Who Will Obama Blame If Baghdad Falls? Isis Closing In On Baghdad.

[edthecynic]

Since they" fucked us over" on Obama's watch, I suspect it is because they considered him a weak and ineffective leader. They can both be at fault if that snaps your garter.

Only as long as you apply that same standard to Bush and 9/11, but you won't.

911 was planned two years before Bush was elected. Clinton was the weak sister they knew.

Did I call it or what!!!!!

They may have planned it during Clinton, but they waited until Bush was in charge because they knew he was too weak and ineffective to get OBL and they feared Clinton who had caught and convicted the Blind Sheikh.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Thanks to those educating the uneducated.

And back to topic, ISIS just one mile away from Baghdad....

And why hasn't the half million Iraqi army, with plenty of modern military capability, stopped them?

Hey, it's Obama's plan.

He's a Military Genius.

Let Baghdad fall. Wash our hands of the regional nonsense going on in the ME. Let's see what happens.

I wouldn't mind.

Then 6 years from now when ISIL is crossing the Mexican Border and detonates a dirty bomb in San Diego, we could all BLAME OBAMA.

Except, of course the unfortunates in San Diego

Why wouldn't they detonate a dirty bomb in China instead?

 

[Antares]

LOL.
God you are stupid, unfortunately for you most people on this board are too intelligent to fall for any of your chit

"John Kerry > February 23, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East."

"So you have nothing on WMDs being in Iraq in the condition as the Bushies said." So, yes, you got it wrong.

I thought I'd use people you voted for Jake,more effect that way.

Do you think using 5 year old intelligence and comments regarding the 5 year old intel is some sort of proof that we knew nothing new regarding intel on iraq and wmd's in 2003?

Seriously? Intel isn't even updated intel 3 months later, let alone 5 LONG YEARS later....and you want to use that from 1998 as some proof of wmd's in 2003??? A bit silly in my book....

Step back,reread the entire conversation and go from there.
Jake says Bush lied, the problem is that EVERYONE believed he had them....hence the pre and post Bush quotes.

All I am saying is the Pre Bush Quotes from 5 years before 2003 or 2 years before 2003 etc are not valid quotes to use for your example of "everyone believed they had WMD'S" because the information those older quotes were relying on, is out dated intel from 5 years previously....You'd think that our intel would have been better and more accurate over the next 5 years...but in actuality....and sadly, we are probably all being HAD by the CIA...with the intel that they provide.... for their own agenda.....

Of course they are, especially those from the Left.

 

[Antares]

Since they" fucked us over" on Obama's watch, I suspect it is because they considered him a weak and ineffective leader. They can both be at fault if that snaps your garter.

Only as long as you apply that same standard to Bush and 9/11, but you won't.

911 was planned two years before Bush was elected. Clinton was the weak sister they knew.

Did I call it or what!!!!!

They may have planned it during Clinton, but they waited until Bush was in charge because they knew he was too weak and ineffective to get OBL and they feared Clinton who had caught and convicted the Blind Sheikh.

Good lord, get a grip.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The unstable far right are freaking.

Now EC is an expert of China, for heaven's sake.

No senior Bushie has ever said that WMDs as described as the reason for war have ever been found.

 

[Antares]

Where did I say Bush lied?

You lie when you say that. I say the neo-cons got it massively wrong and none of the important ones ever lied and said we found WMDs as they described them as cause to go to war.

who are you talking to???? what post are U replying to??? do I have to teach you the basics of communication?

As for your phrase, "WMDs as they described them," it is nuttier than peanut butter.

He directs it at me

Every time Jake engages me he gets his ass kicked, it got so bad he accused me of hacking his account and changing his posts.

Jake? STOP trying to deflect from your own stupidity.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Can't handle getting stomped again, can you, roo?

EC is simply a reactionary Truth Matters, and you are far from it.

 

[Samson]

Thanks to those educating the uneducated.

And back to topic, ISIS just one mile away from Baghdad....

And why hasn't the half million Iraqi army, with plenty of modern military capability, stopped them?

Hey, it's Obama's plan.

He's a Military Genius.

Let Baghdad fall. Wash our hands of the regional nonsense going on in the ME. Let's see what happens.

I wouldn't mind.

Then 6 years from now when ISIL is crossing the Mexican Border and detonates a dirty bomb in San Diego, we could all BLAME OBAMA.

Except, of course the unfortunates in San Diego

Why wouldn't they detonate a dirty bomb in China instead?

Did I say they wouldn't?

But frankly, given that the USA has been attacked before by radical Islamist, I'll put my money on San Diego rather than Shanghai.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Thanks to those educating the uneducated.

And back to topic, ISIS just one mile away from Baghdad....

And why hasn't the half million Iraqi army, with plenty of modern military capability, stopped them?

Hey, it's Obama's plan.

He's a Military Genius.

Let Baghdad fall. Wash our hands of the regional nonsense going on in the ME. Let's see what happens.

I wouldn't mind.

