Notice: All Boston.com forums will be retired as of May 31st, 2016 and will not be archived. Thank you for your participation in this community, and we hope you continue to enjoy other content at Boston.com.

Putin and Assad just blinked.

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

     I didn't even hear the name "ISIS" until this year.

    True. However, we were concerned about the groups that went on to form ISIS. President has to have some responsibility here in having supported some of these groups in the past as well as his role in creating the power vacuum in Iraq that ISIS has so willingly filled.

     

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     I didn't even hear the name "ISIS" until this year.

    True. However, we were concerned about the groups that went on to form ISIS. President has to have some responsibility here in having supported some of these groups in the past as well as his role in creating the power vacuum in Iraq that ISIS has so willingly filled.

     

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.



    ISIS is comprised of angry Sunnis and mercenaries.  The Obama administration didn't install a government in Iraq that was hostile toward Sunnis.  And the Obama administration didn't pay mercenaries to fight for Iraq.  The Bush admin did both.  

    I know you're sick of hearing blame for Bush, but it's where it belongs.  You can be sick of blaming the rain for you being wet, but that doesn't make it any less true.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     I didn't even hear the name "ISIS" until this year.

    True. However, we were concerned about the groups that went on to form ISIS. President has to have some responsibility here in having supported some of these groups in the past as well as his role in creating the power vacuum in Iraq that ISIS has so willingly filled.

     

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.



    ISIS is comprised of angry Sunnis and mercenaries.  The Obama administration didn't install a government in Iraq that was hostile toward Sunnis.  And the Obama administration didn't pay mercenaries to fight for Iraq.  The Bush admin did both.  

    I know you're sick of hearing blame for Bush, but it's where it belongs.  You can be sick of blaming the rain for you being wet, but that doesn't make it any less true.

     



    What Obama did is:

       pull out all our troops

       refuse to negotiate a status of forces agreement

       drew a red line

       erased a red line

       got confused and bombed Libya

       blamed Benghazi on a video

       turned Libya over to radical islamists

       pushed out Mubarak

       said the Muslim Brotherhood wan't a threat

       then ushered them into power

       Refused to fight the JV terrorists

       let the JV beat up our varsity team and take their weapons

       told Israel to stand down

       Told the CIA to stand down

       made reaching out to muslims the top goal of NASA 

     So, your are right. But, Bush didn't install Maliki.  There was an election.  remembers he purple fingers? Yah, that's what they do in countries that care about voter fraud.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.

     

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     I didn't even hear the name "ISIS" until this year.

    True. However, we were concerned about the groups that went on to form ISIS. President has to have some responsibility here in having supported some of these groups in the past as well as his role in creating the power vacuum in Iraq that ISIS has so willingly filled.

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.




    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    Bush arranged the withdrawal agreement. The voters wanted us out. Iraq wanted us out. Obama got elected in part on getting us out.

    I cannot see how Obama can be held responsible for what ISIS has done if nobody can make a reasonable argument based on evidence existing at the time that he should have foreseen this sort of thing. If vague fears that maybe something might happen were a reason to stay, we'd be stuck there forever.

    Obama did what just everyone wanted - to get us out of yet another horribly failed experiment with regime building in the middle east.



    Well, that's simply not true.  What's happening in Iraq, to the extent it is an American Foriegn policy issue, is all on Obama.  

    BIDEN was responsible for the SOFA, under the guidance of the smartest man in the world.

    Obama called ISIS a JV team in January, nine months ago.

    Not that Bush had a stellar record, but, get real.  obama schr00d da pooch in his handling of Iraq. And ISIS.

    How does Obama pull out all support and then blame a guy who left office six years ago? That takes some funny colored glasses for sure.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    ....like a broken record some moron tried to stuff into the CD drive....



    Snark alert.

    facts don't matter to you.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.

     

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.




     Well, you are only responding to one line of what I posted.

    I would have been quite angry with Obama if he had kept a bunch of troops there on the vague premise that maybe, sometime, something might go wrong. The problem with that rationale is that it would suggest we never leave.

    The Middle East is volatile. Things like this are bound to continue happening for quite a while, and we can't afford to police the area forever.



    The Middles East was made significantly more volatile by Obama's Foriegn policy, which has basically put radical Islam in charge of they Middle East.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.



    Heh, heh, heh ... yep, Dubya was soooo dang intent on keeping US forces in Iraq that he signed a SoF agreement mandating ALL US forces out of the country by 12/11.

