Bush / Cheney Created Conditions That Led Directly To I S I L

[AmericanFirst]

It takes a lot of gall for people like Dick Cheney to utter even one critical word about President Obama's strategy to eliminate the threat of ISIL in the Middle East.

In fact, it was the unnecessary Bush/Cheney Iraq War that created the conditions that led directly to the rise of the "Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant" (ISIL).

Former George H.W. Bush Secretary of State James Baker said as much on this week's edition of "Meet the Press." He noted that after the first President Bush had ousted Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in 1991, the U.S. had refrained from marching on Baghdad precisely to avoid kicking over the sectarian hornet's nest that was subsequently unleashed by the Bush/Cheney attack on Iraq in 2003.

But it wasn't just the War in Iraq itself that set the stage for the subsequent 12 years of renewed, high-intensity sectarian strife between Sunni's and Shiites in the Middle East. It was also what came after.

Bush's "de-Bathification program" eliminated all vestiges of Sunni power in Iraqi society and set the stage for the Sunni insurrection against American occupation and the new Shiite-led government. Bush disbanded the entire Sunni-dominated Iraqi Army and bureaucracy. He didn't change it. He didn't make it more inclusive of Shiites and Kurds. He just disbanded it. It is no accident that two of the top commanders of today's ISIL are former commanders in the Saddam-era Iraqi military.

General Petraeus took steps to reverse these policies with his "Sunni Awakening" programs that engaged the Sunni tribes against what was then known as Al Qaeda in Iraq. But the progress he made ultimately collapsed because the Bush/Cheney regime helped install Nouri Al-Maliki as Prime Minister who systematically disenfranchised Sunnis throughout Iraq.

And that's not all. The War in Iraq -- which had nothing whatsoever to do with "terrorism" when it was launched -- created massive numbers of terrorists that otherwise would not have dreamed of joining extremist organizations. It did so by killing massive numbers of Iraqis, creating hundreds of thousands of refugees, imprisoning thousands, and convincing many residents of the Middle East that the terrorist narrative was correct: that the U.S. and the West were really about taking Muslim lands.

More: Bush/Cheney Created Conditions that Led Directly to ISIL Robert Creamer

At least Bush is smart enough to keep his mouth shut about all of this - but Cheney isn't.

The twin towers fell before Iraq was attacked, and that pretty well shows that the hornet's nest was already stirred up before Bush did anything in the Middle East.

Islamic extremists have been at war with the United States since the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, and the fact that we had turned a blind eye to that reality did not make it less of a threat. Bush didn't start the war, he responded to it.

ISIS in Iraq is a direct result of Obama pulling all the troops out of Iraq and leaving the vacuum that ISIS filled. Actions have consequences, and all you left wingers should begin to recognize that tidbit.

You can whine, spin, or turn cartwheels, but Obama owns present day Iraq, and the American public knows it.

I believe the West attacked Iraq on 17 January 1991. Iraq was not involved in the 911 attacks. President Bush started an unnecessary war in Iraq and set the date for the withdrawal of all US troops before he left office.

Yeah it was quite a mess the Bush administration left behind in Iraq. One blunder after an other.

Like most libtards you are a complete moron January of 1991 George W. Bush wasn't in office. LMAO!

 

[AmericanFirst]

It takes a lot of gall for people like Dick Cheney to utter even one critical word about President Obama's strategy to eliminate the threat of ISIL in the Middle East.

In fact, it was the unnecessary Bush/Cheney Iraq War that created the conditions that led directly to the rise of the "Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant" (ISIL).

Former George H.W. Bush Secretary of State James Baker said as much on this week's edition of "Meet the Press." He noted that after the first President Bush had ousted Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in 1991, the U.S. had refrained from marching on Baghdad precisely to avoid kicking over the sectarian hornet's nest that was subsequently unleashed by the Bush/Cheney attack on Iraq in 2003.

But it wasn't just the War in Iraq itself that set the stage for the subsequent 12 years of renewed, high-intensity sectarian strife between Sunni's and Shiites in the Middle East. It was also what came after.

