If GOP Thinks Bombing Iran Is Correct, Why Didn't Bush Do It?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 28, 2015 4:39 AM GMT
    NYT: If bombing Iran is such a great idea, why didn’t the Bush administration do it years ago?

    http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/27/what-john-bolton-gets-wrong-about-iran/?ref=opinion
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Mar 28, 2015 3:23 PM GMT
    Writer Carol Giacoma's mistake in her six paragraph "opinion piece" is the same one most westerners make when they start pontificating about the middle east.

    They don't have an in depth comprehension of the intricacies of politics in the middle east and because of that, apply western perspectives which they do comprehend but do not work in nations outside of western Europe, North America, Australia, and the other nations that have embraced the principles of the Age of Enlightenment along with Democracy, Human Rights and personal liberties.

    It's the same mistake Bush made, Obama is making and almost every American and European diplomat has made regarding the middle east since and even before the fall of the Ottoman Empire. It is arrogant cultural imperialism to assume that western concepts, ideals and solutions are superior as well as effective in cultures not based in the same values systems as western nations.

    And undisputedly, neoliberalism is the main source of the cultural imperialism that pervades and undermines any course towards true progress in bringing the Islamic middle east out of the 7th century into the 21st.

    Other than a few prominent characters Islam pilfered from the religious traditions of Judaism and Christianity, they have nothing in common with western culture. They have definitions that differ from ours. We in the west understand "peace" as a state of harmonious existence. In Islam peace is defined as what will come only after the last infidels are either converted to Islam or killed. Honor in the western world is earned; in the middle east it is demanded at the price of human life. In the west a compassionate father might consent to remove a terminally ill child off life support. In the middle east a compassionate father might kill his own child to save them the humiliation that would come from dishonoring him.

    And those are only small examples. If you need more, ask.





  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4435

    Mar 28, 2015 3:40 PM GMT
    bobbobbob saidWriter Carol Giacoma's mistake in her six paragraph "opinion piece" is the same one most westerners make when they start pontificating about the middle east.

    They don't have an in depth comprehension of the intricacies of politics in the middle east and because of that, apply western perspectives which they do comprehend but do not work in nations outside of western Europe, North America, Australia, and the other nations that have embraced the principles of the Age of Enlightenment along with Democracy, Human Rights and personal liberties.

    It's the same mistake Bush made, Obama is making and almost every American and European diplomat has made regarding the middle east since and even before the fall of the Ottoman Empire. It is arrogant cultural imperialism to assume that western concepts, ideals and solutions are superior as well as effective in cultures not based in the same values systems as western nations.

    And undisputedly, neoliberalism is the main source of the cultural imperialism that pervades and undermines any course towards true progress in bringing the Islamic middle east out of the 7th century into the 21st.

    Other than a few prominent characters Islam pilfered from the religious traditions of Judaism and Christianity, they have nothing in common with western culture. They have definitions that differ from ours. We in the west understand "peace" as a state of harmonious existence. In Islam peace is defined as what will come only after the last infidels are either converted to Islam or killed. Honor in the western world is earned; in the middle east it is demanded at the price of human life. In the west a compassionate father might consent to remove a terminally ill child off life support. In the middle east a compassionate father might kill his own child to save them the humiliation that would come from dishonoring him.

    And those are only small examples. If you need more, ask.

    Is this^^ your rationale for wanting to bomb Iran? Because they're just bad people? And Bush's rationale for invading Iraq and killing (what was the number 100,000?) locals (not to mention 3,000 American men)? That would at least be the most consistent answer to my questions about why Republicans just want to bomb everybody in Syria, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, the Palestinians, Pakistan, ???
    Did I leave anybody out?