    Seriously, can ya'll, just once, argue facts ... not some political rhetoric Dubya said at a news confrence.

    Trying to blame Obama for the fragmentation of Iraq and the rise of these extreme groups just patently ignores the fact that if Dubya hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place none of these groups woul exist today ... but I'm sure Obama used his time machine te get back to '03 to set the whole tinderbox aflame.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.



    Heh, heh, heh ... yep, Dubya was soooo dang intent on keeping US forces in Iraq that he signed a SoF agreement mandating ALL US forces out of the country by 12/11.

    Seriously, can ya'll, just once, argue facts ... not some political rhetoric Dubya said at a news confrence.

    Trying to blame Obama for the fragmentation of Iraq and the rise of these extreme groups just patently ignores the fact that if Dubya hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place none of these groups woul exist today ... but I'm sure Obama used his time machine te get back to '03 to set the whole tinderbox aflame.



    I think it is you that needs a brush up on the facts:

    it was December 2011, it was up to Biden to negotiate it.  He failed.

    Bush was long gone when this mess got started.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/24/biden-reveals-why-the-obama-administration-abandoned-iraq/

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    The Middles East was made significantly more volatile by Obama's Foriegn policy, which has basically put radical Islam in charge of they Middle East.


    Did he kill Bambi, too?

    More importantly, how do you expect to be taken with even the slightest bit of seriousness when you blame Obama for everything?



    Is that a red herring in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me?

    i think it is you that is blaming Bush six years into the Obama foreign policy by apology.

    hasn't really worked out too well, has it?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.



    Heh, heh, heh ... yep, Dubya was soooo dang intent on keeping US forces in Iraq that he signed a SoF agreement mandating ALL US forces out of the country by 12/11.

    Seriously, can ya'll, just once, argue facts ... not some political rhetoric Dubya said at a news confrence.

    Trying to blame Obama for the fragmentation of Iraq and the rise of these extreme groups just patently ignores the fact that if Dubya hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place none of these groups woul exist today ... but I'm sure Obama used his time machine te get back to '03 to set the whole tinderbox aflame.



    I think it is you that needs a brush up on the facts:

    it was December 2011, it was up to Biden to negotiate it.  He failed.

    Bush was long gone when this mess got started.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/24/biden-reveals-why-the-obama-administration-abandoned-iraq/

     



    So basically your admitting that the previous wingnut admin completely sruued-the-pooch and it was up to the next Dem admin to fix it.

    What you're saying is that SoF treaties by wingnut admins are meaningles and should be ignored because the previous admin got it bass ackwards from the start and the following Dem admin has the responsibility to fix the mess the wingnut left.

    What you're saying is that the entire wingnut-led Iraq debacle ... from beginning to end ... was such a complete and utter failure that everything and everything they did in the course of that failure ... right up to and including their SoF treaty to extract the US out of the quagmire ... should be ignored or reversed because everyone knows that ya'll are just inept at foreign policy ... and the wingnuts get the benefit of hindsight ... while blaming the Dems for not being prescient.

    FREAKING HILARIOUS.

    Not too many wingnuts on these boards would admit to such epic failures of their own party. Congrats.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.

     

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.



    Well we basically had two choices - either force US troops to remain in Iraq, against the wishes of its government, indefinitely and hope it is enough to stave off threats from would-be terrorists.  Or leave and see what happens, and if said threats should materialize return when begged by said government.  We had leverage in the latter scenario, not the former, and that is why al Maliki had to step down.

    I don't think it's a safe assumption that US forces alone could stop something like ISIS.  Remember "the Sunni Awakening" was primarily us paying Sunni mercenaries to fight alongside the Iraq army.  What did we think would happen when we stopped paying them?  Or is Obama's failure not just failing to keep troops in Iraq indefinitely, but also failing to indefinitely pay mercenaries to fight on behalf of the government that despises them?

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.



    Heh, heh, heh ... yep, Dubya was soooo dang intent on keeping US forces in Iraq that he signed a SoF agreement mandating ALL US forces out of the country by 12/11.

    Seriously, can ya'll, just once, argue facts ... not some political rhetoric Dubya said at a news confrence.

    Trying to blame Obama for the fragmentation of Iraq and the rise of these extreme groups just patently ignores the fact that if Dubya hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place none of these groups woul exist today ... but I'm sure Obama used his time machine te get back to '03 to set the whole tinderbox aflame.



