Quote:
Originally Posted by tstew
My whole point is that if that is the issue, then discuss that. It is pointless when people introduce whatever particular propaganda they like even when it flies in the face of facts. That is the problem with modern day politics and all the spin machines and outlets on both sides IMO.
Is it possible that Obama had very little to do with this? I guess. Is it possible that his vastly increasing the focus on operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan and strengthening our relationships there had a hand in this? I guess that's possible too.
|
No offense, but that one's "spin," Bro. Iraq has quieted down
because of the Troop Surge that Senator Obama opposed. This has freed up more resources for Afghanistan (and Pakistan) operations - but make no mistake, our relations there have NOT improved since Obama took office. If anything, they've continued to grow worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tstew
Is it possible that this is all a scam and that Osama has either been dead or is sipping margaritas on some private beach on our dime? Anything's possible.
|
Let's leave the "margaritas on a beach" theory for coadie and caman.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tstew
I'm not sure that you can even begin to compare the scope of our involvement and loss in Iraq to what happened in Libya.
|
Wait a minute... did you mean "losses in Iraq?" We didn't "lose" in Iraq. We went there to throw out Saddam and we did that. And, Libya isn't past tense ("
what happened in Libya") - it's ongoing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tstew
Either way I guess I'll go with it for the sake of conversation. Taking out Saddam out of power (which took 15 minutes) is not where a lot of people had problems. It was our continued involvement and our effort to somehow win something that is more than likely unwinnable that turned most people off who I've heard. The resources that we were expending there were too great in terms of human life, but also in terms of resources that would have been better served if focused on those who actually were attacking us.
Either way, I'm still not sure I'm ready to compare Libya to Iraq just yet. Get back with me in 10 years or so  |
You're right about the mess that followed Saddam's ouster. I personally can't believe our DoD people and folks in the Bush admin didn't see those problems coming on... but then again, they obviously did buy into the intel we were getting from the Brits and the French that made Saddam's army out to be this colossal behemoth that would step into the vacuum and keep order.
The comparison between Iraq and Libya isn't in their respective battlefield situation. It's what we see when we look at the President's desk.
GWB took us into Iraq after 12+ years of Iraqi noncompliance to over a dozen Security Council Resolutions. Iraq was also openly firing upon and engaging our aircraft in the UN mandated No-Fly zones. They were shooting at Americans. This is an act of war in anyone's book. They also had failed to comply with the terms of the Kuwait/Gulf War cease fire agreement. Noncompliance with a ceasefire means that there is no "ceasefire..." The Gulf War of 1990/1991 had never really ended until Saddam was out.
The United States Congress met in a special joint session in 2003 to authorize the invasion of Iraq.
In Libya - The Obama Administration attacked a country that hadn't fired a shot at us since the Lockerbie bombing in 1988 - 23 years ago! The Obama administration attacked Libya with just a handful of allies (none from Africa where Libya is located) and WITHOUT Congressional authorization.
Imagine if GWB had attacked anyone without first getting Congressional authorization. We'd be listening to all of the media and press screaming hysterically about a "Constitutional Crisis!!!"
... but Obama? He gets a free pass to drop his bombs wherever he wants. The double standard is the "difference" between Iraq and Libya. In both cases we had (have) a President who is simply doing his best to protect Americans and American interests. In Obama's case - he gets support from his political opponents. In Bush's case - he got treatment that at times proved to be treasonous.
Threaded Mode