  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2015 3:16 PM GMT
    I don't recall Bush ever ordering Americans to bomb schools, crowded market places, or bus stations. It's very immature to assign sole blame for the violence in Iraq on Bush and none on Iran, Al Qaeda, Muqtada al-Sadr, or any of the terrorist groups- you know, the guys who are actually responsible for bombing schools, crowded market places, or bus stations.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Mar 29, 2015 3:26 PM GMT
    Destinharbor said
    bobbobbob saidWriter Carol Giacoma's mistake in her six paragraph "opinion piece" is the same one most westerners make when they start pontificating about the middle east.

    They don't have an in depth comprehension of the intricacies of politics in the middle east and because of that, apply western perspectives which they do comprehend but do not work in nations outside of western Europe, North America, Australia, and the other nations that have embraced the principles of the Age of Enlightenment along with Democracy, Human Rights and personal liberties.

    It's the same mistake Bush made, Obama is making and almost every American and European diplomat has made regarding the middle east since and even before the fall of the Ottoman Empire. It is arrogant cultural imperialism to assume that western concepts, ideals and solutions are superior as well as effective in cultures not based in the same values systems as western nations.

    And undisputedly, neoliberalism is the main source of the cultural imperialism that pervades and undermines any course towards true progress in bringing the Islamic middle east out of the 7th century into the 21st.

    Other than a few prominent characters Islam pilfered fr
    om the religious traditions of Judaism and Christianity, they have nothing in common with western culture. They have definitions that differ from ours. We in the west understand "peace" as a state of harmonious existence. In Islam peace is defined as what will come only after the last infidels are either converted to Islam or killed. Honor in the western world is earned; in the middle east it is demanded at the price of human life. In the west a compassionate father might consent to remove a terminally ill child off life support. In the middle east a compassionate father might kill his own child to save them the humiliation that would come from dishonoring him.

    And those are only small examples. If you need more, ask.


    Is this^^ your rationale for wanting to bomb Iran? Because they're just bad people? And Bush's rationale for invading Iraq and killing (what was the number 100,000?) locals (not to mention 3,000 American men)? That would at least be the most consistent answer to my questions about why Republicans just want to bomb everybody in Syria, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, the Palestinians, Pakistan, ???
    Did I leave anybody out?


    Then we have fucktards like Destinharbor who just make up shit to argue about like this time where he reached up in his anus to grab some imaginative fecal matter and toss it out.

    Does anyone but this fucktard or another liberal ideological bigot see where I said or inferred one damned thing about a rationale for bombing anyone?

    Shove it all back up your ass Destinharbor.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2015 3:29 PM GMT
    Destinharbor said
    Is this^^ your rationale for wanting to bomb Iran? Because they're just bad people? And Bush's rationale for invading Iraq and killing (what was the number 100,000?) locals (not to mention 3,000 American men)? That would at least be the most consistent answer to my questions about why Republicans just want to bomb everybody in Syria, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, the Palestinians, Pakistan, ???
    Did I leave anybody out?

    Libruls
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2015 3:41 PM GMT
    woodsmen said... why didn’t the Bush administration do it ...
    he forgot

    stupid%20director6.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2015 4:43 PM GMT
    volsfan315 saidI don't recall Bush ever ordering Americans to bomb schools, crowded market places, or bus stations. It's very immature to assign sole blame for the violence in Iraq on Bush and none on Iran, Al Qaeda, Muqtada al-Sadr, or any of the terrorist groups- you know, the guys who are actually responsible for bombing schools, crowded market places, or bus stations.


    NYT: William Kristol and other neocon masters of monolith who egged W. into a war in Iraq that has been so long and bloody and awful — reigniting Sunni-Shiite warfare, empowering Iran and creating the Frankenstein of ISIS — that James Jeffrey, Obama’s former ambassador to Iraq, told Michael Crowley of Politico that “we’re in a goddamn free fall here.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/29/opinion/sunday/maureen-dowd-ready-for-45.html?_r=0
  • wellwell

    Posts: 2265

    Mar 29, 2015 6:17 PM GMT
    ...That's because Bush is not a Republican, nor a conservative; he's a R I N O !!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2015 8:33 AM GMT
    woodsmen said
    volsfan315 saidI don't recall Bush ever ordering Americans to bomb schools, crowded market places, or bus stations. It's very immature to assign sole blame for the violence in Iraq on Bush and none on Iran, Al Qaeda, Muqtada al-Sadr, or any of the terrorist groups- you know, the guys who are actually responsible for bombing schools, crowded market places, or bus stations.