    I think it is you that needs a brush up on the facts:

    it was December 2011, it was up to Biden to negotiate it.  He failed.

    Bush was long gone when this mess got started.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/24/biden-reveals-why-the-obama-administration-abandoned-iraq/

     



    So basically your admitting that the previous wingnut admin completely sruued-the-pooch and it was up to the next Dem admin to fix it.

    What you're saying is that SoF treaties by wingnut admins are meaningles and should be ignored because the previous admin got it bass ackwards from the start and the following Dem admin has the responsibility to fix the mess the wingnut left.

    What you're saying is that the entire wingnut-led Iraq debacle ... from beginning to end ... was such a complete and utter failure that everything and everything they did in the course of that failure ... right up to and including their SoF treaty to extract the US out of the quagmire ... should be ignored or reversed because everyone knows that ya'll are just inept at foreign policy ... and the wingnuts get the benefit of hindsight ... while blaming the Dems for not being prescient.

    FREAKING HILARIOUS.

    Not too many wingnuts on these boards would admit to such epic failures of their own party. Congrats.

     



    Well, no. bush left a stable Iraq, and Obama destabilized it.

    can't get around the facts, but please keep trying, because eventually you have to come to one of two conclusions:

    obama did nothing,i.e. Negligent, and therefore this is the long terms result of the Bush doctrine.

    or,

    obama did some thing, and his policies failed.

    so, after six years, you are left with one of two words to describe Obama's foreign policy: negligent, or failure.

    you choose.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.



    Heh, heh, heh ... yep, Dubya was soooo dang intent on keeping US forces in Iraq that he signed a SoF agreement mandating ALL US forces out of the country by 12/11.

    Seriously, can ya'll, just once, argue facts ... not some political rhetoric Dubya said at a news confrence.

    Trying to blame Obama for the fragmentation of Iraq and the rise of these extreme groups just patently ignores the fact that if Dubya hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place none of these groups woul exist today ... but I'm sure Obama used his time machine te get back to '03 to set the whole tinderbox aflame.



    I think it is you that needs a brush up on the facts:

    it was December 2011, it was up to Biden to negotiate it.  He failed.

    Bush was long gone when this mess got started.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/24/biden-reveals-why-the-obama-administration-abandoned-iraq/

     



    So basically your admitting that the previous wingnut admin completely sruued-the-pooch and it was up to the next Dem admin to fix it.

    What you're saying is that SoF treaties by wingnut admins are meaningles and should be ignored because the previous admin got it bass ackwards from the start and the following Dem admin has the responsibility to fix the mess the wingnut left.

    What you're saying is that the entire wingnut-led Iraq debacle ... from beginning to end ... was such a complete and utter failure that everything and everything they did in the course of that failure ... right up to and including their SoF treaty to extract the US out of the quagmire ... should be ignored or reversed because everyone knows that ya'll are just inept at foreign policy ... and the wingnuts get the benefit of hindsight ... while blaming the Dems for not being prescient.

    FREAKING HILARIOUS.

    Not too many wingnuts on these boards would admit to such epic failures of their own party. Congrats.

     



    Well, no. bush left a stable Iraq, and Obama destabilized it.

    can't get around the facts, but please keep trying, because eventually you have to come to one of two conclusions:

    obama did nothing,i.e. Negligent, and therefore this is the long terms result of the Bush doctrine.

    or,

    obama did some thing, and his policies failed.

    so, after six years, you are left with one of two words to describe Obama's foreign policy: negligent, or failure.

    you choose.

     




    So let me get this straight ... it's the present admin's fault for following the road map laid out by the former admin to pull out all ground troops on a preset timeline, the end of 2011, which was signed into law by dubya in 2008.

    Like I said ... you're admitting that the wingnuts scruued-the-pooch badly ... you're just trying to blame someone else for the consequences.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:


    Is that a red herring in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me?



    If you fill your posts with ideological imperatives and falsehoods, there is nothing worth responding directly to.

    But you know that.



    Well, I guess you at talking about your posts, because mine are chock full of inconvient facts.  Calling them otherwise doesn't change that.

    you are free to refute them, but I don't see you doing that either.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.



    Heh, heh, heh ... yep, Dubya was soooo dang intent on keeping US forces in Iraq that he signed a SoF agreement mandating ALL US forces out of the country by 12/11.

