Does Obama own the coming Iraqi Islamic Republic?
Obama claimed victory in Iraq. Iraq is teetering on the brink of a civil war that Muslim extremists will win. Does Obama own the collapse of Iraq since he has removed all American troops and declared victory in Iraq?
Of course he doesn't own it. He will blame everyone else, tell a few lies, and skate away innocent of all wrong doing.
Even a school child could have accurately predicted what would happen when all the troops left this country to the locals. All the lives that were lost, and the billions of dollars that were wasted mean nothing to this administration. They are far more worried about the next election than anything else.
The withdrawal of troops agreement was signed by Bush and agreed upon by the majority of Americans and an extended presence agreement failed to be negotiated (some of that blame can be put on Obama, but not all of it).
As for who owns responsibility, that goes mostly to Bush and his warmongers and the millions of Americans who blindly accepted this colossal disaster in the first place.
Thank you for confirming the position that when the news is good it belongs to Obama, exclusively and when it is bad it is all Bush's fault. There had been a plan to leave a significant number of American troops in Iraq, that plan was quashed by BHO
Funny how people missed your part that said "some of that blame can be put on Obama, but not all of it" junkseller.
You mean the millions who elected all of those Democrats like Hillary that went along with GOP insanity?
"We aren't there now thanks to a status of forces agreement negotiated by Bush and kept by BHO." That is almost exactly what I said, so I don't know what you are on about or why your question is putting so much blame on Obama.
I honestly think lot of these people are Israeli-Firsters, and hate Obama because Netanyahu does. They put Israel above USA, and if Obama doesn't do 100% what Bibi's wants--they get enraged. Just my view, from years of watching and listening.
BHO is President NOW. If Bush was to blame for 9-11, as lefties love to say, then BHO is to blame for what happens on his watch as Commander-in-Chief.
As for Israel Firsters(what ever that means) it seems that is the only song you know.
Congress called for withdrawal. The former administration agreed to a withdrawal. The Iraqis demanded withdrawal. The American people mostly agreed with a withdrawal. What would you do different? Be a tyrant and do as you please?
Japan was occupied by America until the 1951. West Germany was occupied until 1955. Occupation of Italy ended in 1947. Why? Because it took that long to guarantee things like Iraq today didn't happen. Winners make the terms, write the history.
Interesting choices since we still have military forces in all those places. Fact remains that the democratic choice of them and us was to remove the troops and you still didn't say how you would do anything differently.
"Does Obama own the coming Iraqi Islamic Republic?"
Actually yes and no.
Did Obama say the war in Iraq was a victory for the United States military? I can't find a quote by him saying those words (maybe I missed it in my Google search?) but I did find that what he did say was this
"Barack Obama, the US president, yesterday said the withdrawal is a victory for his administration and the fulfilment of a promise to end the war."
A victory for his administration, meaning he did what he promised ending the war, not a military war victory over our enemies.
Leaving semantics, for what its worth, aside, Obama's zeal to fulfill his promise (which was never promised to be a victory, merely and end to the war) is akin to dropping the baton in a relay race, the relay race to win the war in Iraq and so to that extent he owns it.
But real ownership lies with the relay team's coach and his staff, that being George Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld etc.
These guys entered America into a race knowing they wouldn't be there for the second, third and fourth leg of the race. Bush ran the first leg and managed to pull ahead with a surge but when it came to passing the baton, well they never planned for who would run the rest of the race.
My point is Bush (and his administration) started a war, sacrificed our boys, for a war they had no way of knowing how it would turn out, how long it would take and who would be running it after they were gone.
Iraq didn't need boots on the ground - the problem there was the leadership. All that had to be done was take Saddam out with missiles or drones and continue to do so until the country installed the government we want. There was no reason to sacrifice our men for the likes of barbarians which these Iraqi's running Iraq were. Especially when, knowing the mentality of the politics here in the US gave no assurances that our leadership in coming years would be competent enough to follow through and obtain a true and lasting victory.
Yes, I blame Bush, not for Obama's failures but for not having the foresight to know that WE can be defeated not only by the enemy but by our own politicians. The sad thing is these administrations are enjoying life to the fullest while patriots are 6 ft under or handicapped for life, not able to get medical assistance needlessly and now those left alive and their families will not even have the satisfaction that what they were sacrificed for will last another day.
