The WikiLeaks Vindication of George W. Bush

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Man I really don't like the wikileaks people divulging national security secrets.

At the same time I like knowing the secrets.

What a conundrum.

 

[Liability]

* * * *


It is the Bush legacy...he will have to live with it

By any objective measure, the invasion of Iraq was a major ****-up and Bush ordered the invasion

Wrong.

By your always un-objective measure, the liberation of Iraq may have been a ****-up. But to an actually objective measure, it was both a good idea and a success. I grant you it was not as well planned out as it ought to have been (considering the major problems of insurgency and infiltrators from the likes of al qaeda). But that only tells us something we all already know: war is messy and comes with damn few guarantees.

The Bush legacy is being measured by un-objective guys like you in terms of the same partisan crap you spewed while he was serving as President. Despite the proclivities of academic libs to write history in their plodding and predictably slanted fashion, eventually a more coherent assessment of the Bush Administration and the Bush legacy will emerge. It will be far more favorable than you can see or admit. You have no ability at all to be objective. ****. I'm more objective about President Obama than you have ever been or ever could be about Boooooooooooooosh and I am certainly no fan of President Obama.

 

[(R)IGHTeous 1]

* * * *


It is the Bush legacy...he will have to live with it

By any objective measure, the invasion of Iraq was a major ****-up and Bush ordered the invasion

Wrong.

By your always un-objective measure, the liberation of Iraq may have been a ****-up. But to an actually objective measure, it was both a good idea and a success. I grant you it was not as well planned out as it ought to have been (considering the major problems of insurgency and infiltrators from the likes of al qaeda). But that only tells us something we all already know: war is messy and comes with damn few guarantees.

The Bush legacy is being measured by un-objective guys like you in terms of the same partisan crap you spewed while he was serving as President. Despite the proclivities of academic libs to write history in their plodding and predictably slanted fashion, eventually a more coherent assessment of the Bush Administration and the Bush legacy will emerge. It will be far more favorable than you can see or admit. You have no ability at all to be objective. ****. I'm more objective about President Obama than you have ever been or ever could be about Boooooooooooooosh and I am certainly no fan of President Obama.

Beautifully and rightly put, thank you.

 

[BlindBoo]

* * * *


It is the Bush legacy...he will have to live with it

By any objective measure, the invasion of Iraq was a major ****-up and Bush ordered the invasion

Wrong.

By your always un-objective measure, the liberation of Iraq may have been a ****-up. But to an actually objective measure, it was both a good idea and a success. I grant you it was not as well planned out as it ought to have been (considering the major problems of insurgency and infiltrators from the likes of al qaeda). But that only tells us something we all already know: war is messy and comes with damn few guarantees.

The Bush legacy is being measured by un-objective guys like you in terms of the same partisan crap you spewed while he was serving as President. Despite the proclivities of academic libs to write history in their plodding and predictably slanted fashion, eventually a more coherent assessment of the Bush Administration and the Bush legacy will emerge. It will be far more favorable than you can see or admit. You have no ability at all to be objective. ****. I'm more objective about President Obama than you have ever been or ever could be about Boooooooooooooosh and I am certainly no fan of President Obama.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was not a good idea nor have the results been a success. The invasion itself was successful. Of course, we have the world premire military, and Iraq had not been able to rebuild it's military after the First Gulf War. In fact I think the planned invasion and occuaption of Iraq will go down in History as a stategic blunder. Not only did it rock the balance of power in the ME to our enemy Iran, but it threaten the stability of the entire region for at least a generation or more.

 

[rightwinger]

Abandoning the war on terror to attack Iraq was wrong
The reasons for invading Iraq were wrong
The threat from Iraq did not justify an invasion
Not getting a proper alliance was wrong
The number of troops dedicated to the invasion were inadequate
The assessment of the political situation in Iraq was wrong
The assessment of the Iran/Iraq/Saudi balance of power was wrong
The assessment of the vulnerability of US troops was wrong

Major strategic blunder

 

[Liability]

* * * *


It is the Bush legacy...he will have to live with it

By any objective measure, the invasion of Iraq was a major ****-up and Bush ordered the invasion

Wrong.

