2016 US Presidential Election Pt. II - Page 37 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-11-2015, 10:59 PM   #541
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 04:48 PM
2016 US Presidential Election Pt. II

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolf View Post

Its a great thing that Saddam is gone, but I guess I should not be surprised there are those that wish for his return. There are people out there that wish Hitler would return.


Actually, this is what you say when you realize you're wrong and have no counter argument.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 08-11-2015, 11:05 PM   #542
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Polish-American Stronghold PA
Posts: 4,144
Local Time: 04:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Actually, this is what you say when you realize you're wrong and have no counter argument.
We made it to Godwin's Law

Definition: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"
__________________

__________________
Oregoropa is offline  
Old 08-12-2015, 01:11 AM   #543
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 03:48 PM
Nice to see Sting has made it back.

It's literally the same tell...every. damn. time.

The same one. I'm talking about an objective thing here - not a "feeling".

I'm not telling what it is though.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 08-12-2015, 05:29 AM   #544
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 310
Local Time: 05:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Indefinite occupation is not a policy.

I have no desire to live in Israel.

You were given endless blood and treasure to build a functioning state and army in Iraq and you've failed to do so. Western intervention has only made the Middle East worse. We cannot solve problems for other nations -- in fact, they are not even nations.
No one is suggesting indefinite occupation. But we need a policy that is going to achieve U.S. national security objectives in the region. The current policy appears to weak to do that.
No one was given endless blood and treasure for anything in Iraq. March 2003 to December 2011 is only 8 years and 9 months. Plus, given the many mistakes that were made early on, the right policy was not in place until 2007. So only 4.5 years after having the right policy in place, the United States was gone. Yet, in that short period of time, Saddam was removed and a functioning state was established although now it is struggling to regain control of 2 of its 18 provinces. U.S. intervention in the middle east has made countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab Emirates safer. Iraq would be doing very well if the United States had not abandoned it after 2011. Still, Obama has sent several thousand U.S. troops back to Iraq and has been bombing the enemies of the Baghdad government now for a year. Unfortunately, these actions by Obama have been to weak to accomplish the objectives of retaking the large parts of Al Anbar province and Ninawa Province under control of ISIS. A proper response by Obama in the summer of 2014 would of had these areas of Iraq back under the Iraqi governments control by the end of 2014. As of right now unfortunately, Obama's policy to roll back ISIS is not moving at all. Hopefully in his last year as President he will adopt a more aggressive policy to help Iraq retake its territory in the northwest of the country.

Syria, where there has been little U.S. intervention of any kind at all, has suffered the most of any country in the Middle East in just the past four years. Over 300,000 people are dead and the population is declining at a annual rate of 10%. Obama has started to reverse his hands off policy in Syria as U.S. military has been bombing ISIS and other terrorist positions in Syria, but this is primarily to support U.S./Iraqi operations in Northwest Iraq against ISIS. Syria for the most part is still being left alone and the results have not been good at all.
__________________
wolf is offline  
Old 08-12-2015, 05:33 AM   #545
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 310
Local Time: 05:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nbelcik View Post
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casu...f_the_Iraq_War

100,000 civilians were killed during the Iraq War. Do you want to repeat that again?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Saddam murdered millions with his invasions and attacks on various countries and his own people. Do you want a repeat of that?

In addition, U.S. inaction and weak action over the past two years has allowed ISIS to murder and rape thousands of people in Iraq. Think of the untold horrors that people in Mosul and Falluja suffer daily at the hands of ISIS.
__________________
wolf is offline  
Old 08-12-2015, 07:14 AM   #546
Blue Crack Addict
 
mikal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Black Lodge
Posts: 24,910
Local Time: 03:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolf View Post
Saddam murdered millions with his invasions and attacks on various countries and his own people. Do you want a repeat of that?

In addition, U.S. inaction and weak action over the past two years has allowed ISIS to murder and rape thousands of people in Iraq. Think of the untold horrors that people in Mosul and Falluja suffer daily at the hands of ISIS.
You know what we need?

