Bibi gives presentation on finding yellow cake in Iran

[kiwiman127]

It did take them a while to work up to being able to do what they did, that is for sure. It is the same group, they just changed their name. It like like Kentucky Fried Chicken became KFC..same place different name.

What created ISIS was the removal of Saddam. There never would have been an ISIS had Saddam still be in power, he would have quashed them at the beginning. That is just one of many consequences of the invasion of Iraq

And saddam was the worst dictator since Hitler, Killed millions of people

So what? Are you now a supporter of the US invading the country of every evil dictator?

And for all of his evilness, he was not as bad as ISIS


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

No, I’m against the foreign wars especially Afghanistan.
I’m just saying Saddam Hussein was not a saint, obviously you admired him...

Fuck off. I did not admire him but I am smart enough to understand the role he played in the Middle East.

Everyone with a brain tried to tell the idiots what would happen when Saddam was suddenly removed, and they were 100% correct.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

For someone who thinks so highly of himself you are woefully uniformed.

The very conservative Cato Institute has a very well reasoned article, on how/why ISIS came about.
===========================================
<snip>
To their credit, Brands and Feaver do acknowledge, in the conclusion, that “the most fateful choice was also the oldest one: the decision to invade Iraq in 2003, followed by mismanagement of the occupation” (p. 41) but they then temper that note by arguing that “it is not correct to claim that the invasion of Iraq set in motion forces that led ineluctably to the problems that the United States has faced since mid-2014.”

In a strict sense, of course, this is true. Other things could, in theory, have happened to blunt the rise of ISIS. But only a decision not to invade Iraq in 2003 would clearly and unequivocally have averted the rise of ISIS. The reason is simple: the single clearest cause of the rise of ISIS was the invasion of Iraq. As President Obama explained in 2015, “ISIL is a direct outgrowth of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, that came out of our invasion, which is an example of unintended consequences, which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.” David Kilcullen, who worked on counterterrorism at the State Department in 2005-06 and was senior adviser to General David Petraeus at the height of the Iraq surge in 2007-08, put it even more bluntly: “There would be no ISIS if we had not invaded Iraq.”
Was the Rise of ISIS Inevitable?
=========================================
In other words, ISIS would of not of happened, if George W would not have invaded Iraq and mismanaged Iraq following the removal of Saddam.
ISIS, gained strength later through Obama decisions.
I think that sums up reality pretty intelligently and without political bias.
Two presidents and one mistake.

 

[Rustic]

Obama was the creator of ISIS, They saw a weakness...

 

[Doc1]

And saddam was the worst dictator since Hitler, Killed millions of people

So what? Are you now a supporter of the US invading the country of every evil dictator?

And for all of his evilness, he was not as bad as ISIS


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

No, I’m against the foreign wars especially Afghanistan.
I’m just saying Saddam Hussein was not a saint, obviously you admired him...

Fuck off. I did not admire him but I am smart enough to understand the role he played in the Middle East.

Everyone with a brain tried to tell the idiots what would happen when Saddam was suddenly removed, and they were 100% correct.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

For someone who thinks so highly of himself you are woefully uniformed.

The very conservative Cato Institute has a very well reasoned article, on how/why ISIS came about.
===========================================
<snip>
To their credit, Brands and Feaver do acknowledge, in the conclusion, that “the most fateful choice was also the oldest one: the decision to invade Iraq in 2003, followed by mismanagement of the occupation” (p. 41) but they then temper that note by arguing that “it is not correct to claim that the invasion of Iraq set in motion forces that led ineluctably to the problems that the United States has faced since mid-2014.”

In a strict sense, of course, this is true. Other things could, in theory, have happened to blunt the rise of ISIS. But only a decision not to invade Iraq in 2003 would clearly and unequivocally have averted the rise of ISIS. The reason is simple: the single clearest cause of the rise of ISIS was the invasion of Iraq. As President Obama explained in 2015, “ISIL is a direct outgrowth of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, that came out of our invasion, which is an example of unintended consequences, which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.” David Kilcullen, who worked on counterterrorism at the State Department in 2005-06 and was senior adviser to General David Petraeus at the height of the Iraq surge in 2007-08, put it even more bluntly: “There would be no ISIS if we had not invaded Iraq.”
Was the Rise of ISIS Inevitable?
=========================================
In other words, ISIS would of not of happened, if George W would not have invaded Iraq and mismanaged Iraq following the removal of Saddam.
ISIS, gained strength later through Obama decisions.
I think that sums up reality pretty intelligently and without political bias.
Two presidents and one mistake.

