Obama bombs Muslims

[Syriusly]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

we should never have left Iraq or Afghanistan. That was all a libturd idea, had to cut spending. How well did that go, now we have far worse issue and perhaps will be going back again anyway. Funny libturds and there hate for military.

Hmmmm the 'libturd' idea- according to JC

• A President running on the promise to withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan- and doing so.
• A President upholding the promises of the previous President to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan
• A President who refuses to hold American troops hostages to the demands of foreign government.

JC really, really wants America to stay fighting in the MIddle East....forever and ever and ever.....just like ISIS does.

 

[jc456]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

Sadly, even with a partition between the Kurds and the pro-Iran shia, we'd have Sunni areas, and we lost any cred with the Sunnis when both W and Obama sold them down the river to All-ah-mucky. The former al queda, and now ISIS folks, have killed the leaders of the Sunni who Saddam more or less tolerated. Do we want Pakistani troops policing? I don't think so.

Damned if I can see an alternative to some form of the Assad baath party.

Let the Arabs fight it out and settle on their own borders.

That's what Europe had to do.

that's how we got in this scenario today. What a stupid idea.

 

[bendog]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

we should never have left Iraq or Afghanistan. That was all a libturd idea, had to cut spending. How well did that go, now we have far worse issue and perhaps will be going back again anyway. Funny libturds and there hate for military.

Right. W was extremely popular.

 

[jc456]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

we should never have left Iraq or Afghanistan. That was all a libturd idea, had to cut spending. How well did that go, now we have far worse issue and perhaps will be going back again anyway. Funny libturds and there hate for military.

Hmmmm the 'libturd' idea- according to JC

• A President running on the promise to withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan- and doing so.
• A President upholding the promises of the previous President to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan
• A President who refuses to hold American troops hostages to the demands of foreign government.

JC really, really wants America to stay fighting in the MIddle East....forever and ever and ever.....just like ISIS does.

And ISIS builds it army after president removes troops and now civilians are dying around the globe. And Obama is back bombing those innocent. Wow nice tactic.

 

[bendog]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

Sadly, even with a partition between the Kurds and the pro-Iran shia, we'd have Sunni areas, and we lost any cred with the Sunnis when both W and Obama sold them down the river to All-ah-mucky. The former al queda, and now ISIS folks, have killed the leaders of the Sunni who Saddam more or less tolerated. Do we want Pakistani troops policing? I don't think so.

Damned if I can see an alternative to some form of the Assad baath party.

Let the Arabs fight it out and settle on their own borders.

That's what Europe had to do.

that's how we got in this scenario today. What a stupid idea.

No we got here because W decided to go nationbuilding where there was no existential threat to America, and as a result W lost the support of the voters to continue his death march for the US military.

 

[jc456]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

we should never have left Iraq or Afghanistan. That was all a libturd idea, had to cut spending. How well did that go, now we have far worse issue and perhaps will be going back again anyway. Funny libturds and there hate for military.

Right. W was extremely popular.

I never said the orders made sense, they didn't take the oil fields and trusted muslims. That's where Trumps got it right, we march in take the oil field and the money and call it a day.

 

[jc456]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

Sadly, even with a partition between the Kurds and the pro-Iran shia, we'd have Sunni areas, and we lost any cred with the Sunnis when both W and Obama sold them down the river to All-ah-mucky. The former al queda, and now ISIS folks, have killed the leaders of the Sunni who Saddam more or less tolerated. Do we want Pakistani troops policing? I don't think so.

Damned if I can see an alternative to some form of the Assad baath party.

Let the Arabs fight it out and settle on their own borders.

That's what Europe had to do.

that's how we got in this scenario today. What a stupid idea.

No we got here because W decided to go nationbuilding where there was no existential threat to America, and as a result W lost the support of the voters to continue his death march for the US military.

don't rewrite history thanks,

 

[g5000]

Bush signed the agreement for us to withdraw from Iraq after his Administration was gone. He handed off our departure to Obama, who carried it out.

Iraq wanted us out. Simple as that.

So we left. Too bad, so sad for them.

The problem isn't that we left Iraq. The problem is that we didn't leave the Middle East entirely.

We should leave the rest of the Middle East and let the Arabs solve the ISIS problem themselves. They won't do it until we leave.

And they are the ones who should do it. They can do it faster and better than we can. They just need the motivation. Our leaving the field will give them that motivation.

 

[jc456]

Bush signed the agreement for us to withdraw from Iraq after his Administration was gone. He handed off our departure to Obama, who carried it out.

Iraq wanted us out. Simple as that.

So we left. Too bad, so sad for them.

The problem isn't that we left Iraq. The problem is that we didn't leave the Middle East entirely.

We should leave the rest of the Middle East and let the Arabs solve the ISIS problem themselves. They won't do it until we leave.