    Seriously, can ya'll, just once, argue facts ... not some political rhetoric Dubya said at a news confrence.

    Trying to blame Obama for the fragmentation of Iraq and the rise of these extreme groups just patently ignores the fact that if Dubya hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place none of these groups woul exist today ... but I'm sure Obama used his time machine te get back to '03 to set the whole tinderbox aflame.



    I think it is you that needs a brush up on the facts:

    it was December 2011, it was up to Biden to negotiate it.  He failed.

    Bush was long gone when this mess got started.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/24/biden-reveals-why-the-obama-administration-abandoned-iraq/

     



    So basically your admitting that the previous wingnut admin completely sruued-the-pooch and it was up to the next Dem admin to fix it.

    What you're saying is that SoF treaties by wingnut admins are meaningles and should be ignored because the previous admin got it bass ackwards from the start and the following Dem admin has the responsibility to fix the mess the wingnut left.

    What you're saying is that the entire wingnut-led Iraq debacle ... from beginning to end ... was such a complete and utter failure that everything and everything they did in the course of that failure ... right up to and including their SoF treaty to extract the US out of the quagmire ... should be ignored or reversed because everyone knows that ya'll are just inept at foreign policy ... and the wingnuts get the benefit of hindsight ... while blaming the Dems for not being prescient.

    FREAKING HILARIOUS.

    Not too many wingnuts on these boards would admit to such epic failures of their own party. Congrats.

     



    Well, no. bush left a stable Iraq, and Obama destabilized it.

    can't get around the facts, but please keep trying, because eventually you have to come to one of two conclusions:

    obama did nothing,i.e. Negligent, and therefore this is the long terms result of the Bush doctrine.

    or,

    obama did some thing, and his policies failed.

    so, after six years, you are left with one of two words to describe Obama's foreign policy: negligent, or failure.

    you choose.

     



    How stable is a country if doing nothing can de-stabilize it?  We have done nothing for hundreds of countries.  What's unique about Iraq - it collapsed under the weight of freedom and democracy?

     

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    How stable is a country if doing nothing can de-stabilize it?  We have done nothing for hundreds of countries.  What's unique about Iraq - it collapsed under the weight of freedom and democracy?

    Good point, let 'em go to hell.

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to hypertext's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:


    Is that a red herring in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me?



    If you fill your posts with ideological imperatives and falsehoods, there is nothing worth responding directly to.

    But you know that.



    Well, I guess you at talking about your posts, because mine are chock full of inconvient facts.  Calling them otherwise doesn't change that.

    you are free to refute them, but I don't see you doing that either.



    They're also chock full of poor spelling. Just saying.



    Gawd, the speling polise have arrived.

    I guess that makes Obamacare just swell.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    How stable is a country if doing nothing can de-stabilize it?  We have done nothing for hundreds of countries.  What's unique about Iraq - it collapsed under the weight of freedom and democracy?

    Good point, let 'em go to hell.

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.



    You mean give them the opportunity to pull themselves up, right?  That's how you say let 'em go to hell when it comes to domestic policy.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.



    Heh, heh, heh ... yep, Dubya was soooo dang intent on keeping US forces in Iraq that he signed a SoF agreement mandating ALL US forces out of the country by 12/11.

    Seriously, can ya'll, just once, argue facts ... not some political rhetoric Dubya said at a news confrence.

    Trying to blame Obama for the fragmentation of Iraq and the rise of these extreme groups just patently ignores the fact that if Dubya hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place none of these groups woul exist today ... but I'm sure Obama used his time machine te get back to '03 to set the whole tinderbox aflame.



    I think it is you that needs a brush up on the facts:

    it was December 2011, it was up to Biden to negotiate it.  He failed.

    Bush was long gone when this mess got started.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/24/biden-reveals-why-the-obama-administration-abandoned-iraq/

     



    So basically your admitting that the previous wingnut admin completely sruued-the-pooch and it was up to the next Dem admin to fix it.

    What you're saying is that SoF treaties by wingnut admins are meaningles and should be ignored because the previous admin got it bass ackwards from the start and the following Dem admin has the responsibility to fix the mess the wingnut left.

    What you're saying is that the entire wingnut-led Iraq debacle ... from beginning to end ... was such a complete and utter failure that everything and everything they did in the course of that failure ... right up to and including their SoF treaty to extract the US out of the quagmire ... should be ignored or reversed because everyone knows that ya'll are just inept at foreign policy ... and the wingnuts get the benefit of hindsight ... while blaming the Dems for not being prescient.

