Iraqi leaders to blame for army's collapse: U.S.

Now we understand why some countries need a strong arm man like Sadam as a ruler.

Iraqi leaders to blame for army's collapse: U.S.

So it was all the Iraqi leaders fault and had nothing to do with anything the US did or didn't do?

Why not admit it?

The US screwed up.

They started this "war" based on the blatant lies of Bush, Cheney et al.

And after reducing several cities to rubble and killing untold thousands, they just dropped it and ran home.

They could at least have finished the job.

Obama declared it was finished therefore it was. The great decision maker of recent times made yet another.

Obama declared it was finished therefore it was. The great decision maker of recent times made yet another.

MarkG -- huh? You must be conveniently forgetting it was George W. Bush who famously proclaimed "Mission Accomplished" and that the war in Iraq was over. Bertie has it absolutely correct. Bush opened a can of worms because of his personal hatred of Sadam Hussein and now it should be no surprise that this has happened.

@Jerseyboy- Didn't Bush refer to the Sadam guy capture and his regime. He did not suggest time to withdrawal. If you recall the plan was to stabilize Iraq. Bush left office before that. Obama withdrew.

I will agree it was a can of worms and I will also support the people were celebrating the end of the Hussein rein. Problem is they seem to need strong leaders otherwise they will follow strong opposition.

This is the mess that the US made.

After over a decade of sanctions and periodic bombings, the US invaded this already beaten down country on false grounds. Remember what WMD stood for? What we are seeing now should surprise no one.

The sectarian Nouri al Maliki was enthroned by the Bush administration, not the current one.

They started this "war" based on the blatant lies of Bush, Cheney et al.

Don't forget Hillary Clinton. She didn't trust Bush so she sought independent advice from her husbands old national security people -who agreed with Bush. And as opposed to Bush or Cheney, she actually voted to authorize the war.

Obama declared it was finished therefore it was.

Very true. Obama thinks wars end whenever it is most beneficial for the next election cycle. He always forgets that the enemy always has a say in the matter as well. But this isn't surprising for a guy who thinks his mere election can "heal the planet".

@Jersey

You must be conveniently forgetting it was George W. Bush who famously proclaimed "Mission Accomplished" and that the war in Iraq was over.

Well I do not recall Bush picking up and leaving Iraq the minute after his plane touched down on that aircraft carrier. It was Obama that left the Iraqi's high and dry. He is going to do the same thing to Afghanistan as well. Even the "good war" will not keep Obama from sprinting towards the exits.

No, you can't just blame Bush, either. William J. Clinton also had his fingers in the messy pie in '98.

"

It was Obama that left the Iraqi's high and dry.

Wolfpack -- nonsense. The Iraq war should never have started to begin with, and lasted longer than any other in U.S. history. And Obama poured billions into training and equipping the Iraqis before pulling out. Which he was forced to do, since the Iraqi government refused to extend the Status of Forces Agreement. Blame Obama if you want for being too timid in his response to Syria, which has now spread to Iraq if you want possibly. But the Iraqi's themselves, especially the Shite-led government and the soldiers who are surrendering en masse for this problem. Why the hell should the U.S. be getting invloved in a fight that Iraq's own soldiers won't fight?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5Hn1GXBrG4

Some perspective and explanation on this whole facade in Iraq.

jerseyboy

lasted longer than any other in U.S. history

Not to pick at your comment or anything but I think the Vietnam war was just a smidge longer.

Iraq turns to be a battleground between Sunni and Shiite. There are bigger hands behind the scene including Iran, Saudi, the Gulf states,...that pull the strings in the name of Islam. Bush unsuccessfully intended to share power among all sects in Iraq including the Kurd. Obama premature packed the tent and the worst leadership of Shiite Nuri Al Maliki contribute to this mess. Now, Iran steps in and Obama considers sending the drones? Using the band aid to patch up a cancer that you abandoned will not help at all. Out, in...it seems Obama has no clue as Maliki. What a shame.

@bertie

So it was all the Iraqi leaders fault and had nothing to do with anything the US did or didn't do?

It was both Maliki and Obama's fault. More so of Maliki than Obama, but Maliki was a complete incompetent that was an ideological driven Shiite. He was more of a Saddam like person in reverse to an extent. He didn't trust many of his Sunni generals that were trained and experience and that also worked well together with American forces that most hated Al Qaeda and had a very good relationship with the previous admin. But Maliki was MORE concerned about his political standing and position in that country and Obama wanted out. The country wasn't properly stabilized and because Maliki always had this thing in his head that the Sunnis are up to no good, he fires the majority of his top generals and puts in incompetent loyalist Shiite people with hardly any experience, many with little military training to hold up Iraq and that was the start of the end of that country. Obama had his work cut out for him after Bush left, all he had to do was maintain a small force of troops, solidify the SOFA agreement, fully finish and complete the training of the Iraq forces and then withdraw, but maintain a small force to oversee the country until the threat of Al Qaeda is permanently diminished, but Obama didn't do that and for HIS part this is the result.

Why not admit it? The US screwed up.