Tell me, besides the Political and Human carnage, what was the main difference in post Iraq vs. Pre Iraq?

 

[ph3iron]

Looks like Trump’s gonna get his war

Netanyahu to address country with 'dramatic news about Iran' Monday night

The analysts say his charts were from before the agreement

 

[ph3iron]

Obama was the creator of ISIS, They saw a weakness...

No darlin Pres codpiece bush had signed the quit agreement before Obama came in.
I guess you think hill sold uranium to the russians

 

[ph3iron]

Obama was the creator of ISIS, They saw a weakness...

No darlin Pres codpiece bush had signed the quit agreement before Obama came in.
I guess you think hill sold uranium to the russians

 

[ph3iron]

Looks like Trump’s gonna get his war

Netanyahu to address country with 'dramatic news about Iran' Monday night

The analysts say his charts were from before the agreement

I forget, Iran is 4000 years old and been in one war?
We are 275 years old and been in 200 wars?

 

[Rustic]

Obama was the creator of ISIS, They saw a weakness...

No darlin Pres codpiece bush had signed the quit agreement before Obama came in.
I guess you think hill sold uranium to the russians

Na, Obama inspired them…

Slick Willy and the Hildabeast Not only have been involved in uranium sales with Russia, also sex trafficking...

 

[kiwiman127]

So what? Are you now a supporter of the US invading the country of every evil dictator?

And for all of his evilness, he was not as bad as ISIS


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

No, I’m against the foreign wars especially Afghanistan.
I’m just saying Saddam Hussein was not a saint, obviously you admired him...

Fuck off. I did not admire him but I am smart enough to understand the role he played in the Middle East.

Everyone with a brain tried to tell the idiots what would happen when Saddam was suddenly removed, and they were 100% correct.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

For someone who thinks so highly of himself you are woefully uniformed.

The very conservative Cato Institute has a very well reasoned article, on how/why ISIS came about.
===========================================
<snip>
To their credit, Brands and Feaver do acknowledge, in the conclusion, that “the most fateful choice was also the oldest one: the decision to invade Iraq in 2003, followed by mismanagement of the occupation” (p. 41) but they then temper that note by arguing that “it is not correct to claim that the invasion of Iraq set in motion forces that led ineluctably to the problems that the United States has faced since mid-2014.”

In a strict sense, of course, this is true. Other things could, in theory, have happened to blunt the rise of ISIS. But only a decision not to invade Iraq in 2003 would clearly and unequivocally have averted the rise of ISIS. The reason is simple: the single clearest cause of the rise of ISIS was the invasion of Iraq. As President Obama explained in 2015, “ISIL is a direct outgrowth of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, that came out of our invasion, which is an example of unintended consequences, which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.” David Kilcullen, who worked on counterterrorism at the State Department in 2005-06 and was senior adviser to General David Petraeus at the height of the Iraq surge in 2007-08, put it even more bluntly: “There would be no ISIS if we had not invaded Iraq.”
Was the Rise of ISIS Inevitable?
=========================================
In other words, ISIS would of not of happened, if George W would not have invaded Iraq and mismanaged Iraq following the removal of Saddam.
ISIS, gained strength later through Obama decisions.
I think that sums up reality pretty intelligently and without political bias.
Two presidents and one mistake.

Tell me, besides the Political and Human carnage, what was the main difference in post Iraq vs. Pre Iraq?

There was no highly violent civil war between the Sunni and Shia.
This is noted by the experts and Cato within the linked article.
Then there's a second observation, again from ME experts.
======================================
Since the Iraq War, sectarian conflict between Shiites and Sunnis has emerged as a major fissure in Middle East politics — fueling conflicts in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen; a resurgence of extremism and the scourge of the Islamic State; and an escalation in tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia which has become the most significant clash between regional rivals in decades. From country to country, across the region, sectarian conflict is the thread that runs through each crisis, tying them into a strategic Gordian knot.
The War for Islam
======================================
What are your credentials, that trump these expert theories and facts?

 

[Rustic]

No, I’m against the foreign wars especially Afghanistan.
I’m just saying Saddam Hussein was not a saint, obviously you admired him...

Fuck off. I did not admire him but I am smart enough to understand the role he played in the Middle East.

Everyone with a brain tried to tell the idiots what would happen when Saddam was suddenly removed, and they were 100% correct.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

For someone who thinks so highly of himself you are woefully uniformed.

The very conservative Cato Institute has a very well reasoned article, on how/why ISIS came about.
===========================================
<snip>
To their credit, Brands and Feaver do acknowledge, in the conclusion, that “the most fateful choice was also the oldest one: the decision to invade Iraq in 2003, followed by mismanagement of the occupation” (p. 41) but they then temper that note by arguing that “it is not correct to claim that the invasion of Iraq set in motion forces that led ineluctably to the problems that the United States has faced since mid-2014.”

