians had it... NEVER! It is a country that has NEVER existed.

The better solution would have been to lower the sanctions and leave Sadam Hussein in power. All the Europeans had already reached that conclusion. Just like the better decision right now would be to stop villifying Assad in Syria and assist in cleaning up that insurrection with a couple guarantees from Assad on NOT purging the real freedom fighters that are the tiny minority of the conflict there.

 

[Boss]

Uh, guy, now we wouldn't.

Here's the problem with fracking and offshore drilling and such, besides the awful environmental consequences, is that it ONLY makes sense if the price of oil is high. If gasoline was 50 cents a gallon, no one would frack, because they'd lose money. The reason why the Arabs have such a stranglehold on the oil market is that their oil is still pretty easy to get at.

Face it, you are an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about. The reason the Arabs have such a stranglehold on the World Oil Market (which is where we all purchase oil from) is because they produce most of it.

The population is becoming more radicalized because we left and the terrorist elements took over in the vacuum like Bush and everyone warned you would happen if we didn't establish a stable democracy in Iraq. We are following YOUR policy, doing what YOU wanted to do and the results are YOUR fault. Enjoy what you've created!

Uh, no, guy. Bush fucked this up by destroying the only stable government those folks have had in their history. Because Saddam made his Daddy look bad.

Well no, we've already proven you are factually inaccurate. Regime change in Iraq was a matter of legal US foreign policy since 1998, two years before Bush took office.

Bush didn't **** anything up except the "lead-up" to the war. He shouldn't have wasted all the time with the UN and resolutions, or trying to get liberal democrats on board. If he had nailed Saddam hard and unexpectedly, I imagine we would have found the WMDs and more.

No, the fucked up mess that is currently our ME foreign policy is the fault of Obama, Kerry and Hillary Clinton... and that case will be made during this election cycle.

 

[JoeB131]

The Arabs have a stranglehold on the oil market?.....Ahh boy...
The uninformed sound off again....Jeez.
Which awful environmental consequences?
Accidents happen....Do you drive a car? Ever been in a swimming pool? Use a toaster? been caught in a thunderstorm?
If risk averse people like you ran the country we'd be living in hovels......eating stone soup

As opposed to stupid people like you, who happily send poor kids off to die for rich people.

Seriously. **** you.

 

[JoeB131]

Well no, we've already proven you are factually inaccurate. Regime change in Iraq was a matter of legal US foreign policy since 1998, two years before Bush took office.

Bush didn't **** anything up except the "lead-up" to the war. He shouldn't have wasted all the time with the UN and resolutions, or trying to get liberal democrats on board. If he had nailed Saddam hard and unexpectedly, I imagine we would have found the WMDs and more.

No, the fucked up mess that is currently our ME foreign policy is the fault of Obama, Kerry and Hillary Clinton... and that case will be made during this election cycle.

Uh, no, guy. there were no WMD's. Never were.

The thing was, his OWN GENERALS told him invading Iraq was a terrible idea.

But this POS who couldn't even show up to National Guard Drills and his crooked Veep who got five deferrments decided these decorated career soldiers didn't know what they were talking about and invaded anyway.

And now we are a lot worse off.

 

[JoeB131]

The better solution would have been to lower the sanctions and leave Sadam Hussein in power. All the Europeans had already reached that conclusion. Just like the better decision right now would be to stop villifying Assad in Syria and assist in cleaning up that insurrection with a couple guarantees from Assad on NOT purging the real freedom fighters that are the tiny minority of the conflict there.

Uh, the thing is, Assad is too far gone. He's probably gone in the next six months, and we are going to see a partition of the country between the Free Syrian Army and the ISIL.

Which is what the Zionists wanted.

Why do we keep letting them dictate policy again?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Boss 11590024

No, the fucked up mess that is currently our ME foreign policy is the fault of Obama, Kerry and Hillary Clinton... and that case will be made during this election cycle.

Bring that on with little brother Jeb as your candidate. There is no case that the current crisis in the ME was 'made' sometime after 2009. Obama considered it a dumb war before the same advisers now advising Jeb were saying it was a great idea to first invade Baghdad as a jump off point to invade the prize. Real men go to Tehran they said. And knock off Assad too.

The entire post 911 war plan was an utter failure which includes the weakening of our
Military and Diplomatic and strategic war plan in Afghanistan.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Boss 11590024

Bush didn't **** anything up except the "lead-up" to the war. He shouldn't have wasted all the time with the UN and resolutions, or trying to get liberal democrats on board. If he had nailed Saddam hard and unexpectedly,

Thanks you just made HRC's yes vote no more of an issue that can be labeled a vote for the Iraq war. The reason she voted yes was to stop exactly what you just described which remained the Cheney policy throughout the run up to invasion. The AUMF in October would never have received any Democrat support if it did not contain language that would lead to the peaceful disarmament through the UN of potential Iraq's WMDs.