Obama will never admit to it. He's never admitted to anything that he screwed, but wasn't it over a year ago when Obama said to Romney during the debate that Al Qaeda is on the run and NOT a threat. But I keep forgetting, Obama is a scholar and Romney is just a successful experienced politician and Business man with a long resume, of course he's not nearly as smart as our constitutional law prof.

They started this "war" based on the blatant lies of Bush, Cheney et al.

You forgot, to Blame also the Israelis, the Saudis, the Egyptians, the Russians, the Turks, the French and the Brits, they all provided the intel and all of them came to the same findings.

And after reducing several cities to rubble and killing untold thousands, they just dropped it and ran home.

Because for Obama, it was always political. He never cared about the out come the sectarian violence or the Iraqis or the troops.

They could at least have finished the job.

Tell Obama and Maliki that!

@Bass, Great post! I forgot that also the Israelis, Saudis, Egyptians, Russians, Turks, French and UK. And it was and still is political. Clearly you see it on these comments.

Maybe you forget Bass, Al Qaeda was on the run in 2012 campaign. Obama lied as we see today. Supporting the Arab Spring proved disastrous. If not for Biden I would REALLY want him out of office. Week after week this administrations problems arise. The latest Lois Lerner's lost emails....

@dylan - Vietnam was a conflict, it was never a war declared by Congress. U.S. forces were initially introduced into Vietnam as "military advisors", during the French pull-out in 1954-55. The number of "advisors" increased under President Kennedy and escalated dramatically under President Johnson. Congress passed the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148) in an effort to limit the ability of a president to commit U.S. forces overseas.

Vietnam was a conflict, it was never a war declared by Congress. U.S. forces were initially introduced into Vietnam as "military advisors", during the French pull-out in 1954-55. The number of "advisors" increased under President Kennedy and escalated dramatically under President Johnson

@wanderlust,

thank you for reminding us that spin has no conscience whatsoever

@Jerseyboy

You bring up a good point. I think nearly people who know much about the history of Iraq would agree with you...What a mess from the 2003 invasion...what a mess. Of course, sadly, there are those who think the 2003- Iraq War (and even the Vietnam war) were good things which helped the people so in those respctive countries..

So it was all the Iraqi leaders fault and had nothing to do with anything the US did or didn't do? Why not admit it? The US screwed up.

Nope. Before the US left the Iraq military had high morale and excellent training being provided by the US military. Promotions and high ranking positions in the Iraq military were being given based off of merit. Once the US left, this includes the training, Maliki immediately started influencing the military chain of command by having those in higher ranks and senior officers based off of their loyalty to Maliki rather than based off of their merit. Training quality began to immediately suffer because Maliki refused to have US trainers and advisers stationed in Iraq, combined with the poor training and promotions and senior officer positions being given out based off of loyalty the morale started to just nose dive in the lower ranks. When you have officers who are officers not because of their ability it is not surprising why the Iraq military would easily fold when faced with a threat.

What exactly did the US do or not do that would cause the quality of the Iraq military to degrade in quality after we left?

And after reducing several cities to rubble and killing untold thousands, they just dropped it and ran home. They could at least have finished the job.

OH COME ON! The US wanted to keep troops in the US to help continue train and advise the Iraq military. Maliki wanted none of it, he wanted them all gone which is why Iraq never came to an agreement post 2011. Plus you are going to tell me before 2011 that you were not calling for a full withdrawal of American forces from Iraq or that you didn't think the US military pulling out in 2011 was a good thing. You are going to tell me that you agreed with President Bush's Surge when he announced it and that you didn't agree with those who thought it was absurd?

CNN is reporting that there are

500,000 - 1,000,000 Iraqi Security Forces vs 2000 ISIS militants

Outrageous!

Sam, and what we are seeing here is maybe a mirror of the future of Afghanistan.

Wow, I just love all these Arm Chair Generals. The war DID happen, SOMEBODY INVADED their neighbor's country, for THEIR oil, REMEMBER?!

Sure, WA4TKG, Iraq invaded Kuwait for their oil, but what has that to do with the price of fish?

As predicted years ago by many of us liberals, this is the final chapter in the bush failure of invading Iraq based on lies. He told the US there were terrorists in Iraq when their were none and now after the failed invasion the terrorists are taking over iraq. Bush is the perfect reverse president, everything he touched failed. Trillions wasted, 100,000s dead for what? To give the country to the enemies of the USA.

We knew this was going to happen ten years ago. We predicted this while the typical fox news rah rah crowd shouted about shock and awe. You guys shocked and in awe now?

Never vote republican, this is what you get when you do. Massive complete total failure.

John Galt: William J. Clinton also had his fingers in the messy pie in '98.

So it's Bill Clinton's fault.

Wolfpack: Don't forget Hillary Clinton.

So it's Hillary Clinton's fault.

Bass4funk: It was Obama's fault.

So it's Obama's fault.

Kabuki Lover: don't really get the overarching NATO strategy here.

So it's NATO's fault.

BertieWooster: They started this "war" based on the blatant lies of Cheney et al.

So it's was Cheney's fault.

JerseyBoy: George W. Bush who famously proclaimed "Mission Accomplished"

So it's Bush's fault.

