Who Made Isis?

[frigidweirdo]

No, democrats in congress authorized the invasion. It wasn't just Bush unless you're a sucker to DeMSM propaganda.
Obama looking to appease his fan base did the old tired 1960's anti Vietnam war routine and pulled out troops allowing the thing to crumble knowing he could blame Bush. It's worked of you. Meanwhile a worse scenario has developed and it is entirely on obama.

I repeat again that I have never voted for either of the main two parties.

However 21 Democrats and 1 Republican in the Senate voted against the war. That was out of 50 Democratic Senators and 50 Republican.

In the House 126 Democrats and 6 Republicans voted against the war. That was out of 210 Democrats. So more than half in the house voted against. Even if they had all voted against the war, it would still have passed. But that's to say, out there were plenty who did vote for the war. Which is pretty sad.

Obama pulled troops out because it wasn't possible to stay. In 2007, under Bush's "leadership" and after a disastrous supposed "nation building" campaign 55% of people thought the war a mistake and 51% favored a withdrawal
In 2008 BUSH signed an agreement (read below) which said US forces would pull out by 2011.

National news from McClatchy DC News Washington DC

The Iraqis were pissed because it would mean 3 more years of US troops too.

So, what's the problem with Obama carrying out a treaty with Iraq that Bush signed? Oh, it's okay that Bush signed it, he wasn't in office, it was clearly Obama's fault, bla blah, what the hell are you on blah?

 

[frigidweirdo]

I was over there during my time in the military, doing what he's asking guys from my former group to do (as we speak) and shouldn't have to do, so reality is a big thing with me.
This has nothing to do with my agenda.
You said it yourself, Obama set out to be not like Bush. Problem is, in the real world political positions should give way to real-world events. Instead Obama focuses on Global Warming and totally ignores a real threat in the Middle East. He tried to wash his hand of it and it came back to bite him in the ass. Islamic radicals have made great strides in their goals of establishing a caliphate and have murdered or pushed from their home countries hundreds of thousands of Christians and none Muslims, all while Obama looks the other way. He's made it extremely difficult for us to even say what the true enemy is because of his obvious bias towards the religion he won't admit but deeply loves. He compares one shooting in Ferguson to the thousands of people who have been slaughtered in Iraq in the last few months.

Nope, I'm the realist here.

Obama loves Islam? Why would that be? His father was a Muslim, but he disappeared pretty quick. Maybe, just maybe, people have tolerance when things come home.

From Hungarian Neo-Nazi to Orthodox Jew - Jewish World - News - Arutz Sheva

Like this story.

Csanad Szegedi, far right Nazi anti-Semite in Hungary. Finds out his grandparent were Jewish holocaust survivors. Do you think he remained a far-right Nazi? No, come on, he's all of a sudden seen things from a different perspective.

But what you're playing at is that everyone should not hate Islam because Bush made it his role to make everyone hate Islam and for Islam to hate the US. Well done, you've got it.

Islam isn't the true enemy. It was an enemy made and grown by the Republicans to keep people like you in their place, passive and going along with Republican policies.

Sorry, you've been duped.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

No, democrats in congress authorized the invasion. It wasn't just Bush unless you're a sucker to DeMSM propaganda.
Obama looking to appease his fan base did the old tired 1960's anti Vietnam war routine and pulled out troops allowing the thing to crumble knowing he could blame Bush. It's worked of you. Meanwhile a worse scenario has developed and it is entirely on obama.

I repeat again that I have never voted for either of the main two parties.

However 21 Democrats and 1 Republican in the Senate voted against the war. That was out of 50 Democratic Senators and 50 Republican.

In the House 126 Democrats and 6 Republicans voted against the war. That was out of 210 Democrats. So more than half in the house voted against. Even if they had all voted against the war, it would still have passed. But that's to say, out there were plenty who did vote for the war. Which is pretty sad.

Obama pulled troops out because it wasn't possible to stay. In 2007, under Bush's "leadership" and after a disastrous supposed "nation building" campaign 55% of people thought the war a mistake and 51% favored a withdrawal
In 2008 BUSH signed an agreement (read below) which said US forces would pull out by 2011.

National news from McClatchy DC News Washington DC

The Iraqis were pissed because it would mean 3 more years of US troops too.

So, what's the problem with Obama carrying out a treaty with Iraq that Bush signed? Oh, it's okay that Bush signed it, he wasn't in office, it was clearly Obama's fault, bla blah, what the hell are you on blah?

Obama was under no obligation to insist that all US presence be removed. He did so in the name of politics knowing he could blame Bush for what has now happened and dupe those weak enough or biased enough to fall for it.
The Iraq war failings were a result of an unpredicted aftermath which was eventually quelled. In steps obama and there goes the whole thing. This is an obama fiasco. Period.

