It would be great if ISIS were massing a few thousand troops outside the base in the open so that they can be obliterated. Too good to be true though, I doubt they are that stupid or that they have the troops to spare.
Had we had a tougher president, when it came to foreign policy, it would have never come to this. I'm not sure what we can do, it's a messy situation. As a former Marine, I can tell you covert action would be required. This will not be resolved from the air. Spec Ops, Seals, etc.
Don't even bother man.
Look at these morons in this thread; they are still blaming Bush and he hasn't been in office for 6 years. These idiots are so far from reality that they won't answer a question honestly or even give an informed opinion. Instead they type up whatever they think put Dear Leader in the best light.
Is it that difficult to accept the undeniable fact that Iraq and Afghanistan are the responsibility of your previous beloved leader? It isn't even debatable, and this isn't about my team versus their team--it's simply history.
And Democrats voted overwhelmingly for both wars...but yeah, it's all Bush's fault. It isn't even debatable, it's simply history.Is it that difficult to accept the undeniable fact that Iraq and Afghanistan are the responsibility of your previous beloved leader? It isn't even debatable, and this isn't about my team versus their team--it's simply history.
And Democrats voted overwhelmingly for both wars...but yeah, it's all Bush's fault. It isn't even debatable, it's simply history.
It appears as though people are mistaking "acting on impulse" for being "strong leader" and "takes time to think things through" as being "weak leader". What the fuck is wrong with you all?
None of this changes the fact that Democrats voted overwhelming for the AUMF and strongly supported both wars initially...at least until their popularity waned. It isn't even debatable, it's simply history.the authorization to use military force in iraq was 1) punting the question to the president, who was authorized under AUMF to do many things, up to an including ground invasion - ground invasion wasn't the only option (yes, completely weak behavior by a spineless congress); 2) obtained on false pretenses about iraq's WMD capabilities.
i don't know whether bush knew about the second part, but he sure as shit knew about the first part and rushed off for the most extreme measure authorized immediately anyway.
and to answer compuwiz's question, if bush had been a strong leader maybe he'd have known about the second part instead of being led around by the nose by cheney, who, aside from being one of history's biggest assholes, was certainly a strong leader (as big assholes often are).
None of this changes the fact that Democrats voted overwhelming for the AUMF and strongly supported both wars initially...at least until their popularity waned. It isn't even debatable, it's simply history.
And Democrats voted overwhelmingly for both wars...but yeah, it's all Bush's fault. It isn't even debatable, it's simply history.
Nonethelss, the fact is that Obama has had six years to win that war... Or to decide that victory wasn't an option and to bring the troops home. He did neither.
And the current issue is can he muster sufficient resources to keep 300 marines safe?
Doesn't smell like victory to me...
Uno
Well then.
I guess this is really Britain's fault then? I mean...if they had taken into account the different ethnic and religious groups when they mandated Iraq, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in.
Thanks Britain
So even when the Democrats are rushing to get on record supporting the wars, they still want the option to be against them if they go south.the authorization to use military force in iraq was 1) punting the question to the president, who was authorized under AUMF to do many things, up to an including ground invasion - ground invasion wasn't the only option (yes, completely weak behavior by a spineless congress); 2) obtained on false pretenses about iraq's WMD capabilities.
i don't know whether bush knew about the second part, but he sure as shit knew about the first part and rushed off for the most extreme measure authorized immediately anyway.
and to answer compuwiz's question, if bush had been a strong leader maybe he'd have known about the second part instead of being led around by the nose by cheney, who, aside from being one of history's biggest assholes, was certainly a strong leader (as big assholes often are).
Had we had a tougher president, when it came to foreign policy, it would have never come to this. I'm not sure what we can do, it's a messy situation. As a former Marine, I can tell you covert action would be required. This will not be resolved from the air. Spec Ops, Seals, etc.
None of this changes the fact that Democrats voted overwhelming for the AUMF and strongly supported both wars initially...at least until their popularity waned. It isn't even debatable, it's simply history.
But it was Bush's idea to invade Iraq! He was the warmonger who decided we needed to use force. Before he came into office, everything with Iraq was fine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act
But it was Bush's idea to invade Iraq! He was the warmonger who decided we needed to use force. Before he came into office, everything with Iraq was fine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act
President George W. Bush often referred to the Act and its findings to argue that the Clinton Administration supported regime change in Iraq and further that it believed that Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction. The Act was cited as a basis of support in the Congressional Authorization for use of Military Force Against Iraq in October 2002.[8]
None of this changes the fact that Democrats voted overwhelming for the AUMF and strongly supported both wars initially...at least until their popularity waned. It isn't even debatable, it's simply history.
So even when the Democrats are rushing to get on record supporting the wars, they still want the option to be against them if they go south.
Everybody be careful not to step in the, um, leadership.
i'm not sure how being lied to doesn't change things.
So even when the Democrats are rushing to get on record supporting the wars, they still want the option to be against them if they go south.
Everybody be careful not to step in the, um, leadership.
Pretty much the SOP for politicians... have a way out... unfortunately (or forturnately depending on your p.o.v.) that's also why recent democratic presidential candidates who voted for the authorization lost the nomination or the general election.
...
HOUSE Democrats didn't; most of them are in districts where they can only be threatened from the left. SENATE Democrats did, since not that many states are 50.1% bat shit crazy.Except of course Congressional Democrats didn't support the invasion of Iraq.
Yep. That's why I support Obama asking for a new AUMF. War is far too serious to allow politicians to have it both ways.Pretty much the SOP for politicians... have a way out... unfortunately (or forturnately depending on your p.o.v.) that's also why recent democratic presidential candidates who voted for the authorization lost the nomination or the general election.
...
HOUSE Democrats didn't; most of them are in districts where they can only be threatened from the left. SENATE Democrats did, since not that many states are 50.1% bat shit crazy.
Bush asked for an extension of US troops in Iraq. Iraq denied that request. Bush agreed. Obama abided by that agreement.
That was the right thing for both Bush and Obama to do. You can't declare a country sovereign and then immediately turn on it and re-occupy it when it does something you don't like. That would have made their government fall apart immediately.
I just did, dude. I acknowledged that House Democrats did not vote for it.Or in this case "bat shit completely right". Haha.
Your dubious depiction aside, on what planet is 43% overall support and 58% support in the chamber that overall approved "overwhelming support"? You've got 98% of congressional republicans and the republican president for something and you have 43% of democrats for it.
Sometimes you just have to own your mistakes.