Missing from the list: Radical Islamists who are actually doing the killing.

“Citizens who are able to bear arms and fight terrorists, defending their country and their people and their holy places, should volunteer and join the security forces to achieve this holy purpose'

Iraq has many fault lines and its spiral into this was inevitable after the removal of Saddam and the occupation. The fault lines are economic, ethnic and most poisonous of all, religious. The repetition of 'holy' here tells us that this country is doomed to failure.

" And despite billions spent on training Iraqi security forces, U.S. officials said they were disappointed to see them just melt away in the face of ISIL’s onslaught. "

Billions down the drain. And now they are going to throw more good mony after bad money.

Instead stopping to support both Sunni and Shia fanatics and instead concentrating on protecting secularism and modernity from the religious throwbacks.

"U.S. officials said they were disappointed to see them just melt away in the face of ISIL’s onslaught."

Exactly the same as Vietnam, 1973-1975. Same strategy producing the same failure.

Didn't the morons who launched this misadventure in 2003 learn anything about the Vietnam debacle? He who forgets history is condemned to repeat it. Indeed, Mr. Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz!

Readers, please keep the discussion focused on the current situation in Iraq

Jefflee:

" Didn't the morons who launched this misadventure in 2003 learn anything about the Vietnam debacle? He who forgets history is condemned to repeat it. Indeed, Mr. Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz! "

I agree that Bush, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were stupid in destroying Saddams secular dictatorship. But it is unfair to blame the current disaster on them. Remember, total removal of the troops from Iraq in 2010 was Obamas doing, and he and Joe Biden claimed credit for that brilliant move. Remember, BIden called the widrawal "one of Obamas greatest achievements".

So the blame for the current situation is squarely on Barack Hussein Obama and his pals. Period.

If GWB was still in charge, he would still have troops there and still be throwing money down that particular hole. But we would not have the ISIS Caliphate that is now forming in Iraq and Iran.

So choose who you blame for what. You can not blame your favourite villain for everything forever.

@zurc

As predicted years ago by many of us liberals, this is the final chapter in the bush failure of invading Iraq based on lies.

So Zurc, please tell us about the lies the Obama admin. Has been feeding to the public that Al Qaeda is on the run, dis functional and fractured. Tell us please about the lies he spewed that NOW Iraq is now stable and we and the Iraqis don't have anything to worry about. Gotcha!

He told the US there were terrorists in Iraq when their were none and now after the failed invasion the terrorists are taking over iraq. Bush is the perfect reverse president, everything he touched failed. Trillions wasted, 100,000s dead for what? To give the country to the enemies of the USA.

The U.S. Already had enemies before Bush invaded that country. If NOT, please tell us why the Iranians took our people hostage and why the USS Cole was bombed and the Kenyan Embassy was bombed if we had no prior enemies. How could have Clinton miss the opportunity to kill OBL, so you need to go way back even before Bush, if you want to make that point.

We knew this was going to happen ten years ago.

As well as many Generals and military analysts knew what would happen if you cut and run and you don't secure the country.

We predicted this while the typical fox news rah rah crowd shouted about shock and awe. You guys shocked and in awe now?

I'm more shocked that you still think that Obama handled this well, quite the contrary. So now it's Fox's fault that most people preferred to watch it over listening to Olbermann's whiny diatribe about Republicans? Why is it, you never want to admit that Obama majorly screwed up.

Never vote republican, this is what you get when you do. Massive complete total failure.

Put if you vote Democrat, the entire country, plus our allies and enemies will hate us and the country will be in ruins.

Correction:

of course I meant to write "ISIS Caliphate that is now forming in Iraq and Syria."

Iran is of course not part of that -- in fact we can shortly expect Iran to support the Maliki government against ISIS.

MarkG, wolfpack, sorry guys, the time for selective conservative amnesia is long gone.

Bush and co started this pointless war, threw billions of good money after bad, didn't equip the troops properly (remember the thin-skinned humvees and troops scavenging local towns for bits of metal to up-armor their vehicles?), then bush (not Obama) signed the bill to start the withdrawal. 

Also, don't forget which country (US) and GOP conservative 'icon' (Reagan) supplied the poison gas/WMD to Saddam through which special envoy (Don Rumsfeld - GOP) in the early 80s, and then invaded Saddam's country 20 years later to find it.

Also, be careful not to forget which president's administration (bush's) would have known the shelf life of that poison gas (early 90s) since Reagan's government would have contracted out the manufacture of the gas and would of course have records showing when the effectiveness of that US-made WMD expired (early 90s, around the time of Gulf War 1.)

Following that, be sure not to forget that in 1993, bush, rumsfeld and co. actually invaded a country to look for the US-made poison gas that they must have known was not dangerous.

So, yes, you are right: they were basically invading a country to look for their own poison gas/WMD.

Of course, you will also be well aware the same bush administration declared 'mission accomplished' before it ever was, never found the WMDs ("smuggled out to Syria, or was 'north, south, east, west of Tikrit' or something), while the war created 4.25 million Iraqi refugees (both in and outside their borders), killed who knows how many thousands of people, dragged America's reputation through the mud, created millions more enemies of America, emboldened and strengthened Iran and destroyed their worst enemy (Iraq) for them on the US taxpayer's dime, sucked more than a trillion $ out of your economy, ratcheted up US debt to levels never before seen, gave China even more control over America through that same debt burden, led to the deaths of  5,000 of your countrymen and women, and injured and maimed thousands more, creating a long term financial drain of having to pay for the lifetime healthcare of those same veterans.

