‘When ISIS takes Baghdad…’

Hotair ^ | 08/05/2014 | Noah Rothman

[NELSON111]

>>>And W should be using the bully pulpit to prod Congress, the Media and the Citizenry.

Why? So they can remind him that all of this is his fault? That makes no sense. We should have left Saddam in power...and you don't have to be a Monday morning QB to have seen this coming. Anyone who knows anything about middle eastern culture could have told him back in 2003 that setting up a democracy and "allies" was a pipe dream. If he (W) had REALLY wanted to have a war on terror....he should have used air power to dismantle Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran.

And for the record...I served over there...did my job. Was there when it all started (actually arrived in mid Feb in theatre).

This is called the law of unintended consequences. We didn't learn the lesson in the 50's with Mossadegh...we didn't learn it with the Shah...we didn't learn it with the Mujahidin...and we did it again in Iraq.

[Rennes Templar]

I think an aggressive continued presence there would have resulted by now in a more stable region. You’re betting it would stayed stable with Saddam in power. I’d rather bet on us than them.

However, that didn’t happen. After W, we should have strengthened our presence in SE Asia, NATO and set up permanent bases in Iraq. The price of freedom and controlling terror is force - a stronger military, not a shrinking one.
At the same time we should have been developing more domestic oil production to lessen dependence there.

By the way, all those things, McCain or Romney would have done. But no, instead we have ISIS threatening Baghdad and taunting Washington, Russia taking Ukraine, and China expanding in the Pacific.