By your always un-objective measure, the liberation of Iraq may have been a ****-up. But to an actually objective measure, it was both a good idea and a success. I grant you it was not as well planned out as it ought to have been (considering the major problems of insurgency and infiltrators from the likes of al qaeda). But that only tells us something we all already know: war is messy and comes with damn few guarantees.

The Bush legacy is being measured by un-objective guys like you in terms of the same partisan crap you spewed while he was serving as President. Despite the proclivities of academic libs to write history in their plodding and predictably slanted fashion, eventually a more coherent assessment of the Bush Administration and the Bush legacy will emerge. It will be far more favorable than you can see or admit. You have no ability at all to be objective. ****. I'm more objective about President Obama than you have ever been or ever could be about Boooooooooooooosh and I am certainly no fan of President Obama.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was not a good idea nor have the results been a success. The invasion itself was successful. Of course, we have the world premire military, and Iraq had not been able to rebuild it's military after the First Gulf War. In fact I think the planned invasion and occuaption of Iraq will go down in History as a stategic blunder. Not only did it rock the balance of power in the ME to our enemy Iran, but it threaten the stability of the entire region for at least a generation or more.

You could not be more wrong. Going in was a positive thing in MANY respects, not all of which may have been initially apparent and many of which YOU guys wouldn't acknowledge if you had a gun to your heads. As I say, none of you are known for actual objectivity.

And rather than tipping any alleged Middle East "balance of Power" (a meaningless old phrase in this context), it was designed to and DID accomplish the toe hold in the region we needed for prospective future strikes against the true enemy.

That you don't get it doesn't make it a bad thing. Your inability to be objective leads you to your many silly conclusions.

 

[(R)IGHTeous 1]

*The liberation went beautifully.

*We continue to find bits and pieces of evidence proving Saddam was actively pursuing WMDs almost routinely now.

*The surge crushed the insurgency and WON us and our allied coalition (WHICH WAS VARIED AND STRONG) the war.

*We have planted the seed of democratic reform in the Middle East, that will/is repaying us, and will serve as our best ally in that region next to Israel, worth it compared to what we had to deal with before.

Wackos like rightwinger (who I'm starting to suspect is really a leftwinger posing) and BLINDboo continue to spew the same tired, oblivious, isolationist/defeatist diatribe they've likely been spewing for years now, and couldn't be more wrong.

History will judge, and judge with us.

 

[BlindBoo]

Does the OP know that the US replaced the democratically elected Mossadegh with the ruthless Shaw because the latter supported US energy needs?

Well, the UK and the US help out BP to keep the contracts for another 25 years

Does the OP know that Western intervention of this nature only served to push the public into the hands of radical groups?

Does the OP know that Ronald Reagan removed Iraq from the official list of terrorist nations so that he could pump money and weapons into Hussein's hands (for the purpose of gaining an ally in the region, especially after Khomeini defeated the Shaw).?

The Raygun Administration opened the door for all our allies to sell western technology to Iraq. And they did. And so did many American companies. Also unknown to many is that Iraq sent agents abroad to aquire technology that the West was hoping to keep from them too.

Does the OP know that Reagan sold weapons to the world's leading terrorist nation, Iran, in the 80s -- for the purpose of supporting another ruthless group, the Contras?

The original reason they sold weapons to Iran was for Iran to aid with hostage release in Lebanon. The profits were diverted to the Contra's.

Does the OP know that Reagan's CIA developed powerful, lasting ties with the Taliban and the mujahideen (embryonic formation of Al Qaeda) in the 80s... in order to fight against the Russians in Afghanistan?

The weapons and support went through Pakistan. The Taliban and Mujahideen did not know they were being supported by the US.