 

[mudwhistle]

I was over there during my time in the military, doing what he's asking guys from my former group to do (as we speak) and shouldn't have to do, so reality is a big thing with me.
This has nothing to do with my agenda.
You said it yourself, Obama set out to be not like Bush. Problem is, in the real world political positions should give way to real-world events. Instead Obama focuses on Global Warming and totally ignores a real threat in the Middle East. He tried to wash his hand of it and it came back to bite him in the ass. Islamic radicals have made great strides in their goals of establishing a caliphate and have murdered or pushed from their home countries hundreds of thousands of Christians and none Muslims, all while Obama looks the other way. He's made it extremely difficult for us to even say what the true enemy is because of his obvious bias towards the religion he won't admit but deeply loves. He compares one shooting in Ferguson to the thousands of people who have been slaughtered in Iraq in the last few months.

Nope, I'm the realist here.

Obama loves Islam? Why would that be? His father was a Muslim, but he disappeared pretty quick. Maybe, just maybe, people have tolerance when things come home.

From Hungarian Neo-Nazi to Orthodox Jew - Jewish World - News - Arutz Sheva

Like this story.

Csanad Szegedi, far right Nazi anti-Semite in Hungary. Finds out his grandparent were Jewish holocaust survivors. Do you think he remained a far-right Nazi? No, come on, he's all of a sudden seen things from a different perspective.

But what you're playing at is that everyone should not hate Islam because Bush made it his role to make everyone hate Islam and for Islam to hate the US. Well done, you've got it.

Islam isn't the true enemy. It was an enemy made and grown by the Republicans to keep people like you in their place, passive and going along with Republican policies.

Sorry, you've been duped.

I've trained Muslims.
They've told me all I need to know about the subject.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Obama was under no obligation to insist that all US presence be removed. He did so in the name of politics knowing he could blame Bush for what has now happened and dupe those weak enough or biased enough to fall for it.
The Iraq war failings were a result of an unpredicted aftermath which was eventually quelled. In steps obama and there goes the whole thing. This is an obama fiasco. Period.

Bush agreed a withdrawal, Obama carried it out. The Iraqis wanted them out.

You claim, somehow, that this is then Obama's fault. I'm confused.

Unpredictable aftermath? Oh spare me the violins. A ten year old should be able to figure out what happens when you take a country, take away all the local police, all of the local army. The US didn't learn from Afghanistan, they could see what Iran would do.

In fact, it worked in Bush's favor to have al-Qaeda there. What's 4,000 US soldiers' lives when you can increase your support massively? I'm not saying this is what Bush was thinking, it's a possibility, but nothing about the post war period made any sense. He messed up SO BADLY, it shouldn't have happened, and don't give me that "unpredictable" carp, ISIS was unpredictable, because Assad was firmly in power until Spring 2011. Wasn't that unpredictable then?

There's a lot of double standard nonsense going on here.

 

[mudwhistle]

This is the reality:


In 2008, the Bush administration negotiated a status of forces agreement with the Iraqi government that would remove troops by the end of 2011. Bush signed that agreement in anticipation of Obama’s entry to the White House. Sure enough, Obama then failed to sign a renewed status of forces agreement. According to David Filkens of the New Yorker:

[E]very single senior political leader, no matter what party or what group, including Maliki, said to them privately, we want you to stay. We don’t want you to fight. We don’t want combat troops. We don’t want Americans getting killed, but we want 10,000 American troops inside the Green Zone training our army, giving us intelligence, playing that crucial role as the broker and interlocutor that makes our system work. We want you to stay.​

Filkens told NPR that James Jeffrey, an American ambassador, said he “got no guidance from the White House.”

Now there is no stabilization force in Iraq. And with an ISIS force that is merely hundreds large, according to some reports, rushing through Iraq with impunity, it is difficult to argue that even a minor force wouldn’t have made a difference.

Pulling Troops Out of Iraq Allowed Al-Maliki’s Sectarianism to Dominate. Al-Maliki was, as noted, always a disaster area. But America’s presence prevented him from using his power to dominate the Sunni minority in Iraq and forge close ties with Iran. Filkins points out, “Time and again, American commanders have told me, they stepped in front of Maliki to stop him from acting brutally and arbitrarily toward Iraq’s Sunni minority.” Then, he writes, “the Americans left,” and everything went to hell in a handbasket:

In the two and a half years since the Americans’ departure, Maliki has centralized power within his own circle, cut the Sunnis out of political power, and unleashed a wave of arrests and repression. Maliki’s march to authoritarian rule has fueled the re-emergence of the Sunni insurgency directly. With nowhere else to go, Iraq’s Sunnis are turning, once again, to the extremists to protect them.