Bush's "de-Bathification program" eliminated all vestiges of Sunni power in Iraqi society and set the stage for the Sunni insurrection against American occupation and the new Shiite-led government. Bush disbanded the entire Sunni-dominated Iraqi Army and bureaucracy. He didn't change it. He didn't make it more inclusive of Shiites and Kurds. He just disbanded it. It is no accident that two of the top commanders of today's ISIL are former commanders in the Saddam-era Iraqi military.

General Petraeus took steps to reverse these policies with his "Sunni Awakening" programs that engaged the Sunni tribes against what was then known as Al Qaeda in Iraq. But the progress he made ultimately collapsed because the Bush/Cheney regime helped install Nouri Al-Maliki as Prime Minister who systematically disenfranchised Sunnis throughout Iraq.

And that's not all. The War in Iraq -- which had nothing whatsoever to do with "terrorism" when it was launched -- created massive numbers of terrorists that otherwise would not have dreamed of joining extremist organizations. It did so by killing massive numbers of Iraqis, creating hundreds of thousands of refugees, imprisoning thousands, and convincing many residents of the Middle East that the terrorist narrative was correct: that the U.S. and the West were really about taking Muslim lands.

More: Bush/Cheney Created Conditions that Led Directly to ISIL Robert Creamer

At least Bush is smart enough to keep his mouth shut about all of this - but Cheney isn't.

The twin towers fell before Iraq was attacked, and that pretty well shows that the hornet's nest was already stirred up before Bush did anything in the Middle East.

Islamic extremists have been at war with the United States since the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, and the fact that we had turned a blind eye to that reality did not make it less of a threat. Bush didn't start the war, he responded to it.

ISIS in Iraq is a direct result of Obama pulling all the troops out of Iraq and leaving the vacuum that ISIS filled. Actions have consequences, and all you left wingers should begin to recognize that tidbit.

You can whine, spin, or turn cartwheels, but Obama owns present day Iraq, and the American public knows it.

I believe the West attacked Iraq on 17 January 1991. Iraq was not involved in the 911 attacks. President Bush started an unnecessary war in Iraq and set the date for the withdrawal of all US troops before he left office.

Yeah it was quite a mess the Bush administration left behind in Iraq. One blunder after an other.

It takes a lot of gall for people like Dick Cheney to utter even one critical word about President Obama's strategy to eliminate the threat of ISIL in the Middle East.

In fact, it was the unnecessary Bush/Cheney Iraq War that created the conditions that led directly to the rise of the "Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant" (ISIL).

Former George H.W. Bush Secretary of State James Baker said as much on this week's edition of "Meet the Press." He noted that after the first President Bush had ousted Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in 1991, the U.S. had refrained from marching on Baghdad precisely to avoid kicking over the sectarian hornet's nest that was subsequently unleashed by the Bush/Cheney attack on Iraq in 2003.

But it wasn't just the War in Iraq itself that set the stage for the subsequent 12 years of renewed, high-intensity sectarian strife between Sunni's and Shiites in the Middle East. It was also what came after.

Bush's "de-Bathification program" eliminated all vestiges of Sunni power in Iraqi society and set the stage for the Sunni insurrection against American occupation and the new Shiite-led government. Bush disbanded the entire Sunni-dominated Iraqi Army and bureaucracy. He didn't change it. He didn't make it more inclusive of Shiites and Kurds. He just disbanded it. It is no accident that two of the top commanders of today's ISIL are former commanders in the Saddam-era Iraqi military.

General Petraeus took steps to reverse these policies with his "Sunni Awakening" programs that engaged the Sunni tribes against what was then known as Al Qaeda in Iraq. But the progress he made ultimately collapsed because the Bush/Cheney regime helped install Nouri Al-Maliki as Prime Minister who systematically disenfranchised Sunnis throughout Iraq.