Then 6 years from now when ISIL is crossing the Mexican Border and detonates a dirty bomb in San Diego, we could all BLAME OBAMA.

Except, of course the unfortunates in San Diego

So you think we can go back into Iraq and destroy ISIS down to the last man, including the last 19 they would need to fly more planes into buildings in the US?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Thanks to those educating the uneducated.

And back to topic, ISIS just one mile away from Baghdad....

And why hasn't the half million Iraqi army, with plenty of modern military capability, stopped them?

I've answered that about 20 times now. But thanks for bumping the thread idiot.

Why don't the Islamist extremists attack China?

LOL, I used to do business in China....you really wanna go there? Another subject you're clueless about.

China is a competitor.....on a number of fronts...including business and as a superpower. They're doing PLENTY in their superpower role to undermine us in the Middle East. We're also in low grade trade wars at all times with them.

Wake up. You sound like mac.

Why doesn't China have troops in the ME to protect their vital interests? Why isn't China a world policeman in order to protect their vital interests?

 

[Samson]

Thanks to those educating the uneducated.

And back to topic, ISIS just one mile away from Baghdad....

And why hasn't the half million Iraqi army, with plenty of modern military capability, stopped them?

Hey, it's Obama's plan.

He's a Military Genius.

Let Baghdad fall. Wash our hands of the regional nonsense going on in the ME. Let's see what happens.

I wouldn't mind.

Then 6 years from now when ISIL is crossing the Mexican Border and detonates a dirty bomb in San Diego, we could all BLAME OBAMA.

Except, of course the unfortunates in San Diego

So you think we can go back into Iraq and destroy ISIS down to the last man, including the last 19 they would need to fly more planes into buildings in the US?

Not sure that scorching the earth would be necessary, but defending the USA against enemies certainly is not an Original Concept. What is somewhat modern is the theory that this can be done with half ass military ops. Military operations are largely unsuccessful when deployed without total commitment. Clinton's firing of tomahawks at Al Qaeda would be an example.

Or the USA could simply do nothing and hope for the best, then when attacked responding with total commitment if possible at that point

 

[NYcarbineer]

The unstable far right are freaking.

Now EC is an expert of China, for heaven's sake.

No senior Bushie has ever said that WMDs as described as the reason for war have ever been found.

And why hasn't the half million Iraqi army, with plenty of modern military capability, stopped them?

Hey, it's Obama's plan.

He's a Military Genius.

Let Baghdad fall. Wash our hands of the regional nonsense going on in the ME. Let's see what happens.

I wouldn't mind.

Then 6 years from now when ISIL is crossing the Mexican Border and detonates a dirty bomb in San Diego, we could all BLAME OBAMA.

Except, of course the unfortunates in San Diego

So you think we can go back into Iraq and destroy ISIS down to the last man, including the last 19 they would need to fly more planes into buildings in the US?

Not sure that scorching the earth would be necessary, but defending the USA against enemies certainly is not an Original Concept. What is somewhat modern is the theory that this can be done with half ass military ops. Military operations are largely unsuccessful when deployed without total commitment. Clinton's firing of tomahawks at Al Qaeda would be an example.

Or the USA could simply do nothing and hope for the best, then when attacked responding with total commitment if possible at that point

Why have troops in the ME in the first place?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oil.

All the more power to change the economic dynamic of our country, take the $$$ hit, and go as close to 100% energy independence as possible. On the other end of that, we will continue to dominate the world economically.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Oil.

All the more power to change the economic dynamic of our country, take the $$$ hit, and go as close to 100% energy independence as possible. On the other end of that, we will continue to dominate the world economically.

China doesn't have troops in the ME for the sake of oil? How do they manage to survive?

 

[JakeStarkey]

I imagine China gets its oil from Russia and us more than the ME.

 

[Samson]

Why have troops in the ME in the first place?

Positioning forward units is also not a terribly unique military concept.

 

[Samson]

I imagine China gets its oil from Russia and us more than the ME.

 

[Samson]

Oil.

All the more power to change the economic dynamic of our country, take the $$$ hit, and go as close to 100% energy independence as possible. On the other end of that, we will continue to dominate the world economically.

Really, that "$$$ hit" is quite unnecessary.

As you see, increasing domestic production quite effectively decreases total crude imports. A significant amount of the imported volume decrease originates from OPEC. Also note that Imports from the Persian Gulf only make up about 25% of total imported crude.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I imagine China gets its oil from Russia and us more than the ME.

Than corrects me. What is interesting is that Saudi Arabia suppies 20%. I would think China would have a greater interest in protecting that supply line.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oil.

All the more power to change the economic dynamic of our country, take the $$$ hit, and go as close to 100% energy independence as possible. On the other end of that, we will continue to dominate the world economically.

Really, that "$$$ hit" is quite unnecessary.

As you see, increasing domestic production quite effectively decreases total crude imports. A significant amount of the imported volume decrease originates from OPEC. Also note that Imports from the Persian Gulf only make up about 25% of total imported crude.

That is very interesting.