# NEO-CONNED: Iraq Establishing Itself As Geopolitical Player  But Not The Way...



## Lakhota (Jul 14, 2012)

*NEO-CONNED: Iraq Establishing Itself As Geopolitical Player  But Not The Way The War's Architects Envisioned *

Iraq-Iran Ties Grow Stronger As Iraq Rises From The Ashes


----------



## Lakhota (Jul 14, 2012)

*NEO-CONNED: Iraq Establishing Itself As Geopolitical Player  But Not The Way The War's Architects Envisioned *

Iraq-Iran Ties Grow Stronger As Iraq Rises From The Ashes


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 14, 2012)

> Though technically a democracy, Iraq's floundering government has degenerated into a tottering quasi-dictatorship. The costs of the war (more than $800 billion) and reconstruction (more than $50 billion) have been staggeringly high. And while Iraq is finally producing oil at pre-war levels, it is trying its best to drive oil prices as high as possible.
> 
> Most disturbing to many American foreign policy experts, however, is Iraq's extremely close relationship with Iran. Today, the country that was formerly Iran's deadliest rival is its strongest ally.



And here we see the consequences of neo-con ignorance and the incompetence of the Bush Administration. 

At the end of the First Gulf War GHWB was wise enough to understand that by leaving the Saddam regime in place, it would safeguard against an alliance among the Shiites in Southern Iraq, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Iran. With the fundamental Sunni power structure still in place in Baghdad, these three Shiite-dominated regions would remain more difficult for Tehran to influence. 

And with the establishment of the NFZs, Saddam posed no threat to his people or neighbors. 

Indeed, the NFZs proved to be so effective that President Clinton was just as wise to leave them in place. Although the solution was not perfect, given the complex and Byzantine nature of the ME, it kept Iran relatively isolated and Americas allies in the region a little more secure. 

Until Bush 41s idiot son came along and destroyed his fathers good work.


----------



## tjvh (Jul 14, 2012)

Lakhota said:


> *NEO-CONNED: Iraq Establishing Itself As Geopolitical Player  But Not The Way The War's Architects Envisioned *
> 
> Iraq-Iran Ties Grow Stronger As Iraq Rises From The Ashes



You don't think it might be because Obama might have jumped the gun on leaving Iraq to it's own demise... No, of course not. It simply must be Bush's fault.


----------



## ItsjustmeIthink (Jul 14, 2012)

tjvh said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> > *NEO-CONNED: Iraq Establishing Itself As Geopolitical Player  But Not The Way The War's Architects Envisioned *
> ...



8 years and $800 billion is jumping the gun? lol


----------



## Lakhota (Jul 14, 2012)

tjvh said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> > *NEO-CONNED: Iraq Establishing Itself As Geopolitical Player  But Not The Way The War's Architects Envisioned *
> ...



Duh, the deal to leave was struck by the Bush Administration.  And Iraq told Obama to get out when that date came.


----------



## Mad Scientist (Jul 14, 2012)

Lakhota said:


> tjvh said:
> 
> 
> > Lakhota said:
> ...


If you're saying that Obama is *just playing along*, then you'd be correct.


----------



## Lakhota (Jul 14, 2012)

As I understand it, Obama along with former Bush officials tried to renegotiate the deadline - but the deal breaker was that U.S. troops would be subject to Iraqi law - and Obama wouldn't allow that.

Obama: Iraq War Over, Troops to Leave by Year's End | PBS NewsHour

Status of Forces Agreement - The New York Times

Iraq Denies Legal Immunity to U.S. Troops After 2011 - The New York Times


----------



## tjvh (Jul 14, 2012)

ItsjustmeIthink said:


> tjvh said:
> 
> 
> > Lakhota said:
> ...



It damn sure IS jumping the gun if the job was not finished.


----------



## tjvh (Jul 14, 2012)

Lakhota said:


> tjvh said:
> 
> 
> > Lakhota said:
> ...



Another fine example of Obama continuing the policies of Bush.


----------



## Lakhota (Jul 14, 2012)

Yeah, right...


----------



## uscitizen (Jul 14, 2012)

Umm some of us pretty much predicted this outcome when the mess first started..
Somehow "I told you so" just does not cut it.


----------



## Desperado (Jul 14, 2012)

tjvh said:


> ItsjustmeIthink said:
> 
> 
> > tjvh said:
> ...



What job?
The mission was constantly changing, from removing WMD's and making the world safe, then it was to remove a horrific and brutal dictator. Finally it was to bring democracy to Iraq. They voted and choose their new government. Seems we completed all their missions.


----------



## Lakhota (Jul 14, 2012)

uscitizen said:


> Umm some of us pretty much predicted this outcome when the mess first started..
> Somehow "I told you so" just does not cut it.



Exactly!


----------



## Lakhota (Jul 14, 2012)

The Iraq folly made a lot of people rich and a lot of rich people richer, while thousands were killed and wounded.

And the cost to taxpayers...

Cost of war at least $3.7 trillion and counting | Reuters

The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond - The Washington Post


----------



## Lakhota (Jul 14, 2012)

> "It's really the decision of how to pay for it that has had such a negative effect on the U.S. economy. Because unlike any previous war in U.S. history, this was paid for entirely by debt at the same time that we cut taxes," says Bilmes. While entitlements and other mandatory spending make up a majority of annual federal budgets and contribute heavily to deficits and debt, the Iraq War also contributed significantly. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities has estimated that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, together with the Bush tax cuts, will account for almost half of the projected $20 trillion debt in 2019.



More: What Did the Iraq War Cost? More Than You Think. - US News and World Report


----------



## Lakhota (Jul 14, 2012)

Bush fucked us really long time!