And that's not all. The War in Iraq -- which had nothing whatsoever to do with "terrorism" when it was launched -- created massive numbers of terrorists that otherwise would not have dreamed of joining extremist organizations. It did so by killing massive numbers of Iraqis, creating hundreds of thousands of refugees, imprisoning thousands, and convincing many residents of the Middle East that the terrorist narrative was correct: that the U.S. and the West were really about taking Muslim lands.

More: Bush/Cheney Created Conditions that Led Directly to ISIL Robert Creamer

At least Bush is smart enough to keep his mouth shut about all of this - but Cheney isn't.

The twin towers fell before Iraq was attacked, and that pretty well shows that the hornet's nest was already stirred up before Bush did anything in the Middle East.

Islamic extremists have been at war with the United States since the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, and the fact that we had turned a blind eye to that reality did not make it less of a threat. Bush didn't start the war, he responded to it.

ISIS in Iraq is a direct result of Obama pulling all the troops out of Iraq and leaving the vacuum that ISIS filled. Actions have consequences, and all you left wingers should begin to recognize that tidbit.

You can whine, spin, or turn cartwheels, but Obama owns present day Iraq, and the American public knows it.

I believe the West attacked Iraq on 17 January 1991. Iraq was not involved in the 911 attacks. President Bush started an unnecessary war in Iraq and set the date for the withdrawal of all US troops before he left office.

Yeah it was quite a mess the Bush administration left behind in Iraq. One blunder after an other.

You know what he signed? Bush signed the bill that the DEMOCRATS passed with the help of Chucky "turncoat" Hagel.

Remember when he crossed the floor to give the Democrats the win on the troop withdrawal?

Would you like to revisit who set the date?

Don't expect a libtard to be honest.

 

[paulitician]

Just come home. Leave the Middle East to the People it belongs to. Let them sort out their own problems. The U.S. and Great Britain especially, just do too much meddling around the world. It's time to scale that back.

I don't think you're going to like how a group like ISIS "sorts things out", Paul...just saying...

Isolationism hasn't worked for quite some time. It's a small world these days.

ISIS came about as a result of our endless meddling over there. Radical Islam has risen in popularity mostly because of the West's abuse of Muslims around the world. The U.S. and Great Britain especially, are the worst offenders. It's time to withdraw from the Middle East. It doesn't belong to us. Just come home.

Do you think that will keep them from attacking us here?

Maybe not, but i think it will lessen their desire to cut Americans' heads off. ISIS is a result of our endless meddling over there. There was virtually no Al Qaeda in Iraq or Syria before we invaded Iraq. Hussein hated the radicals. He would kill any he found in his country.

The same can be said of Gaddafi and Mubarak. Yet now, we're trying to kill Assad too. Assad is an educated reasonable man. He despises the radicals. Removing him will be just another misguided blunder. So yes, it is time to come home. It's time to end this Permanent State of War we're stuck in.

"Assad is an educated reasonable man." Who uses chemical weapons on his own people? Would you like to think about that statement, Paul and then perhaps try again?

Proven to be a scam. Assad did not use Chemical Weapons. It was a despicable attempt at getting people to support another unnecessary war. It didn't happen. But regardless, Assad and Syria are no threat to our nation. Assad has never done any harm to our nation. And he is a secular Anti-Radical Islam leader. Removing him from power will prove to be another deadly blunder.

 

[paulitician]

I don't think you're going to like how a group like ISIS "sorts things out", Paul...just saying...

Isolationism hasn't worked for quite some time. It's a small world these days.

ISIS came about as a result of our endless meddling over there. Radical Islam has risen in popularity mostly because of the West's abuse of Muslims around the world. The U.S. and Great Britain especially, are the worst offenders. It's time to withdraw from the Middle East. It doesn't belong to us. Just come home.

Do you think that will keep them from attacking us here?

Maybe not, but i think it will lessen their desire to cut Americans' heads off. ISIS is a result of our endless meddling over there. There was virtually no Al Qaeda in Iraq or Syria before we invaded Iraq. Hussein hated the radicals. He would kill any he found in his country.