The Leader of ISIS Was Released by The Obama Administration. Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, leader of ISIS, was in US custody in Camp Bucca, in Iraq. He was released in 2009 when the US shut down the camp in anticipation of the end of US presence in the country.

Enabling Iran. Al-Maliki has turned to Iran in this crisis. And why not? The United States is nowhere to be found, and al-Maliki’s radical anti-Sunni policies make him a popular man with the mullahs. Not only that – President Obama has surrendered all pretense at holding Iran accountable throughout his tenure, from abandoning the Iranian opposition in 2009 to signing an empty-headed nuclear deal with the mullahs last year to leaving Iranian-backed Syrian dictator Bashar Assad untouched after Assad used chemical weapons against civilians. Iran is now the regional power. Which means that Iraq itself will now become a proxy war in which America loses either way: either ISIS wins, or the Iranians do.

Contributing to Syrian Chaos. Focusing on Israel instead of Syria, then arming the Syrian opposition while refusing to do anything after Bashar Assad’s gassing of civilians, President Obama has contributed to a chaotic situation that facilitated ISIS’ rise in Syria. ISIS plays both sides of the aisle. On the one hand, they want to break away from Assad’s regime; on the other hand, they are saving their ammunition for use against erstwhile allies who don’t want an Islamist state.

ISIS began working in Syria in 2009 as an anti-Assad, al Qaeda-associated rebel faction. A few years later, the Obama administration began shipping arms into the country. One of the great concerns with the situation in Syria has always been the capacity for weaponry to fall into the wrong hands. While the Obama administration has claimed that it has the perfect ability to follow the weaponry, that is doubtful at best – and ISIS has been seizing warehouses of weapons.

Now the Obama administration, including President Obama, claims that it is busily vetting the Syrian opposition to which America has shipped arms. On Sunday, National Security Advisor Susan Rice explained, “the United States has ramped up its support for the moderate vetted opposition, providing lethal and non-lethal support where we can to support both the civilian opposition and the military opposition.” Meanwhile, ISIS is grabbing US humvees in Iraq itself.

Caving All Over The World. Ukraine. Afghanistan. The Palestinian Authority. Fear of the United States is passé, because there is simply nothing to fear. ISIS knows this; so do the Iranians. The only true fear is the fear of our allies, who now know better than to trust a United States that will abandon them at the worst possible time.

6 Reasons Obama Lost Iraq

 

[frigidweirdo]

I've trained Muslims.
They've told me all I need to know about the subject.

I've lived with a Pakistani Muslim. I trump your training.

Though speaking to a few Muslims hardly makes someone an expert on Islam.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Obama was under no obligation to insist that all US presence be removed. He did so in the name of politics knowing he could blame Bush for what has now happened and dupe those weak enough or biased enough to fall for it.
The Iraq war failings were a result of an unpredicted aftermath which was eventually quelled. In steps obama and there goes the whole thing. This is an obama fiasco. Period.

Bush agreed a withdrawal, Obama carried it out. The Iraqis wanted them out.

You claim, somehow, that this is then Obama's fault. I'm confused.

Unpredictable aftermath? Oh spare me the violins. A ten year old should be able to figure out what happens when you take a country, take away all the local police, all of the local army. The US didn't learn from Afghanistan, they could see what Iran would do.

In fact, it worked in Bush's favor to have al-Qaeda there. What's 4,000 US soldiers' lives when you can increase your support massively? I'm not saying this is what Bush was thinking, it's a possibility, but nothing about the post war period made any sense. He messed up SO BADLY, it shouldn't have happened, and don't give me that "unpredictable" carp, ISIS was unpredictable, because Assad was firmly in power until Spring 2011. Wasn't that unpredictable then?

There's a lot of double standard nonsense going on here.

The Bush withdrawal was tentative. For obama, as with everything else, it was political opportunity.

 

[Antares]

What a disappointment.

You show promise but you submerge it in the common dogma of the day, oh well.

I figured you for more than the run of the mill conspiracy type,my mistake.
Islam is the enemy of the modern world, NOT because they are "angry" at it/us but because it is completely at odds with it/us.
Our way of life, our culture, our basically "free" society.

Very simply,we are antithetical to their way of life, that's it.
There is no mystery, no grand scheme, no hidden conspiracy.

Sorry to disappoint, but I don't tend to make stuff up just for your enjoyment.

I don't like Islam. People somehow think I'm defending Islam. I'm not. I'm pointing out the reality of the situation, and I'm sorry you think this is "the common dogma of the day", but I don't make these comments out of nothing.

