 |
Sure have hearings ,knock yourself out.. Call in all the intelligence people from all over the world to testify what they knew prior to the war . Call in the intel experts from a decade worth of work from 2 administrations that swore to the fact . Call in the UN inspectors who were saying weeks before the war that the WMD was still there . Maybe they will ALL say they were fooled by the all clever Saddam Hussein ,or even better... fooled by Chalabi .Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Hello again,
Let me see if I've got this straight... There WERE WMD, even though we couldn't find them, the CIA was right, and so was Bush.. And, the REASON we lost, is because Obama walked away.
Dudes!
excon
We got them... there was even news reports on it... just because the left wants to ignore that fact doesn't change the reality of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Yes and yes. When Bush left office there was a status of forces agreement between the United States and the democratically elected government in Baghdad. AQ in Iraq was crushed but not yet defeated ,and the Shia had settled for a political deal. All that was left was the time for the new government to develop it's own security structure .
In the 4 years since ;after the Obots failed to renew the status of forces agreement ,the security situation has worsened ,and AQ in Iraq is on the rebound (with it's sister organization the al -Nusra front in Syria.) All that is on Obama's watch . He lost it .
When Bush left office , the Baathists' 40-year stranglehold on Iraq was over . We had liberated 25 million people from one of the most vicious regimes the region has produced. We put an end to Saddam Hussein and his deadly ambitions, which had provoked three wars in two decades in the region that had taken MILLIONS of lives .
All that was squandered under Obama who made the conscious choice to turn victory into defeat .
Oh yeah ,let's dispel another lie your side told... The claim that America invaded to “steal” Iraq's oil has been exposed as the lie it was.
A real possibility since it was suggested they were buried in Syria, but Bush didn't pursue themQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
The lefty pantywastes had enough problems over us finding the ones still in Iraq because it proved them wrong... they would have had strokes if we went after them in Syria.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Yes you can only fight one war at a time
The Democrat party was Supporters of the Syrian Dictator... he's one of the FIRST people Obama visited after he was elected. He's in his Fifth year and it's the first visit to Israel just now... that speaks volumes.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
I was discussing a Bush war not an Obama war, Obama doesn't do war well
Obama doesn't do anything well. Except maybe read a teleprompter... he's good at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
More than a possibility... there was a convoy of trucks leaving Iraq ,and cargo planes flying into Syria in the days leading up to the invasion. Perhaps if Bush didn't have a decent respect to the opinions of mankind ,then he wouldn't have wasted months making the case to the world before the invasion. I'll add why I think the President didn't expand the war into Syria and Iran later ,although you probably already know the answer to that .Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Resources, money, crediabilityQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
If we wanted we could really turn that entire country into a desert devoid of human life in a matter of days... without resorting to nuclear weapons.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
But that would upset the measured response panty wastes...
Partly true except the last one . No there were more complex factors involved . 1st ;post invasion the effort shifted to stabilizing the nation ;finding Saddam and his top officers ,combating his guerilla war . In this effort we had successes and failures .The failures was in the State Dept's post invasion administration of the country . A poor decision was made in not having the Iraqis form a govern
Ent .Instead we set up a provisional government with a Viceroy . That was a mistake.
During this time AQ had decided that Iraq would be the central front of the jihad . They were infiltrating through Syria ;but expanding the war with incursions into Syria and /or Iran (Syria's ally ) would've made it a regional war . Having the center of gravity in Iraq was in our interest .
But AQ did something that I don't think was expected. They blew up the golden Mosque; and plunged the nation into a civil war. Now our troops were dealing with fighting both AQ ,and various warring factions of the civil war.
We made political arrangement with the Shia when they got tired of fighting us ;and then we turned the Sunni's ;who in turn turned on AQ . Iraqi's twice went to the polls ,and they were on their way toward building their own free nation without the jack boot of a brutal totalitarian dictator.
We signed a treaty to assist in the nations security ,like we have done with other nations like South Korea and Europe (where American troops still have bases ) .
It was victory by anyone's standard .
Then Obama was elected and he squandered everything .
Here is a short answer .Once Saddam was captured ,tried by free Iraqi's and executed ,the emphasis shifted from finding and securing the WMD ,to securing the nation.
I recall the same attitude towards Iraq and you did lay waste to a lot of the country thus you have no friends there now. But why hesitate, WMD are on the agenda again, the excuse has risen once more and the opportunity to destroy one more Baathist regime.Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
The days of a coalition of the willing are gone, we won't make that mistake again. You want war with Syria to revive your flagging economy, off you go
I hear violins playing again...Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Oh.. keep that sentiment in mind when China starts flexing its muscle in your back yard.
Really what are they playing this time... when johnny comes marching homeQuote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
I remember the Japanese
China isn't the issue there are bigger issues than China, Iran and NK are the big issues for you, China is sitting on the sidelines watching. China has a long history of staying in their traditional lands even if you want to debate what those lands might be. In any case we do business with China
When they decide to move in... and decide to move a few hundred MIllion other Chinese in with them... keep that thought in mind...Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Big deal we already have a Chinese population, nice people, industrious and your geography needs updating, this continent will not support hundreds of millions of people and in any case you can't walk here. You are more likely to have a problem with Chinese than we are once they decide they want their money backQuote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
China has massive amounts of water this is why they can support the population they have, we don't, water supply is already becoming a problem despite recent flooding. This is a very dry place and only a relatively small area is arable two hundred miles from the coast, maybe
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:30 AM. |