The same can be said of Gaddafi and Mubarak. Yet now, we're trying to kill Assad too. Assad is an educated reasonable man. He despises the radicals. Removing him will be just another misguided blunder. So yes, it is time to come home. It's time to end this Permanent State of War we're stuck in.

"Assad is an educated reasonable man." Who uses chemical weapons on his own people? Would you like to think about that statement, Paul and then perhaps try again?

That was never proven. That chemical attack came at a time when Qatar and Saudi Arabia who both are desperate to overthrow Assad wanted air strikes from the US against Assad but the Syrian President hadn't crossed " that red line".

Lo and behold a chemical attack!!!!! In a suburb.

Out of the blue. I'm sure as hell the Assad knowing full well the US would mobilize air power against him wasn't going to attack a freaking suburb of Damascus.

Qatar and Saudi Arabia would be the ones that benefited from the chemical attack. Not Assad.

Assad did not use Chemical Weapons. Why would he? There was absolutely no benefit to him in doing so. It didn't happen. It was just a shameful ploy to get people to support another needless war.

 

[Oldstyle]

So those people in the hospitals gassed themselves to make Assad look bad? Come on...get real!

 

[georgephillip]

Did Bush and Cheney like Vietnam?

"Vietnam analogies are often overused, particularly by people who want to stay out of a proposed war or get us out of one we are fighting.

"Although I agree that the Islamic State, or whatever it is calling itself this week, must be dealt with militarily; the strategy with which the Obama administration is going about it is deeply disturbing and its basic elements bring vividly to mind the War in Vietnam which began in earnest when I was in the Tenth Grade; American involvement did not end until I was a senior Marine Corps First Lieutenant in 1973.

"I am not yet senile enough to have forgotten key details."

If You Liked Vietnam You ll Love the War With the Islamic State Small Wars Journal

 

[paulitician]

So those people in the hospitals gassed themselves to make Assad look bad? Come on...get real!

Who knows what happened? But we can safely assume Assad did not order a Chemical Weapons attack. Why would he? There was absolutely no strategic value or other benefit in doing so. But regardless, it's not our war. We should mind our own business. Let them sort out their own problems.

It's time to withdraw from the Middle East. Most Americans could care less about Sunnis, Shiites, Alawites, or whatever. They're far more concerned with their rapidly expanding Police State and Illegal Invasion taking place on their border. We don't belong in the Middle East. It's time to come home and address our problems here.

 

[M14 Shooter]

So those people in the hospitals gassed themselves to make Assad look bad? Come on...get real!

Who knows what happened? But we can safely assume Assad did not order a Chemical Weapons attack. Why would he? There was absolutely no strategic value or other benefit in doing so. But regardless, it's not our war. We should mind our own business. Let them sort out their own problems.

It's time to withdraw from the Middle East. Most Americans could care less about Sunnis, Shiites, Alawites, or whatever. They're far more concerned with their rapidly expanding Police State and Illegal Invasion taking place on their border. We don't belong in the Middle East. It's time to come home and address our problems here.

And so, what do we do when we leave there and they attack us here?
What do we do when they decide to cut off the oil to not just us, but the rest of the west?

 

[paulitician]

So those people in the hospitals gassed themselves to make Assad look bad? Come on...get real!

Who knows what happened? But we can safely assume Assad did not order a Chemical Weapons attack. Why would he? There was absolutely no strategic value or other benefit in doing so. But regardless, it's not our war. We should mind our own business. Let them sort out their own problems.

It's time to withdraw from the Middle East. Most Americans could care less about Sunnis, Shiites, Alawites, or whatever. They're far more concerned with their rapidly expanding Police State and Illegal Invasion taking place on their border. We don't belong in the Middle East. It's time to come home and address our problems here.

And so, what do we do when we leave there and they attack us here?
What do we do when they decide to cut off the oil to not just us, but the rest of the west?