    NYT: William Kristol and other neocon masters of monolith who egged W. into a war in Iraq that has been so long and bloody and awful — reigniting Sunni-Shiite warfare, empowering Iran and creating the Frankenstein of ISIS — that James Jeffrey, Obama’s former ambassador to Iraq, told Michael Crowley of Politico that “we’re in a goddamn free fall here.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/29/opinion/sunday/maureen-dowd-ready-for-45.html?_r=0


    I honestly don't know where to start with this, or even if it is worth dignifying with a response.

    1) If we want to assign blame for empowering a belligerent Iran, you really need to go back to Jimmy Carter's presidency. Up until the 1979 revolution Iran, not Israel, was the center-piece of American policy in the Middle East. Jimmy Carter allowed a staunch American ally to be ousted and then did nothing to cushion the blow of the revolution or assist Iran in it's transition from an absolute monarchy. As a result, a friendly -albeit, oppressive- government was replaced with one openly hostile to the US while also being much more oppressive. Had Carter either supported the Shah or assisted the democratic elements of the revolution (who made up the majority) in a transition to democracy, the Middle East would be far less volatile a place.

    2)"creating the Frankenstein of ISIS". According to your beloved president, ISIS is a "JV team" that "doesn't pose much of a threat". In fact, up until late 2014, Obama openly said that he didn't have a strategy for dealing with ISIS. This is three and a half years after the Syrian Civil War started. Barrack Obama did nothing to prevent ISIS from becoming what it is. He did nothing to empower the moderate elements of the Syrian Civil War, which ultimately spilled over into Iraq.

    When we withdrew from Iraq, it was a largely peaceful nation. The Obama Administration's failure to sign a Status of Forces Agreement with Nouri al-Malaki (yet another strategic relationship he ruined, along with Hamid Karzai) removed a significant amount of American influence from the equation- influence that could have done much to mitigate the effect of the fallout from the Syrian Civil War. Had the Syrian Civil War, or the Arab Spring in a larger context, been effectively handled, the fire that is currently raging would likely not exist.

    3) Barrack Obama has been in office for the last 6 years. When he assumed office, the region was a much more safe and stable place. It is because of his ineffectiveness as a world leader and his laughable foreign policy that we are in this free fall. Your tired tactics of blaming Bush for everything are getting old. Instead, why don't you actually start thinking for yourself and admit when you are wrong.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2015 9:00 AM GMT
    volsfan315 said
    woodsmen said
    volsfan315 saidI don't recall Bush ever ordering Americans to bomb schools, crowded market places, or bus stations. It's very immature to assign sole blame for the violence in Iraq on Bush and none on Iran, Al Qaeda, Muqtada al-Sadr, or any of the terrorist groups- you know, the guys who are actually responsible for bombing schools, crowded market places, or bus stations.


    NYT: William Kristol and other neocon masters of monolith who egged W. into a war in Iraq that has been so long and bloody and awful — reigniting Sunni-Shiite warfare, empowering Iran and creating the Frankenstein of ISIS — that James Jeffrey, Obama’s former ambassador to Iraq, told Michael Crowley of Politico that “we’re in a goddamn free fall here.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/29/opinion/sunday/maureen-dowd-ready-for-45.html?_r=0


    I honestly don't know where to start with this, or even if it is worth dignifying with a response.