Bush prior to the vote told Dems like Senator Clinton that he preferred the UN route instead of war but the AUMF was needed "if necessary" in the event that Saddam Hussein did not let the inspectors back in or the UN did not act.

The UN acted and SH cooperated - So Bush lied in October 2002 saying he wanted peace and then lied again in March 2003 saying he had Intel that WMD was being hidden from those inspectors that Bush wanted to handle the WMD matters.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Boss 11590024

Bush didn't **** anything up except the "lead-up" to the war. He shouldn't have wasted all the time with the UN and resolutions, or trying to get liberal democrats on board. If he had nailed Saddam hard and unexpectedly,

Do you think it was wrong of Bush to see the need to have the Brits involved as a major partner for the invasion of Iraq as he did?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Boss 11589887

Bush didn't lie, and everything Bush told you would happen is happening.

Of course Bush43 lied when he said he wanted peaceful disarmament through the UN. You criticize Bush for going through the UN so you must know that he lied because the UN and Iraq were working toward peaceful verification of disarmament when a Bush lied again and claimed they were not doing so.

But where on earth do you think Bush43 told us what bad news would happen if all US troops were out of Iraq cities by June 2009 and completely gone by the end of 2011. He agreed to that in December 2008.

Obama got a ten year SOFA in Afghanistan. Bush virtually surrendered to Iraq in 2008 getting a measely 3 year deal. If it's true that Bush warned that three years was not enough time then he had no business accepting such a short term deal.

I know he never said what you think he said. The Quote often cited by right wing morons was in 2007 and about something else and terrorists have not taken over Iraq except some parts of Sunni areas of Iraq.

So you are absolutely wrong to repeat that bogus Bush prediction.

 

[Boss]

The Arabs have a stranglehold on the oil market?.....Ahh boy...
The uninformed sound off again....Jeez.
Which awful environmental consequences?
Accidents happen....Do you drive a car? Ever been in a swimming pool? Use a toaster? been caught in a thunderstorm?
If risk averse people like you ran the country we'd be living in hovels......eating stone soup

As opposed to stupid people like you, who happily send poor kids off to die for rich people.

Seriously. **** you.

You're the "stupid people" as you've clearly demonstrated here. First of all, we don't round up poor kids and put them in the Army to go fight wars for rich people. That's apparently something that happens in the Liberal Utopian Universe and not the normal one. In the normal universe, young men and women VOLUNTEER to serve their country and they are aware that this may involve deployment where their lives may be at risk and people may shoot at them. Secondly, voters don't send anyone to war... Congress does that, and only Congress has that authority according to the Constitution.

You are a textbook example of someone who has been brainwashed by propaganda. I honestly don't know if there is a way to deprogram you at this point, I am hoping we can avoid having to put you down like a rabid dog.

 

[Boss]

Well no, we've already proven you are factually inaccurate. Regime change in Iraq was a matter of legal US foreign policy since 1998, two years before Bush took office.

Bush didn't **** anything up except the "lead-up" to the war. He shouldn't have wasted all the time with the UN and resolutions, or trying to get liberal democrats on board. If he had nailed Saddam hard and unexpectedly, I imagine we would have found the WMDs and more.

No, the fucked up mess that is currently our ME foreign policy is the fault of Obama, Kerry and Hillary Clinton... and that case will be made during this election cycle.

Uh, no, guy. there were no WMD's. Never were.

The thing was, his OWN GENERALS told him invading Iraq was a terrible idea.

But this POS who couldn't even show up to National Guard Drills and his crooked Veep who got five deferrments decided these decorated career soldiers didn't know what they were talking about and invaded anyway.

And now we are a lot worse off.

But there WERE WMDs, we found tons of depleted ones. He hadn't had time to produce fresh ones due to UNSCOM and sanctions, but all kinds of raw materials and empty missile heads went to Syria along with the technology for production.

No one ever told Bush anything was "a terrible idea." General Colin Powell warned Bush, "If you break it, you buy it." Simply meaning, if you invade Iraq, you own the consequences. As for Bush and Cheney's military records, it doesn't matter... they were legitimately elected by the people just like Obama who has no military record.

