Flashback: George W. Bush Predicted Iraqi Meltdown If US Troops Were Withdrawn from Region

The Gateway Pundit ^ | 6/16/14 | Jim Hoft

[Nachum]

President George W. Bush predicted the current meltdown in Iraq – back in 2007. Bush vetoed a Democratic bill to withdraw troops from Iraq.

Via Truth Revolt:

I know some in Washington would like us to start leaving Iraq now. To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al Qaeda. It would mean that we’d be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we’d allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. It would mean increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.

[Nachum]

Vid at link

[Nachum]

The list, Ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/

[Genoa]

Prophetic! Bush was right, God bless him.

[TwelveOfTwenty]

Of course, the lefties think we should still be starving them to death at a rate of hundreds of thousands a year.

Well, not exactly, but that's still what would be happening if we did things their way.

[Mears]

Thanks for the ping——good stuff.

.

[x]

Why'd he go in, then?

Did he expect us to stay there forever?

[Genoa]

Going in might have been bad enough, leaving early was a disaster. Obama and his gang of Rats did the worst thing they could have done, for politics.

[Sergio]

bkmk

[ansel12]

Long enough, there are a lot of places that we have maintained a presence for generations.

Generations of American military families have gone through our bases in various nations around the globe.

[al_c]

Obama likes to take credit for ending the war and bringing the troops home. I guess now he’ll change his tune and blame Bush for bring the troops home before the job was done.

[x]

Germany, sure.

The Philippines, fine.

Korea, even.

Iraq -- not such a good idea to begin with.

Bush's advice in 2007 may have been sound.

2003? Not so much.

[ConstantSkeptic]

So why did Bush sign the Status of Forces Agreement in the fall of 2008? It required “All the United States Forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory no later than December 31, 2011.”

[agere_contra]

America still has troops in Germany 70 years after the event.

Foreign military bases are a good thing. They give the US options and global reach, and access to novel training grounds - as well as reinforcing geopolitical allies.

[Jacquerie]

Unlike the Left, GWB knew some history other than Marx.

There is enormous responsibility on conquerors to maintain order in conquered lands. Like the adage of, “if you break it, you own it,” after busting up Iraq we owned it. To withdraw precipitously is to invite horror.

[minnesota_bound]

Where is George Bush?
Millions endangered by obama’s actions. You just know obama going to let Iran get nuclear weapons and I bet he still won’t talk.
Stop being quiet about what is happening.

[Karl Spooner]

There is only one thing that we could not give to them people and that is guts.

.

[ansel12]

Did he expect us to stay there forever?

Well we pulled out, and what we got was different from all the places where we maintained a presence, including the ones on your list that you approve of.

[ansel12]

Unlike the Left, GWB knew some history other than Marx.

I read a column once that was raving about W's ignorance of history and how if he had ever read a book on it, it would educate him.

The writer didn't know that Bush's Yale degree, is in history.

[x]

Well we pulled out, and what we got was different from all the places where we maintained a presence, including the ones on your list that you approve of.

What we should have asked -- but didn't -- was "is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?"

[Jedidah]

Absolutely what we should have done.