In a strict sense, of course, this is true. Other things could, in theory, have happened to blunt the rise of ISIS. But only a decision not to invade Iraq in 2003 would clearly and unequivocally have averted the rise of ISIS. The reason is simple: the single clearest cause of the rise of ISIS was the invasion of Iraq. As President Obama explained in 2015, “ISIL is a direct outgrowth of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, that came out of our invasion, which is an example of unintended consequences, which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.” David Kilcullen, who worked on counterterrorism at the State Department in 2005-06 and was senior adviser to General David Petraeus at the height of the Iraq surge in 2007-08, put it even more bluntly: “There would be no ISIS if we had not invaded Iraq.”
Was the Rise of ISIS Inevitable?
=========================================
In other words, ISIS would of not of happened, if George W would not have invaded Iraq and mismanaged Iraq following the removal of Saddam.
ISIS, gained strength later through Obama decisions.
I think that sums up reality pretty intelligently and without political bias.
Two presidents and one mistake.

Tell me, besides the Political and Human carnage, what was the main difference in post Iraq vs. Pre Iraq?

There was no highly violent civil war between the Sunni and Shia.
This is noted by the experts and Cato within the linked article.
Then there's a second observation, again from ME experts.
======================================
Since the Iraq War, sectarian conflict between Shiites and Sunnis has emerged as a major fissure in Middle East politics — fueling conflicts in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen; a resurgence of extremism and the scourge of the Islamic State; and an escalation in tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia which has become the most significant clash between regional rivals in decades. From country to country, across the region, sectarian conflict is the thread that runs through each crisis, tying them into a strategic Gordian knot.
The War for Islam
======================================
What are your credentials, that trump these expert theories and facts?

Muslims love to fight plain and simple, they kill everybody they disagree with even themselves. Islam is the most violent cult the planet has ever known...

 

[Doc1]

No, I’m against the foreign wars especially Afghanistan.
I’m just saying Saddam Hussein was not a saint, obviously you admired him...

Fuck off. I did not admire him but I am smart enough to understand the role he played in the Middle East.

Everyone with a brain tried to tell the idiots what would happen when Saddam was suddenly removed, and they were 100% correct.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

For someone who thinks so highly of himself you are woefully uniformed.

The very conservative Cato Institute has a very well reasoned article, on how/why ISIS came about.
===========================================
<snip>
To their credit, Brands and Feaver do acknowledge, in the conclusion, that “the most fateful choice was also the oldest one: the decision to invade Iraq in 2003, followed by mismanagement of the occupation” (p. 41) but they then temper that note by arguing that “it is not correct to claim that the invasion of Iraq set in motion forces that led ineluctably to the problems that the United States has faced since mid-2014.”

In a strict sense, of course, this is true. Other things could, in theory, have happened to blunt the rise of ISIS. But only a decision not to invade Iraq in 2003 would clearly and unequivocally have averted the rise of ISIS. The reason is simple: the single clearest cause of the rise of ISIS was the invasion of Iraq. As President Obama explained in 2015, “ISIL is a direct outgrowth of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, that came out of our invasion, which is an example of unintended consequences, which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.” David Kilcullen, who worked on counterterrorism at the State Department in 2005-06 and was senior adviser to General David Petraeus at the height of the Iraq surge in 2007-08, put it even more bluntly: “There would be no ISIS if we had not invaded Iraq.”
Was the Rise of ISIS Inevitable?
=========================================
In other words, ISIS would of not of happened, if George W would not have invaded Iraq and mismanaged Iraq following the removal of Saddam.
ISIS, gained strength later through Obama decisions.
I think that sums up reality pretty intelligently and without political bias.
Two presidents and one mistake.

Tell me, besides the Political and Human carnage, what was the main difference in post Iraq vs. Pre Iraq?

There was no highly violent civil war between the Sunni and Shia.
This is noted by the experts and Cato within the linked article.
Then there's a second observation, again from ME experts.
======================================
Since the Iraq War, sectarian conflict between Shiites and Sunnis has emerged as a major fissure in Middle East politics — fueling conflicts in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen; a resurgence of extremism and the scourge of the Islamic State; and an escalation in tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia which has become the most significant clash between regional rivals in decades. From country to country, across the region, sectarian conflict is the thread that runs through each crisis, tying them into a strategic Gordian knot.
The War for Islam
======================================
What are your credentials, that trump these expert theories and facts?

