Politico: The Man Who Broke The Middle East

No, it was terrorist attacks against the United States. And Saddam Hussein's defiance of United Nations resolutions. And Saddam Hussein's rejection of Bush's ultimatum. And flawed intelligence. And democraps, 111 of whom voted FOR the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. And a bunch of other factors. It's leftist revisionist nonsense to put all the blame on Bush and "neocons."

Bush's Legacy is alive and thriving.
Bush, Cheyney and (known-unknown)Rumsfeld. :mad: .
 
Right, but isn't it rather well-established that Saddam Hussein didn't have anything to do with Al-Qaeda? As to the defiance of UN resolutions, isn't it also reasonably accepted now that these violations do not represent a sufficient justification for military action? And yes, 111 Democrats and 263 Republicans voted for the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.

As to a residual force, would the American people be happy if their soldiers keep dying in Iraq? I thought that there was pretty clear consensus (not just in the US) that the people want out...

Your points, while all are technically true and clearly recorded in the public record, point to a troubling, and ultimately unacceptable, conclusion: Obama did not break the Middle East.

Therefore... Obamacare!
 
Your points, while all are technically true and clearly recorded in the public record, point to a troubling, and ultimately unacceptable, conclusion: Obama did not break the Middle East.

Therefore... Obamacare!

Just because you weren't the guy who dropped the vase on the floor doesn't mean you're not the guy who used a sledge hammer to bash it into tiny pieces.
 
Right, but isn't it rather well-established that Saddam Hussein didn't have anything to do with Al-Qaeda? As to the defiance of UN resolutions, isn't it also reasonably accepted now that these violations do not represent a sufficient justification for military action? And yes, 111 Democrats and 263 Republicans voted for the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.

As to a residual force, would the American people be happy if their soldiers keep dying in Iraq? I thought that there was pretty clear consensus (not just in the US) that the people want out...
As I said... flawed intelligence was a factor and it wasn't the defiance of UN resolutions alone. Not that we would cede our right to use military force if we feel it's necessary anyway. BTW... did you watch the video? From all the leftist revisionist history, you'd never think any of those democraps said what they did.

About the residual force... Odumbo should have listened to his commanders and explained to the people why it's necessary. Because, like it or not, we have vital national interests in the middle east that won't go away simply because we decide to.
 
Bush's Legacy is alive and thriving.
Bush, Cheyney and (known-unknown)Rumsfeld. :mad: .
So is Odumbo's legacy of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory by ignoring his commanders on the ground who said we needed a residual force of ~20,000.

And let's not forget that Iraq was going so well when Odumbo inherited it that Biden predicted it would be one of the "great achievements of this administration."

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/tLteUGkvpOc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
What does healthcare have to do with it? I'll tell you what. You leftists want Cheney to shut up because he was wrong. Why don't you want Obama to shut up about healthcare?


Bush got the ball rolling? You mean Iraq and Iran at war, Iraq invading Kuwait war, etc., etc were something like 'good, inconsequential' wars, but Isis invading Iraq is a 'bad, very consequential' war?
I don't follow the healthcare debates, as it's a domestic US issue. I am not a leftist and I don't support Obama, so please apply your labels elsewhere.

Until Bush and his merry band of neocons, the US never had such a lengthy and costly - in every way - commitment to the project of Middle East "regime change". At any rate, Putin, as usual, had much more foresight and wisdom to offer on this issue (in 2003) than any American politician. But, obviously, the American people and the political establishment wouldn't listen to an "evil dictator" like Putin. I hope they will listen to Rand Paul...
 
So is Odumbo's legacy of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory by ignoring his commanders on the ground who said we needed a residual force of ~20,000.

And let's not forget that Iraq was going so well when Odumbo inherited it that Biden predicted it would be one of the "great achievements of this administration."

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/tLteUGkvpOc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

LOL! That's a priceless video.
 
I don't follow the healthcare debates, as it's a domestic US issue. I am not a leftist and I don't support Obama, so please apply your labels elsewhere.

Until Bush and his merry band of neocons, the US never had such a lengthy and costly - in every way - commitment to the project of Middle East "regime change". At any rate, Putin, as usual, had much more foresight and wisdom to offer on this issue (in 2003) than any American politician. But, obviously, the American people and the political establishment wouldn't listen to an "evil dictator" like Putin. I hope they will listen to Rand Paul...


I was always for getting the terrorists and whatever regime supported them, never for staying there and nation building. I can't see letting the terrorists get away with murder against us.

Funny how you aren't aware of the healthcare debate because it's a domestic US issue but you seem to think you know the feelings of the American people about Putin. Maybe you should consider that the headlines in newspapers doesn't realistically reflect the popularity in the US of Putin. Or Obama.
 
Until Bush and his merry band of neocons...
You're leaving out the context of increasingly severe terrorist attacks culminating in 9/11, plus all the other factors which absolutely is leftist revisionist history, whether you're a leftist or not.
 
Back
Top