They won't likely want to kill us as much when we're gone from their lands. We don't belong there. And i'm sure they'll continue to sell the oil. Why wouldn't they? The Middle East belongs to the Peoples of the Middle East. It's time for us to come home.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And so, what do we do when we leave there and they attack us here?
What do we do when they decide to cut off the oil to not just us, but the rest of the west?

They won't likely want to kill us as much when we're gone from their lands. We don't belong there. And i'm sure they'll continue to sell the oil. Why wouldn't they? The Middle East belongs to the Peoples of the Middle East. It's time for us to come home.

Your response does not answer either of my questions.

 

[paulitician]

And so, what do we do when we leave there and they attack us here?
What do we do when they decide to cut off the oil to not just us, but the rest of the west?

They won't likely want to kill us as much when we're gone from their lands. We don't belong there. And i'm sure they'll continue to sell the oil. Why wouldn't they? The Middle East belongs to the Peoples of the Middle East. It's time for us to come home.

Your response does not answer either of my questions.

Well, actually it does. But if it helps, i'll be more clear about my overall solution to this mess...

Abolish Homeland Security (Gestapo), the Patriot Act, NDAA, NSA, and IRS. Then move to a humble balanced Non-Intervention Foreign Policy, while also securing our Border.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And so, what do we do when we leave there and they attack us here?
What do we do when they decide to cut off the oil to not just us, but the rest of the west?

They won't likely want to kill us as much when we're gone from their lands. We don't belong there. And i'm sure they'll continue to sell the oil. Why wouldn't they? The Middle East belongs to the Peoples of the Middle East. It's time for us to come home.

Your response does not answer either of my questions.

Well, actually it does.

No, they don't

Rather than addressing the questions, you state you do not believe we'll have to worry about the issues presented in them, based on nothing more than your premise that their actions are NOT motivated by our difference in religion, politics, ethics and society.

So... please address the questions I asked.

 

[paulitician]

And so, what do we do when we leave there and they attack us here?
What do we do when they decide to cut off the oil to not just us, but the rest of the west?

They won't likely want to kill us as much when we're gone from their lands. We don't belong there. And i'm sure they'll continue to sell the oil. Why wouldn't they? The Middle East belongs to the Peoples of the Middle East. It's time for us to come home.

Your response does not answer either of my questions.

Well, actually it does.

No, they don't

Rather than addressing the questions, you state you do not believe we'll have to worry about the issues presented in them, based on nothing more than your premise that their actions are NOT motivated by our difference in religion, politics, ethics and society.

So... please address the questions I asked.

The threat will lessen once we're gone from their lands. Those lands belong to them. And i've clearly laid out the solutions to this mess in an earlier post. Check it out.

 

[Camp]

And so, what do we do when we leave there and they attack us here?
What do we do when they decide to cut off the oil to not just us, but the rest of the west?

They won't likely want to kill us as much when we're gone from their lands. We don't belong there. And i'm sure they'll continue to sell the oil. Why wouldn't they? The Middle East belongs to the Peoples of the Middle East. It's time for us to come home.

Your response does not answer either of my questions.

Well, actually it does. But if it helps, i'll be more clear about my overall solution to this mess...

Abolish Homeland Security (Gestapo), the Patriot Act, NDAA, NSA, and IRS. Then move to a humble balanced Non-Intervention Foreign Policy, while also securing our Border.

In other words, change the structure and culture along with the morals of the entire nation and experiment with new systems that meets the opinions and ideas about how you think the nation should operate.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The threat will lessen once we're gone from their lands. Those lands belong to them. And i've clearly laid out the solutions to this mess in an earlier post. Check it out.

Yes. All based on your unsupportable premise.

I asked what I asked for a reason - I knew you did not have an answer.

 

[paulitician]

The threat will lessen once we're gone from their lands. Those lands belong to them. And i've clearly laid out the solutions to this mess in an earlier post. Check it out.

Yes. All based on your unsupportable premise.

I asked what I asked for a reason - I knew you did not have an answer.