    1) If we want to assign blame for empowering a belligerent Iran, you really need to go back to Jimmy Carter's presidency. Up until the 1979 revolution Iran, not Israel, was the center-piece of American policy in the Middle East. Jimmy Carter allowed a staunch American ally to be ousted and then did nothing to cushion the blow of the revolution or assist Iran in it's transition from an absolute monarchy. As a result, a friendly -albeit, oppressive- government was replaced with one openly hostile to the US while also being much more oppressive. Had Carter either supported the Shah or assisted the democratic elements of the revolution (who made up the majority) in a transition to democracy, the Middle East would be far less volatile a place.

    2)"creating the Frankenstein of ISIS". According to your beloved president, ISIS is a "JV team" that "doesn't pose much of a threat". In fact, up until late 2014, Obama openly said that he didn't have a strategy for dealing with ISIS. This is three and a half years after the Syrian Civil War started. Barrack Obama did nothing to prevent ISIS from becoming what it is. He did nothing to empower the moderate elements of the Syrian Civil War, which ultimately spilled over into Iraq.

    When we withdrew from Iraq, it was a largely peaceful nation. The Obama Administration's failure to sign a Status of Forces Agreement with Nouri al-Malaki (yet another strategic relationship he ruined, along with Hamid Karzai) removed a significant amount of American influence from the equation- influence that could have done much to mitigate the effect of the fallout from the Syrian Civil War. Had the Syrian Civil War, or the Arab Spring in a larger context, been effectively handled, the fire that is currently raging would likely not exist.

    3) Barrack Obama has been in office for the last 6 years. When he assumed office, the region was a much more safe and stable place. It is because of his ineffectiveness as a world leader and his laughable foreign policy that we are in this free fall. Your tired tactics of blaming Bush for everything are getting old. Instead, why don't you actually start thinking for yourself and admit when you are wrong.

    Excellent points. They won't have impact with the far-left here because you are dealing with people who can do nothing but blame Bush for all of Obama's failures and quote sources that don't refute the points you make.
  • mwolverine

    Posts: 3385

    Mar 30, 2015 1:33 PM GMT
    volsfan315 said
    woodsmen saidNYT: William Kristol and other neocon masters of monolith who egged W. into a war in Iraq that has been so long and bloody and awful — reigniting Sunni-Shiite warfare, empowering Iran

    1) If we want to assign blame for empowering a belligerent Iran, you really need to go back to Jimmy Carter's presidency. Up until the 1979 revolution Iran, not Israel, was the center-piece of American policy in the Middle East. Jimmy Carter allowed a staunch American ally to be ousted and then did nothing to cushion the blow of the revolution or assist Iran in it's transition from an absolute monarchy. As a result, a friendly -albeit, oppressive- government was replaced with one openly hostile to the US while also being much more oppressive. Had Carter either supported the Shah or assisted the democratic elements of the revolution (who made up the majority) in a transition to democracy, the Middle East would be far less volatile a place.

    Exactly right.

    The thousand year old Sunni-Shia tension didn't need to be "reignited", it was always there just under the surface (just like other old scores in Yugoslavia). Yet the seminal event of our time was the rise of the Shia regime in Tehran. The pioneers of suicide bombing, they immediately began exporting their revolution (e.g. Hizbullah). It also opened the door to Iraq's attack on Iran (resulting in about a million people killed).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2015 2:01 PM GMT
    volsfan315 said
    woodsmen said
    volsfan315 saidI don't recall Bush ever ordering Americans to bomb schools, crowded market places, or bus stations. It's very immature to assign sole blame for the violence in Iraq on Bush and none on Iran, Al Qaeda, Muqtada al-Sadr, or any of the terrorist groups- you know, the guys who are actually responsible for bombing schools, crowded market places, or bus stations.


    NYT: William Kristol and other neocon masters of monolith who egged W. into a war in Iraq that has been so long and bloody and awful — reigniting Sunni-Shiite warfare, empowering Iran and creating the Frankenstein of ISIS — that James Jeffrey, Obama’s former ambassador to Iraq, told Michael Crowley of Politico that “we’re in a goddamn free fall here.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/29/opinion/sunday/maureen-dowd-ready-for-45.html?_r=0


    I honestly don't know where to start with this, or even if it is worth dignifying with a response.