    FREAKING HILARIOUS.

    Not too many wingnuts on these boards would admit to such epic failures of their own party. Congrats.

     



    Well, no. bush left a stable Iraq, and Obama destabilized it.

    can't get around the facts, but please keep trying, because eventually you have to come to one of two conclusions:

    obama did nothing,i.e. Negligent, and therefore this is the long terms result of the Bush doctrine.

    or,

    obama did some thing, and his policies failed.

    so, after six years, you are left with one of two words to describe Obama's foreign policy: negligent, or failure.

    you choose.

     



    How stable is a country if doing nothing can de-stabilize it?  We have done nothing for hundreds of countries.  What's unique about Iraq - it collapsed under the weight of freedom and democracy?

     

     



    Pulling out ALL the troops isn't doing nothing.

    What is unique is that we beat it to a pulp, and we're in the process off rebuilding it.  Makes no difference is you agree with that strategy, that is what we were doing.  Pulling your support in this weakened state in amongst groups like ISIS is the foriegn policy of champions?

    You have to believe that Obama made a mistake, which he should own up to, or that he knew exactly what he was doing, which is more likely.

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.



    Heh, heh, heh ... yep, Dubya was soooo dang intent on keeping US forces in Iraq that he signed a SoF agreement mandating ALL US forces out of the country by 12/11.

    Seriously, can ya'll, just once, argue facts ... not some political rhetoric Dubya said at a news confrence.

    Trying to blame Obama for the fragmentation of Iraq and the rise of these extreme groups just patently ignores the fact that if Dubya hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place none of these groups woul exist today ... but I'm sure Obama used his time machine te get back to '03 to set the whole tinderbox aflame.



    I think it is you that needs a brush up on the facts:

    it was December 2011, it was up to Biden to negotiate it.  He failed.

    Bush was long gone when this mess got started.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/24/biden-reveals-why-the-obama-administration-abandoned-iraq/

     



    So basically your admitting that the previous wingnut admin completely sruued-the-pooch and it was up to the next Dem admin to fix it.

    What you're saying is that SoF treaties by wingnut admins are meaningles and should be ignored because the previous admin got it bass ackwards from the start and the following Dem admin has the responsibility to fix the mess the wingnut left.

    What you're saying is that the entire wingnut-led Iraq debacle ... from beginning to end ... was such a complete and utter failure that everything and everything they did in the course of that failure ... right up to and including their SoF treaty to extract the US out of the quagmire ... should be ignored or reversed because everyone knows that ya'll are just inept at foreign policy ... and the wingnuts get the benefit of hindsight ... while blaming the Dems for not being prescient.

    FREAKING HILARIOUS.

    Not too many wingnuts on these boards would admit to such epic failures of their own party. Congrats.

     



    Well, no. bush left a stable Iraq, and Obama destabilized it.

    can't get around the facts, but please keep trying, because eventually you have to come to one of two conclusions:

    obama did nothing,i.e. Negligent, and therefore this is the long terms result of the Bush doctrine.

    or,

    obama did some thing, and his policies failed.

    so, after six years, you are left with one of two words to describe Obama's foreign policy: negligent, or failure.

    you choose.

     



    How stable is a country if doing nothing can de-stabilize it?  We have done nothing for hundreds of countries.  What's unique about Iraq - it collapsed under the weight of freedom and democracy?

     

     



    Pulling out ALL the troops isn't doing nothing.

    What is unique is that we beat it to a pulp, and we're in the process off rebuilding it.  Makes no difference is you agree with that strategy, that is what we were doing.  Pulling your support in this weakened state in amongst groups like ISIS is the foriegn policy of champions?

    You have to believe that Obama made a mistake, which he should own up to, or that he knew exactly what he was doing, which is more likely.

     

    Then what would doing nothing look like?  Leaving troops in Iraq against the wishes of the Iraqi government?  

    We beat it to a pulp and were in the process of rebuilding it?  You previously claimed the the Bush admin had stabilized the country.  I think your positions are at odds with one another.

    All things being equal, I think the United States is better off looking like the cavalry and swooping in at Iraq's request then we are leaving a military presence indefinitely for the entire country to resent.  In 2011, trying to negotiate the latter, we couldn't even get Maliki to share power with moderates.  By contrast, in 2014, by responding to their request for help, Maliki has been forced to step down.  

