IRAQ: Was it worth it?

[Crystalclear]

No, Iraq wasn't worth all the money and dead people.

 

[Stephanie]

well, people said the same thing about every war, it wasn't worth it


just think Hitler

freedom don't come free and some of you don't deserve it

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Please explain in detail exactly how Obama fucked up.

Oh where oh where do I start.

He let the leader of ISIS go in 2009, that's just for the kick off.

And because Obama really wanted Assad gone he tried to convince and did convince his moronic followers that there was such a thing as a "Syrian Spring" when all along ISIS was building a terrorist army of 12,000 plus and now occupies land in Syria and Iraq.

Obama allowed them to grow.

And then you know. AQ is on the run. AQ is decimated. He has held to that belief with you idiots in tow. ISIS is an offshoot of AQ but they make bin Laden look like a choir boy.

How far in to do you want me to go with Obama being to blame for all this shit happening on his watch?

I can go a long time tonight.

I don't recall asking you anything, retard.

Obama overruled his military leadership and withdrew the troops that were supposed to stay and train and support the ISF and protect our victory. Instead he threw in with his goat fucking Islamist friends stripped the ISF of our support. They were fucking Weblos and Obama threw them into the fight with no support or training

 

[Kondor3]

Let's blame Bush for breaking it in the first place.

Let's blame Obama for walking away before it was fixed.

Plenty of blame to go around.

And none of it means shit.

What DOES signify is where we are TODAY.

And what we plan on doing about it.

If anything.

Saddam needed to be removed. Anyone who thinks the United States or in particular Kuwait would be better off with Saddam in power is crazy.

You are, apparently, taking exception to something I've said here.

There are several things being served-up in that original post, on the macro level.

Which point(s), in particular, are you objecting to?

I can guess, based upon your response, but there is some room for ambiguity there, and I seek the favor of clarification, before I offer-up a reply.

 

[Camp]

Oh where oh where do I start.

He let the leader of ISIS go in 2009, that's just for the kick off.

And because Obama really wanted Assad gone he tried to convince and did convince his moronic followers that there was such a thing as a "Syrian Spring" when all along ISIS was building a terrorist army of 12,000 plus and now occupies land in Syria and Iraq.

Obama allowed them to grow.

And then you know. AQ is on the run. AQ is decimated. He has held to that belief with you idiots in tow. ISIS is an offshoot of AQ but they make bin Laden look like a choir boy.

How far in to do you want me to go with Obama being to blame for all this shit happening on his watch?

I can go a long time tonight.

I don't recall asking you anything, retard.

Obama overruled his military leadership and withdrew the troops that were supposed to stay and train and support the ISF and protect our victory. Instead he threw in with his goat fucking Islamist friends stripped the ISF of our support. They were fucking Weblos and Obama threw them into the fight with no support or training

Obama didn't overrule the military. Iraq made keeping troops there impossible by insisting that US Troops could be arrested and tried in Iraqi courts for alleged offenses committed during official operations and combat. It was a poison pill promoted by Shiite's in the Iraq government who chose to ally and rely on Iran for support rather than the USA. Iraqi democracy at work.

 

[Bloodrock44]

It was not worth 4500 American lives for Bush to get revenge against Saddam for trying to assassinate his daddy.

 

[Kondor3]

I don't recall asking you anything, retard.

Obama overruled his military leadership and withdrew the troops that were supposed to stay and train and support the ISF and protect our victory. Instead he threw in with his goat fucking Islamist friends stripped the ISF of our support. They were fucking Weblos and Obama threw them into the fight with no support or training

Obama didn't overrule the military. Iraq made keeping troops there impossible by insisting that US Troops could be arrested and tried in Iraqi courts for alleged offenses committed during official operations and combat. It was a poison pill promoted by Shiite's in the Iraq government who chose to ally and rely on Iran for support rather than the USA. Iraqi democracy at work.

And yet, despite who-promoted-what inside the fledgling Iraqi government, we felt obliged to honor and abide-by the wishes of the Iraqi government, once they had made their decision, so, we departed in peace, and honoring their wishes, correct?

And yet, there is great value in reinforcing the idea in the collective mind of the global community that we are willing to leave when asked - as we did in France in 1966 and the Philippines in 1992, etc. - that we are not long-term occupiers as a matter of practice.

I'm no Obama fan, and I think he's screwed-the-pooch on a half-dozen major issues, but I don't see much fault in his handling of our exit from Iraq.

We needed an exit anyway, we'd done what we could to put the place back in-order and on a paying basis, and the new government knowingly served-up conditions that made it impossible for us to stay - it was equivalent to an order or request to leave, so we did.

It's the same behavior that I would have hoped-from any American President, regardless of party, and regardless of age or governing or military or strategic diplomatic experience.

Even a ham-handed milktoast can do something right, every so often.

 

[Kondor3]

It was not worth 4500 American lives for Bush to get revenge against Saddam for trying to assassinate his daddy.

There were, of course, several reasons for us going into Iraq, other than the horseshit that the Bush Administration served-up at the time, but, one of 'em were worth a damn, and this revenge-for-Daddy business was just as bogus as the rest of 'em.

 

[Camp]

On the other hand, the world learned a valuable lesson about what happens when you poke America with a stick. There is just absolutely no way of knowing what a random President and government will do. The grief and cost to the Muslim world for the actions of some radical jihadist is still being payed and the results are still being played out. The invasion of Iraq has nudged the Muslim world into a holy war against each other, Sunni vs Shiite.

