Was Jesus the First Republican?

No, there was no plan for building an Iraqi government at the end of the conquest.

Our policy at that time was "debaathification". That policy had the US removing the experts from all branches of government AND civil service (which covered far more than it does in the US) with NO IDEA how these people could ever be replaced by those savvy enough to make Iraq successful.

Suggesting that was a "plan" for "liberty" as claimed is ridiculous.

 

What we do with convicts is a very separate topic. It has nothing to do with people (including families) living outdoors on our streets.

What makes sidewalk dwellers better than convicts is that they haven't been convicted of anything.

 

Were you to investigate, a good many sidewalk dwellers are felons.

 

You are correct.. There was no exit strategy.. Putting Maliki in power was a horrible mistake since he was Shia and had lived in Iran so much of his life.

I think Bush settled for Maliki simply because there was no one else.

 

Definitely there was that plan. Democrats keep pleading the Baathists got a lousy deal. Well they lost the war. Actually it was the leaders all over Iraq that insisted on Debathafacation. It puzzles me how one can defeat the Baathists yet leave them runnion the show,. Seems Democrats did not bother to study the excellent book on this topic by Paul Bremer who installed the program. Can't recall the name of the invasion yet? I will help you. Iraqi Freedom is the name. Could not pick a better name when you wish to free them.

Your idea is it still took Saddam to rule Iraq is the pipe dream of some Democrats.

 

You credit Bush for Maliki. That is error one. Democrats have lost the entire concept of the Iraq war. They do not recall what happened.

 

Iraqi Freedom? Its a damned jingle.

 

Yes.. Bush coached Maliki via skype.

1. Bush Backs Embattled Al-Maliki in Speech to VFW, Says Only ...
   
   President Bush publicly ... Bush Backs Embattled Al-Maliki ... who this week said the Iraqi parliament should choose another leader. Al-Maliki also ...
   

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/0...h-to-vfw-says-only-iraqis-can-decide-who.html

1. Bush and Maliki Put on a Show of Unity - TIME
   
   
   Bush and Maliki Put on ... between President Bush and Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-MalikiWednesday night in Jordan ... have told Maliki to choose him or ...
   

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1564304,00.html

 

Coaching is not installing.

 

From first to last, it was the plan. Why do so many Democrats bellyache over the Baath party? Because they liked what Saddam did to Iraq.

 

You are not making any sense at all.

 

The codswallop sold by Democrats was Saddam had Iraq well under control and in fact was an excellent choice to lead Iraq. I of course dispute those claims.

 

Bibi wanted regime change in Iraq.. Iraq was not a threat to its neighbors.. The invasion was absolutely without justification.

Never mind that it was also one of the biggest blunders in US foreign policy in the past 50 years.

 

Of course you dispute without having or presenting any evidence. Doesn't lend much credence to your opinion. Here is a simple question for you. is the Middle East more stable now or was it more stable before Bush invaded Iraq?

 

Well Margot not sure it isn't a toss up between the blunder in Iraq or the blunder in Vietnam.

 

Point taken.... and critical thinking skills seem to have gone the way of the Dodo..

 

Painting the homeless as felons is absolutely NOT acceptable.

Time and again it has been pointed out that there are people living on the streets for a wide variety of reasons.

 

Yes.

Maliki was the Iraqi point man for deBaathification. He was VERY happy in attacking Sunnis in any position of leadership - or for living in the "wrong" cities.

As for choices, their election ended in what was a very close 4-way division with Maliki coming in 3rd or 4th.

In general, I would say that having the one who got the most votes would be an option of choice if we actually believe in democracy.

But, we see democracy as only one option.

And, if anyone wants to argue that point, then bring it!

 

Read the New Testament and you will see that Jesus would be the last person on earth to ever be a Republican.

 

This is total nonsense. Under Saddam, anyone in a significant position pretty much had to be Baath party, regardless of what they believed.

Saying these civil servants lost the war is just plain STUPID. These were the people who made the national utilities work, banking work, etc., etc.

Even the Bush folks in Iraq recognized that YOU are WRONG! They recognized that the entire "deBaathification" program was a gigantic mistake. It was predicated on the notion that there was some other party that included people who were experts in all these fields - which, again, was just plain wrong. It was also predicated on the idea that the military would never be ready to fight for a new nation of Iraq - that it represented a threat. Thus they, too, were removed, leaving Iraq with no military leadership, while a significant percent of Sunnis including military leadership had just been robbed of all means of livelihood by the USA. America paid dearly for that blunder.

And, if you want to learn what I thought, you better ask. Because your guesses are not just wrong - they are ridiculous fantasy.

 

Yes a religion that allowed them to conquer kill rape plunder enslave much of the world. Christianity changed all that! Do you understand?

 

actually true, Jesus and Luther taught the 10 Comandments to billions. Do you understand?

 

you forgo to tell us what original sin has to do with our subject? I ignored the price of tea in China too. Do you understand?

 

nobody was talking about how you get out of hell. Do you have any idea what your subject is??

 

so??? its seems you are talking at random and have no subject in mind and certainly no logical reaction to OP.