https://youtu.be/MGQaH3-LK54

Sent from my SM-G925V using U2 Interference mobile app
__________________
mikal is online now  
Old 08-12-2015, 08:35 AM   #547
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 04:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolf View Post
No one is suggesting indefinite occupation. But we need a policy that is going to achieve U.S. national security objectives in the region. The current policy appears to weak to do that.
No one was given endless blood and treasure for anything in Iraq. March 2003 to December 2011 is only 8 years and 9 months. Plus, given the many mistakes that were made early on, the right policy was not in place until 2007. So only 4.5 years after having the right policy in place, the United States was gone. Yet, in that short period of time, Saddam was removed and a functioning state was established although now it is struggling to regain control of 2 of its 18 provinces. U.S. intervention in the middle east has made countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab Emirates safer. Iraq would be doing very well if the United States had not abandoned it after 2011. Still, Obama has sent several thousand U.S. troops back to Iraq and has been bombing the enemies of the Baghdad government now for a year. Unfortunately, these actions by Obama have been to weak to accomplish the objectives of retaking the large parts of Al Anbar province and Ninawa Province under control of ISIS. A proper response by Obama in the summer of 2014 would of had these areas of Iraq back under the Iraqi governments control by the end of 2014. As of right now unfortunately, Obama's policy to roll back ISIS is not moving at all. Hopefully in his last year as President he will adopt a more aggressive policy to help Iraq retake its territory in the northwest of the country.

Syria, where there has been little U.S. intervention of any kind at all, has suffered the most of any country in the Middle East in just the past four years. Over 300,000 people are dead and the population is declining at a annual rate of 10%. Obama has started to reverse his hands off policy in Syria as U.S. military has been bombing ISIS and other terrorist positions in Syria, but this is primarily to support U.S./Iraqi operations in Northwest Iraq against ISIS. Syria for the most part is still being left alone and the results have not been good at all.



It's amazing how they can blame Obama for all of Bush's mistakes.

You had 10 years. You failed.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 08-12-2015, 09:09 AM   #548
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,885
Local Time: 04:48 PM
In non-STING revisionist history "news," it only takes a few hundred thousand dollars in bribes donations to get Scott Walker to take money from education and give it to you to build yourself a big playground.

Scott Walker To Sign Bill Spending Hundreds Of Millions Of Tax Dollars On A Private Stadium | ThinkProgress
__________________
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 08-12-2015, 09:42 AM   #549
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,237
Local Time: 03:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolf View Post
Its a great thing that Saddam is gone, but I guess I should not be surprised there are those that wish for his return. There are people out there that wish Hitler would return.


You've had enough fun, sting.
__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 08-12-2015, 12:27 PM   #550
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BEAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,580
Local Time: 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
It's amazing how they can blame Obama for all of Bush's mistakes.

You had 10 years. You failed.
Plus didn't Bush sign the agreement with the gov of Iraq to pull the troops out of there by 2011? Or failed to renegotiate

But yeah, it's Obama's fault. He should have just invaded the country again.
__________________
BEAL is offline  
Old 08-12-2015, 01:09 PM   #551
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 04:48 PM
2016 US Presidential Election Pt. II

The way to deal with ISIL is how we should have continued to deal with Saddam -- containment.

That was always the strategy.

It was only after 9-11 when the hardliners in the W administration decided to manipulate understandable public fear and trauma (remember WMD's and Condi warning of "mushroom clouds" and how we had to remove Sadsam so we wouldn't see terror "like we saw on 9-11"?)

Why did the administration seek to link 9-11 to Saddam? Obviously, if it were as clear cut and logical as STING has presented it, a President Gore would have invaded in 2003 as well, right?

Or is it because this was never Clinton policy, because the invasion of Iraq was always right wing fringe policy, that it needed an event like 9-11 to ever make it palatable to a then deeply divided public?

This isn't 9-11 conspiracy theory. An event happened, and Rumsfeld and Cheney saw and opportunity to take a fringe idea (invasion and occupation of Iraq) and pull it into the mainstream.

"Regime change" happens by means other than invasion and occupation. It can and is part of a containment policy. The radical idea was invasion. No one wanted to invade Iraq in 1991, or 1998. And with good reason.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 08-12-2015, 04:54 PM   #552
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: southwest USA
Posts: 3,302
Local Time: 09:48 PM
2016 US Presidential Election Pt. II

Latest Rasmussen poll has Trump dropping 9% in the polls down to 17%. Rubio surges to 2nd at 10%. It shouldn't be much of a surprise, though, Trump's constant bad mouthing of the other republican candidates have turned people off. But he is still doing well with Independents. I expect his numbers to continue to drop while he tries to stay relevant until the next debate, which is September 16th.
My prediction: Rubio will have a solid lead heading into the Iowa primaries.