However I don't believe Islam is one set thing. There are plenty of Muslims in this world who live peacefully. I have a Chinese Muslim friend, most Chinese Muslims are peaceful, those who aren't are unfortunate in they live in an area which is not traditionally Chinese, but the Chinese want the resources, and they're turning to al-Qaeda type groups to help them in their fight with the Chinese because they have nowhere else to turn.
The Tibetans just get trampled on, the Muslims at least fight back.
In southern Africa there are plenty of peaceful Muslims.

But a history of Islam isn't one of just violence. But in the last 200 years, especially in the Middle East, it's a story of the west, generally Britain and France, coming in and doing what they like. Had the Ottoman Empire remained strong, then Islam would probably be very different today than it is.

But to be honest, I see a lot of people talking a lot of carp about Islam, they just believe what they're force fed by those who have an interest in making sure Islam remains the common enemy. The fear is used to keep us down, it's used to promote the right being tough on them and so on and on and on.

It's no conspiracy, it's quite clear this happens.

Look at the difference in speeches by Obama and Bush. Now, many will say Obama's not being tough, well exactly, Obama doesn't do the whole "we'll be tough on them" carp that the right will use.
Bush used key words to keep people down "War on Terror", when was the last time you heard a Democrat use these words?


Look at spending on the military.

Bush increase military spending far beyond Cold War spending as a % of GDP. It had been below average for the whole time the Cold War had finished, up to the point where Bush could squeeze money out of them.

Defense OpenSecrets

Funny how the amount of money being spent on the military sees the amount of money being given to political parties by defence contractors goes up. Let's look at the biggest, Lockheed Martin.

Four of the top five recipients are Republicans, the top three are from Texas. The fifth just happens to be on the sub committee for defence, About 4/5th of their money goes to Republicans. This is with a Democratic President and Senate.

Is this a conspiracy? Not really. The money isn't the best from defence, but the Republicans get it and the Democrats don't. Why?

Back to the conspiracy issues again.
Nope.

Islam's ENTIRE history is violence and bloodshed from the beginning, the fact that you like the revisionist version is your problem, not mine.

 

[frigidweirdo]

This is the reality:


In 2008, the Bush administration negotiated a status of forces agreement with the Iraqi government that would remove troops by the end of 2011. Bush signed that agreement in anticipation of Obama’s entry to the White House. Sure enough, Obama then failed to sign a renewed status of forces agreement. According to David Filkens of the New Yorker:

[E]very single senior political leader, no matter what party or what group, including Maliki, said to them privately, we want you to stay. We don’t want you to fight. We don’t want combat troops. We don’t want Americans getting killed, but we want 10,000 American troops inside the Green Zone training our army, giving us intelligence, playing that crucial role as the broker and interlocutor that makes our system work. We want you to stay.​

Filkens told NPR that James Jeffrey, an American ambassador, said he “got no guidance from the White House.”

Now there is no stabilization force in Iraq. And with an ISIS force that is merely hundreds large, according to some reports, rushing through Iraq with impunity, it is difficult to argue that even a minor force wouldn’t have made a difference.

Pulling Troops Out of Iraq Allowed Al-Maliki’s Sectarianism to Dominate. Al-Maliki was, as noted, always a disaster area. But America’s presence prevented him from using his power to dominate the Sunni minority in Iraq and forge close ties with Iran. Filkins points out, “Time and again, American commanders have told me, they stepped in front of Maliki to stop him from acting brutally and arbitrarily toward Iraq’s Sunni minority.” Then, he writes, “the Americans left,” and everything went to hell in a handbasket:

In the two and a half years since the Americans’ departure, Maliki has centralized power within his own circle, cut the Sunnis out of political power, and unleashed a wave of arrests and repression. Maliki’s march to authoritarian rule has fueled the re-emergence of the Sunni insurgency directly. With nowhere else to go, Iraq’s Sunnis are turning, once again, to the extremists to protect them.

The Leader of ISIS Was Released by The Obama Administration. Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, leader of ISIS, was in US custody in Camp Bucca, in Iraq. He was released in 2009 when the US shut down the camp in anticipation of the end of US presence in the country.

Enabling Iran. Al-Maliki has turned to Iran in this crisis. And why not? The United States is nowhere to be found, and al-Maliki’s radical anti-Sunni policies make him a popular man with the mullahs. Not only that – President Obama has surrendered all pretense at holding Iran accountable throughout his tenure, from abandoning the Iranian opposition in 2009 to signing an empty-headed nuclear deal with the mullahs last year to leaving Iranian-backed Syrian dictator Bashar Assad untouched after Assad used chemical weapons against civilians. Iran is now the regional power. Which means that Iraq itself will now become a proxy war in which America loses either way: either ISIS wins, or the Iranians do.

