Obama Wants to Declare War on ISIS

[blueandgoldguy]

Might have been better if the troops would have been able to stay a little longer but Obama campaigned on the promise to bring the soldiers home.  A lot of pressure from the public to end the war in Iraq.

 

Al-Queda was minor threat by 2010 and 2011. More of a nuisance really.  I think if Maliki had been more inclusive of the Sunnis when it came to the politics of Iraq then Al-Queda would have continued to be nothing more than a nuisance.

 

Of course, the situation in Syria doesn't help either.

[The Unknown Poster]

You think the Americans went into Iraq to get Al Qaeda? They went in so Bush could finish the job his dad couldn't. To Kill Hussein. Think that subject didn't come up over dinner at the Bush house for years after the war?.I can just see George Jr saying, "I'll get him for ya, Daddy. Count on it". Now that whole area is just totallly ****** up as Obama got the troops out with absolutely no thought or care what happened after that. Obama is as bad as Bush Jr was. Both are total morons.

Don't confuse opinion with facts.

[New_Earth_Mud]

 

The Americans are stupid and had and have no clue what they are doing. They alone created this.

The Americans cant control their own country and have zero right to go tell others how to live. They brought out this war and now other country's are brought into it for the simple fact they try to help.

Now they want to sit back and say it up to the others in the region to control it? It was under control before.. it was all nuts but it was controlled.

Now its still nuts.... And out of control and spread world wide.

The yanks are to blame and now need to fix it.

Spare us the uninformed anti American nonsense.

 

 

 

LMAO

 

Whats uninformed about it?

 

Oh i get it.....  I dont agree with your opinion so i must be uninformed.   Good grief

[Mark F]

Might have been better if the troops would have been able to stay a little longer but Obama campaigned on the promise to bring the soldiers home.  A lot of pressure from the public to end the war in Iraq.

 

Al-Queda was minor threat by 2010 and 2011. More of a nuisance really.  I think if Maliki had been more inclusive of the Sunnis when it came to the politics of Iraq then Al-Queda would have continued to be nothing more than a nuisance.

 

Of course, the situation in Syria doesn't help either.

 

Obama wanted to keep his soldiers in Iraq. But they wouldn't stay without immunity from Iraqi law. The Iraqis wouldn't give that. And it was impossible to get a vote passed in Iraq legislature  allowing and extension of American troops;  the Americans were forced to leave. Obama for public consumption could not admit these facts. They now have a billion dollar embassy in Iraq, their largest in the world, which is basically empty. 

 

"As the senior Pentagon official responsible for Iraq policy during the first three years of the Obama administration, I had a front-row seat for the internal deliberations over how to end the war. Through the first half of 2011, there was a vigorous debate within the administration about whether U.S. forces should remain in Iraq beyond December, and if so, in what numbers and with what missions. Ultimately, at great political risk, President Obama approved negotiations with the Iraqi government to allow a force of around 5,000 American troops to stay in Iraq to provide counterterrorism support and air cover and to train the Iraqi army. But, as commander in chief, he was unwilling to strand U.S. forces in a hostile, anti-American environment without the legal protections and immunities required to ensure soldiers didn’t end up in Iraqi jails. These protections, which are common in nearly every country where U.S. forces operate, were guaranteed under the 2008 status of forces agreement negotiated by the Bush administration; Obama simply demanded that they continue under any follow-on accord."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/no-obama-didnt-lose-iraq-107874.html#ixzz3RjKjdMJU

 

Maliki couldn't get his parliamentarians to agree to immunity for us troops. lots of videos on youtube from Iraq showing their conduct, if you wonder why that might be.

[17to85]

The Americans are stupid and had and have no clue what they are doing. They alone created this.

 

 

Oh please. The middle east is such a mess and has been for a long time because the global powers started arbitrarily dividing the place up putting factions on opposite sides into countries together and expecting to to work. The whole area has been getting attacked and conquered for centuries and used as pawns in global power games and you're saying it's the americans alone? Come on now. 

[Mark F]

The American's are the latest in a long series, and they've probably caused the most misery, in numbers of dead and displaced. Well, they're up there, maybe not the most.

