Posted on 03/29/2015 6:57:46 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Boomers that never grew up are now running the asylum.
because the stupid bastard (literally accurate) in charge of US foreign policy thought the world would swoon at his feet because he’s just so incredibly awesome.
in other words, he’s a dangerous, self obsessed newbie with nearly terminal naïveté.
It’s a puzzle. Like a dead young female staffer in a Congressman’s office.
This would be directly Joe’s fault.
Or put another way, America is losing commonality of thought and values. The population is fragmenting in their views and ideology, spinning off in different directions. It means that policy will wind up being based on ever-changing PC requirements or ideologies, or on the whims of America's oligarchs for pure profit.
Hillary was Secretary of State for four years and left the Middle East literally in flames.
That’s what happened.
Yep.
Oh. So it’s all Bush’s fault and Obama inherited the mess.
Sure.
So true. And the sad part is that the powers that be are actually encouraging it. The old "melting pot" concept is what made this nation strong, and gave it a future. Now that idea is seen as outdated, mistaken, and probably racist.
I once heard a silly liberal say that we don't need a "melting pot". We need a "tossed salad". Well, that's just asking for Balkanization.
Bush had things pretty well in hand, a situation Obama was anxious to undo and Obama was successful in reversing every gain Bush had made. We are now in the middle of an Obama world and just wait until Iran emerges victorious.
Bush in 2003 was faced with choosing the lesser of two evils. If he had done nothing, Saddam would still be in power and perhaps would have nukes. The rants like Scarborough's that attack Bush for his decision never ask what would have happened if Bush had done nothing.
It was my feeling at the time that if Bush let Saddam stay in power, Bush would be defeated in 2004. Of course there is no way to prove or disprove that. Kerry in 2005 could have started the Clinton-Obama demolition of American interests in the Middle East 4 years earlier.
Bill Clinton didn't exactly have much success in the Middle East either and his forgotten errors (like refusing to accept Osama bin Laden when offered him) caused a lot of our later difficulties.
This must be a trick question. You have an elected President who hates the United States like the Devil hates Holy Water or Allah hates infidels.
Gee Joe, I think it might be the person YOU VOTED FOR ..!!
I will agree with Joe that taking out Saddam now appears to have been a mistake. Everything else is Zero’s fault of mismanagement.
Bush over time was methodically surrounding the center of world terrorism in Iran. Øbama is fundamentally transforming that situation, enlarging the power of Iran so it surrounds those that remain instead. Just turning the tables a tad.
Future historians will look back and wonder why the U.S. transferred enormous amounts of their wealth to Muslim countries to pay for oil when the U.S. could have and should have simply taken it.
It is pretty simple.
Weakness encourages aggression. And this President is the biggest wimp to have ever inhabited the Oval Office.
Even squinty-eyed terrorists with pea-brains can spot weakness that apparent.
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.