"no way of knowing how it would turn out, how long it would take and who would be running it after they were gone." So Bush is responsible for the NATURE of all Wars? There was political will to fight until the Press lied and lied
The nature of all wars? Don't put words in my mouth. This was not like all wars. They didn't have to put boots on the ground in a country that had nothing to do with 911. Iraq did not attack us - regime change was all that was needed.
...had nothing to do with 911. Iraq did not attack us - regime change was all that was needed..... Seems there is a parallel to your observation. How did that whole WWll thing go again? Iraq was at war with us, starting in 1991, read your history.
I don't recall Obama claiming victory in Iraq. It was George W. Bush who stood in front of a banner saying "Mission Accomplished".
Iraq (refused) to grant the U.S. permission to allow a certain amount of U.S. troops to remain after the draw down.
Needless to say it's really not about the U.S. as much as it is the various groups in Iraq who have hated each other for thousands of years. It was idealistic to say the least for the U.S. to believe that we could set up a democracy there that would endure peacefully after they've known nothing but dictatorship for so many years.
Lastly no one could have stopped the people who were trained to protect their country from becoming cowards! We should have remembered how they gave up so easily during Desert Storm in the early 1990s. They have not bought into the idea that democracy and freedom are worth dying for.
The only way peace of kind will last in that region is if we set up (permanent bases) there or allow them to return a dictatorship. Neither option is a good one.
You mean the same groups Obama was ready to support in Syria? The groups backed by Al Qaeda or The Muslim Brotherhood(friends of Obama)?
We never put any troops on the ground in Syria. Historically politics makes strange bedfellows. We were on the wrong side of Apartheid in South Africa. Allies become enemies. We once sold weapons and supported Iraq when they fought against Iran.
Why do you bring muslims into everything? Unless you are seriously ignorant, Al Queda is OURS. And aren't you RW'ers angry at BO because he didn't bomb Syria, Iran, etc? Please---take a position! Bomb Bomb Bomb...or not.
Allies become enemies, when has that happened. Iraq was never an ally, merely a useful tool. The hope among many was that the Iran/Iraq War would claim both regimes. The US gave aid to brutal Muslim fanatics in Syria-more Obama brilliance.
On whose behalf? Do you ever ask yourself that? Do you ever wonder why we ar always invading, deposing, violently coup-ing? What do we get out of it? Nada. Just dead kids, and rich contractors Seem to me they are not OUR enemies. Proxy war.Israel-1st
No, it belongs to the idiot who put us there, safely ensconsed in the "herodom" of NeverNeverLand.
"Yes, George...you did a good thing by invading Iraq. There, there now...you just sleep" Uncle Rupert'll make em all forget what really happened.
This year's numbers show that 35 percent trusted the Fox News Channel, more than any other outlet, CBS at 9 percent, MSNBC and Comedy Central tied at 6 percent, and just 3 percent for NBC. Fox topped the list ever since the left wing poll started.
You mean despite Clinton's cry for regime change or Great General and former Democrat candidate Wesley Clark's claim that Al Qaeda and Saddam were connected?We aren't there now thanks to a status of forces agreement negotiated by Bush and kept by BHO
LMC - It is interesting how in your world everything is George Bush's fault. If your toilet backs up and floods your house, it had to be GWB that caused it. I do agree though that GWB got us into this mess based on faulty intel from what I read.
Bush and his team of maniacs thumped their chest at the world and had a policy of bombs before brains. They deserve an enormous amount of blame for our situation. Obama hasn't been impressive, but far better than the disaster of Bush.
Funny Obama is far better than the disaster of Bush in spite of the fact he continued all the Bush policies, but purposely left Iraq a sitting duck for terrorist takeover, is under seige of 6 scandals (we know of) & is proven a liar on everything
And?I knew the media was right wing all along.Obviously.Not 1 "reporter" talks about Romney being sued for racketeering.Can u imagine if it was Obama?And Hello:We are in Iraq because of the Bush adm.The fall-out is theirs.Take some d*m responsibility
Obama has been President for over 5 years unless he is an idiot, Iraq is his.
Unless he put us there, no it isn't. He has to deal with the mess he was left, TAKE RESPONSIBILTY.
It took Bush less than 8 months to plot 9/11. Less then 15 months to plot Afghanistan. Less than 2 years to plot Iraq. Obama has had 5 years. Obviously Bush the devil is more powerful than Obama the IDIOT angel.
Bush didn't plot any of it. He allowed it to happen. It was plotted in 1997. That's why he had to win the presidency by hook or crook. Funny you people always hype up the USmilitary, yet believe it could be gotten the best of by such primitive means.