Answer the question son.

 

[kiwiman127]

Fuck off. I did not admire him but I am smart enough to understand the role he played in the Middle East.

Everyone with a brain tried to tell the idiots what would happen when Saddam was suddenly removed, and they were 100% correct.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

For someone who thinks so highly of himself you are woefully uniformed.

The very conservative Cato Institute has a very well reasoned article, on how/why ISIS came about.
===========================================
<snip>
To their credit, Brands and Feaver do acknowledge, in the conclusion, that “the most fateful choice was also the oldest one: the decision to invade Iraq in 2003, followed by mismanagement of the occupation” (p. 41) but they then temper that note by arguing that “it is not correct to claim that the invasion of Iraq set in motion forces that led ineluctably to the problems that the United States has faced since mid-2014.”

In a strict sense, of course, this is true. Other things could, in theory, have happened to blunt the rise of ISIS. But only a decision not to invade Iraq in 2003 would clearly and unequivocally have averted the rise of ISIS. The reason is simple: the single clearest cause of the rise of ISIS was the invasion of Iraq. As President Obama explained in 2015, “ISIL is a direct outgrowth of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, that came out of our invasion, which is an example of unintended consequences, which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.” David Kilcullen, who worked on counterterrorism at the State Department in 2005-06 and was senior adviser to General David Petraeus at the height of the Iraq surge in 2007-08, put it even more bluntly: “There would be no ISIS if we had not invaded Iraq.”
Was the Rise of ISIS Inevitable?
=========================================
In other words, ISIS would of not of happened, if George W would not have invaded Iraq and mismanaged Iraq following the removal of Saddam.
ISIS, gained strength later through Obama decisions.
I think that sums up reality pretty intelligently and without political bias.
Two presidents and one mistake.

Tell me, besides the Political and Human carnage, what was the main difference in post Iraq vs. Pre Iraq?

There was no highly violent civil war between the Sunni and Shia.
This is noted by the experts and Cato within the linked article.
Then there's a second observation, again from ME experts.
======================================
Since the Iraq War, sectarian conflict between Shiites and Sunnis has emerged as a major fissure in Middle East politics — fueling conflicts in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen; a resurgence of extremism and the scourge of the Islamic State; and an escalation in tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia which has become the most significant clash between regional rivals in decades. From country to country, across the region, sectarian conflict is the thread that runs through each crisis, tying them into a strategic Gordian knot.
The War for Islam
======================================
What are your credentials, that trump these expert theories and facts?

Answer the question son.

Since we were discussing the the birth of ISIS, that is your answer.
Clearly, as experts point out, ISIS was born from the civil war post Saddam; and enhanced by Obama's actions.
If that doesn't answer your question, maybe you should be more specific.
And, answer my questions, son.

 

[Doc1]

For someone who thinks so highly of himself you are woefully uniformed.

The very conservative Cato Institute has a very well reasoned article, on how/why ISIS came about.
===========================================
<snip>
To their credit, Brands and Feaver do acknowledge, in the conclusion, that “the most fateful choice was also the oldest one: the decision to invade Iraq in 2003, followed by mismanagement of the occupation” (p. 41) but they then temper that note by arguing that “it is not correct to claim that the invasion of Iraq set in motion forces that led ineluctably to the problems that the United States has faced since mid-2014.”

In a strict sense, of course, this is true. Other things could, in theory, have happened to blunt the rise of ISIS. But only a decision not to invade Iraq in 2003 would clearly and unequivocally have averted the rise of ISIS. The reason is simple: the single clearest cause of the rise of ISIS was the invasion of Iraq. As President Obama explained in 2015, “ISIL is a direct outgrowth of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, that came out of our invasion, which is an example of unintended consequences, which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.” David Kilcullen, who worked on counterterrorism at the State Department in 2005-06 and was senior adviser to General David Petraeus at the height of the Iraq surge in 2007-08, put it even more bluntly: “There would be no ISIS if we had not invaded Iraq.”
Was the Rise of ISIS Inevitable?
=========================================
In other words, ISIS would of not of happened, if George W would not have invaded Iraq and mismanaged Iraq following the removal of Saddam.
ISIS, gained strength later through Obama decisions.
I think that sums up reality pretty intelligently and without political bias.
Two presidents and one mistake.

Tell me, besides the Political and Human carnage, what was the main difference in post Iraq vs. Pre Iraq?