Contributing to Syrian Chaos. Focusing on Israel instead of Syria, then arming the Syrian opposition while refusing to do anything after Bashar Assad’s gassing of civilians, President Obama has contributed to a chaotic situation that facilitated ISIS’ rise in Syria. ISIS plays both sides of the aisle. On the one hand, they want to break away from Assad’s regime; on the other hand, they are saving their ammunition for use against erstwhile allies who don’t want an Islamist state.

ISIS began working in Syria in 2009 as an anti-Assad, al Qaeda-associated rebel faction. A few years later, the Obama administration began shipping arms into the country. One of the great concerns with the situation in Syria has always been the capacity for weaponry to fall into the wrong hands. While the Obama administration has claimed that it has the perfect ability to follow the weaponry, that is doubtful at best – and ISIS has been seizing warehouses of weapons.

Now the Obama administration, including President Obama, claims that it is busily vetting the Syrian opposition to which America has shipped arms. On Sunday, National Security Advisor Susan Rice explained, “the United States has ramped up its support for the moderate vetted opposition, providing lethal and non-lethal support where we can to support both the civilian opposition and the military opposition.” Meanwhile, ISIS is grabbing US humvees in Iraq itself.

Caving All Over The World. Ukraine. Afghanistan. The Palestinian Authority. Fear of the United States is passé, because there is simply nothing to fear. ISIS knows this; so do the Iranians. The only true fear is the fear of our allies, who now know better than to trust a United States that will abandon them at the worst possible time.

6 Reasons Obama Lost Iraq

It's funny, you know. Bush signed to leave, "hero", Obama left "villain". Bush eats cornflakes for breakfast, "hero", Obama eats cornflakes for breakfast "villain". It's getting tiring. Time and time and time and time again debating with people who cannot think objectively.

So, everyone in Iraq wanted Obama to stay, secretly. Why secretly? If they wanted the US to stay so much why not make it clear? Probably because A) the US people did not want the US to stay. B) The iraqi people did not want the US to stay C) the country had to go it alone at some point. It could not reply on the US Army forever. Whenever the US leaves it was going to be a problem, especially after the mess the US had put the Iraq people through in the first place.

So, Maliki said stay, but then when they left he could do what he liked. So why did he want the US to stay if they stopped him being a non-puppet leader?

But here's the real big thing. Bush went in believing he could make Iraq like America. He had no understanding of Iraq, no understanding of Muslims, claimed to be making Iraq a better place for Muslims while constantly making Muslims the new common enemy. A contradiction that is ridiculous and isn't going to get someone very far.

What would you do if the US were controlled by Muslims who said constantly that Christians were evil and bad? You'd not trust them at all. So why would expect differently when it's reversed?

So the US left and shut down a camp. Well and.....? Were they expected to predict that such a person was going to end up running ISIS? And if so, why didn't the people who ran the damn country not do anything, ie, the Iraqi govt? I'm not saying mistakes weren't made, but it's not as simple as saying "they closed a camp therefore Obama's bad because some guy blah blah"

However, a quick bit of research suggests the guy was in prison in 2004, there are claims he was in prison till 2009 but this hasn't been proven. A Colonel King states this, but records don't. Even if he had been in prison, under Bush the army didn't see the guy as a threat. So..... we can mud sling all day.

It claims Iran is NOW a regional power. It always has been.

Then the funniest thing is, it criticises Obama for doing nothing against Assad, then says that ISIS was an anti-Assad group. So, they're criticising Obama for not working with ISIS???? What?

In fact the whole thing shows just how rubbish US foreign policy is, both Bush and Obama, Reagan, Carter and others, all the same, all about short sighted. Such as, it doesn't criticise Obama for arming the anti-Assad and anti-ISIS Syrians. History is repeating itself, and here I will criticise Obama for one of the worst things he has done, and no one else is, everyone else is supporting him.

Doh.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The Bush withdrawal was tentative. For obama, as with everything else, it was political opportunity.

For Bush eating cornflakes was just to get energy, but for Obama it was a political opportunity to take down his opponents.

Oh, give me a break with this nonsense you're spouting.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The Bush withdrawal was tentative. For obama, as with everything else, it was political opportunity.

For Bush eating cornflakes was just to get energy, but for Obama it was a political opportunity to take down his opponents.

Oh, give me a break with this nonsense you're spouting.

Everything with obama is political. You need to realize that before there can be any more conversation.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Back to the conspiracy issues again.
Nope.

Islam's ENTIRE history is violence and bloodshed from the beginning, the fact that you like the revisionist version is your problem, not mine.

So is Christianity's.