And then, as a parting 'sayonara' gift to their country and the world, the fiscal incompetence of the same bush administration tanked the global economy.

So, congratulations, your sticking up for what is a catastrophic failure is well and truly noted.

But, yeah, you're right - blame Obama.

No.  

Obama - wisely - opposed all of it, and then had the whole disaster chucked in his face when the abysmal failure that was the bush administration failed to finish the job. 

The US made a bed it refuses to sleep in... It really is that simple...and it was a bed long in the making..even before the famed Rumsfeld/ Saddam handshake. Many of the decisions made throughout the course of Anglo-American Imperialist adventurism are now coming to home to roost. And not just in Iraq either...

"But it is unfair to blame the current disaster on them."

The program of training and equipping the Iraqi military to defend their own country was launched during the Bush administration. Bush and his people assured us on numerous times at the time that the plan was proceeding according to plan and that the Iraqis were ready. Some reporters, mainly liberal types like the Guardian, pointed to serious problems with morale, competence and security within the Iraqi military.

The Bush administration and other conservatives dismissed the critical, though well researched reports, and carried on, as if the sun shone out of their....um....you know. Well, now we all know who was right and who was wrong.

"Now we understand why some countries need a strong arm man like Sadam as a ruler."

Yes, the Iraqis needed to be ruled by a dictator, the Iranians needed Iraqi missiles raining down on their cities, the Kurds needed to be gassed, and the Kuwaitis needed to be annexed by Iraq, among other bad stuff..

U.S. could've stayed, but people complained.

Here is an idea, why dont we send bush to become the dictator in Iraq. He is just painting pictures of his feet now-a-days, doing nothing really important. He created this mess so let him run it. I am sure he can just declare again "mission accomplished" and all will be good.

Put if you vote Democrat, the entire country, plus our allies and enemies will hate us and the country will be in ruins.

Um, you are describing 2008. We are in 2014. The US economy has recovered from the great bush depression. Stocks markets at all time highs. We have not had another disaster war started. Come on people, out of the bubble. Reality is waiting for you.

'Yes, the Iraqis needed to be ruled by a dictator, the Iranians needed Iraqi missiles raining down on their cities, the Kurds needed to be gassed, and the Kuwaitis needed to be annexed by Iraq, among other bad stuff'

He was backed by the US and others through the atrocities you mention. They still decided to leave him there after a million dead in the war with Iran ( supported by western powers ) an invasion of Kuwait and massacres of Kurds and Marsh Arabs ( I wonder where those chemical weapons came from ). The US and others are complicit in some of Saddam's crimes and his ill-thought out removal has led to what we see now. Better for all concerned if Iraq is left alone.

OK now. Bush invaded! Certainly not with todays outcome intended. If you disagree with that you an idiot. Enough already. Better discussion would be how to fix it. Partisan arguments are futile!

Should US return to Iraq? I say no. Should airstrikes against the advancing rebels take place? I say yes. Will this create negative world opinion against USA? Likely. Should the US withdraw from the ME region? I wish.

Democrat or Republican, US politicians are generally the same. USA has massive debt and growing and those who support that are unpatriotic. Those who oppose reduction are unAmerican!

@SuperLib

So it's Hillary Clinton's fault

Not entirely but her vote for the war based on her independent analysis of the situation in Iraq does not allow her to dodge responsibility.

As for Obama it is ludicrous for him to lay the entire blame at the feet of the Iraqi government. He bailed on Iraq as quickly as he could and refused to support them since his unilateral declaration of victory.

@SuperLib

So it's Hillary Clinton's fault

Not entirely but her vote for the war based on her independent analysis of the situation in Iraq does not allow her to dodge responsibility.

As for Obama it is ludicrous for him to lay the entire blame at the feet of the Iraqi government. He bailed on Iraq as quickly as he could and refused to support them since his unilateral declaration of victory.

JeffLee:

" The Bush administration and other conservatives dismissed the critical, though well researched reports, and carried on, as if the sun shone out of their....um....you know. Well, now we all know who was right and who was wrong. "

Yes, the Bush administration was wrong. No argument there. But in case you missed it, the Bush administration was replaced by the Obama administration almost 8 years ago, the withdrawal of troops came under Obama administration, and it was the Obama adminstration which assured us in 2010 that Iraq is just fine and well, and that the situation in Iraq is one of "greatest accomplishments" of the Obama administration.

So stop blanking out the Obama administration of the picture. How many more decades will you continue every ailment in the world and then some on the Bush administration? This is getting seriously ridiculous.

Two questions that seem to be lost in the bickering here:

What possibly could America have done to prevent this situation?

Aside from the "pottery barn" rule (which could well be considered expired upon the Iraqi government's expulsion of the American military), what responsibility remains for America in Iraq?

