Second Iraq city falls to Al Qaeda-aligned militants

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
In defense of Dubya (yes, really)

He was in power for 8 months when 9-11 happened........I think the failure to deal with Osama et al hardly rests with him alone.

Saddam Hussein was a looney who ignored the cease-fire signed 10 years before. WMDs or no, there were LOTS of reasons to whack Iraq.......that said, the Americans failed to foresee a continuing insurrection, as they firmly believe EVERYONE wants to be an American at heart, and they are wrong.

They really had no other option with Afghanistan. As, in a few years, they will have no other option but to re-invade Iraq.....unless, of course, the lunatic Islamists get all obsessed with their own war, and Iraq (Sunni) and Iran (Shia) go at it yet again. It is an awful thing when the best possible future is never-ending bloody war.

Yeah, he flopped big time on Katrina.

Dubya was not malicious, he just wasn't up to the job. He was, even at that, much more competent than Obama. Like I said, he may have started the wars, he did not LOSE them.......

Oh, as for the economy, you should check out who deregulated Wall Street (Clinton) and who co-sponsored a (failed) bill to re-regulate the Wall Street Scum (McCain),

There was no reason to invade Iraq.
Much better ways were available.
Less cost in blood & treasure.
 

Corduroy

Senate Member
Feb 9, 2011
6,670
2
36
Vancouver, BC
There were plenty of reasons to invade Iraq. None of them were Bush's stated reason (WMDs) or his actual reasons (government contracts for his friends).
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
There were plenty of reasons to invade Iraq. None of them were Bush's stated reason (WMDs) or his actual reasons (government contracts for his friends).

Revisionists (see your mirror) consistently forget that the belief in the existence of Saddam's WMDs was extremely widespread (think in terms of the 97% GW consensus) for three reasons

1. he gassed the Kurds during the Iran-Iraq War.
2. he was breaking every part of the cease-fire agreement
3. by his own admission, he was trying to make Iran believe he had WMD.

As for Bush's actual reasons, I think he felt (correctly) it was a job left undone, he believed in WMD, and the Iraqis had plotted to kill his Pa. That made it personal. Dubya IS a Texan, you know.

There was much Dubya did I do not like (see the Patriot Act, rendition, torture, and the massive security apparatus in the USA) but I do not see him as an evil man.

Just overwhelmed by the circumstances.
 

Corduroy

Senate Member
Feb 9, 2011
6,670
2
36
Vancouver, BC
Revisionists (see your mirror) consistently forget that the belief in the existence of Saddam's WMDs was extremely widespread (think in terms of the 97% GW consensus) for three reasons

1. he gassed the Kurds during the Iran-Iraq War.
2. he was breaking every part of the cease-fire agreement
3. by his own admission, he was trying to make Iran believe he had WMD.

As for Bush's actual reasons, I think he felt (correctly) it was a job left undone, he believed in WMD, and the Iraqis had plotted to kill his Pa. That made it personal. Dubya IS a Texan, you know.

Oh right, I forgot one of the reasons he killed all those people was a **** measuring contest between him, his father and Saddam Hussein. Oh no, he's not an evil man. He's just willing to commit mass murder to satisfy his ego. Nothing wrong with that, eh? I've worked with people who were victims of George W Bush. I never thought to dismiss the murder and injury he caused with a joke about him being Texan. A bit that would have made them feel better.


Just overwhelmed by the circumstances.

But Obama just wants to destroy America.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
I would like to draw something to the attention of all the folks who blindly love Comrade Obama. Blaming Bush may be emotionally satisfying, but it fails to deal with the inexorable hand of external reality.

External reality has permitted the rise of ever more virulent forms of Islamism. ISIS, Boko Haram, Abu Sayyef, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Magreb, et al. exist, are metastasizing, and reaching critical mass. This is happening right now.

The extreme factions will be their own undoing.... Economic sanctions/blockade will have the desired effect (presuming that the major players all go along)... Doesn't matter if the fanatic's brain trust is governed by theology, politics or whatever, money always seems to be the underlying commonality that all the aforementioned rely upon.

Revisionists (see your mirror) consistently forget that the belief in the existence of Saddam's WMDs was extremely widespread (think in terms of the 97% GW consensus) for three reasons

1. he gassed the Kurds during the Iran-Iraq War.
2. he was breaking every part of the cease-fire agreement
3. by his own admission, he was trying to make Iran believe he had WMD.

As for Bush's actual reasons, I think he felt (correctly) it was a job left undone, he believed in WMD, and the Iraqis had plotted to kill his Pa. That made it personal. Dubya IS a Texan, you know.

There was much Dubya did I do not like (see the Patriot Act, rendition, torture, and the massive security apparatus in the USA) but I do not see him as an evil man.

Just overwhelmed by the circumstances.

Hussein and Kuwait... Buddy played his cards early and kept on rattling his sabre.

For all those that piss and moan about military action in Iraq (regardless of the advertised reason), these would be the same folks blaming the US had the not gone in and provided humanitarian assistance.
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
I would like to draw something to the attention of all the folks who blindly love Comrade Obama. Blaming Bush may be emotionally satisfying, but it fails to deal with the inexorable hand of external reality.

External reality has permitted the rise of ever more virulent forms of Islamism. ISIS, Boko Haram, Abu Sayyef, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Magreb, et al. exist, are metastasizing, and reaching critical mass. This is happening right now.

