Obama Bombs Iraq: Do you Support It?...

[NotfooledbyW]

The FACT of the matter is that Obama could have told What the fuck his name is to go eat shit.

Obama was quite wise not to listen to the advice of idiots. What would that get the U.S.? And if your idiotic advice were indeed the correct move, then Bush would have made the same call for Maliki to eat shit, Iraq was ours and US troops will leave when we are good and ready.

Bush did not do what you ask Obama to do, instead he actually agreed to have all US troops out of Iraq cities by July 2009 and out of Iraq entirely by the end of 2011.

So why did Bush in 2008 not tell Maliki to eat shit?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Same damned thing with the SOFA. He could have told him "We TOOK" this country. We'll leave when we're damned well ready, so sit your ass down and shut the hell up" Or, as we told the Germans and the Japanese after WWII - We will leave when WE are ready.

If your idiotic option were legally, diplomatically, and morally available to Obama, then you must believe it was available to Bush when Maliki and Muqtada al Sadr essentially told Bush to eat shit in 2008, here's the deal - take it or get out now?

Why was Bush such a wimp in 2007? In 2007 Maliki wrote a letter to the UNSC denanding that the UNSC terminate the US controlled Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) that was enacted in May 2003 by UN resolution 1483 and which placed Iraq under formal US occupation.

That request by Maliki was granted and the CPA would end on January 1, 2009. That forced the negotiations on Bush on the status of US forces beyond 2008.

So why didnt Bush tell Maliki to eat shit and shut up and to rescind that letter to the UNSC that requested the US occupation of Iraq to end after 2008?

Why do you demand Obama should do what the fool that started the war in the first place didnt do?

 

[paulitician]

Clearly, most Americans aren't tired of war yet. Looks like they're addicted to it.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

No, as expected, he pussed out and pulled the troops. Now, all the blood that was lost in that war was for nothing. It probably means nothing to you - but it means a hell of a lot to those thousands of families who lost Sons or Daughters or Husbands and Fathers.

The blood and treasure was lost on March 17, 2003 when George W. Bush lied to you and all those service members and service members' families and the rest of us that the peaceful UN inspectors must leave Iraq to avoid being bombed by the US and UK because he had intelligence that left no doubt that Iraq was hiding the most lethal weapons ever devised from those inspectors.

The reason Bush gave for invading Iraq was not true. Al the lives and limbs and treasure to be spent after Bush's terrible decision on snatch 17 was for nothing. The mission could not achieve its objective or its purpose. There was no WMD being hidden. There was no reason to kick inspectors out and invade.

The war in Iraq after May 2003 was to correct Bush's criminal offensive war that wrongly toppled the government in Iraq. Bush led the US into Iraq, broke it and obligated the US to fix it.

By 2009 the US military did all the fixing that the military could do. The achievement was getting Iraq to the point that THEY believed THEY could maintain and defend their own sovereignty.

What happens after 2011 is on them. There is no US military solution to what's happening in Iraq right now. There is a US military role to find that solution but the political solution is up to the there sects that make up Iraq.

But the US military was dealt a tragic hand by Bush in 2003. That should never be forgotten. The US ground operation in Iraq did the best they possibly could and will never be labeled losers on that condition.

You are sick to politicize the losses suffered by our Service members and their families in the sickening way that so many here do.

 

[Mac1958]

Americans clearly aren't tired of war yet. Looks like they're addicted to it.

I don't know. I hope not.

And I don't know how many more lives and limbs and minds of American soldiers have to be lost, how many more trillions have to wasted, and much more proof that all we end up doing is making things worse when we do this -- how much more evidence that our own behavior and narcissism are hurting us is needed before we wake up.

.

 

[paulitician]

This latest chaos over there definitely began when our Government decided to fund & arm rebel groups in Syria. ISIL grew out of that American support. Obama committed a huge blunder. Assad is the safer bet. He shouldn't have involved us in the Syrian War. We're suffering the Blow Back on that now.

 

[paulitician]

Americans clearly aren't tired of war yet. Looks like they're addicted to it.

I don't know. I hope not.

And I don't know how many more lives and limbs and minds of American soldiers have to be lost, how many more trillions have to wasted, and much more proof that all we end up doing is making things worse when we do this -- how much more evidence that our own behavior and narcissism are hurting us is needed before we wake up.

.

Yeah, i do think Americans are addicted to war at this point. Most don't know anything else. We've been bombing & killing around the world for that last 70yrs. straight. We're in a permanent state of war. The cycle has to be broken. But i don't expect that anytime soon. I'm not optimistic. There always seems to be a Boogeyman for Americans to fear and hate.

 

[DriftingSand]

Clearly, most Americans aren't tired of war yet. Looks like they're addicted to it.