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    How stable is a country if doing nothing can de-stabilize it?  We have done nothing for hundreds of countries.  What's unique about Iraq - it collapsed under the weight of freedom and democracy?

    Good point, let 'em go to hell.

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.



    You mean give them the opportunity to pull themselves up, right?  That's how you say let 'em go to hell when it comes to domestic policy.

     




    I think that I would be very supportive of domestic policies that prevented American heads from being removed from their bodies.

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Putin and Assad just blinked.

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    But Obama didn't create a power vacuum in Iraq. Bush did.

    President Obama's team failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement that would have kept the necessary force on hand to be a credible threat to groups like ISIS. That was the intention of the Bush Administration all along.

    It was a lot easier for the Obama adminstration to let it go, claim victory and go home. The result is that now we have to go back.

    Slomag, I agree that they Shia goverment dropped the ball and created conditions for the Sunni to allow the jihadis back but we also dropped the ball by not maintaining any kind of leverage to prevent that from happening in the first place.



    Heh, heh, heh ... yep, Dubya was soooo dang intent on keeping US forces in Iraq that he signed a SoF agreement mandating ALL US forces out of the country by 12/11.

    Seriously, can ya'll, just once, argue facts ... not some political rhetoric Dubya said at a news confrence.

    Trying to blame Obama for the fragmentation of Iraq and the rise of these extreme groups just patently ignores the fact that if Dubya hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place none of these groups woul exist today ... but I'm sure Obama used his time machine te get back to '03 to set the whole tinderbox aflame.



    I think it is you that needs a brush up on the facts:

    it was December 2011, it was up to Biden to negotiate it.  He failed.

    Bush was long gone when this mess got started.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/24/biden-reveals-why-the-obama-administration-abandoned-iraq/

     



    So basically your admitting that the previous wingnut admin completely sruued-the-pooch and it was up to the next Dem admin to fix it.

    What you're saying is that SoF treaties by wingnut admins are meaningles and should be ignored because the previous admin got it bass ackwards from the start and the following Dem admin has the responsibility to fix the mess the wingnut left.

    What you're saying is that the entire wingnut-led Iraq debacle ... from beginning to end ... was such a complete and utter failure that everything and everything they did in the course of that failure ... right up to and including their SoF treaty to extract the US out of the quagmire ... should be ignored or reversed because everyone knows that ya'll are just inept at foreign policy ... and the wingnuts get the benefit of hindsight ... while blaming the Dems for not being prescient.

    FREAKING HILARIOUS.

    Not too many wingnuts on these boards would admit to such epic failures of their own party. Congrats.

     



    Well, no. bush left a stable Iraq, and Obama destabilized it.

    can't get around the facts, but please keep trying, because eventually you have to come to one of two conclusions:

    obama did nothing,i.e. Negligent, and therefore this is the long terms result of the Bush doctrine.

    or,

    obama did some thing, and his policies failed.

    so, after six years, you are left with one of two words to describe Obama's foreign policy: negligent, or failure.

    you choose.

     



    How stable is a country if doing nothing can de-stabilize it?  We have done nothing for hundreds of countries.  What's unique about Iraq - it collapsed under the weight of freedom and democracy?

     

     



    Pulling out ALL the troops isn't doing nothing.

    What is unique is that we beat it to a pulp, and we're in the process off rebuilding it.  Makes no difference is you agree with that strategy, that is what we were doing.  Pulling your support in this weakened state in amongst groups like ISIS is the foriegn policy of champions?

    You have to believe that Obama made a mistake, which he should own up to, or that he knew exactly what he was doing, which is more likely.

     

    Then what would doing nothing look like?  Leaving troops in Iraq against the wishes of the Iraqi government?  

    We beat it to a pulp and were in the process of rebuilding it?  You previously claimed the the Bush admin had stabilized the country.  I think your positions are at odds with one another.

    All things being equal, I think the United States is better off looking like the cavalry and swooping in at Iraq's request then we are leaving a military presence indefinitely for the entire country to resent.  In 2011, trying to negotiate the latter, we couldn't even get Maliki to share power with moderates.  By contrast, in 2014, by responding to their request for help, Maliki has been forced to step down.  



    Man.  You are just stupid. Learn something about the situation and get back to us.

    the "Obama was handed a bag of p00h and is doing the best he can" is a line for fools like you. And Obama apparently.

     
Sections
Shortcuts