Carter wanted out of the Middle East through conservation and alternative energy. Reagan, supported by Big Oil and Big Weapons, wanted the opposite: he increased our presence in the Middle East, and formed a network of terrorists alliances that would ultimately radicalize the region and lead to terrible forms of blowback, which -- all tolled -- would get us trapped in the region just like Soviets in the 80s. (Trapped and eventually bankrupted)

Carter wanted to reduce our dependence on foriegn oil but he recanted his policy of Detente. See the Carter Doctrine as to how he felt about the ME when he left office.

Don't take my word for it. Do your own digging bubby. Research who took Iraq off the list of terrorist nations in the 80s. Research the alliances we formed to drive the Russians out of Afghanistan. Research things like Iran-Contra or the money the US has poured into Saudi Arabia, which has amounted to keeping a bad terrorist-breeding regime in power for eons.

Stop listening to Right Wing Talk Radio.

Study the Cold War.

Study the geopolitics of globalization and energy.

You are taught to worry about how the other party is centralizing power in Washington.

Poor thing.

You've been lied to.

Do you know what makes government big and expensive and secretive?

(Hint: it's not welfare food programs for poor school children)

[drum roll] It's the Cold War and the War on Terrorism, whose deep structure depends on alliances with bad people. Washington isn't just centrally controlling the United States, it's centrally controlling the globe on behalf of stateless transnationals who ship American jobs overseas and don't pay taxes for their Pentagon bill.

Turn off the radio my man and start studying exactly who and what makes terrorism stronger.

(wow, just wow)

Embedded comments.

 

[BlindBoo]

*The liberation went beautifully.

*We continue to find bits and pieces of evidence proving Saddam was actively pursuing WMDs almost routinely now.

*The surge crushed the insurgency and WON us and our allied coalition (WHICH WAS VARIED AND STRONG) the war.

*We have planted the seed of democratic reform in the Middle East, that will/is repaying us, and will serve as our best ally in that region next to Israel, worth it compared to what we had to deal with before.

Wackos like rightwinger (who I'm starting to suspect is really a leftwinger posing) and BLINDboo continue to spew the same tired, oblivious, isolationist/defeatist diatribe they've likely been spewing for years now, and couldn't be more wrong.

History will judge, and judge with us.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2w1g-idt-8U[/ame]

There is no evidence Saddam had any active WMD progam after the first Gulf War. None has surfaced and they stopped looking years ago.

The Surge bribed the warring factions in Iraq to stop targeting US soldiers. The violence in Iraq continues and the Civil war has split the country into three parts.

Actually what we have done is destroy one of the most secular countries in the Arab world and left it in a war torn, ruined state where violence is rampant. Oh that and embolden the Islamic radicals in Iran.

Keep on Cheerleading, maybe Mrs. Palin could use you like she did "Joe, the Little Lying Plumbers Helper"

 

[Neotrotsky]

Ancient dried up chemical weapons that were not a threat and not worth the deaths of 4000 American servicemen

Speaking of deaths

WASHINGTON, March 27, 2010 -- Newswire services this morning reported that the number of U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan has roughly doubled


The left and the MSM does not talk about war death as much any more. Almost like they can't use it to their political advantage anymore.....

Funny how that works


Where have you gone Cindy Sheehan
Our nation turns it lonely eyes to you

 

[rightwinger]

My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators." –Vice President Dick Cheney, "Meet the Press," March 16, 2003

I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency." --Vice President Dick Cheney, on the Iraq insurgency, June 20, 2005

 

[rightwinger]

Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed." –President Bush, standing under a "Mission Accomplished" banner on the USS Lincoln aircraft carrier, May 2, 2003

 

[rightwinger]

It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam’s security forces and his army. Hard to imagine." –Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, testifying before the House Budget Committee prior to the Iraq war, Feb. 27, 2003

 

[rightwinger]

We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat." –Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, when asked about weapons of mass destruction in an ABC News interview, March 30, 2003


British intelligence has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." –President Bush, 2003 State of the Union Address

Already, the Kay Report identified dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations." –President Bush, 2004 State of the Union Address

 

[Neotrotsky]

* * * *


It is the Bush legacy...he will have to live with it

By any objective measure, the invasion of Iraq was a major ****-up and Bush ordered the invasion

Wrong.

