I love Trump but disagree fundamentally with him about Iraq.
What people don't YET understand about Iraq was that Bush understood we could not invade Yemen, Syria, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Iran . . . . We couldn't take every one of them out. Instead, by putting US troops on the ground in Iraq, he got the terrorists to come to us. It was the same strategy as Lord Chelmsford used vs. the Zulu in 1879, the same as we used with our bombers over Europe in WW II. Get the enemy to come out in the open. No, it wasn't a war on "all Islam," but it was extremely effective for what we could do at the time.
Agreed, the Iraq move of President Bush was effective and would have worked if he had been smart eneough to set up an military government for 20 years (like in Japan after World War II ) to maintain and change Iraq. But he was foolish in allowing the Muslim government. Stupid is as stupid does and so many Americans are stupid, unfortunately.
Our bombers were over Europe because we were at war with Germany. Attacking Iraq helped to give us Obama, Isis & a stronger Iran. Every day, it seems like a bigger mistake.
The flypaper strategy...
Yes. 9/11, the first Twin Towers attack, and several other terrorist attacks occurred BEFORE!!! we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. We don’t want them coming here, we want them in kill zones i.e the Mideast, where it is easier to eradicate them.
I think Trump’s thought process is that the effort need to win doesn’t exist in the US.
The American people are so afraid of collateral damage that a single bombing mission of the sort we need to do, would end up as a war crime.
The terrorists were funded by Saudi Arabia. 19 of the terrorists were Saudi.
Petty secular dictators like Saddam (who was also a foil for Iran), Assad, Qaddafi, and others crushed fanatics for the most part.
Saudi Arabia wasn’t touched because they owned the Bushes.
Also, going in 200,000 men short, not being able to secure borders, having no law and order, all this did was have our men killed by ex Iraqi soldiers with explosives sent courtesy of Iran.
It was a complete and utter failure.
Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.
And we let warlords take over the battle against the latter, which should have been the focus.
And Obama squandered it.
The American people keep hitting the snooze button on the numerous wake up calls.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fc-7FXzbeA0
Yes, it seem obvious but there are even GOP candidates who campaign against Bush’s strategy.
It was the high point in fighting the Islamicsts - over there. Hillary and Obama lost it.
Europe is paying the price now.
>>No, it wasn’t a war on “all Islam,”
Ya, kinda hard to have one of those when praising the “religion of peas” and scurrying his Saudi bidness partners out of the country.
I agree with your premise but i think we stayed out of those other nations because their governments simply weren’t a threat. Iraq had Saddam and Afghanistan was run by AQ. Khadaffy had been neutered since Reagan and the rest were non factors. Don’t forget Obama’s first regime change was Egypt where he not only refused to help but insisted on immediate abdication. That was him flexing his muscles and not his brain.
Bush understood what his masters told him to understand. You do NOT fight a war against terrorism with open borders. That’s not a war, it’s subterfuge for the real purpose.
You are absolutely correct.
There are several significant milestones not mentioned by our media in general regarding Iraq.
Give or take, specifically, the number of xxal-Qaeda killed on the ground in Iraq was near 34,000 by mid 2008. xxAl-Qaeda absolutely did come from points throughout the Middle East to go to battle with us.
- Getting off the al-Qaeda topic a bit, the value of yellow xcake removed from Iraq by Christmas of 2008 was roughly $4.5 billion dollars worth. Most of which has since belonged to Canada.
- Number of US troops suffering from chemical xweapon exposure is believed to be roughly 600. This is a real no-no topic. Some actually died.
While Iraq was a xtacticalx environment for those who were there, the grand strategy included being positioned on both sides of Iran, to get between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Iran and Israel, and to control the length of the Persian Gulf and to protect our “allies” on the west side of the Persian Gulf.
By default, being in Iraq placed our defensive xassets between Iran and Southeast Europe, as well as acted to displace some geopolitical influences from Moscow and Beijing. At least for a while.
What we have now is quite the opposite.
Which of our current presidents policies has not worked to rejuvenate and strengthen the geopolitical and military influence of Moscow (as throughout the “cold war”) throughout the Middle East?
You’re probably right (although I now think that Iraq was a big debacle- from start to finish). That said, the best piece of evidence to support your comment, that (i.e. going into Iraq....i.e. the Hornet’s nest) is that other than London and Madrid, the U.S. didn’t have any major attacks after 9/11. Still, the main problem was that Bush, like so many of his surrogates (then or now) never really explained it, and still don’t, to the public nor asked Congress for a Declaration of War (as per the Constitution)!! To make matters worst- instead of asking the public at large to fully sacrifice... he told them to go shopping and to pay for the “War” he cut taxes! (I’m 100% for cutting taxes...during PEACE time)That’s why many people lump Bush and Obama as the same in the sense of their total incompetences!!!