 

[Kondor3]

On the other hand, the world learned a valuable lesson about what happens when you poke America with a stick. There is just absolutely no way of knowing what a random President and government will do. The grief and cost to the Muslim world for the actions of some radical jihadist is still being payed and the results are still being played out. The invasion of Iraq has nudged the Muslim world into a holy war against each other, Sunni vs Shiite.

Yes. I believe that this is an accurate assessment, on the macro level.

 

[Brain357]

Oh where oh where do I start.

He let the leader of ISIS go in 2009, that's just for the kick off.

And because Obama really wanted Assad gone he tried to convince and did convince his moronic followers that there was such a thing as a "Syrian Spring" when all along ISIS was building a terrorist army of 12,000 plus and now occupies land in Syria and Iraq.

Obama allowed them to grow.

And then you know. AQ is on the run. AQ is decimated. He has held to that belief with you idiots in tow. ISIS is an offshoot of AQ but they make bin Laden look like a choir boy.

How far in to do you want me to go with Obama being to blame for all this shit happening on his watch?

I can go a long time tonight.

Why should we have kept spending lives and money on Iraq?

Because you like to drive cars, use electricity in your house, shop at a supermarket full with food that had to be transported there, and other things that require energy the price of which is deeply effect by the Persian Gulf region and in particular Iraq. Unless your willing to live like the Amish in Pennsylvania, then you should indeed support continued engagement in Iraq and the Persian Gulf.

Gas prices have only gone up since we messed up that region. It would be cheaper to have the government just subsidize the cost of gas.

 

[Brain357]

Let's blame Bush for breaking it in the first place.

Let's blame Obama for walking away before it was fixed.

Plenty of blame to go around.

And none of it means shit.

What DOES signify is where we are TODAY.

And what we plan on doing about it.

If anything.

Saddam needed to be removed. Anyone who thinks the United States or in particular Kuwait would be better off with Saddam in power is crazy.

Why is that? He kept Iran and terrorists in check.

 

[Camp]

Let's blame Bush for breaking it in the first place.

Let's blame Obama for walking away before it was fixed.

Plenty of blame to go around.

And none of it means shit.

What DOES signify is where we are TODAY.

And what we plan on doing about it.

If anything.

Saddam needed to be removed. Anyone who thinks the United States or in particular Kuwait would be better off with Saddam in power is crazy.

Why is that? He kept Iran and terrorists in check.

Neither Iran nor terrorist, particularly al Qaeda were kept in check. They flourished and grew in power and influence.

 

[Samson]

As much as I hate it....

I see the current Iraq situation as anagolous to post WWII Europe: While there are no Soviets invading liberated Czechoslovakia, there are Syrians (radical Sunnis) and Iranians (radical Shiites) invading liberated Iraq. Also anagolous is the prevalence of ethnic in-fighting in both Czechoslovakia and Iraq.

We will no more prevent the invasion of Iraq than we prevented the 1968 Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. To "blame Obama" for the current situation, we would then blame Truman for the Potsdam Treaty, and eventually Johnson.

 

[Brain357]

Saddam needed to be removed. Anyone who thinks the United States or in particular Kuwait would be better off with Saddam in power is crazy.

Why is that? He kept Iran and terrorists in check.

Neither Iran nor terrorist, particularly al Qaeda were kept in check. They flourished and grew in power and influence.

You seem to be confused. There were no terrorists in Iraq until we took out Saddam. Do you think Saddam would like Iran get nuclear weapons? We wouldn't have to worry about Iran if he was still around.

 

[ogibillm]

well, people said the same thing about every war, it wasn't worth it


just think Hitler

freedom don't come free and some of you don't deserve it

oh i see. what was your contributing sacrifice?

and how did fighting in iraq promote freedom in america?

 

[sealybobo]

It was not worth 4500 American lives for Bush to get revenge against Saddam for trying to assassinate his daddy.

What would republicans do, put boots on the ground? And then what? They'll just go hide until we leave again. They'll plant roadside bombs for us to drive over. We need to give Arabia back to the arabs.

Don't want them blowing up our buildings in planes? Stop letting towel heads in the country.

 

[Camp]

Why is that? He kept Iran and terrorists in check.

Neither Iran nor terrorist, particularly al Qaeda were kept in check. They flourished and grew in power and influence.

You seem to be confused. There were no terrorists in Iraq until we took out Saddam. Do you think Saddam would like Iran get nuclear weapons? We wouldn't have to worry about Iran if he was still around.

They flourished and grew after Saddam was taken out and we stayed as targets and training for al Qaeda fighters. We also helped other jihadist groups get started, specifically the ISIS which is the problem today. While we were busy, Iran continued their nuke program and today is the power house in the ME and on the verge of even more power with greater influence in Iraq.
Technically, there were terrorist in Iraq when we invaded. They were not al Qaeda, but rather the Palestinian affiliated terrorist who Saddam supported with rewards for attacks on Israel. Saddam had relations with other terrorist groups affiliated with Libya, Lebanon and other areas.
There was a legitimate concern that weapons such as WMD's could be available to these other terrorist and al Qaeda would find access to these weapons via those other groups.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The end results in Iraq look to be no different than those in Syria or Libya. Using the middle east as our personal lego collection is not working. Having said that, we must not allow terrorists to amass. We should be using Airstrikes in Iraq before we have to use ambulances & fire trucks in America again.

 

[Brain357]

The end results in Iraq look to be no different than those in Syria or Libya. Using the middle east as our personal lego collection is not working. Having said that, we must not allow terrorists to amass. We should be using Airstrikes in Iraq before we have to use ambulances & fire trucks in America again.

Sounds like a waste of money. Israel will not let the terrorists get too powerful. Neither will Iran.