By your always un-objective measure, the liberation of Iraq may have been a ****-up. But to an actually objective measure, it was both a good idea and a success. I grant you it was not as well planned out as it ought to have been (considering the major problems of insurgency and infiltrators from the likes of al qaeda). But that only tells us something we all already know: war is messy and comes with damn few guarantees.

The Bush legacy is being measured by un-objective guys like you in terms of the same partisan crap you spewed while he was serving as President. Despite the proclivities of academic libs to write history in their plodding and predictably slanted fashion, eventually a more coherent assessment of the Bush Administration and the Bush legacy will emerge. It will be far more favorable than you can see or admit. You have no ability at all to be objective. ****. I'm more objective about President Obama than you have ever been or ever could be about Boooooooooooooosh and I am certainly no fan of President Obama.

It is amazing that Papa Obama and his crew have not managed to F Up Iraq while implementing Bush's exit plans.


But to be fair- Blame Bush is all the Left has left (racism card is worn out)

http://thepeoplescube.com/gallery/others-a54/obamahand-i2146.jpg

 

[rightwinger]

The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy, we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on, which was weapons of mass destruction, as the core reason." --Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, "Vanity Fair" interview, May 28, 2003

 

[rightwinger]

We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." –National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, on Iraq's nuclear capabilities and the Bush administration's case for war, Sept. 8, 2002

 

[rightwinger]

I don't know anybody that I can think of who has contended that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons." –Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, June 24, 2003


We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." –Vice President Dick Cheney, "Meet The Press" March 16, 2003


In Iraq, a ruthless dictator cultivated weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. He gave support to terrorists, had an established relationship with al Qaeda, and his regime is no more." –Vice President Dick Cheney, Nov. 7, 2003

 

[rightwinger]

Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties." —President Bush, discussing the Iraq war with Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson, after Robertson told him he should prepare the American people for casualties

 

[BlindBoo]

Wrong.

By your always un-objective measure, the liberation of Iraq may have been a ****-up. But to an actually objective measure, it was both a good idea and a success. I grant you it was not as well planned out as it ought to have been (considering the major problems of insurgency and infiltrators from the likes of al qaeda). But that only tells us something we all already know: war is messy and comes with damn few guarantees.

The Bush legacy is being measured by un-objective guys like you in terms of the same partisan crap you spewed while he was serving as President. Despite the proclivities of academic libs to write history in their plodding and predictably slanted fashion, eventually a more coherent assessment of the Bush Administration and the Bush legacy will emerge. It will be far more favorable than you can see or admit. You have no ability at all to be objective. ****. I'm more objective about President Obama than you have ever been or ever could be about Boooooooooooooosh and I am certainly no fan of President Obama.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was not a good idea nor have the results been a success. The invasion itself was successful. Of course, we have the world premire military, and Iraq had not been able to rebuild it's military after the First Gulf War. In fact I think the planned invasion and occuaption of Iraq will go down in History as a stategic blunder. Not only did it rock the balance of power in the ME to our enemy Iran, but it threaten the stability of the entire region for at least a generation or more.

You could not be more wrong. Going in was a positive thing in MANY respects, not all of which may have been initially apparent and many of which YOU guys wouldn't acknowledge if you had a gun to your heads. As I say, none of you are known for actual objectivity.

And rather than tipping any alleged Middle East "balance of Power" (a meaningless old phrase in this context), it was designed to and DID accomplish the toe hold in the region we needed for prospective future strikes against the true enemy.

That you don't get it doesn't make it a bad thing. Your inability to be objective leads you to your many silly conclusions.

Needless to say I disagree. I can't really say I find you objective either. But feel free to list some of these so call positive things and we'll see.

As far as the Balance of Power in the ME being a meaningless and old phrase I refer you to President Bushes reasons for not Removing Saddam in the First Gulf war.

Reasons Not to Invade Iraq, By George Bush Sr.