Yup. We love the vision of bombs blasting all over the globe. That wonderful, orange hue. The splash of body parts and blood splattering the side of some decimated building. An endless flow of tears from somebody's eyes -- anybody's eyes. As long as there is fear, death, mayhem, bloodshed, pain, and maimed bodies then we're satisfied (as long as we aren't the ones personally experiencing it). And Satan smiles.

 

[Wildman]

i would support it if he strapped himself or rode one of the 1,000 pounders. hell, i would even support a A or H bomb in this scenario.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Americans clearly aren't tired of war yet. Looks like they're addicted to it.

You are clearly addicted to ignorance about this war and ignorance about what Americans think about war.

Sometimes war is necessary and sometimes it is not, and since September 2001 many times there are tough calls to make on war.

I do know this however, that your simplistic isolationist view that the US involvement in the millennial generation's sporadic wars are all wrong is abnormal and is ad unreasonable as can be.

Don't worry though, most Americans and the leader of the free world has your back; and Ron and Rand Paul's back too.

 

[DriftingSand]

Americans clearly aren't tired of war yet. Looks like they're addicted to it.

I don't know. I hope not.

And I don't know how many more lives and limbs and minds of American soldiers have to be lost, how many more trillions have to wasted, and much more proof that all we end up doing is making things worse when we do this -- how much more evidence that our own behavior and narcissism are hurting us is needed before we wake up.

.

Yeah, i do think Americans are addicted to war at this point. Most don't know anything else. We've been bombing & killing around the world for that last 70yrs. straight. We're in a permanent state of war. The cycle has to be broken. But i don't expect that anytime soon. I'm not optimistic. There always seems to be a Boogeyman for Americans to fear and hate.

And why not when there's lots of cashola to be made (on both sides of the aisle)?

 

[DriftingSand]

Americans clearly aren't tired of war yet. Looks like they're addicted to it.

You are clearly addicted to ignorance about this war and ignorance about what Americans think about war.

Sometimes war is necessary and sometimes it is not, and since September 2001 many times there are tough calls to make on war.

I do know this however, that your simplistic isolationist view that the US involvement in the millennial generation's sporadic wars are all wrong is abnormal and is ad unreasonable as can be.

Don't worry though, most Americans and the leader of the free world has your back; and Ron and Rand Paul's back too.

Unfortunately, your "sometimes" happens to be ALL of the time. Endless. Never ending. Perpetual. Without end. Decade after decade after decade.

 

[zeke]

Clearly, most Americans aren't tired of war yet. Looks like they're addicted to it.

Yup. We love the vision of bombs blasting all over the globe. That wonderful, orange hue. The splash of body parts and blood splattering the side of some decimated building. An endless flow of tears from somebody's eyes -- anybody's eyes. As long as there is fear, death, mayhem, bloodshed, pain, and maimed bodies then we're satisfied (as long as we aren't the ones personally experiencing it). And Satan smiles.

Why you talking about John McCain and Lindsey Graham that way? They haven't met a war yet that they didn't like.

 

[U2Edge]

Since your brain is only programmed to repeat "far left" over and over, you missed where the article you posted backs up what I said.

No I posted a far left blog site that backs up what you said, because that is all you will believe.

Since Russia sold arms to both Iraq and Iran during their war it is not impossible to believe that Iran would sell arms to someone who is fight the US no matter how much they dislike them.

But only a far left Obama drone would see only what the far left blog sites wants them to see.

Weapons prove Iranian role in Iraq, U.S. says - The Washington Post

So which far left site do you wish to believe, the ones that the far left programs for you?

See, you are too caught up in calling everything far left that you can't be bothered with the details. Iranian weapons in the past were provided to Shi'ite insurgents. ISIS is a group of Sunni insurgents. The Shi'ite's who make up Iraq's government, Iran's allies, are fighting against ISIS.

The reason the Soviets were selling weapons to both Iraq and Iran in the 80's and didn't think anything of it was because neither country was a threat to the Soviet Union. Iran is terrified of ISIS and will not be supplying them with weapons that could be used against them in the near future.

The Soviet Union NEVER sold weapons to Iran in the 1980s. The Soviet Union did sell Iraq thousands of Weapon Systems as well as keeping several Thousand Soviet military advisors on the ground in Iraq training and advising Iraqi forces. Saddam's Iraq was a client state of the Soviet Union and apart of Soviet strategy in the Middle East.

The only support Iran got in the 1980s was from the United States which sent Iran thousands of TOW missiles and replacement parts for United States equipment Iran had in large quantities. Prior to the 1979 Revolution in Iran, Iran had been a longtime client state of the United States.

 

[paulitician]

Clearly, most Americans aren't tired of war yet. Looks like they're addicted to it.

Yup. We love the vision of bombs blasting all over the globe. That wonderful, orange hue. The splash of body parts and blood splattering the side of some decimated building. An endless flow of tears from somebody's eyes -- anybody's eyes. As long as there is fear, death, mayhem, bloodshed, pain, and maimed bodies then we're satisfied (as long as we aren't the ones personally experiencing it). And Satan smiles.