    1) If we want to assign blame for empowering a belligerent Iran, you really need to go back to Jimmy Carter's presidency. Up until the 1979 revolution Iran, not Israel, was the center-piece of American policy in the Middle East. Jimmy Carter allowed a staunch American ally to be ousted and then did nothing to cushion the blow of the revolution or assist Iran in it's transition from an absolute monarchy. As a result, a friendly -albeit, oppressive- government was replaced with one openly hostile to the US while also being much more oppressive. Had Carter either supported the Shah or assisted the democratic elements of the revolution (who made up the majority) in a transition to democracy, the Middle East would be far less volatile a place.

    2)"creating the Frankenstein of ISIS". According to your beloved president, ISIS is a "JV team" that "doesn't pose much of a threat". In fact, up until late 2014, Obama openly said that he didn't have a strategy for dealing with ISIS. This is three and a half years after the Syrian Civil War started. Barrack Obama did nothing to prevent ISIS from becoming what it is. He did nothing to empower the moderate elements of the Syrian Civil War, which ultimately spilled over into Iraq.

    When we withdrew from Iraq, it was a largely peaceful nation. The Obama Administration's failure to sign a Status of Forces Agreement with Nouri al-Malaki (yet another strategic relationship he ruined, along with Hamid Karzai) removed a significant amount of American influence from the equation- influence that could have done much to mitigate the effect of the fallout from the Syrian Civil War. Had the Syrian Civil War, or the Arab Spring in a larger context, been effectively handled, the fire that is currently raging would likely not exist.

    3) Barrack Obama has been in office for the last 6 years. When he assumed office, the region was a much more safe and stable place. It is because of his ineffectiveness as a world leader and his laughable foreign policy that we are in this free fall. Your tired tactics of blaming Bush for everything are getting old. Instead, why don't you actually start thinking for yourself and admit when you are wrong.


    Below are the headlines and direct quotes from people during the time of what Bush along with the Republicans did to result in the free-fall in Middle East:

    “The greatest thing to come out of [invading Iraq] for the world economy ... would be $20 a barrel for oil.” Rupert Murdoch, chairman of News Corporation (which owns Fox News), February 2003

    “Oil Touches Record $78 on Mideast Conflict.” Headline on www.foxnews.com, July 14, 2006

    “The administration’s top budget official estimated today that the cost of a war with Iraq could be in the range of $50 billion to $60 billion,” saying that “earlier estimates of $100 billion to $200 billion in Iraq war costs by Lawrence B. Lindsey, Mr. Bush’s former chief economic adviser, were too high.” The New York Times, Dec. 31, 2002

    “According to C.B.O.’s estimates, from the time U.S. forces invaded Iraq in March 2003, $290 billion has been allocated for activities in Iraq. ... Additional costs over the 2007-2016 period would total an estimated $202 billion under the first [optimistic] scenario, and $406 billion under the second one.” Congressional Budget Office, July 13, 2006

    “Peacekeeping requirements in Iraq might be much lower than historical experience in the Balkans suggests. There’s been none of the record in Iraq of ethnic militias fighting one another that produced so much bloodshed and permanent scars in Bosnia.” Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense and now president of the World Bank, Feb. 27, 2003

    “West Baghdad is no stranger to bombings and killings, but in the past few days all restraint has vanished in an orgy of ‘ethnic cleansing.’ Shia gunmen are seeking to drive out the once-dominant Sunni minority and the Sunnis are forming neighborhood posses to retaliate. Mosques are being attacked. Scores of innocent civilians have been killed, their bodies left lying in the streets.” The Times of London, July 14, 2006

