Posted on 06/12/2014 7:00:05 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
If we really wanted to keep Iraq out of radical Islamist hands, then we shouldn’t have elected a radical Muslim as President.
It was an expensive, bloody war, but at least in early 2009, Bush and Petreaus had it stabilized to the point where a relatively small US presence could maintain order.
Obama the idiot gave it all away and set Iraq on fire.
Very depressing news coming out of Iraq.
Are we better off with Iraq becoming an Al Qaeda state?
The media and liberals will spin this as Bush’s fault, because we should never have gone into Iraq in the first place.
But, Obama likes to talk about how he inherited difficult problems when he became president. His decision to withdraw as we did helped create the circumstances for Al Qaeda to gain strength in Iraq.
And Obama has frequently said Bin Laden is dead and Al Qaeda is on the run due to his policies.
How do these events square with Obama’s statements that Al Qaeda is on the run, and that due to his allegedly enlightened policies, that the back of Al Qaeda was broken???
2 late
Oboma has spent his entire presidency aiding the militant muslims, and the world is suffering greatly because of it.
This is what happens when people vote for someone based on political correctness rather than common sense.
Here’s my proposal:
Lets go with history, not against it.
Iraq was an artificial country created by the British and the French. We have to re-do what they did.
Recognize three new countries — a Sunni west, Kurdish north, and Shia south.
If the western portion was truly an independent country, I think we could easily get the Saudis and other Sunni countries to back a pan-Arab peacekeeping force to throw out the radicals and set up a new, non-threatening government there.
We were in Germany and Japan for a long time, and both of those, especially Germany, were relatively modern countries at the time that they fell under the sway of loonies who made them threats to the world.
But we have to recall that Obama's goal is not to bring Third World Islamic hell-holes into the modern world (because that would mean Westernizing them), but to destroy the West.
He had no interest in stabilizing or modernizing Iraq, and certainly no interest in anything that would make the US look good or powerful.
uhhhh....the US put parts of Iraq and Nigeria in their hands when it overthrew dictators who controlled them and armed and trained the terrorists coming out of Syria and Libya.
Good luck with all of that.
Most presidents scurry around the last two years of their second term trying to nail down what they see as their legacy.
Obama doesn’t have that concern.
The New Caliphate taking shape in the mideast is his legacy along with destruction of the American economy and the transformation of free America into an Autocratic Dictatorship ruled by the arrogant racist tyrant Obama himself.
Have these inside-the-beltway intellectual fools learned nothing from our repeated propping up of the lesser of evils? Enough! Just as no bank is too big to fail, no government which will not fight for, and then ENFORCE, freedom for its own people is too big to fail. Enough of our blood and treasure.
Colonel, USAFR
Hey NR, you should’ve thought of that 11 years ago when you were cheerleading for war against a secularist Iraqi government.
Pray for Israel.
Get a clue, NRO. The islamists had it all along and our islamist caliph in chief has no intentions of saving the Iraq that we re-built at great cost. It’s another Obama victory of transformational neglect and collapse.
Let's leave this to the private sector. Anyone who wants to should go to Iraq and pick a side. Or, stay home and raise money to help your favorite flavor of Muslim.
Like most problems, the Iraq problem cannot be solved by more and more government intervention.
Sad to say, but yeah. Without a brutal dictator, they're like wild, blood thirsty animals.
Maybe they're just too primitive to understand freedom and self control.
Just how many times must we get involved in a Muslim country, before we get it through our heads that “YOU CAN NOT MAKE A SILK PURSE OUT OF A SOWS EAR”. I know of no Muslim country, other than Malaysia, that doesn’t prefer a “STRONG MAN” to lead their country. Name any Muslim country, again except Malaysia, that hasn’t elected a “STRONG MAN” to lead their country. That’s the only thing a Muslim, living in a Muslim country, knows. They have absolutely no idea what a “DEMOCRATIC/REPUBLIC” is, or how it works. Every 50 years or so, every Muslim country will go through a “REVOLUTION”, kicking out the present “STRONG MAN”, and replace him with another “STRONG MAN”. Usually, when there is a revolution, the present “STRONG MAN”, along with his family, is disemboweled, sodomized, and strung up in the public square, while the new “STRONG MAN” looks on.
“No thanks we don’t need anymore dead American troops for this. We need our Military on the borders. “
We won’t lose one American airman’s life.
We have total air superiority and can assist the Iraqis in degrading the Islamists.
And it is absolutely a critical American security interest in not seeing radical Islamist Jihadis controlling Iraq.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.