Barack Obama is the President of the United States of America at this moment in history. He wanted the job. Now that he has the job he is obligated to determine the best course of action, and to act effectively to protect the lives of his people, their friends and allies, and to preserve their well being. None of those obligations can be accomplished by blaming the errors of George W. Bush.

Don't you all agree? Of course you do. You are compelled by logic expressed adroitly.
But it's you guys that keep perpetuating the conversational. If Obama takes a crap you immediately point out that he failed to take a good one. If you don't want to read comparisons then don't start them.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
Oh right, I forgot one of the reasons he killed all those people was a **** measuring contest between him, his father and Saddam Hussein. Oh no, he's not an evil man. He's just willing to commit mass murder to satisfy his ego. Nothing wrong with that, eh? I've worked with people who were victims of George W Bush. I never thought to dismiss the murder and injury he caused with a joke about him being Texan. A bit that would have made them feel better.




But Obama just wants to destroy America.

ONE of the reasons....he was not alone either. The free world joined him.

I am sorry for the people you worked with, but if they are Iraqi, you need to understand that the people are ALWAYS responsible for their leaders, unless they are engaged in rebellion against them. And Hussein was a monster of epic proportions, a Stalin without quite the position to achieve Stalin's body count............

And Bush did not commit mass murder.

And Obama is destroying America through his incompetence.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
There were plenty of reasons to invade Iraq. None of them were Bush's stated reason (WMDs) or his actual reasons (government contracts for his friends).
Reasons yes- was it necessary?
Was it in the US national interest?
 

WLDB

Senate Member
Jun 24, 2011
6,182
0
36
Ottawa
Now they are dressed as civilians and mingling so now they don't know who to shoot

As if thats ever stopped drones or bombers. Has the Iraqi government even asked for help? So far as Ive seen they haven't. They were the ones who wanted the US out in the first place.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,690
14,381
113
Low Earth Orbit
Yes poor poor Bush. Was he that friggin stupid that he could be manipulated so easily or couldn't make his own informed decisions as President.


If he couldn't keep a leash on his people either, than no matter how you look at it, he was a pretty bad leader.

At no point did I say he was a good leader just the he was the Iggy.
 

WLDB

Senate Member
Jun 24, 2011
6,182
0
36
Ottawa
In defense of Dubya (yes, really)

He was in power for 8 months when 9-11 happened........I think the failure to deal with Osama et al hardly rests with him alone.

Saddam Hussein was a looney who ignored the cease-fire signed 10 years before. WMDs or no, there were LOTS of reasons to whack Iraq.......that said, the Americans failed to foresee a continuing insurrection, as they firmly believe EVERYONE wants to be an American at heart, and they are wrong.

Indeed, I believe Clinton said not getting Bin Laden was one of his big regrets from his time as President - and that was well before 9/11.

Agreed on Iraq. I wish they had just used one of those reasons instead of the WMD thing. They could have just said "Saddam is a tyrant - lets get rid of him." They should have went all the way to Baghdad in the first gulf war.

Script? Are you referring to Paradise Lost?

Whatever is on the teleprompter
 

BaalsTears

Senate Member
Jan 25, 2011
5,732
0
36
Santa Cruz, California
But it's you guys that keep perpetuating the conversational. If Obama takes a crap you immediately point out that he failed to take a good one. If you don't want to read comparisons then don't start them.

I agree wholeheartedly with your position on George W. Bush. That eliminates him from the discussion of prospective courses of action.

The discussion now turns to what can be done about the current state of affairs in the Greater Middle East. Since George W. Bush is no longer president he has no further decision making role about what can be done. Only Barack Hussein Obama can decide on and implement policy on what can be done in the Greater Middle East.

So what should or shouldn't Obama do about the course of events in the Greater Middle East?
 

B00Mer

Make Canada Great Again
Sep 6, 2008
47,127
8,145
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.canadianforums.ca
Fail to prevent the worst terrorist attack in American history.

Yeah, like you anyone would have thought someone would have used planes as a weapon.. duh - maybe you should have alerted the USA it was going to happens sounds like you're a little clarvoient..

Invade two countries without an plan; get the country bogged down two insurgencies with no end.

Yeah, let's fight them on US and maybe Canadian soil.. 9/11 was just that.. take the fight to them, and keep them over there..

Use the war as an excuse to enrich his friends with government contracts. Blow trillions of dollars.

Capitalisim at it's best... don't be a hater because your a broke azz Canuck.

All of this actually fails to capture those responsible for the terrorist attack. Not give a ****.

You just complained about the USA not respecting the sovereignty of 2 nations, but when Obama goes into a Pakistan it's O.K.

The the USA traded 5 terrorist leader for one soldier Bergdahl, a coward and a deserter. However, the hero Doctor who helped US get Osama Bin Laden now on hunger strike in Pakistani prison..
 

B00Mer

Make Canada Great Again
Sep 6, 2008
47,127
8,145
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.canadianforums.ca
Iraq crisis: what is ISIS? - Telegraph

 

WLDB

Senate Member
Jun 24, 2011
6,182
0
36
Ottawa
Yes. The Iraqi Govt. has requested air strikes and other air support. Obama has turned them down.

Yeah I saw that about 5 minutes after my post. I thought about editing it out but I figured it would have already been read by that point.