 

It is true that the history of civilization, is one mainly of war, conquest, and greed. 

[New_Earth_Mud]

 

The Americans are stupid and had and have no clue what they are doing. They alone created this.

 

 

Oh please. The middle east is such a mess and has been for a long time because the global powers started arbitrarily dividing the place up putting factions on opposite sides into countries together and expecting to to work. The whole area has been getting attacked and conquered for centuries and used as pawns in global power games and you're saying it's the americans alone? Come on now. 

 

 

After 9/11

 

Have things got better since the Yanks went and attacked these countrys?  Dont seem so.

 

These countrys and people need to figure things out alone without interference from others. 

[iso_55]

 

You think the Americans went into Iraq to get Al Qaeda? They went in so Bush could finish the job his dad couldn't. To Kill Hussein. Think that subject didn't come up over dinner at the Bush house for years after the war?.I can just see George Jr saying, "I'll get him for ya, Daddy. Count on it". Now that whole area is just totallly ****** up as Obama got the troops out with absolutely no thought or care what happened after that. Obama is as bad as Bush Jr was. Both are total morons.

Don't confuse opinion with facts.

 

I'm not. You can't tell me that wasn't Dubya's reasoning for going into Iraq in the first place. They created the mess but won't stick around to fix it so we have instability in the Middle East & ISIS. 

[17to85]

 

 

The Americans are stupid and had and have no clue what they are doing. They alone created this.

 

 

Oh please. The middle east is such a mess and has been for a long time because the global powers started arbitrarily dividing the place up putting factions on opposite sides into countries together and expecting to to work. The whole area has been getting attacked and conquered for centuries and used as pawns in global power games and you're saying it's the americans alone? Come on now. 

 

 

After 9/11

 

Have things got better since the Yanks went and attacked these countrys?  Dont seem so.

 

These countrys and people need to figure things out alone without interference from others. 

 

Did things get better after the crusades? After the Mongols sacked everything they could? After the western powers started drawing arbitrary lines to make countries? The place has been unstable since long before 9/11. Trying to pin this entirely on Americans shows a frighteningly short sided view of the history of the region and why it's in the state it is. Yes America has it's share of responsibility, but you made the claim saying it was all their fault and that is completely incorrect. 

[iso_55]

The US going into Iraq instead of Afghanistan created the mess we have today. 

[Mark F]

heard this?

 

Donald Rumsfeld had the chance when he was US defence secretary in December 2001 to make sure Osama bin Laden was killed or captured, but let him slip through his hands, a Senate report has found.

The report by the Senate foreign relations committee is damning of the way George Bush's administration conducted the aftermath of its bombing campaign in Afghanistan, saying it amounted to a "lost opportunity". It states that as a result of allowing the al-Qaida leader to flee from his Tora Bora stronghold into Pakistan, Americans were left more vulnerable to terrorism, and the foundations were laid for today's protracted Afghan insurgency. It also lays blame for the July 2005 London bombings on a failure to kill the al-Qaida leaders at Tora Bora.

But the report contains a mass of evidence that points towards the near certainty that Bin Laden was in the Tora Bora district of the White Mountains in eastern Afghanistan, along with up to 1,500 of his most loyal al-Qaida fighters and bodyguards, in late November 2001, shortly before the fall of Kabul."

 

The Guardian 29.11.09

 

I think there was an infamous phone call to Florida from Afghanistan, where the commander in Afghanistan was asking what to do, and was told to do nothing.

 

If they had captured Osama, then they were out of excuses to go into Iraq.

 

All in all, it's a very ugly disaster, no matter how you look at it.

[The Unknown Poster]

The Americans are stupid and had and have no clue what they are doing. They alone created this.

The Americans cant control their own country and have zero right to go tell others how to live. They brought out this war and now other country's are brought into it for the simple fact they try to help.

Now they want to sit back and say it up to the others in the region to control it? It was under control before.. it was all nuts but it was controlled.

Now its still nuts.... And out of control and spread world wide.

The yanks are to blame and now need to fix it.