And on the Democratic side, Sanders has just pulled ahead of Hillary in New Hampshire. Things are getting interesting over there. We're still a long way out, but Bernie has a very loyal following and many people are excited about his candidacy. However, 52% of democrats believe Hillary wins the nomination and only 11% think it will be Bernie. Those debates should be interesting.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
bobsaget77 is offline  
Old 08-12-2015, 05:25 PM   #553
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Mrs. Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: pig farming in Bolivia
Posts: 7,219
Local Time: 03:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrs. Garrison View Post
^ Wow yes. I was gung ho for removing Saddam back in the day. But damn if we don't miss him now, knowing what we now know. Most of you were correct way back then. We've been looking for the next Saddam ever since we took out the original. Pretty sad when most everyone agrees now that Iraq under Saddam was...better...for pretty much everyone compared to where we stand now. Damn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolf View Post
Yep, the invasion of Kuwait and its annexation several days after was a real "cool" event. So was the invasion of Iran. Or how about the launching of ballistic missiles against Israel, dozens of them. Saudi Arabia was also invaded and had a hail of ballistic missiles launched against it. Yep, lets resurrect Saddam so the world can experience these uniquely "cool" events again. Or how about the March 16, 1988 Chemical attack on Halabja that murdered 5,000 people and injured over 10,000. Do you want to repeat that again? Its one thing when northwest Iraq and half of Syria are in trouble, its quite another when Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Israel are in trouble.

Its a great thing that Saddam is gone, but I guess I should not be surprised there are those that wish for his return. There are people out there that wish Hitler would return.
I don't think anyone, myself included, ever said that Saddam was a good guy. And i haven't seen anyone wish for the return of Hitler either. Perhaps you are not looking at the entire situation here. Saddam was a bad person and did a lot of really horrible things, to his neighbors and even to his own people. This much we know. We also know that at one point in time he was sort of our friend, as we had a common enemy.



My point was, and is, that the world we live in today is currently less stable without Saddam in power in Iraq. I don't think these dots are too hard to connect, and im saying that as someone who has literally been sent to the region to fight Saddam and his army if necessary.

With Saddam in power there was no ISIS or ISIL. We cannot even exaggerate the Al Qaeda claims in Iraq, which were made by the previous administration. Saddam brutally executed anyone who wasn't loyal to him and his brutal regime would not allow for much of an uprising. And when his own people did try to rise up against him, he crushed them swiftly.

With Saddam gone, the power vacuum is immense and perhaps more dangerous than we could have imagined. It's a vast lawless hell hole. Temperatures can reach as high as 127 degrees, and yet some people there (perhaps many) still do not have electricity or running water, thanks to our bombs, as well as the insurgency, ISIS, etc. It's a horrible fucking mess, which we helped create, because we were foolish enough to think we could waltz in and spread our democracy to people who didn't really want us there to begin with.

It's an unfortunate statement or conclusion to be made, but it seems as if the so called "Butcher of Baghdad", while horrible, was the better choice for those people in Iraq instead of the alternative.
__________________
Mrs. Garrison is offline  
Old 08-12-2015, 05:33 PM   #554
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Mrs. Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: pig farming in Bolivia
Posts: 7,219
Local Time: 03:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
The way to deal with ISIL is how we should have continued to deal with Saddam -- containment.

That was always the strategy.

It was only after 9-11 when the hardliners in the W administration decided to manipulate understandable public fear and trauma (remember WMD's and Condi warning of "mushroom clouds" and how we had to remove Sadsam so we wouldn't see terror "like we saw on 9-11"?)

Why did the administration seek to link 9-11 to Saddam? Obviously, if it were as clear cut and logical as STING has presented it, a President Gore would have invaded in 2003 as well, right?

Or is it because this was never Clinton policy, because the invasion of Iraq was always right wing fringe policy, that it needed an event like 9-11 to ever make it palatable to a then deeply divided public?

This isn't 9-11 conspiracy theory. An event happened, and Rumsfeld and Cheney saw and opportunity to take a fringe idea (invasion and occupation of Iraq) and pull it into the mainstream.

"Regime change" happens by means other than invasion and occupation. It can and is part of a containment policy. The radical idea was invasion. No one wanted to invade Iraq in 1991, or 1998. And with good reason.
I am going to have to strongly disagree with you on part of this. Every administration since GHWB kicked Saddam out of Kuwait has had some sort of contingency operations plan or "regime change" policy on the table for Saddam/Iraq. The hope was, or should have been, this policy would NEVER be implemented. But it was most certainly there...just as there is a similar policy with Iran, NK, etc.

While i don't necessarily think a President Gore would have followed such a policy...it's important to remember that he publicly supported it, along with many other lawmakers, to include the Clintons' as well.
__________________
Mrs. Garrison is offline  
Old 08-12-2015, 07:08 PM   #555
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Polish-American Stronghold PA
Posts: 4,144
Local Time: 04:48 PM
Meanwhile . . .

The FBI has seized two Clinton emails marked "Top Secret". And she is surrendering her server to the Bureau.

__________________

__________________
Oregoropa is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com