Those who bemoan the withdrawal of American troops might add some suggestions as to what they would have been useful for: Training? (Done.) Fighting alongside Iraqi troops? (Slippery slope.) Assuming control of the civil war? (Most probable.) The result would have been America fighting on behalf of one side which intensely disliked them against another which hated them with a vengeance. Perhaps those who propose this would be comfortable with another surge to 100,000 with no end in sight. Please - if you hold such a position, please try to be more specific.

As for the second point, America's invasion of Iraq had only one favorable outcome: that Middle East factions at war since time immemorable would figure out a way to work together. Amazingly, this didn't pan out. Too bad, but welcome to the Imperial Club (say everyone from the Assyrians to the Ottomans to the British and French). Instead of trying to put a Humpty Dumpty never cohesive in the first place back together, America needs to focus on its interests - which means a lot of things, but primarily not getting caught in a Middle Eastern war.

This is all pretty simple, really. Too bad that the Neocons still don't get it, even after all of this time.

What possibly could America have done to prevent this situation?

Laguna, your questions, along with your comments are really first-rate. (Yet another regret for only one thumbs-up to give.)

Consider this, when tensions rose between the Czechs and Slovaks, they split the former Czechoslovakia up into two new nations. The same thing happened with the former Yugoslavia, after a pretty brutal transition -- though FAR less brutal than Iraq's has been.

Perhaps the logical divisions with local autonomy seemed like basic common sense to the West because neither the Czech situation, nor Yugoslavia's, had much of anything to do with oil.

If you want to read something really funny -- if you laugh at sardonic stuff -- go back and read the Republicans' opposition to Clinton's proposal to use a relative handful of American troops as peace-keepers in Bosnia. Read all the things they were afraid of, and then look how they ran unquestioningly into Iraq -- where the same dangers were exponentially worse.

Thanks, Habits. A further observance: al-Maliki did America a very large favor by facilitating rejection of the SOF agreement. Neither side was enthusiastic about it; the Sunnis saw it as a way for the Americans to perpetuate their disenfranchisment, while the Shia saw it as an obstacle to exactly what the Sunnis feared.

al-Maliki's rejection of the proposed SOF agreement was exactly what Obama needed to draw a big, fat line between the previous administration and his. Obama's too smart to want America to own this crock - and now it doesn't.

Laguna:

" This is all pretty simple, really. Too bad that the Neocons still don't get it, even after all of this time. "

Yes. And just as bad that the liberals don´t get it either, even after being in power for 7 years now.

So can you already get off the party political talking points?

Not "political talking points," unfortunately, WilliB - just pushback against very recent articles from Neocon-related journals such as the WSJ and politicians such as McCain. There are policies being proposed now for a renewed, robust American intervention in Iraq. My posts above simply list what I see as American failures and why. If you have any concrete ideas to add, I would like to hear them.

@LagunaJUN. 14, 2014 - 09:52PM JS

Top drawer post. Any poster still flogging a rotting dead horse needs to read it carefully.

@Sushi

Bush and co started this pointless war, threw billions of good money after bad, didn't equip the troops properly (remember the thin-skinned humvees and troops scavenging local towns for bits of metal to up-armor their vehicles?), then bush (not Obama) signed the bill to start the withdrawal.

But you forget, after that complaint, adjustments were made, if you are going to rant, then please tell the entire story. Also, remember the Bush admin. set up the SOFA agreement for Obama and his admin, so his work was cut out and all he had to do was follow up on it, which he did not and now you see these fruits are a coming to fruition.

Also, don't forget which country (US) and GOP conservative 'icon' (Reagan) supplied the poison gas/WMD to Saddam through which special envoy (Don Rumsfeld - GOP) in the early 80s, and then invaded Saddam's country 20 years later to find it.

So was the U.S. supposed to supply Iran?? The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The Bush admin. never denied that they were cozy with Saddam, it's NOT a secret and it's NOT HOT off the press NEW news. Anything and anyone that could slow or occupy Iran and hated Iran just as much as we did was Saddam, which at the time seemed the best solution.

Also, be careful not to forget which president's administration (bush's) would have known the shelf life of that poison gas (early 90s) since Reagan's government would have contracted out the manufacture of the gas and would of course have records showing when the effectiveness of that US-made WMD expired (early 90s, around the time of Gulf War 1.)

Why is it, you don't mention how brutal of a dictator Saddam was, killing his own people, gassing them to death, brutalizing and torturing the Shiites and Kurds mostly, again, you are making this a political, let's go back to the past, because you guys have absolutely nothing else to run on. The beauty of it all is, people are finally waking up and realizing this.

Following that, be sure not to forget that in 1993, bush, rumsfeld and co. actually invaded a country to look for the US-made poison gas that they must have known was not dangerous.

Stay away from msnbc, Move on and the Daily Kos, please.

So, yes, you are right: they were basically invading a country to look for their own poison gas/WMD.

And your fact based proof of that is.....