    “Earlier this week, I traveled to Baghdad to visit the capital of a free and democratic Iraq.” President Bush, June 17, 2006

    “People are doing the same as [in] Saddam’s time and worse. ... These were the precise reasons that we fought Saddam and now we are seeing the same things.” Ayad Allawi, Mr. Bush’s choice as Iraq’s first post-Saddam prime minister, November 2005

    “Iraq’s new government has another able leader in Speaker Mashhadani. ... He rejects the use of violence for political ends. And by agreeing to serve in a prominent role in this new unity government, he’s demonstrating leadership and courage.” President Bush, May 22, 2006

    “Some people say ‘we saw you beheading, kidnappings and killing. In the end we even started kidnapping women who are our honor.’ These acts are not the work of Iraqis. I am sure that he who does this is a Jew and the son of a Jew.” Mahmoud Mashhadani, speaker of the Iraqi Parliament, July 13, 2006

    “My fellow citizens, not only can we win the war in Iraq, we are winning the war in Iraq.” President Bush, Dec. 18, 2005

    “I think I would answer that by telling you I don’t think we’re losing.” Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff, when asked whether we’re winning in Iraq, July 14, 2006

    “Regime change in Iraq would bring about a number of benefits for the region. ...Extremists in the region would have to rethink their strategy of jihad. Moderates throughout the region would take heart, and our ability to advance the Israeli-Palestinian peace process would be enhanced.” Vice President Dick Cheney, Aug. 26, 2002

    “Bush — The world is coming unglued before his eyes. His naïve dreams are a Wilsonian disaster.” Newsweek Conventional Wisdom Watch, July 24, 2006 edition

    “It’s time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be the commander in chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war, we undermine presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.” Senator Joseph Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut, Dec. 6, 2005

    “I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now.” Representative Tom DeLay, Republican of Texas, on the campaign against Slobodan Milosevic, April 28, 1999
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Mar 30, 2015 2:41 PM GMT
    Fuck! you are going to wear out your time machine going back and forth digging up old shit to use to rationalize you doing nothing about being the solution to anything in the present.

    What do you hope to accomplish with your obsession for blaming people you don't like for all the ills on earth?

    Do you really believe that? If so you are one simple minded bumpkin.

    It's like an irresponsible 8 year old always blaming everything on anyone. Except all I can see that you get out of this is an excuse to sit on your ass and do nothing but bitch bitch bitch about others attempting to solve problems.
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4435

    Mar 30, 2015 5:11 PM GMT
    bobbobbob saidFuck! you are going to wear out your time machine going back and forth digging up old shit to use to rationalize you doing nothing about being the solution to anything in the present.

    What do you hope to accomplish with your obsession for blaming people you don't like for all the ills on earth?

    Do you really believe that? If so you are one simple minded bumpkin.

    It's like an irresponsible 8 year old always blaming everything on anyone. Except all I can see that you get out of this is an excuse to sit on your ass and do nothing but bitch bitch bitch about others attempting to solve problems.

    You've finally lost it. (Well, maybe that happened long ago--probably.) It matters a great deal how it got started because that leads you to where we are today. We invaded a stable region under false pretenses. We had a few troups in Iraq and Sadam was locked down by the "No fly" zone. Because of the lies of your man Bush II and the neocons, we empowered the the faction most tightly allied with Iran forcing everyone else to find new allies. You consistently post about how awful Obama is and in particular the attempt to make some sort of peace with Iran. Like this article, you offer no policy prescription. The alternative to peace is war, moron. You just bitch.

    As to Volsfan, the reason the region was more safe and stable when Obama entered office, that was because we had over 200,000 American groups there and were spending a Trillion dollars trying to figure out how to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. It couldn't be done.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Mar 30, 2015 6:31 PM GMT
    Destinharbor said

    You've finally lost it. (Well, maybe that happened long ago--probably.) It matters a great deal how it got started because that leads you to where we are today. We invaded a stable region under false pretenses. We had a few troups in Iraq and Sadam was locked down by the "No fly" zone. Because of the lies of your man Bush II and the neocons, we empowered the the faction most tightly allied with Iran forcing everyone else to find new allies. You consistently post about how awful Obama is and in particular the attempt to make some sort of peace with Iran. Like this article, you offer no policy prescription. The alternative to peace is war, moron. You just bitch.