Do you know how long it would take me to write down every war that has involved a Christian country in the past 100 years? I'd be here forever. I doubt there's been a time in the last 1000 years where a Christian country wasn't out there killing people.

THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY is violence and bloodshed. WW2, WW1, Vietnam, Korea, I could go on and on and on.

Also, telling me things are conspiracy theories and that's all isn't debate, it's nonsense. What part of what I wrote is false?

The Republican Party doesn't increase military spending? Doesn't get lots more money from defence contractors? Doesn't get a few nice donations because, hey, they provide a lot more business to defence contractors than the democrats.

If you made bombs for the F-22 which political party would you support? The one who uses them sometimes, or the one who promises all out war every few years?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Basically, ISIS is a product of incompetent US foreign policy over a period of time ranging from the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviets,.

1) Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was not an example of incompetent US foreign policy

2) Our war there against soviets led to fall of liberal communism, removal of nuclear threat, and freeing of perhaps 2 billion people. It was brilliant foreign policy

3) no one predicted aftermath would lead to 9/11 or that invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and non invasion of Syria would lead to ISIS.

You are declaring yourself intelligent based on 20/20 hindsight, so it is you who is the incompetent. Sorry

 

[frigidweirdo]

This is the reality:


In 2008, the Bush administration negotiated a status of forces agreement with the Iraqi government that would remove troops by the end of 2011. Bush signed that agreement in anticipation of Obama’s entry to the White House. Sure enough, Obama then failed to sign a renewed status of forces agreement. According to David Filkens of the New Yorker:

[E]very single senior political leader, no matter what party or what group, including Maliki, said to them privately, we want you to stay. We don’t want you to fight. We don’t want combat troops. We don’t want Americans getting killed, but we want 10,000 American troops inside the Green Zone training our army, giving us intelligence, playing that crucial role as the broker and interlocutor that makes our system work. We want you to stay.​

Filkens told NPR that James Jeffrey, an American ambassador, said he “got no guidance from the White House.”

Now there is no stabilization force in Iraq. And with an ISIS force that is merely hundreds large, according to some reports, rushing through Iraq with impunity, it is difficult to argue that even a minor force wouldn’t have made a difference.

Pulling Troops Out of Iraq Allowed Al-Maliki’s Sectarianism to Dominate. Al-Maliki was, as noted, always a disaster area. But America’s presence prevented him from using his power to dominate the Sunni minority in Iraq and forge close ties with Iran. Filkins points out, “Time and again, American commanders have told me, they stepped in front of Maliki to stop him from acting brutally and arbitrarily toward Iraq’s Sunni minority.” Then, he writes, “the Americans left,” and everything went to hell in a handbasket:

In the two and a half years since the Americans’ departure, Maliki has centralized power within his own circle, cut the Sunnis out of political power, and unleashed a wave of arrests and repression. Maliki’s march to authoritarian rule has fueled the re-emergence of the Sunni insurgency directly. With nowhere else to go, Iraq’s Sunnis are turning, once again, to the extremists to protect them.

The Leader of ISIS Was Released by The Obama Administration. Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, leader of ISIS, was in US custody in Camp Bucca, in Iraq. He was released in 2009 when the US shut down the camp in anticipation of the end of US presence in the country.

Enabling Iran. Al-Maliki has turned to Iran in this crisis. And why not? The United States is nowhere to be found, and al-Maliki’s radical anti-Sunni policies make him a popular man with the mullahs. Not only that – President Obama has surrendered all pretense at holding Iran accountable throughout his tenure, from abandoning the Iranian opposition in 2009 to signing an empty-headed nuclear deal with the mullahs last year to leaving Iranian-backed Syrian dictator Bashar Assad untouched after Assad used chemical weapons against civilians. Iran is now the regional power. Which means that Iraq itself will now become a proxy war in which America loses either way: either ISIS wins, or the Iranians do.

Contributing to Syrian Chaos. Focusing on Israel instead of Syria, then arming the Syrian opposition while refusing to do anything after Bashar Assad’s gassing of civilians, President Obama has contributed to a chaotic situation that facilitated ISIS’ rise in Syria. ISIS plays both sides of the aisle. On the one hand, they want to break away from Assad’s regime; on the other hand, they are saving their ammunition for use against erstwhile allies who don’t want an Islamist state.

ISIS began working in Syria in 2009 as an anti-Assad, al Qaeda-associated rebel faction. A few years later, the Obama administration began shipping arms into the country. One of the great concerns with the situation in Syria has always been the capacity for weaponry to fall into the wrong hands. While the Obama administration has claimed that it has the perfect ability to follow the weaponry, that is doubtful at best – and ISIS has been seizing warehouses of weapons.