Spare us the uninformed anti American nonsense.

LMAO

Whats uninformed about it?

Oh i get it..... I dont agree with your opinion so i must be uninformed. Good grief

Not at all. Being uniformed is uninformed. We can disagree no problem. Framing an arguing as Americans are stupid is the wrong way to begin a point of you feel you are informed.

[The Unknown Poster]

heard this?

Donald Rumsfeld had the chance when he was US defence secretary in December 2001 to make sure Osama bin Laden was killed or captured, but let him slip through his hands, a Senate report has found.

The report by the Senate foreign relations committee is damning of the way George Bush's administration conducted the aftermath of its bombing campaign in Afghanistan, saying it amounted to a "lost opportunity". It states that as a result of allowing the al-Qaida leader to flee from his Tora Bora stronghold into Pakistan, Americans were left more vulnerable to terrorism, and the foundations were laid for today's protracted Afghan insurgency. It also lays blame for the July 2005 London bombings on a failure to kill the al-Qaida leaders at Tora Bora.

But the report contains a mass of evidence that points towards the near certainty that Bin Laden was in the Tora Bora district of the White Mountains in eastern Afghanistan, along with up to 1,500 of his most loyal al-Qaida fighters and bodyguards, in late November 2001, shortly before the fall of Kabul."

The Guardian 29.11.09

I think there was an infamous phone call to Florida from Afghanistan, where the commander in Afghanistan was asking what to do, and was told to do nothing.

If they had captured Osama, then they were out of excuses to go into Iraq.

All in all, it's a very ugly disaster, no matter how you look at it.

Clinton had a chance at Osama too.

[Mark F]

1. If what you say about Clinton is true (haven't seen any kind of evidence from you, just your statement,) Does that make Rumsfeld's failure ok then? 

 

If it does, in your mind, please explain the logic.

[The Unknown Poster]

1. If what you say about Clinton is true (haven't seen any kind of evidence from you, just your statement,) Does that make Rumsfeld's failure ok then?

If it does, in your mind, please explain the logic.

I think you know the answer. Just getting ahead of the usual "the republicans orchestrated 9/11 and were pals with bin laden" nonsense by pointing out that it's not a republican thing. Far more complicated.

Bush Sr should have marched right into Baghdad but he didn't. Bush jr wasn't finishing what his dad couldn't. That's simpleton nonsense. The U.S. did what they did with the support of several nations as a result of the failings of the UN.

[Mark F]

Just getting ahead of the usual…

 

 

 

Why not just respond to the question I asked, instead of answering a question I didn't ask.

[blueandgoldguy]

Eliminating Sadam in 1990 would not have guaranteed any sort of resolution in Iraq unless you have an effective plan for rebuilding the leadership of the country afterwards - one that includes a partnership with former Baathist party officials (those who have a previous understanding of the country and the inner workings of its government) and not disbanding the army to leave all the heavy lifting to the invading forces' army (what the US did in 2003).  I doubt it would have turned out any different if they decided to eliminate Sadam in 1990.  Still would have ended up with thousands of US soldiers killed and hundred of thousands of Iraqis killed and no noticeable appreciation in the quality of life.  The UN is not always right but they were right in calling the US war on Iraq in 2003 illegal.  And outside of England, every other country of consequence agreed by choosing not to get involved -a wise choice indeed.

[Mark F]

every other country of consequence agreed by choosing not to get involved -a wise choice indeed.

 

 

and, Canada thanks you Jean Chretien for declining to involve us in that.

[New_Earth_Mud]

 

 

 

The Americans are stupid and had and have no clue what they are doing. They alone created this.

 

 

Oh please. The middle east is such a mess and has been for a long time because the global powers started arbitrarily dividing the place up putting factions on opposite sides into countries together and expecting to to work. The whole area has been getting attacked and conquered for centuries and used as pawns in global power games and you're saying it's the americans alone? Come on now. 

 

 

After 9/11

 

Have things got better since the Yanks went and attacked these countrys?  Dont seem so.

 

These countrys and people need to figure things out alone without interference from others. 

