How is Bush not 100% responsible for what has happened to the Middle East

Dictators like Saddam, Qaddafi, and the like were necessary evil in order to prevent groups like ISIS from coming into the forefront. When Saddam was overthrown, it created a chain reaction that has resulted in the monster that is ISIS and the return of the Caliphate.

Obama inherited the Iraq mess, and the fallout of Iraq led to the "Arab Spring" which has made it's way, now, to North Africa. I cannot believe what has happened to the Middle East.

Has Obama made mistakes, sure. But never forget that he INHERITED the Iraq war and the fallout from it.

 

That's an easy one.
Because a Democrat led senate gave him overwhelming support by voting 77-23

 

Sheee-it, you know better than that. If Bush had just done a little bit better job of lying and playing the pre-election 'soft on terror' card, the vote would have been 98-2. He missed a few senators.

 

Actually, due to Slick Willie's incompetence as CIC, the ME bad guys were poised to cause trouble when Bush took office.

 

It's actually President Lincoln's fault. President Obama inherited the country as President Lincoln left it.

How big of you to say President Obama has made mistakes but since he didn't get to start with a clean slate as have all the other presidents, nothing is his fault.

Did President Bush force President Obama to embrace the Arab Spring and America's enemies?

 

channe

"Necesary evil". Tell that to the families that Saddam and his murdering sons fed thru wood choppers.

The fact is Bush turned over an Iraq that was pretty much free of war. THEN--------------the fool Obama totally pulled out leaving a power vacuum and ISIS stepped in. BLAME OBAMA AND HIS IGNORANCE!!!!!!!

 

There may be a percentage point or two that he is not responsible for, but 100% is pretty damn close. Actually, I think the second invasion was a legacy invasion, like everything else in his life.

 

If you look at Iraq with a geopolitical eye you can see not only did Obama inherit Iraq but so did Bush, Clinton, etc etc. That situation was caused a very long time ago and was an issue created and worsened by many players in many countries over an extended time frame.

 

Baloney. I can remember the kidnappings and the Shia bodies floating down the Euphrates under the noses of the U.S. military at its peak. I can remember the Shia mosques being blown to (*)(*)(*)(*). And that's just the news the Bushies allowed out. "Pretty much free of war" my white butt.

 

So just to be clear, if the Republican controlled Senate votes against authorizing military force against ISIS, we can blame them for anything bad that happens afterwards yes?

 

Unless you were there, you don't (*)(*)(*)(*) about what happened.

 

Apparently daily car and suicide bombings, daily IED attacks, daily mortar attacks, large and powerful insurgent militias in control of areas where government forces can only go in armored vehicles, etc are examples of "pretty much free of war".



- - - Updated - - -

I was there and it is utter bull(*)(*)(*)(*) to say that Iraq was "pretty much free of war" in 2008.

 

I was there as well, so don't try putting words in my mouth.

 

Then why are you defending a poster who said exactly that?

Oh wait. He's a fellow Rightwinger. You guys never call each other out on bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

 

Do yourself and bone up on reading comprehension, you partisan hack. I didn't defend anyone. I stated a simple fact.

 

You stated opinion. The poster you responded to was countering your fellow traveler's bull(*)(*)(*)(*) and that Liberal was the one stating facts. Attacks like those did occur even at the height of Coalition power.

But instead of supporting the truth over bull(*)(*)(*)(*), you have some canned BS "if you weren't there you do t know anything" (because apparently the Iraq War was never in the news ) to defend the bull(*)(*)(*)(*) your Rightwing friend spouted.

 

Once again you're an idiot. I could care less about some ridiculous claim about a peaceful Iraq in 2008

I never mentioned it, never defended it. So do yourself and get off my nuts.

 

So then what was your purpose in going after a guy stating facts to counter bull(*)(*)(*)(*)?

 

None of your business, so butt out.

 

Sure, as long as we can blame the democrat controlled senate for the Iraq war, yes?

 

WAH..WAAHHH...It's YOUR fault I hit little Jimmy with the baseball bat, Mommy and Daddy. You didn't tell me hitting people with baseball bats might hurt them and I shouldn't do it. It's all YOUR fault, WAAAHHH, WWWAAHHH

What pathetic BUSHwa. First they wave the bloody shirt of 9/11 better than Hitler did the Reichstag fire then try to sluff off blame when Dems do what they couldn't have avoided doing against a Republican supermajority anyway. The only thing sadder than the fact that the Republican leadership and disgrace to our government continues to push this obvious and egregious steaming pile of bovine waste is the fact that so many Republican lickspittles were and are still stupid enough to fall for it.

 

Can you state clearly that it is hull(*)(*)(*)(*) to claim that Iraq was "pretty much clear of war" in 2008?

Can you call bull(*)(*)(*)(*) out for what it is?

 

That is what you were claiming, yes?

 

So aside from your little rant, are you saying the democrat controlled senate who voted overwhelming to support the Iraq war, share zero blame, you're kidding, right?

 

I'm just laughing at the entire thread premise and moving on. Really, it's not worthy!