Stop all the meddling. Withdraw from the Middle East. We've caused enough bloody chaos there. Time to come home and address this expanding Police State and the Illegal Invasion taking place on our Border.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The threat will lessen once we're gone from their lands. Those lands belong to them. And i've clearly laid out the solutions to this mess in an earlier post. Check it out.

Yes. All based on your unsupportable premise.
I asked what I asked for a reason - I knew you did not have an answer.

Stop all the meddling. Withdraw from the Middle East. We've caused enough bloody chaos there. Time to come home and address this expanding Police State and the Illegal Invasion taking place on our Border.

More of the same argument based on an unsupportable premise.
It doesn't matter how many times you repeat yourself, this will never change.

 

[rdean]

It takes a lot of gall for people like Dick Cheney to utter even one critical word about President Obama's strategy to eliminate the threat of ISIL in the Middle East.

In fact, it was the unnecessary Bush/Cheney Iraq War that created the conditions that led directly to the rise of the "Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant" (ISIL).

Former George H.W. Bush Secretary of State James Baker said as much on this week's edition of "Meet the Press." He noted that after the first President Bush had ousted Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in 1991, the U.S. had refrained from marching on Baghdad precisely to avoid kicking over the sectarian hornet's nest that was subsequently unleashed by the Bush/Cheney attack on Iraq in 2003.

But it wasn't just the War in Iraq itself that set the stage for the subsequent 12 years of renewed, high-intensity sectarian strife between Sunni's and Shiites in the Middle East. It was also what came after.

Bush's "de-Bathification program" eliminated all vestiges of Sunni power in Iraqi society and set the stage for the Sunni insurrection against American occupation and the new Shiite-led government. Bush disbanded the entire Sunni-dominated Iraqi Army and bureaucracy. He didn't change it. He didn't make it more inclusive of Shiites and Kurds. He just disbanded it. It is no accident that two of the top commanders of today's ISIL are former commanders in the Saddam-era Iraqi military.

General Petraeus took steps to reverse these policies with his "Sunni Awakening" programs that engaged the Sunni tribes against what was then known as Al Qaeda in Iraq. But the progress he made ultimately collapsed because the Bush/Cheney regime helped install Nouri Al-Maliki as Prime Minister who systematically disenfranchised Sunnis throughout Iraq.

And that's not all. The War in Iraq -- which had nothing whatsoever to do with "terrorism" when it was launched -- created massive numbers of terrorists that otherwise would not have dreamed of joining extremist organizations. It did so by killing massive numbers of Iraqis, creating hundreds of thousands of refugees, imprisoning thousands, and convincing many residents of the Middle East that the terrorist narrative was correct: that the U.S. and the West were really about taking Muslim lands.

More: Bush/Cheney Created Conditions that Led Directly to ISIL Robert Creamer

At least Bush is smart enough to keep his mouth shut about all of this - but Cheney isn't.

The twin towers fell before Iraq was attacked, and that pretty well shows that the hornet's nest was already stirred up before Bush did anything in the Middle East.

Islamic extremists have been at war with the United States since the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, and the fact that we had turned a blind eye to that reality did not make it less of a threat. Bush didn't start the war, he responded to it.

ISIS in Iraq is a direct result of Obama pulling all the troops out of Iraq and leaving the vacuum that ISIS filled. Actions have consequences, and all you left wingers should begin to recognize that tidbit.

You can whine, spin, or turn cartwheels, but Obama owns present day Iraq, and the American public knows it.

You can blow up a house with a push of a button.

But it takes weeks or months to rebuild it.

Republicans won't let anyone rebuild anything. They failed so miserable under Bush, they want everyone to fail just so we can all be at the same level.

 

[rdean]

Granny says...

..."Dat's right...

... is all Bush's fault.

I blame the entire GOP.

Bush I can t remember why we disbanded the Iraqi army Daily Mail Online

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Losing Iraq FRONTLINE PBS

Looks like Obama and Bush get to share the blame here.

Facts can suck