We're worse off now because we gave up the fight and abandoned the War on Terror. In 2008, our strategy changed to the liberal democrat strategy of diplomacy, negotiation, sticking our heads in the sand and ignoring the problems until they bite us in the ass. Obama was going to "talk to them" and make things right... Kerry went over there to spread good will and negotiate peace. Now it's all blowing up in his stupid mashed potato face just like everyone warned would happen. And predictably, when it all goes tits up, you find a way to spin it into the fault of Bush and Republicans.

 

[Boss]

Boss 11590024

No, the fucked up mess that is currently our ME foreign policy is the fault of Obama, Kerry and Hillary Clinton... and that case will be made during this election cycle.

Bring that on with little brother Jeb as your candidate. There is no case that the current crisis in the ME was 'made' sometime after 2009. Obama considered it a dumb war before the same advisers now advising Jeb were saying it was a great idea to first invade Baghdad as a jump off point to invade the prize. Real men go to Tehran they said. And knock off Assad too.

The entire post 911 war plan was an utter failure which includes the weakening of our
Military and Diplomatic and strategic war plan in Afghanistan.

For the life of me, I can't see the GOP nominating Jeb Bush. All I can tell you is, IF that happens, this person will NOT be voting for the GOP candidate.

For the record, I totally agree with the premise of establishing a military presence in Iraq for the express purpose of being close enough to take out Iran and Syria if needed.

What has been a complete and utter failure is the liberal democrat attempts to negotiate and have diplomacy with an enemy religiously committed to killing us all.

 

[Boss]

Boss 11590024

Bush didn't **** anything up except the "lead-up" to the war. He shouldn't have wasted all the time with the UN and resolutions, or trying to get liberal democrats on board. If he had nailed Saddam hard and unexpectedly,

Thanks you just made HRC's yes vote no more of an issue that can be labeled a vote for the Iraq war. The reason she voted yes was to stop exactly what you just described which remained the Cheney policy throughout the run up to invasion. The AUMF in October would never have received any Democrat support if it did not contain language that would lead to the peaceful disarmament through the UN of potential Iraq's WMDs.

Bush prior to the vote told Dems like Senator Clinton that he preferred the UN route instead of war but the AUMF was needed "if necessary" in the event that Saddam Hussein did not let the inspectors back in or the UN did not act.

The UN acted and SH cooperated - So Bush lied in October 2002 saying he wanted peace and then lied again in March 2003 saying he had Intel that WMD was being hidden from those inspectors that Bush wanted to handle the WMD matters.

Again... MY argument is, he shouldn't have bothered with ANY of it! **** Hillary Clinton and the Democrats! **** the UN! If Saddam is posing an "imminent threat" as the administration claimed, take his ass out... you have that authority as president. Yeah, people are going to hoop and holler, Democrats are going to writhe and moan about their war powers... but at the end of the day, you took care of the problem in short order and it's done.. over, we can move on.

Sanctions obviously weren't ever going to work. UN inspectors were a total joke and resembled the Keystone Cops in Iraq. And we can speculate all kinds of things if we hadn't invaded and taken out Saddam... what if we had been attacked by some obscure terrorist group who obtained WMDs from Saddam somewhere down the road? You'd all be calling for Bush's head due to sheer negligence.... You mean we had all this information about his WMDs, terrorist training camps, meeting with terrorists, ignoring UN resolutions and Bush sat on his thumbs and let them attack us?

 

[Boss]

Boss 11590024

Bush didn't **** anything up except the "lead-up" to the war. He shouldn't have wasted all the time with the UN and resolutions, or trying to get liberal democrats on board. If he had nailed Saddam hard and unexpectedly,

Do you think it was wrong of Bush to see the need to have the Brits involved as a major partner for the invasion of Iraq as he did?

I see what Bush was trying to do. It was what his dad did in the first Gulf War. You build a coalition so that it doesn't appear to be some "imperialist invasion" and is instead an "international effort." That said, he garnered a fairly significant coalition. Did this do him ANY good? No... His detractors STILL claimed he was an imperial president invading and occupying a sovereign country.

I think that, after 9-11, and with the Bush Doctrine, his best move would have been to go after Saddam even before Afghanistan. No warning, no diplomacy or negotiation, no UN or Congress, just start turning his palaces into rubble and keep bombing him until a piss ant can carry off the biggest piece of Iraq remaining. But Bush didn't want to kill a bunch of innocent Iraqis, this wasn't their fault, they could not help that they had a madman leader. So his "compassionate conservatism" led him to the plan of waging a "clean war" in Iraq, killing bad guys while preserving infrastructure and protecting citizens.