Of course, you will also be well aware the same bush administration declared 'mission accomplished' before it ever was, never found the WMDs ("smuggled out to Syria, or was 'north, south, east, west of Tikrit' or something), while the war created 4.25 million Iraqi refugees (both in and outside their borders), killed who knows how many thousands of people, dragged America's reputation through the mud, created millions more enemies of America, emboldened and strengthened Iran and destroyed their worst enemy (Iraq) for them on the US taxpayer's dime, sucked more than a trillion $ out of your economy, ratcheted up US debt to levels never before seen, gave China even more control over America through that same debt burden, led to the deaths of 5,000 of your countrymen and women, and injured and maimed thousands more, creating a long term financial drain of having to pay for the lifetime healthcare of those same veterans.

Someone remind me again how many billions of dollars the allied forces spent in "stabilizing" Iraq and how many lives were lost?

Saddam managed to keep the country under control, so did Khadafi, and Bashir Asad, as well as the Iranian leaders as ruthless as they may seem. But there was control, not chaos. After all, is not that what the NWO promotes, order out of chaos?

What a wonderful job Bush Jr. did, huh?

SushiSake:

" Obama - wisely - opposed all of it, and then had the whole disaster chucked in his face when the abysmal failure that was the bush administration failed to finish the job. "

The contortions that some American party fanatics go through to absolve the Obama adminstration from this are almost funny.

Fact: In 2010, Obama bragged about Iraq being one of his "greatest accomplishments". He did NOT say that Iraq is a mess from which which the US has to extract itself. No, he said Iraq is stable, and a great success for him. Selective memory?

Fact: Where do you think ISIS gets their weapons from? ISIS is simply another name for the SAME "vetted rebels" that Obama is supplying with weapons in Syria, for their glorious fight against Assads secular regime. And guess what? In the "liberated" areas of Syria, ISIS has already established its Shariah Caliphate. And Obama is aiding these people with weapns AS WE SPEAK.

Without Obamas help, ISIS would arguable not be able to pull of their current success in Iraq. Obama is HELPING these nutcases!

How in the world do you manage to ignore all that, and STILL blame GWB for this?

@sushi

Ok, so now let's look at his replacement. "Barack Hussein Obama" didn't maintain NOT only the SOFA agreement between Iraq and Afghanistan, he just bolted out, NEVER listening to his advisors or generals that leaving the country in a bad faltering situation could most likely lead to serious consequences if the military and the police from either countries are not fully trained and NOW look at the result of what is unfolding. We are close, very close to seeing the possible birth of a Radical Jihadist state, a group that is more violent, unwavering and willing to die for their Jihadist cause. Obama was the one that advocated the real war was in Afghanistan and to relocate and use all of our efforts to get OBL and to dismantle and kill the Taliban to his credit he did, but they are coming back, stronger then ever and why is that? Obama has a very difficult time listening to anybody, including the people that have the most experience when it comes to military conflict, his generals. Obama with his apologetic tour thinking that the Muslims would embrace us and forgive us for him NOT being Bush, bowing to the Saudi prince and didn't lift a finger to help Egypt and their Arab Spring, Syria, not following through his red line ultimatum. Let's not forget Obama added to Bush's debt which is amounting to 17 Trillion, he ordered the surge in Afghanistan and as Bob Gates explained that Obama never believed in his own foreign policy, but didn't want to come off as weak to his enemies sent men and women in harms way and for what? To make a political point? From Syria, to China and Russia and look what has happened in this year along. As for the VA, Obama said, changes were underway and the Vets are still waiting and waiting. And now look at Iraq, the ISIS group has taken over 40% of Iraq, this is purely Maliki and Obama's fault, these men were too busy worrying about their political careers than to help and assist the Iraqis and help them to maintain their country and that never happened, now both terrorist groups are strengthened and rejuvenated and will now be virtually impossible to stop now.

And then, as a parting 'sayonara' gift to their country and the world, the fiscal incompetence of the same bush administration tanked the global economy.

And Obama made it 10 times worse. If you ever get a chance, visit California and you'll understand. Record debt, high unemployment and why, because Obama didn't make jobs in his first 4 years in office.

So, congratulations, your sticking up for what is a catastrophic failure is well and truly noted.

Not only his Obama worse, but he's more inept than we expected, doesn't listen to his men or his military and what is the result of that? Deserting soldiers are leaving as fast you can say "Fast!"

But, yeah, you're right - blame Obama. No.

He does. Obama has the ABSOLUTE worst policy than ANY president since the U.S. has been created.

Obama - wisely - opposed all of it, and then had the whole disaster chucked in his face when the abysmal failure that was the bush administration failed to finish the job.

No, Obama wanted to play the Sainted Anointed know everything, but little of any foreign accomplishments.

Syria-Bashar still in power and at this point, you really want that, red ling crossed, did nothing.

Iran-still pursuing their efforts to complete a nuclear bomb, red line crossed, did nothing.

Russia-Reset what? Putin takes Crimea, didn't even try to stop him and did nothing.

Iraq-ISIS and Al Qaeda are on the verge of completely overtaking the country, will do nothing.

Obama's foreign policy in a nutshell. Simply a joke and the ONLY thing Obama cares about is, Obama.