Now the Obama administration, including President Obama, claims that it is busily vetting the Syrian opposition to which America has shipped arms. On Sunday, National Security Advisor Susan Rice explained, “the United States has ramped up its support for the moderate vetted opposition, providing lethal and non-lethal support where we can to support both the civilian opposition and the military opposition.” Meanwhile, ISIS is grabbing US humvees in Iraq itself.

Caving All Over The World. Ukraine. Afghanistan. The Palestinian Authority. Fear of the United States is passé, because there is simply nothing to fear. ISIS knows this; so do the Iranians. The only true fear is the fear of our allies, who now know better than to trust a United States that will abandon them at the worst possible time.

6 Reasons Obama Lost Iraq

It's funny, you know. Bush signed to leave, "hero", Obama left "villain". Bush eats cornflakes for breakfast, "hero", Obama eats cornflakes for breakfast "villain". It's getting tiring. Time and time an

 

[mudwhistle]

I've trained Muslims.
They've told me all I need to know about the subject.

I've lived with a Pakistani Muslim. I trump your training.

Though speaking to a few Muslims hardly makes someone an expert on Islam.

You lived with one. Wow.

My nephew, who's family was from Mogadishu Somalia, lived with me after his mother died. I was his legal guardian until he was 21. His father was a pilot in the Somali air force. His father and his family was Muslim. He didn't seem to think that hanging around to raise his son was all that great of an idea.

I've spoke to more than a few of them. Each region has a different dialect and slightly different political views. But they all universally believe their religion is the only religion and that they know what God's will is better than we do. The Kuwaitis I trained couldn't resist the urge to make fun of the Brits who trained them before we did, and I'm sure they made fun of us when we left. I also trained Pakistan troops. They're different from Kuwaitis, Somalis, Jordanians, and Iraqis.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

This is the reality:


In 2008, the Bush administration negotiated a status of forces agreement with the Iraqi government that would remove troops by the end of 2011. Bush signed that agreement in anticipation of Obama’s entry to the White House. Sure enough, Obama then failed to sign a renewed status of forces agreement. According to David Filkens of the New Yorker:

[E]very single senior political leader, no matter what party or what group, including Maliki, said to them privately, we want you to stay. We don’t want you to fight. We don’t want combat troops. We don’t want Americans getting killed, but we want 10,000 American troops inside the Green Zone training our army, giving us intelligence, playing that crucial role as the broker and interlocutor that makes our system work. We want you to stay.​

Filkens told NPR that James Jeffrey, an American ambassador, said he “got no guidance from the White House.”

Now there is no stabilization force in Iraq. And with an ISIS force that is merely hundreds large, according to some reports, rushing through Iraq with impunity, it is difficult to argue that even a minor force wouldn’t have made a difference.

Pulling Troops Out of Iraq Allowed Al-Maliki’s Sectarianism to Dominate. Al-Maliki was, as noted, always a disaster area. But America’s presence prevented him from using his power to dominate the Sunni minority in Iraq and forge close ties with Iran. Filkins points out, “Time and again, American commanders have told me, they stepped in front of Maliki to stop him from acting brutally and arbitrarily toward Iraq’s Sunni minority.” Then, he writes, “the Americans left,” and everything went to hell in a handbasket:

In the two and a half years since the Americans’ departure, Maliki has centralized power within his own circle, cut the Sunnis out of political power, and unleashed a wave of arrests and repression. Maliki’s march to authoritarian rule has fueled the re-emergence of the Sunni insurgency directly. With nowhere else to go, Iraq’s Sunnis are turning, once again, to the extremists to protect them.

The Leader of ISIS Was Released by The Obama Administration. Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, leader of ISIS, was in US custody in Camp Bucca, in Iraq. He was released in 2009 when the US shut down the camp in anticipation of the end of US presence in the country.

Enabling Iran. Al-Maliki has turned to Iran in this crisis. And why not? The United States is nowhere to be found, and al-Maliki’s radical anti-Sunni policies make him a popular man with the mullahs. Not only that – President Obama has surrendered all pretense at holding Iran accountable throughout his tenure, from abandoning the Iranian opposition in 2009 to signing an empty-headed nuclear deal with the mullahs last year to leaving Iranian-backed Syrian dictator Bashar Assad untouched after Assad used chemical weapons against civilians. Iran is now the regional power. Which means that Iraq itself will now become a proxy war in which America loses either way: either ISIS wins, or the Iranians do.

Contributing to Syrian Chaos. Focusing on Israel instead of Syria, then arming the Syrian opposition while refusing to do anything after Bashar Assad’s gassing of civilians, President Obama has contributed to a chaotic situation that facilitated ISIS’ rise in Syria. ISIS plays both sides of the aisle. On the one hand, they want to break away from Assad’s regime; on the other hand, they are saving their ammunition for use against erstwhile allies who don’t want an Islamist state.