Well, i think that mentality would change a bit if Americans actually saw the dead charred bodies of the children murdered by their weapons. The problem is, the American MSM is a Government/Media Complex at this point. It will never show Americans the ugly reality. It helps the Government sanitize the images war. They're only shown a clean censored action movie version. If shown any reality, it will only be brutal acts committed by the 'enemy.' They never see their own Government's brutality. If shown the dead women & children, i think most Americans would begin to kick their war addiction. I truly believe that.

 

[U2Edge]

Iraq is a clusterfuck created by the Bush family:

Bush 41 suckered Saddam into invading Kuwait by giving him the "green light" via April Glaspie.

It is now more than fifteen years since that fateful meeting on July 25, 1990 between then-US Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie and President Saddam Hussein that the Iraqi leader interpreted as a green light from Washington for his invasion of Kuwait eight days later.

TRANSCRIPT: Is the US State Department still keeping April Glaspie under wraps?​

Bush 43 conjured up lies to invade Iraq a 2nd time.

The Downing Street Memo :: What is it?​

That's a crock of shit. Are you also going to claim the Bush family also got SADDAM to ANNEX Kuwait and wipe it off the map forever a few days after Saddam invaded it 24 years ago. Did April Glaspie in any way shape or form allow, demand, suggest that Saddam annex a sovereign member of the United Nations?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

This latest chaos over there definitely began when our Government decided to fund & arm rebel groups in Syria. ISIL grew out of that American support. Obama committed a huge blunder. Assad is the safer bet. He shouldn't have involved us in the Syrian War. We're suffering the Blow Back on that now.

You could not back up this claim of yours before. Why do you keep preaching it now? You have not demonstrated that US funding of rebel groups that fight ISIS and Assad actually ended up funding ISIS.

The Saudis are suspected of funding ISIL in the past but have since stopped since the firing of Prince Bandar from the top intelligence post of the Saudi Kingdom.

 

[Mac1958]

.

The fact that ISIS is strolling around Iraq at their leisure is a perfect reminder of the short-sighted stupidity of Bush's war there. They would not be able to act with such impunity if Saddam were still there.

Of course, neither would Iran. What a coincidence, huh?

We just seem to keep fucking things up with our bullets and bombs.

And all we had to do to learn this lesson was waste a trillion dollars and the lives, limbs and minds of a few thousand American soldiers.

What a deal!

.

 

[U2Edge]

Clearly, most Americans aren't tired of war yet. Looks like they're addicted to it.

Yup. We love the vision of bombs blasting all over the globe. That wonderful, orange hue. The splash of body parts and blood splattering the side of some decimated building. An endless flow of tears from somebody's eyes -- anybody's eyes. As long as there is fear, death, mayhem, bloodshed, pain, and maimed bodies then we're satisfied (as long as we aren't the ones personally experiencing it). And Satan smiles.

Well, i think that mentality would change a bit if Americans actually saw the dead charred bodies of the children murdered by their weapons. The problem is, the American MSM is a Government/Media Complex at this point. It will never show Americans the ugly reality. It helps the Government sanitize the images war. Once shown the dead women & children, i think most Americans would begin to kick their war addiction. I truly believe that.

So you think Americans would give up defending themselves and their interest if they were shown images of dead bodies? How about the thousands of dead French Civilians in Normandy, women and children torn to pieces by US bombs? Did that cause American Gi's to drop their weapons and get on the ground the fetal position sucking their thumbs? Nope.

Despite the carnage that military action causes, it is often necessary to protect national security and ensure national survival. The proper use of military force in the long run saves lives and helps to create a more stable and prosperous world.

 

[U2Edge]

.

The fact that ISIS is strolling around Iraq at their leisure is a perfect reminder of the short-sighted stupidity of Bush's war there. They would not be able to act with such impunity if Saddam were still there.

Of course, neither would Iran. What a coincidence, huh?

We just seem to keep fucking things up with our bullets and bombs.

And all we had to do to learn this lesson was waste a trillion dollars and the lives, limbs and minds of a few thousand American soldiers.

What a deal!

.

Well if Saddam were still there, then you could have Saddam invading Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, launching Ballistic Missiles at other countries, seizing the worlds primary sources of energy and causing a worldwide economic depression as well as continuing work on developing nuclear weapons, and once again producing and using Sarin Gas on a massive scale to kill tens of thousands of people along with the 1.7 million people he murdered during his first stent as leader of Iraq.

The problem is that too many people are either ignorant or have forgotten who Saddam was, what he did, and how he threatened the natural resources of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia which are vital to the survival of the industrialized World.

ISIS is indeed a threat, and needs to be destroyed, but its silly to suggest that it would have been worth it to keep Saddam in power to prevent the rise of ISIS in Iraq, even if you believe that the two are connected.