Sushi, how about trying to be fair and factual instead of being a one-sided partisan? Is it so hard to admit that Obama has made mistakes? People like you and most Dems and libs just refuse to acknowledge ANY mistakes this president has made? By the way, constantly blaming Bush and ranting about the past will NOT lift Obama in the polls, help his, congress or the Democrats unpopularity change with the people, weaving dodging, thinking the American people are stupid just makes all you guys look pathetic. Bush made his share of mistakes, all presidents do, but for some reason, Obama gets a pass?? Because he's the first Black president and it just wouldn't look good to blame his failed policies because of his skin color? You guys are losing everything and the Senate is next. I just want to know, if you guys think sticking up for this guy and his lies and false promises was worth it?

@WilliB

The contortions that some American party fanatics go through to absolve the Obama adminstration from this are almost funny.

You think that's funny you should hear some of the fairy tales they talk about on Fox comedy news to blame the Obama Administration for everything.

So basically what you are saying is some weapons being turned over to extremest in Syria, weapons pushed by the GOP, and now those weapons are being used by extremists, because they probably killed the rebel who originally had it, somehow is Obama's fault. Do you also blame Obama for the 190,000 AK47s that mysteriously went missing in Iraq back in 2007 as being Obama's fault too? It's a trick question, so think and do a little math before you answer.

If I had gotten us out of a Decade war, I'd be bragging about it too, especially since it was a campaign promise. And why should he go and poo poo the previous president over this? It was already a fact back then as it is now that that war was a mess. The president didn't need to bring this to anybodies attention. It was already out there.

@bass4funk

Ok, so now let's look at his replacement. "Barack Hussein Obama" didn't maintain NOT only the SOFA agreement between Iraq and Afghanistan, he just bolted out

It sounds like you were okay with the little clause that American military could be subject to Iraqi courts and military justice. I can see where a non American could miss that or accept that as part of an agreement, and if you are an American then you MUST be conservative, because with all the other things conservatives have had to say over these years, your priorities are out of whack.

And Obama made it 10 times worse. If you ever get a chance, visit California and you'll understand. Record debt, high unemployment and why, because Obama didn't make jobs in his first 4 years in office.

Obviously you DON'T live in California... I do and in this last fiscal year we had a surplus. Since the Obama Administration, my pay has gone from 65K to 135k and it will go up more next year. Picked up a house here, another house in the PI, a Chevy Volt and Ford Focus electric and my stocks are doing well. Also in the IT field, which I'm in I am constantly being told by recruiter they cannot find enough people to fill positions. I blame the GOP for blocking Obama's education reform bills. I also blame Jerry Brown for sucking the funds our of our education system which caused tuition to go up even more. I also blame conservatives like you for introducing stupidity into the conversation that has hurt our chances to grow faster. I'm not blaming all conservatives because I do have some conservative friends that have more common sense... just conservatives like you.

Not only his Obama worse, but he's more inept than we expected, doesn't listen to his men or his military and what is the result of that? Deserting soldiers are leaving as fast you can say "Fast!"

Who's soldiers? Our soldiers?? I only know of one possible soldier which has yet to be determined. If you are talking about Iraqi soldiers... well those are Iraqi soldiers, not American soldiers... learn the difference.

No, Obama wanted to play the Sainted Anointed know everything, but little of any foreign accomplishments.

Yeah kind of like Bush and Cheney right? No Obama just used common sense, something the Bush Administration lacked. And the worst president ever??? Really? Ever??? You'd make a good pundit on Fox comedy news. I hear they have great skits and you'd be perfect.

Here's an idea, if the GOP is successful in getting us back into Iraq, perhaps you can enlist and go over there and make sure every thing goes smoothly. And don't let the little bit of knowledge that you would now be on the side of Iran in the conflict stand in your way. And if you don't understand why that would be the case, then all I can say is... WOW...

Also proof reading your posts before you hit submit can go a long way...

@ optikool -- glad to see a sane voice.

Fact: Where do you think ISIS gets their weapons from? ISIS is simply another name for the SAME "vetted rebels" that Obama is supplying with weapons in Syria

From what I've been reading, ISIS has gotten a lot of funding from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. ISIS has allied itself with a lot of the former Baathists who were loyal to Saddam Hussein. And so here we have Kuwait funding loyalists to the guy who attacked them. It does not appear that the folks who live in the area are doing much better than the U.S. has. Bottom line is the whole area runs on a low level of sanity, and anyone who helps distance the United States from it isn't doing to badly.

Other fact: Any arms sold to any party over there today will soon be used against someone else tomorrow. It is better than a 90% chance that any good intentions will go awry. Folks like WilliB have nothing to offer in the discussion but a consistent hatred of Islam and the billion-plus people who follow it. (The other poster you referred to is a complete joke.)

Maybe the US should have left Saddam alone.

@opti

It sounds like you were okay with the little clause that American military could be subject to Iraqi courts and military justice. I can see where a non American could miss that or accept that as part of an agreement, and if you are an American then you MUST be conservative, because with all the other things conservatives have had to say over these years, your priorities are out of whack.