ISIS began working in Syria in 2009 as an anti-Assad, al Qaeda-associated rebel faction. A few years later, the Obama administration began shipping arms into the country. One of the great concerns with the situation in Syria has always been the capacity for weaponry to fall into the wrong hands. While the Obama administration has claimed that it has the perfect ability to follow the weaponry, that is doubtful at best – and ISIS has been seizing warehouses of weapons.

Now the Obama administration, including President Obama, claims that it is busily vetting the Syrian opposition to which America has shipped arms. On Sunday, National Security Advisor Susan Rice explained, “the United States has ramped up its support for the moderate vetted opposition, providing lethal and non-lethal support where we can to support both the civilian opposition and the military opposition.” Meanwhile, ISIS is grabbing US humvees in Iraq itself.

Caving All Over The World. Ukraine. Afghanistan. The Palestinian Authority. Fear of the United States is passé, because there is simply nothing to fear. ISIS knows this; so do the Iranians. The only true fear is the fear of our allies, who now know better than to trust a United States that will abandon them at the worst possible time.

6 Reasons Obama Lost Iraq

It's funny, you know. Bush signed to leave, "hero", Obama left "villain". Bush eats cornflakes for breakfast, "hero", Obama eats cornflakes for breakfast "villain". It's getting tiring. Time and time an

there can be no doubt that Barry left Iraq prematurely just as we left Afghanistan prematurly after soviets were defeated! I wonder if Barry will make the same mistake in Afghanistan again!!

 

[frigidweirdo]

Basically, ISIS is a product of incompetent US foreign policy over a period of time ranging from the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviets,.

1) Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was not an example of incompetent US foreign policy

2) Our war there against soviets led to fall of liberal communism, removal of nuclear threat, and freeing of perhaps 2 billion people. It was brilliant foreign policy

3) no one predicted aftermath would lead to 9/11 or that invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and non invasion of Syria would lead to ISIS.

You are declaring yourself intelligent based on 20/20 hindsight, so it is you who is the incompetent. Sorry

1) Oh, so arming the Mujaheddin who later sort of became the Taliban who used these weapons to kill American soldiers with was good US foreign policy? I bet you think giving weapons to the Iraqi army which ran away leaving all this nice shiny new equipment to ISIS is also good foreign policy? Or arming Saddam Hussain who used such weaponry against US troops good foreign policy?

Jeez.

2) Your war there? It was the US's war? The US didn't fight there, they provided arms. It didn't lead to the fall of Communism, more like the problems the Communist were having led them to leave Afghanistan, also the fact that their new leader was more of a progressive guy too.
As for freeing 2 billion people. How many people do you think lived in the USSR? You're out by about 1.8 billion people.

It didn't remove a threat at all, the threat is still there, the number of nuclear material that went missing during the 1990s is worrying, Russia is threatening a world war (according to some) right now. It also removed the Republican's big scare tactic which led them to find another one which was Islam, which led to the Iraq war and the complete balls up there and ISIS, great policy.

3) No one predicted that Iraq would to ISIS, who could predict such a thing? People did predict that the US would have more problems in the region, I for one predicted such a thing. It's not hard, it's history repeating itself. Anyone who didn't see this is blind to history.

Also seems to be a lot of "Bush couldn't predict what would happen" and then "Obama's a fool for not predicting what would happen". It's so tiring.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

1) Oh, so arming the Mujaheddin who later sort of became the Taliban who used these weapons to kill American soldiers with was good US foreign policy?.

yes dear, winning the cold war, preventing nuclear anniliation, and freeing 2 billion human beings was great great great foreign policy!!

 

[frigidweirdo]

You lived with one. Wow.

My nephew, who's family was from Mogadishu Somalia, lived with me after his mother died. I was his legal guardian until he was 21. His father was a pilot in the Somali air force. His father and his family was Muslim. He didn't seem to think that hanging around to raise his son was all that great of an idea.

I've spoke to more than a few of them. Each region has a different dialect and slightly different political views. But they all universally believe their religion is the only religion and that they know what God's will is better than we do. The Kuwaitis I trained couldn't resist the urge to make fun of the Brits who trained them before we did, and I'm sure they made fun of us when we left. I also trained Pakistan troops. They different from Kuwaitis, Somalis, Jordanians, and Iraqis.

Okay, and your point is what? You've met some Muslims. Makes you an expert. You do realise I was being sarcastic right?

It's kind of like saying that a person who served in WW2 knew everything that happened in WW2. Clearly not the case.

So what is your point? All Muslims are bad and evil?