Iraq Reverts

[heironymouspasparagus]

Oh, yeah....this is soooo much better than Saddam Hussein...!!    The world is a much better place today!


None of this is any kind of a surprise!  It's just that we as a nation have collectively ignored history.  And now it repeats itself....

[guido911]

Oh, yeah....this is soooo much better than Saddam Hussein...!!    The world is a much better place today!


None of this is any kind of a surprise!  It's just that we as a nation have collectively ignored history.  And now it repeats itself....

I knew it!  Bush's fault. Here's Obama wearing gear that you would find appealing.

[Breadburner]

Ole Mr. Mom Jeans has sure foobared this up.....!!

[Hoss]

Ole Mr. Mom Jeans has sure foobared this up.....!!

And remind me who it was that got us in Iraq in the first place?

[heironymouspasparagus]

I knew it!  Bush's fault. Here's Obama wearing gear that you would find appealing.

At last you finally do understand!  It IS Bush's fault.  We should never have been there to start and would not have been except for the sense of entitlement engendered by his raising - his background told him he was entitled to lie in any way needed to get the use of the entire US military any way he wanted with no restraint.

That is what you mean by "entitlement" isn't it?  Since that is the real meaning and all.....

[guido911]

Is there a coup happening in Iraq?

http://www.news.com.au/world/troops-surround-baghdad-green-zone-as-embattled-prime-minister-maliki-appears-to-cling-to-power/story-fndir2ev-1227020033404

I do not think so. Obama said in December 2011 that Iraq was a "a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people."

[Gaspar]

Failure to "community organize."

Best to just sit back and watch this happen.   

[Cats Cats Cats]

We've got a war Bush started to
A troop withdrawl treaty signed by Bush to remove troops from Iraq
A Prime Minister fanning the flames that was brought in by Bush to lead.
Luckily Bush looked al-Maliki in the eyes.  he wouldn't try to start a coup against an elected government would he?  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/17/AR2006061700662.html

[guido911]

Never quite understood why Obama would say this if by treaty all the troops would be home anyway.

THE PRESIDENT:  Good afternoon, everybody.  As a candidate for President, I pledged to bring the war in Iraq to a responsible end -- for the sake of our national security and to strengthen American leadership around the world.  After taking office, I announced a new strategy that would end our combat mission in Iraq and remove all of our troops by the end of 2011.
   
As Commander-in-Chief, ensuring the success of this strategy has been one of my highest national security priorities.  Last year, I announced the end to our combat mission in Iraq.  And to date, we've removed more than 100,000 troops.  Iraqis have taken full responsibility for their country's security.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/10/21/remarks-president-ending-war-iraq

(Emphasis).

But with his "new strategy" he took credit for the removal of troops from Iraq. Now, of course, it was someone's fault the U.S. is not there. Is it Bush's fault? Mailiki? Who know, we just know it's not Obama. From the article:

"This issue keeps on coming up as if this was my decision," Obama retorted when asked if he had any second thoughts, in light of the terrorist force taking over regions of Iraq, about having pulled all American troops out of the country. "The reason that we did not have a follow-on force in Iraq was because a majority of Iraqis did not want U.S. troops there and politically they could not pass the kind of laws that would be required to protect our troops in Iraq," he said.

A report in The New Yorker showed how President Obama failed to secure the status of forces agreement necessary to leave the troops in place after 2011.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/385069/obama-not-my-decision-pull-troops-out-iraq-joel-gehrke

So much for that ol' Bush treaty. And ENOUGH about Iraq being Bush's war. Do we need to trot out the videos of Biden, Hillary, Clenis, Harry Reid, and everyone else who was favoring regime change? Do we really? Oh, okay.

So stop rewriting history Sheen and Sons and deal with the fact there was a war, it was won, we got rid of a threat even RM believes was necessary. Obama is now president, and all that is happening right now is on Obama. Not Bush, not Blair. ON OBAMA. Hell, this mess with ISIS could been minimized if Barry wasn't not drawing his little wussified red lines in the sand in Syria--where ISIS grew. I guess that was Bush's fault too, right?

And here's some BS from politifact with a "pants on fire" ranking on rewriting history.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/sep/16/democrats-supporting-syria-action-rewrite-history-/

[heironymouspasparagus]

But with his "new strategy" he took credit for the removal of troops from Iraq. Now, of course, it was someone's fault the U.S. is not there. Is it Bush's fault? Mailiki? Who know, we just know it's not Obama. From the article:

You gotta step away from the Faux Non-News a little bit....  It isn't someone else' fault we aren't there - it's someone else' (Baby Bush) fault we were there to start with and got this big ole stinkin' pile of carp mess that exists now in Iraq!

Focus!!

[guido911]

You gotta step away from the Faux Non-News a little bit....  It isn't someone else' fault we aren't there - it's someone else' (Baby Bush) fault we were there to start with and got this big ole stinkin' pile of carp mess that exists now in Iraq!