Sorry, I'm quite alright, I don't know what that has to do with anything. But if you are talking about Iraqi justice, once they have their courts properly up and running, fine with me, but that is not what is happening and especially in the past. Now that Maliki is president the courts have been more like reprisal and Shiite revenge courts. So until they can iron out their religious strife and unify into a single cohesive court system that is based on rule and law and not revenge, I wouldn't object to it, depending on the circumstances. I'm not in the military. There is a reason why they have their own justice system.

Obviously you DON'T live in California... I do and in this last fiscal year we had a surplus. Since the Obama Administration, my pay has gone from 65K to 135k and it will go up more next year. Picked up a house here, another house in the PI, a Chevy Volt and Ford Focus electric and my stocks are doing well. Also in the IT field, which I'm in I am constantly being told by recruiter they cannot find enough people to fill positions.

First of all, I AM from California, born and bred. It is true in the largest state for the WEALTHY income levels are slowly going up, but so is housing, but so too, is the poverty in California and minorities are suffering the most, in particular Blacks and Hispanics have been doing a lot worse under Obama than ANY other president. CA, ranks 36th in education with an average C grade in quality count's report of 2013 CA. educates 1/8 of the nations students. You are an elite and NOT the average. I too, am self-employed and have a house in CA. but I can ONLY afford it because I have a very good income, otherwise there is NO way I could ever afford to live here and I want to live cheaper, then I have to move my family in a dangerous gang infested area. You should know that, if you are from CA. California has the widest income gap in the union. Just drive around and you can see it. So while you and I might be doing well, the majority of Californians are NOT.

I blame the GOP for blocking Obama's education reform bills. I also blame Jerry Brown for sucking the funds our of our education system which caused tuition to go up even more. I also blame conservatives like you for introducing stupidity into the conversation that has hurt our chances to grow faster.

CA. is the bluest of blue states, the reason CA. is becoming bankrupt and failing is because of liberal policies, I lived through the changes, liberals completely destroyed the state with the 5th largest economy.

I'm not blaming all conservatives because I do have some conservative friends that have more common sense... just conservatives like you.

You mean, conservatives like me that can smell...anyway, Libs like conservatives that are quiet, don't speak their mind and are ignorant about the issues, maybe that's why you like your conservative friends.

Ok, now back on topic!

Who's soldiers? Our soldiers?? I only know of one possible soldier which has yet to be determined. If you are talking about Iraqi soldiers... well those are Iraqi soldiers, not American soldiers... learn the difference.

Obama has repeatedly been advised by many of his generals on ways as to how to execute this war properly and for some reason, he has NEVER listened to any of them, but using his own and I have NO idea as to why, judgment and that judgment has led to very serious consequences, which he is responsible for. NOT his generals, Obama's. The man has little experience about virtually anything and he wants to use his judgment as a law professor to use on the battlefield as smart? The difference is, whatever you might think about Bush, the man listened to his military advisors, Bush was advised to use the surge, it helped turn the tide and that is how we were able to push back Al Qaeda, but Obama, NOT hearing it and this is the result. The Iraqis weren't trained properly, their training wasn't completed, you saw the result, it wasn't even a slaughter, they just put their gear down and fled. If we'd have stayed and help to complete their training and provided them with additional support, the outcome probably would have been different.

Yeah kind of like Bush and Cheney right? No Obama just used common sense,

Sorry, Obama has NEVER used common sense and the sense that he did use was disastrous, EVERY TIME!

something the Bush Administration lacked. And the worst president ever??? Really? Ever??? You'd make a good pundit on Fox comedy news. I hear they have great skits and you'd be perfect.

But Bush had guts, no matter how you look at it, Bush wasn't a you know what...Bush never had any illusions that these guys were bad guys and they need to be wiped out. It was cut and dry for him, so for me, I would prefer that and accept that any day of the week over a president that talks, talks and talks and talks and threatens and falls back on every promise and loves to look good, loves to make himself look good, kiss up to Hollywood and make his primary focus on pleasing his party. That is Obama in a nutshell. And thank you for that comment. I think so. They did kind of hated me at NBC, probably because they didn't like it when I pointed out any mistakes Dems would make. Because the only thing they wanted was positive spin on liberals and Dems and I couldn't tell you how many times, I would have to reedit stories before the News director to get it approved before going on air. Libs are very bad when it comes to criticism.

Here's an idea, if the GOP is successful in getting us back into Iraq, perhaps you can enlist and go over there and make sure every thing goes smoothly.

If I could, I would.

And don't let the little bit of knowledge that you would now be on the side of Iran in the conflict stand in your way. And if you don't understand why that would be the case, then all I can say is... WOW...

? Babble??

Also proof reading your posts before you hit submit can go a long way...

I'm typing from an iPhone, not exactly the largest keypad and please before you say something, kindly take your own advice, Thanks.

Burning Bush:

" ISIS, and the other Sunni extremists in Syria and Iraq obviously must have a lot of funding and a steady supply of weapons and ammunition. Who is backing them, the answer is Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and Turkey. "

Yep. Plus, don´t forget, Barrack Hussein Obama himself, who continues to support these "vetted rebels" in their war against the secular Assad regime in Syria.

Anybody who thinks there is a strict separation between the two is delusional. In ISIS controlled areas, there are no border posts between Syria and Iraq. Weapons and Jihadists flow freely.