----------



## Ariux (Jul 14, 2012)

tjvh said:


> You don't think it might be because Obama might have jumped the gun on leaving Iraq to it's own demise... No, of course not. It simply must be Bush's fault.



Neocon, that's the way to be a shithead to the end!


----------



## freedombecki (Jul 15, 2012)

*obama jerking troops out of iraq is all the fault of*

*boooooosssssshhhhh!!!!*​


----------



## Lakhota (Jul 16, 2012)

Romney Says He Wouldn't Need Approval of Congress to Attack Iran


----------



## tjvh (Jul 16, 2012)

Ariux said:


> tjvh said:
> 
> 
> > You don't think it might be because Obama might have jumped the gun on leaving Iraq to it's own demise... No, of course not. It simply must be Bush's fault.
> ...



Judging from your negative Rep, I'd guess you *aren't* one to ever let *pesky little things* like facts ever get in the way of your opinions.


----------



## tjvh (Jul 16, 2012)

Lakhota said:


> Romney Says He Wouldn't Need Approval of Congress to Attack Iran



Don't worry, Obama's Syrian debacle will unfold long before that day comes.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 16, 2012)

Ariux, tjvh, Lakhota, _et al,_

Well, you could write a book on this topic, but in the end, it was the Iraqi's that ASKED that US and coalition forces leave.  There were many leaders that wanted to stay, and the State Department is there in force.  But when it is all said and done, it was the Iraqi's that set the stage for the withdrawal.  



Ariux said:


> tjvh said:
> 
> 
> > You don't think it might be because Obama might have jumped the gun on leaving Iraq to it's own demise... No, of course not. It simply must be Bush's fault.
> ...





tjvh said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> > Romney Says He Wouldn't Need Approval of Congress to Attack Iran
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The outcome in Iraq was a product of 20th Century thinking and leadership failures on a grand scale.  It cannot be blamed on one person; or even a small group of persons.  It was a real cascade failure on many levels; the White House Administration, The Pentagon _(militarily)_, The State Department _(diplomatically)_, and an exceptionally poor showing by our Congressional leadership _(politically)_.   Additionally, there were intelligence failures, the likes of which haven't been seen for more than half a century.

One cannot blame President Bush, any more than one can blame President Obama; although Bush is much more culpable than Obama.  But by the time the Obama Administration was in place, there had been so many mistakes made that the situation was virtually beyond repair.

However, because the issue is so highly charged, it is almost impossible to correct any mistakes learned in Iraq and apply the lessons learned to either Afghanistan _(a work in-progress) _or Iran _(another mistake in the making)_.  That is because no one wants to admit that there are some things that America should keeps it fingers out of, that America is not all-powerful, and that America is not always right.  One is very hard pressed to find one thing - that America did, in the Middle East, that has contributed to the stability of the region with an acceptable long-term outcome; with the possible exception of the Kuwait Campaign.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Lakhota (Aug 18, 2012)

> _By JAMES RISEN and DURAID ADNAN_
> 
> WASHINGTON &#8212; When President Obama announced last month that he was barring a Baghdad bank from any dealings with the American banking system, it was a rare acknowledgment of a delicate problem facing the administration in a country that American troops just left: for months, Iraq has been helping Iran skirt economic sanctions imposed on Tehran because of its nuclear program.
> 
> ...



More: U.S. Says Iraqis Are Helping Iran to Skirt Sanctions - The New York Times


----------



## U2Edge (Sep 15, 2012)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> > Though technically a democracy, Iraq's floundering government has degenerated into a tottering quasi-dictatorship. The costs of the war (more than $800 billion) and reconstruction (more than $50 billion) have been staggeringly high. And while Iraq is finally producing oil at pre-war levels, it is trying its best to drive oil prices as high as possible.
> >
> > Most disturbing to many American foreign policy experts, however, is Iraq's extremely close relationship with Iran. Today, the country that was formerly Iran's deadliest rival is its strongest ally.
> 
> ...




          A No Fly Zone in August of 1990 still wouldn't have saved Kuwait from being overrun by the Iraqi Republican Guard. The No Fly Zones only helped security in a small way and had next to no impact on events on the ground where Saddam's regime had most of its power anyways. 

            As for the allegations of Saddam not being a threat, lets take a look at what Bill Clinton said about the issue in December 1998:

I can't post youtube videos yet, but go to youtube and type in Bill Clinton on Iraq and look at the video that is 9 minutes long. 

Listen carefully to the last 3 minutes.

Kuwait, The Persian Gulf, Middle East, and the world are safer and more secure with Saddam's regime removed from power. I've yet to see anyone write a book arguing how Saddam was beneficial to security of Kuwait and that now that he is removed Kuwait is somehow less secure.

        Its only natural that the new Iraqi government will have better relations with Iran than Saddam did. Thats not a bad thing. It reduces the chances of war between the two countries and can serve as a bridge between the Arab world and Iran.


----------



## Lakhota (Jun 11, 2014)

It ain't over...


----------



## Desperado (Jun 11, 2014)

Lakhota said:


> As I understand it, Obama along with former Bush officials tried to renegotiate the deadline - but the deal breaker was that U.S. troops would be subject to Iraqi law - and Obama wouldn't allow that.
> 
> Obama: Iraq War Over, Troops to Leave by Year's End | PBS NewsHour
> 
> ...



At least one person was paying attention.


----------



## RoccoR (Jun 12, 2014)

Desperado, Lakhota, _et al,_

Yes, it is not like we did not expect this.



Desperado said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> > As I understand it, Obama along with former Bush officials tried to renegotiate the deadline - but the deal breaker was that U.S. troops would be subject to Iraqi law - and Obama wouldn't allow that.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Iraq is what it is.  They got what they demanded.  I only hope that the Kurds can hold their own.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------