There was no highly violent civil war between the Sunni and Shia.
This is noted by the experts and Cato within the linked article.
Then there's a second observation, again from ME experts.
======================================
Since the Iraq War, sectarian conflict between Shiites and Sunnis has emerged as a major fissure in Middle East politics — fueling conflicts in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen; a resurgence of extremism and the scourge of the Islamic State; and an escalation in tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia which has become the most significant clash between regional rivals in decades. From country to country, across the region, sectarian conflict is the thread that runs through each crisis, tying them into a strategic Gordian knot.
The War for Islam
======================================
What are your credentials, that trump these expert theories and facts?

Answer the question son.

Since we were discussing the the birth of ISIS, that is your answer.
Clearly, as experts point out, ISIS was born from the civil war post Saddam; and enhanced by Obama's actions.
If that doesn't answer your question, maybe you should be more specific.
And, answer my questions, son.

I see, you want to preach, not dialogue. You're dismissed as the child you are

 

[Faun]

Obama was the creator of ISIS, They saw a weakness...

Look ^^^ Another idiot who thinks Obama was president in 2006.

 

[bendog]

I think Bibi's speech was aimed solely at Trump and AIPAC, but Germany, UK, France and the world lol sees his speech as a reason to support the Iran deal. Trump's going to blow it up. We'll have to see what Iran is willing to agree to without any world sanctions. I'd guess that China is pretty much driving whatever Iran will agree too, but they have their own interests in limiting inspections of all kinds of stuff

 

[Rustic]

Obama was the creator of ISIS, They saw a weakness...

Look ^^^ Another idiot who thinks Obama was president in 2006.

Obama removed troops, That emboldened ISIS

 

[Faun]

Obama was the creator of ISIS, They saw a weakness...

Look ^^^ Another idiot who thinks Obama was president in 2006.

Obama removed troops, That emboldened ISIS

Now look, everyone ^^^ the idiot switches from “creator” ... to ... “emboldened.”

Does this mean even you recognize what a complete moron you are for asserting Obama created ISIS?

 

[Rustic]

Obama was the creator of ISIS, They saw a weakness...

Look ^^^ Another idiot who thinks Obama was president in 2006.

Obama removed troops, That emboldened ISIS

Now look, everyone ^^^ the idiot switches from “creator” ... to ... “emboldened.”

Does this mean even you recognize what a complete moron you are for asserting Obama created ISIS?

ISIS was nothing till obama took power... fact

 

[Dschrute3]

Looks like Trump’s gonna get his war

Netanyahu to address country with 'dramatic news about Iran' Monday night

Looks like Israel is continuing to control US Foreign Policy in the Middle East. Which one is 'Big Satan' and which one is 'Little Satan?' There's no valid justification for bombing Iran.

Does it really matter? Muslims want to eliminate Israelis from existence...

So more 'Preemptive War?' Sorry, but i don't support that policy. We need some separation from Israel's Foreign Policy. We don't always have to go along with everything Israel does. Because Israel does a lot of wrong in the Middle East.

I don’t think we should give Israel any support or any country for that matter. But at the same time we do know for a fact Muslims want to eliminate Israel from existence, the Koran demands it

I hear ya, but remember Israel is attacking Syria and Iran. It's the aggressor. We as a sovereign nation, aren't required to support that.

 

[Dschrute3]

Israel has stolen nothing from Syria. Syria recklessly went to war with Israel twice and has since foolishly refused to make peace with Israel despite repeated Israeli offers to return the Golan in return for peace. It is fair to say that at this point, Syria has abandoned its claim to the Golan.

You can't return what you don't have. The Golan Heights is not Israeli property. Israel just needs to get the fuck off it!

Go fight with the Iranians punk. Did Syria atta

Yeah, pretty shocking the World Community has stayed so silent on Israel attacking Syria daily. Its Civil War had nothing to do with Israel. The attacks are unprovoked and unjust. It just shows that the game is rigged.

You do realize that Iran has sent armed drones into Israel AND that they (Iran) has troops entrenched on the Syria side of the Golan?

Bullshit....and there you said it "the syria side"....Israel is a thug and acts like one.

It wasn't the FIRST time I've said it dumbass. Why is Iran in Syria, entrenched on the Syrian side of the Golan? If you truly think Israel should give it back you're an idiot.

Iran and Syria haven't attacked Israel. So why has Israel been allowed to bomb those nations with impunity? If the situation were reversed, i'm sure the reaction would be much different. Israel needs to be reigned in.

They sent an armed drone into Israeli airspace. Why are the entrenched on the Golan? How many proxy groups does Iran have? Who are they?

It's fact, Israel has routinely attacked Iran and Syria in recent years. So Iran retaliating, makes perfect sense. I'm actually surprised Iran's been so restrained. The World Community has completely ignored Israel's aggression. The game is rigged.