And they are the ones who should do it. They can do it faster and better than we can. They just need the motivation. Our leaving the field will give them that motivation.

well the US will never leave the middle east

 

[Syriusly]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

we should never have left Iraq or Afghanistan. That was all a libturd idea, had to cut spending. How well did that go, now we have far worse issue and perhaps will be going back again anyway. Funny libturds and there hate for military.

Hmmmm the 'libturd' idea- according to JC

• A President running on the promise to withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan- and doing so.
• A President upholding the promises of the previous President to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan
• A President who refuses to hold American troops hostages to the demands of foreign government.

JC really, really wants America to stay fighting in the MIddle East....forever and ever and ever.....just like ISIS does.

And ISIS builds it army after president removes troops and now civilians are dying around the globe. And Obama is back bombing those innocent. Wow nice tactic.

ISIS is building its army in Syria because of the civil war in Syria- and in Iraq because the Iraqi government- that we installed- allowed ISIS to do so.

Civilians are always dying around the globe. They were prior to 9/11, and they have been after 9/11.

The United States, at the direction of Barack Obama, is bombing our enemies- and yes- just as in World War 2, and every other war- civilians are getting killed as we pursue our enemies- the only difference is the ratio of dead civilians to dead enemies is the lowest that it has been in any war since before WW2- we target much better now.

"We should never have left Iraq"

Despite the American people wanting us to leave.
Despite the Iraqi government wanting us to leave
Despite the Iraqi people wanting us to leave.

You really want us to stay there forever- no matter.

 

[Syriusly]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

we should never have left Iraq or Afghanistan. That was all a libturd idea, had to cut spending. How well did that go, now we have far worse issue and perhaps will be going back again anyway. Funny libturds and there hate for military.

Right. W was extremely popular.

I never said the orders made sense, they didn't take the oil fields and trusted muslims. That's where Trumps got it right, we march in take the oil field and the money and call it a day.

Wow- okay which oil fields?

Venezuela's? Nigeria's?

Or Saudi Arabia's?

Or Iraq's?

 

[the_human_being]

Well, I'm a veteran and I say give our military the authority and the backing of the Congress and the American people and let them go and win this thing quickly and in a way the terrorists will respect. With overwhelming force.

But you have no answer for who governs the damn place after "victory." And you simply rehash the clusterfuck inflicted by W.

Of course I do. We govern. We took over Japan and Germany for a while after we defeated them. We would need to take over Iraq and recoup our military expenses from their oil supply. This crap of fighting wars for other nations at our own expense has always been a stupid policy.

We already tried that in Iraq. It didn't work. The terrorists were prepared to wait as long as necessary, certainly longer than "a while".

Well, we have bases in Japan and in Germany today. I don't see your problem.

A few bases wouldn't stop the terrorists from regrouping. So you would have to have cycle after cycle of massive warfare each time the terrorists re-emerged from the population. Your solution would be no less drawn out than what's currently going on, but with greater loss of American lives.

So your alternative is to withdraw from the world and stick your head in the sand and hope they leave us alone? They are already in Europe, in Africa, and even in the United States and your President and the Democrat leading candidate for the 2016 election wants to open our immigration system even wider and love them to death? Really? That's what they are counting on.

 

[the_human_being]

America has no stomach for loss of life and treasure.

ISIS does, and that is their huge advantage. They know they simply need to outwait us.

ISIS is essentially a death cult- that wants to provoke a 'final solution' every bit as much as HB does.

ISIS wants European boots on the ground so that they can frame the war as Christianity versus Islam- and want to be leading Muslims to the final battle against the Infidels.

I agree with the others that have mentioned it- the solution has to be solved by the Middle East themselves- only other Muslims can ultimately defeat ISIS. We can help- as we are now- but until Turkey is more interested in defeating ISIS than defeating the Kurds, and Iraq wants to defeat ISIS more than it wants to defeat it's political rivals in Iraq, and Saudi Arabia wants to defeat ISIS more than promoting Wahabism, etc, etc.

A coalition of Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Iran and Kurds could defeat ISIS and dig them out with no real place to hide.

But they are willing to let the U.S. and Russia get bogged down in that crap instead.

It is the way it is. Leading from behind will not work. The United States has always had to do the job and shoulder the brunt of the expense, the causalities, and the blame. What has changed? Nothing.

 

[the_human_being]

America has no stomach for loss of life and treasure.

ISIS does, and that is their huge advantage. They know they simply need to outwait us.

ISIS is essentially a death cult- that wants to provoke a 'final solution' every bit as much as HB does.

ISIS wants European boots on the ground so that they can frame the war as Christianity versus Islam- and want to be leading Muslims to the final battle against the Infidels.

I agree with the others that have mentioned it- the solution has to be solved by the Middle East themselves- only other Muslims can ultimately defeat ISIS. We can help- as we are now- but until Turkey is more interested in defeating ISIS than defeating the Kurds, and Iraq wants to defeat ISIS more than it wants to defeat it's political rivals in Iraq, and Saudi Arabia wants to defeat ISIS more than promoting Wahabism, etc, etc.