The problem is, this sort of bold unprecedented plan would take time... many years... not a luxury Bush had with 30-40% of the country worked into a fanatical hysteria and ready to send him and Cheney up on war crimes.

 

[Boss]

Boss 11589887

Bush didn't lie, and everything Bush told you would happen is happening.

Of course Bush43 lied when he said he wanted peaceful disarmament through the UN. You criticize Bush for going through the UN so you must know that he lied because the UN and Iraq were working toward peaceful verification of disarmament when a Bush lied again and claimed they were not doing so.

But where on earth do you think Bush43 told us what bad news would happen if all US troops were out of Iraq cities by June 2009 and completely gone by the end of 2011. He agreed to that in December 2008.

Obama got a ten year SOFA in Afghanistan. Bush virtually surrendered to Iraq in 2008 getting a measely 3 year deal. If it's true that Bush warned that three years was not enough time then he had no business accepting such a short term deal.

I know he never said what you think he said. The Quote often cited by right wing morons was in 2007 and about something else and terrorists have not taken over Iraq except some parts of Sunni areas of Iraq.

So you are absolutely wrong to repeat that bogus Bush prediction.

Again, I criticize Bush for going through the UN because it was pointless and a waste of time. It literally gave Saddam time to clean up his act and pretend he was innocent and Bush had lied.

Now... IF... on say, September 14, 2001... US stealth bombers took out most of Saddam's palaces and we were unleashing hell on earth before they even knew we were coming... things would have turned out much differently. You all want to stick with the meme that Bush lied, well... hell, if you're going to lie, just say Saddam was responsible for 9-11 and that's why you're taking him out! Oh... oops, sorry we were mistaken... it was alQaeda, our bad!

 

[flacaltenn]

The better solution would have been to lower the sanctions and leave Sadam Hussein in power. All the Europeans had already reached that conclusion. Just like the better decision right now would be to stop villifying Assad in Syria and assist in cleaning up that insurrection with a couple guarantees from Assad on NOT purging the real freedom fighters that are the tiny minority of the conflict there.

Uh, the thing is, Assad is too far gone. He's probably gone in the next six months, and we are going to see a partition of the country between the Free Syrian Army and the ISIL.

Which is what the Zionists wanted.

Why do we keep letting them dictate policy again?

Take your simplistic Zionist excuses and shove them up your ass. The only thing the Zionists are doing is patching up the wounded and keeping IRAN from moving in. Assad is not to8 far gone if we started to help him against 4 or 5 of our mutual enemies.. The FSA is never gonna govern anything there. But thats not for us to decide. Our only involvement is to make certain ANOTHER void isnt created by our shitty policies....

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I don't know what it is you think you get.

Bush himself warned about the creation of ISIS if we pulled out too precipitously and without a proper status of forces agreement. When Bush left office, there was no ISIS.

Obumbler came INTO office and couldn't give a crap about the status of forces requirement for withdrawal.

Now there is ISIS.

Couldn't possibly be Obumbler's fault, though.

Nah.

 

[Faun]

Yes, Bush caused this...

What are the Islamic State's origins?

The group that calls itself the Islamic State can trace its lineage to the aftermath of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, in 2003. The Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi aligned his Jama’at al-Tawhidw’al-Jihad with al-Qaeda, making it al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI).

Zarqawi’s organization took aim at U.S. forces (PDF), their international allies, and local collaborators. It sought to draw the United States into a sectarian civil war by attacking Shias and their holy sites, including the Imam al-Askari shrine, in 2006, and provoking them to retaliate against Sunnis.

Zarqawi was killed in a U.S. airstrike that year. The emergence of the U.S.-backed Awakening, or Sons of Iraq, coalitions further weakened AQI as Sunni tribesmen reconciled with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s Shia-led government. Zarqawi’s successors rebranded AQI as the Islamic State of Iraq and later, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), referring to a territory that roughly corresponds with the Levant, reflecting broadened ambitions as the 2011 uprising in Syria created opportunities for AQI to expand. The group is known to its followers as il-Dawla (“the State”) and its Arabic-speaking detractors as Daesh, the Arabic equivalent of the acronym ISIS.

The Islamic State’s current leader, the self-proclaimed caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, spent time in U.S.-run prisons in Iraq. Cells organized in them, along with remnants of Saddam Hussein’s ousted secular-nationalist Ba’ath party, make up some of the Islamic State’s ranks.

http://www.cfr.org/iraq/islamic-state/p14811

Lots of opinions.

Your pathetically weak and vapid response is dismissed as the useless noise it was meant to be. Thanks for playin' though.