Focus!!

I am focused. One thing is certain, it is not Saddam Hussein's fault we invaded. He did nothing.

[Townsend]

Well Hell, let's do something about this.

You guys pull the truck 'round.  I'll grab the twizzlers.

[Gaspar]

Never quite understood why Obama would say this if by treaty all the troops would be home anyway.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/10/21/remarks-president-ending-war-iraq

(Emphasis).

But with his "new strategy" he took credit for the removal of troops from Iraq. Now, of course, it was someone's fault the U.S. is not there. Is it Bush's fault? Mailiki? Who know, we just know it's not Obama. From the article:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/385069/obama-not-my-decision-pull-troops-out-iraq-joel-gehrke

So much for that ol' Bush treaty. And ENOUGH about Iraq being Bush's war. Do we need to trot out the videos of Biden, Hillary, Clenis, Harry Reid, and everyone else who was favoring regime change? Do we really? Oh, okay.


So stop rewriting history Sheen and Sons and deal with the fact there was a war, it was won, we got rid of a threat even RM believes was necessary. Obama is now president, and all that is happening right now is on Obama. Not Bush, not Blair. ON OBAMA. Hell, this mess with ISIS could been minimized if Barry wasn't not drawing his little wussified red lines in the sand in Syria--where ISIS grew. I guess that was Bush's fault too, right?

And here's some BS from politifact with a "pants on fire" ranking on rewriting history.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/sep/16/democrats-supporting-syria-action-rewrite-history-/

To blame Bush is simply a convenience. He followed through on what Bill Clinton and the UN threatened would happen if Iraq withdrew from the inspection process, and did exactly what the US said it would do if Iraq crossed the red line.  At least he understood what a red line was.  To say that anything Obama has done is positive, is ridiculous.  He has been nothing but political on everything foreign and domestic, with little or no regard for the consequences.  He just seems to leap from one poor decision to another, until only one course of action remains.

That does not change the fact that it was our mistake for getting involved in the first place. . .and by "first place" I mean participating in the creation of wealthy, powerful, weaponized tyrannies, fueled by a hunger for cheap energy, and a disregard for our own free market principals.

Wealth is dangerous when not earned, and power is destructive when not deserved. We are guilty of arresting the development of whole civilizations by subsidizing them, allowing their economies, governments, and people to remain culturally primitive, devoid of innovation and evolution.  Most of these, especially Iraq, are made up of tribal groups that still refuse to recognize government, and for good reason.  They have been subject to puppet after puppet, and generations of war and hunger caused by the tug of war.  Our gift to them has always been the guns that kill their children, paid for with oil that allows soccer moms in Iowa to drive to their pedicures.

Bush has no more guilt than all of those before him, and he who followed. They just generate different mythology to justify their actions.
It will have to stop at some point.
Either the slaves die or they kill the master.
Until then the bullshitt will continue.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop
weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom
line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want
to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction
program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here.
For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or
biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since
1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.
Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and
missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by
Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry,
and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made
a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs.
Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and
may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine
delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to
develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others,
Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to
the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United
Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering
them "  Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons
throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and
we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that
Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and
that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and
biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking
nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force
— if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly
arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to
our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to
develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five
years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress
Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every
significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his
chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to
do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam
Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his
missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort,
and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that
if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage
biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam
Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the
production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we
need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an
oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so
consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam
Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

[rebound]

TL/DR...

[Conan71]

To blame Bush is simply a convenience. He followed through on what Bill Clinton and the UN threatened would happen if Iraq withdrew from the inspection process, and did exactly what the US said it would do if Iraq crossed the red line.  At least he understood what a red line was.  To say that anything Obama has done is positive, is ridiculous.  He has been nothing but political on everything foreign and domestic, with little or no regard for the consequences.  He just seems to leap from one poor decision to another, until only one course of action remains.

That does not change the fact that it was our mistake for getting involved in the first place. . .and by "first place" I mean participating in the creation of wealthy, powerful, weaponized tyrannies, fueled by a hunger for cheap energy, and a disregard for our own free market principals.

Wealth is dangerous when not earned, and power is destructive when not deserved. We are guilty of arresting the development of whole civilizations by subsidizing them, allowing their economies, governments, and people to remain culturally primitive, devoid of innovation and evolution.  Most of these, especially Iraq, are made up of tribal groups that still refuse to recognize government, and for good reason.  They have been subject to puppet after puppet, and generations of war and hunger caused by the tug of war.  Our gift to them has always been the guns that kill their children, paid for with oil that allows soccer moms in Iowa to drive to their pedicures.

Bush has no more guilt than all of those before him, and he who followed. They just generate different mythology to justify their actions.
It will have to stop at some point.
Either the slaves die or they kill the master.
Until then the bullshitt will continue.

Never heard Bush blame Clinton for us ending up in Iraq nor the recession he inherited as he came into office either.