 

Did things get better after the crusades? After the Mongols sacked everything they could? After the western powers started drawing arbitrary lines to make countries? The place has been unstable since long before 9/11. Trying to pin this entirely on Americans shows a frighteningly short sided view of the history of the region and why it's in the state it is. Yes America has it's share of responsibility, but you made the claim saying it was all their fault and that is completely incorrect. 

 

 

Christians went around killing. So did everyone.    

 

Im not going back that far dude.  I know history.

 

Good grief.  That crap there has been a giant mess before America FFS

[New_Earth_Mud]

 

 

 

The Americans are stupid and had and have no clue what they are doing. They alone created this.

The Americans cant control their own country and have zero right to go tell others how to live. They brought out this war and now other country's are brought into it for the simple fact they try to help.

Now they want to sit back and say it up to the others in the region to control it? It was under control before.. it was all nuts but it was controlled.

Now its still nuts.... And out of control and spread world wide.

The yanks are to blame and now need to fix it.

Spare us the uninformed anti American nonsense.

LMAO

Whats uninformed about it?

Oh i get it..... I dont agree with your opinion so i must be uninformed. Good grief

Not at all. Being uniformed is uninformed. We can disagree no problem. Framing an arguing as Americans are stupid is the wrong way to begin a point of you feel you are informed.

 

 

 

They are stupid.

 

First of all....  these people have been around a whole hell of alot longer then America, They have been fighting each other forever.

 

America cant control its own people and country ...  they sure as hell aint going to control them.

 

You cant fight or win a war you dont understand. Its pretty stupid thinking that they are going to go kill people they think are bad and put people in place they think are good when they have no idea whos who.

 

This is why the Russians just walked away from their war in Afgan. They knew there was no winning.

 

You cant win against something you dont understand. 

[SPuDS]

Yea almost as stupid as arguing a point with no reasons to backup your stance or not having complete understanding of what's going on..

[New_Earth_Mud]

Yea almost as stupid as arguing a point with no reasons to backup your stance or not having complete understanding of what's going on..

 

 

Inform me with your wisdom plz.

 

Point something out i said that was incorrect.

[17to85]

well the whole thing is pretty incorrect. Winning the war is really easy. The problems arise after the battles are all won. See what happens is once the enemy forces are destroyed and the leadership is gone there is a power vacuum and more often than not it gets filled by less than desirable people. If you could still conquer a nation and annex them you'd see a lot less problems but that's not what goes on. They go in win the war then leave the locals to pick up the pieces and that leads to radicals stepping into that power vacuum. It's not about winning a war, it's about having the commitment to stay after it's won. 

[New_Earth_Mud]

well the whole thing is pretty incorrect. Winning the war is really easy. The problems arise after the battles are all won. See what happens is once the enemy forces are destroyed and the leadership is gone there is a power vacuum and more often than not it gets filled by less than desirable people. If you could still conquer a nation and annex them you'd see a lot less problems but that's not what goes on. They go in win the war then leave the locals to pick up the pieces and that leads to radicals stepping into that power vacuum. It's not about winning a war, it's about having the commitment to stay after it's won. 

 

 

Ya im sure that wont piss them off more. Stick around and occupy their land? Thats what pissed them off in the first place.

 

Did the USA not back Saddam at one time? Did they also not back the rebels in Afgan against the Russians? How did all that turn out?

 

The problem is and my point is.....  They dont understand these people and you cant win against what you cant understand. You dont know who to help or give weapons to because they will just turn on you like it has many times over.  

[Mark F]

 "Iraq has suffered a lack of correct metering from its wellheads and pipelines since at least 2003. The International Advisory and Monitoring Board (IAMB), created in 2003 to oversee management of Iraq's natural resources during a transitional period, said in 2006 that years of requesting an accurate metering system had brought no results

The IAMB first expressed concern at the lack of metering in July 2004.^] A 2011 review of an audit by PricewaterhouseCoopers of Iraq's oil revenue management found that the plan to fully install and calibrate a metering system by 2012 was only 39% complete"

 

no metering of oil eh…