    As to Volsfan, the reason the region was more safe and stable when Obama entered office, that was because we had over 200,000 American groups there and were spending a Trillion dollars trying to figure out how to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. It couldn't be done.


    Nah. You showed your arrogant ass by assuming I ever supported the war in Iraq. I didn't because I knew better as you have been reading on 2 threads here...

    So shove that pile of shit back in your ass.

    Any comments I made about Obama's efforts in Iraq are more pertinent than any you and anyone do on Bush era antics because THIS IS NOW AND THAT IS THE FUCKING PAST. Why don't you go watch a DVD of Superbowl XII and take your out of date yabber to a sports forum and see how much respect you get?

    Some of you guys just cannot wrap you head around the concept that the way to solve problems and resolve issues has nothing to do with blaming blaming blaming blaming blaming and doing nothing nothing nothing nothing nothing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2015 7:25 PM GMT
    pellaz said
    woodsmen said... why didn’t the Bush administration do it ...
    he forgot

    stupid%20director6.jpg

    http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/binoculars.asp
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2015 8:52 PM GMT
    volsfan315 said
    woodsmen said
    volsfan315 saidI don't recall Bush ever ordering Americans to bomb schools, crowded market places, or bus stations. It's very immature to assign sole blame for the violence in Iraq on Bush and none on Iran, Al Qaeda, Muqtada al-Sadr, or any of the terrorist groups- you know, the guys who are actually responsible for bombing schools, crowded market places, or bus stations.


    NYT: William Kristol and other neocon masters of monolith who egged W. into a war in Iraq that has been so long and bloody and awful — reigniting Sunni-Shiite warfare, empowering Iran and creating the Frankenstein of ISIS — that James Jeffrey, Obama’s former ambassador to Iraq, told Michael Crowley of Politico that “we’re in a goddamn free fall here.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/29/opinion/sunday/maureen-dowd-ready-for-45.html?_r=0


    I honestly don't know where to start with this, or even if it is worth dignifying with a response.

    1) If we want to assign blame for empowering a belligerent Iran, you really need to go back to Jimmy Carter's presidency. Up until the 1979 revolution Iran, not Israel, was the center-piece of American policy in the Middle East. Jimmy Carter allowed a staunch American ally to be ousted and then did nothing to cushion the blow of the revolution or assist Iran in it's transition from an absolute monarchy. As a result, a friendly -albeit, oppressive- government was replaced with one openly hostile to the US while also being much more oppressive. Had Carter either supported the Shah or assisted the democratic elements of the revolution (who made up the majority) in a transition to democracy, the Middle East would be far less volatile a place.

    2)"creating the Frankenstein of ISIS". According to your beloved president, ISIS is a "JV team" that "doesn't pose much of a threat". In fact, up until late 2014, Obama openly said that he didn't have a strategy for dealing with ISIS. This is three and a half years after the Syrian Civil War started. Barrack Obama did nothing to prevent ISIS from becoming what it is. He did nothing to empower the moderate elements of the Syrian Civil War, which ultimately spilled over into Iraq.

    When we withdrew from Iraq, it was a largely peaceful nation. The Obama Administration's failure to sign a Status of Forces Agreement with Nouri al-Malaki (yet another strategic relationship he ruined, along with Hamid Karzai) removed a significant amount of American influence from the equation- influence that could have done much to mitigate the effect of the fallout from the Syrian Civil War. Had the Syrian Civil War, or the Arab Spring in a larger context, been effectively handled, the fire that is currently raging would likely not exist.