A coalition of Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Iran and Kurds could defeat ISIS and dig them out with no real place to hide.

But they are willing to let the U.S. and Russia get bogged down in that crap instead.

Were you to actually understand their religion, it is their very aim to usher in their version of the end of the world. Theirs is a religion built upon evil. You cannot love them away.

 

[the_human_being]

Your 'solution' would be like us bombing China in order to defeat Japan.

But- your "solution" would actually convince Muslims all around the world that ISIS was actually correct.

But it is a viable solution where you Liberals have failed to offer one. Ignoring is not a solution.

The only way it would be "viable" is if you killed them all, making you the worst mass murderer in world history 100 times over.

You know you would not kill all Muslims. You're being childish. No one killed all the Japanese. The Germans did not kill all the Jews. You hunt down and destroy radical Islamists and their supporters wherever they might be regardless to what nation's border they cross into. You put sanctions against any nation aiding and abetting the terrorists. You seize their assets worldwide. You watch the internet for recruiting and anyone supporting them and put those that do in prison. You actually have Congress declare a formal state of war against any and all radical Islamists. You actually actively engage the enemy 24/7 until he refuses to fight any longer and no one will join his lost cause.

But the libturds are childish. It is their complete nature. Over exaggerate most everything and cry the sky is falling.

Yet is it is Conservatives calling for the nuking of Muslims

View attachment 57190

A small nuke would do wonders towards getting their attention. Were they to get one and a delivery mechanism, they wouldn't hesitate to use it.

 

[the_human_being]

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

The tards announce Obama has been bombing Muslims as if they just heard about it.

As for drone strikes in the US, they are completely unnecessary. I'll allow you ten seconds to figure out why.

false and false and false.

The irony is what you miss. The mere fact that Obama is bombing them and killing innocent people and did when he sent troops in to kill Bin Laden. But you cry because Trump said he would do the very same thing. That's ironic

The killing of civilians is an unavoidable consequence of war. But if you think the accidental killing of civilians by our military in the past few years is the same thing as Trump's desire to DELIBERATELY kill tens of thousands, if not millions, of civilians, then you are even dumber than I thought. And that's really saying something.

Actually Trump never said that but you certainly have. Can't you at least be honest about what the man actually said?

 

[the_human_being]

Once again you jump into a conversation with inanity.

HB:
Then what is your solution? Continue involvement in a never-ending war with the constant threat of acts of terrorism on our own cities and communities? Is that your plan for your children?

Me:My children are in no significant danger from Muslims.

Meanwhile
Your solution is like Germany's solution to the "Jewish problem"- and sounds eerily like the very reason for the Nazi policy

So JC- do you agree with HB that every Muslim in the world should be killed as his suggested final solution?

did I ever write that? I did not. Comparing Nazi shit to what is proposed here is pure nonsense. .

This is HB's 'final solution'

Do you agree with it?

View attachment 57187

I answered what I'd do already, why are you so persistent at asking over and over again the same stupid questions?

Oh because it is fun to watch you dodge the question.

So JC- do you agree with HB that every Muslim in the world should be killed as his suggested final solution?

I answered what I'd do already, why are you so persistent at asking over and over again the same stupid questions?

He has no attention span at all.

 

[the_human_being]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

we should never have left Iraq or Afghanistan. That was all a libturd idea, had to cut spending. How well did that go, now we have far worse issue and perhaps will be going back again anyway. Funny libturds and there hate for military.

Until the military is needed. Then they want them to go but they themselves refuse to do any of the lifting.

 

[the_human_being]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

Sadly, even with a partition between the Kurds and the pro-Iran shia, we'd have Sunni areas, and we lost any cred with the Sunnis when both W and Obama sold them down the river to All-ah-mucky. The former al queda, and now ISIS folks, have killed the leaders of the Sunni who Saddam more or less tolerated. Do we want Pakistani troops policing? I don't think so.

Damned if I can see an alternative to some form of the Assad baath party.

Let the Arabs fight it out and settle on their own borders.

That's what Europe had to do.

that's how we got in this scenario today. What a stupid idea.

No we got here because W decided to go nationbuilding where there was no existential threat to America, and as a result W lost the support of the voters to continue his death march for the US military.

And the military love Bush because he looked out for them. They despise Obama.

 

[the_human_being]

Bush signed the agreement for us to withdraw from Iraq after his Administration was gone. He handed off our departure to Obama, who carried it out.

Iraq wanted us out. Simple as that.

So we left. Too bad, so sad for them.

The problem isn't that we left Iraq. The problem is that we didn't leave the Middle East entirely.

We should leave the rest of the Middle East and let the Arabs solve the ISIS problem themselves. They won't do it until we leave.

And they are the ones who should do it. They can do it faster and better than we can. They just need the motivation. Our leaving the field will give them that motivation.

BS. Only the American might can solve the problem. You would leave Israel and the rest of our few allies to their slaughter by a crazed religious evil.