Barrack Obama has been in charge of American foreign policy for years and what has it got us. Iraq falling into the hands of Al Qaeda. Afghanistan falling into the hands of the Talliban. The Syrians running amok. Iran on the verge of nuclear power status while brutalizing its own people. Korea pushing all limits. The Chinese slowly annexing territory after territory. Russia resurgent. Venezuela on fire. The border with Mexico in full collapse. Libya teetering. An energized Muslim Brotherhood.
Of course it belongs to him, he is PRESIDENT of the United States and that office is more than equipped to deal with all of these events, in the hands of someone competent.
So tell me then, how does the Bush administration who waged the war in Iraq without regard for the inevitable consequences and the fact that they may not be around to finish it competently not own it? If it wasn'tfor the surge they would have lostit.
The U.S. is NOT the world police! Many of these countries have had issues for 1000s of years! Some folks believe we should put troops everywhere and spend trillions of dollars on (unwinnable civil wars). They don't want democracy and never did!
Excellent answer. And what is it WE want? Hmmm? That is what got us here, and what we need to decide.
I do not want to be world empire. I want to be U S of A.
The Bush Surge? No President is around for more than 8 years. His time was up. Obama was deemed ready by the voters. He has had 5 years to become competent. Iraq became his when he was elected AND when he sent Joey B. out to spike the ball.
Obama was against the "war". How is it his? Obamacare is his. Tax cuts for middle class is his. Iraq war is Bush's. Tell me: Do you call it Obama's medicare part D?
Medicare requires Congressional action. He is commander-in-chief.
And Obama was not the president who invaded Iraq. Nor was it his congress who created AUMF.--when do you take responsibility?
AUMF, you mean the Authorization that had to be voted on twice so Democrats could get on board; the AUMF that Hillary enthusiastically supported; the AUMF that all but one Democrat in the House and EVERY Democrat in the Senate voted for? Whose fault?
Yours. It was a Repub house and Repub senate.They held majority in both. AND had Supreme Court (still do). Why do you insist on making GW Bush's terms Democratic ones? It was all R's for 6 yrs. Wars, Patriot Act, AUMF AbuGharib,U insist dems.Ushamed?
The REALITY, you know that uncomfortable thing you keep running into, is that Democrats supported the AUMF 100% in the Senate. Hillary voted for it, how is her vote a Republican one?
All the dems could have voted AGAINST it, and it still would have passed! R's held majority..R's ruled.Totally, for 6 long awful years.Let me ask: is GW Bush responsible for anything that happened from 2000-2008? Or does it all fall On Obama and D's?
So the Democrats lacked the courage of their convictions. Republicans have opposed many things to which they object despite the certainty of passing. Democrats controlled Congress beginning in January 2007 just in time to wreck the economy.
by mortimerjackson 11 years ago
Despite what Obama's press secretary might tell you, the only reason that America is leaving Iraq is because of a declaration signed by George Bush saying that America will leave by 2011. Obama insisted upon staying in Iraq, but the Iraqi government has refused to grant US troops immunity for their...
by Stevennix2001 12 years ago
Okay, I know this probably isn't that big of a deal to some folks, but i thought i'd bring it up anyway. On the radio the other day, I was listening to two political analysts, and one of them still insists on labeling O'Bama a moron for how he's handled things from day one of his...
by Scott Belford 8 years ago
One of President Bush's arguments for invading Iraq was the strong Hussain-al Qaeda connection. The anti-Iraq invasion group said there was only very skimpy evidence of that and much stronger evidence that such an arrangement couldn't exist;. After several extensive post-war...
by Ralph Deeds 12 years ago
Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney release their memoirs early next year. What are they and other neoconservatives who pushed for the Iraq War in the Bush Administration saying now? Brookings Institution Senior Fellow Justin Vaisse explains that many have been lying low and backtracking from...
by Susan Reid 12 years ago
Every day we hear from hubbers about how Obama is out to destroy the Constitution. Across this great nation there is a movement of very vocal, very serious "pro-contitutionalists."The Constitution is suddenly quoted and defended like the Bible.It's all the vogue -- ALL OF A SUDDEN.My...
by Susan Reid 10 years ago
Oh no! Our commander in chief's strategies have now killed the #1 and the #2 al-Quaeda leaders. Don't you just hate when that happens??Funny how we here zero, zippo, nada anymore about the "war on terror" while our POTUS quietly goes about his businesses taking out the leaders.I know many...
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2023 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|