    3) Barrack Obama has been in office for the last 6 years. When he assumed office, the region was a much more safe and stable place. It is because of his ineffectiveness as a world leader and his laughable foreign policy that we are in this free fall. Your tired tactics of blaming Bush for everything are getting old. Instead, why don't you actually start thinking for yourself and admit when you are wrong.


    Very nicely put. To answer the original question, because it was over 6 years ago and Iran was then nowhere near as close to NWC as it is now.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Mar 30, 2015 8:52 PM GMT
    rkyjockdn said
    pellaz said
    woodsmen said... why didn’t the Bush administration do it ...
    he forgot

    stupid%20director6.jpg

    http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/binoculars.asp


    Oh heck rkyjockdn, you sure screwed up a liberal narrative with some cats by throwing that link on here. Should we mail them kleenex or kotex?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2015 9:19 PM GMT
    Destinharbor said
    bobbobbob saidFuck! you are going to wear out your time machine going back and forth digging up old shit to use to rationalize you doing nothing about being the solution to anything in the present.

    What do you hope to accomplish with your obsession for blaming people you don't like for all the ills on earth?

    Do you really believe that? If so you are one simple minded bumpkin.

    It's like an irresponsible 8 year old always blaming everything on anyone. Except all I can see that you get out of this is an excuse to sit on your ass and do nothing but bitch bitch bitch about others attempting to solve problems.

    You've finally lost it. (Well, maybe that happened long ago--probably.) It matters a great deal how it got started because that leads you to where we are today. We invaded a stable region under false pretenses. We had a few troups in Iraq and Sadam was locked down by the "No fly" zone. Because of the lies of your man Bush II and the neocons, we empowered the the faction most tightly allied with Iran forcing everyone else to find new allies. You consistently post about how awful Obama is and in particular the attempt to make some sort of peace with Iran. Like this article, you offer no policy prescription. The alternative to peace is war, moron. You just bitch.

    As to Volsfan, the reason the region was more safe and stable when Obama entered office, that was because we had over 200,000 American groups there and were spending a Trillion dollars trying to figure out how to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. It couldn't be done.


    "Because of the lies of your man Bush II and the neocons"





  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2015 9:25 PM GMT
    bobbobbob said
    rkyjockdn said
    pellaz said
    woodsmen said... why didn’t the Bush administration do it ...
    he forgot

    stupid%20director6.jpg

    http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/binoculars.asp


    Oh heck rkyjockdn, you sure screwed up a liberal narrative with some cats by throwing that link on here. Should we mail them kleenex or kotex?


    Why post a fake George Bush howler when there are so many genuine ones to choose from?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 31, 2015 12:50 PM GMT
    Woodsmen... you said NOTHING in response to any of my points. That's not how a debate works.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 31, 2015 12:59 PM GMT
    "As to Volsfan, the reason the region was more safe and stable when Obama entered office, that was because we had over 200,000 American groups there and were spending a Trillion dollars trying to figure out how to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. It couldn't be done."

    Fiction. The most we ever had in Iraq was about 170,000 during The Surge, which was almost two years before he took office.

    In Barrack Obama's own words, we were leaving behind "a sovereign, stable, and self reliant Iraq" when we withdrew in Dec 2011. You can't blame Bush for what has happened between now and then.


    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/dec/14/barack-obama-iraq-war-success

  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Mar 31, 2015 1:21 PM GMT
    volsfan315 saidWoodsmen... you said NOTHING in response to any of my points. That's not how a debate works.


    Get used to that. They all do it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 31, 2015 1:43 PM GMT
    volsfan315 saidWoodsmen... you said NOTHING in response to any of my points. That's not how a debate works.


    You attacked me personally in your post. My reply is using facts as evidenced by headlines and direct quotes from people at the time period to illustrate cause and effect of what Bush and the Republican did to destabilize the Middle East. So when you said that I said NOTHING, it is false.