War in Iraq is Over

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What's your point? That fighting is still going on? It is. What should be done?

Personally, I think since the US and UK broke Iraq they should 'fix' it. Of course, it doesn't work that way.

[GBCW 397]

liar liar pant son fire!

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

What's your point? That fighting is still going on? It is. What should be done?

Personally, I think since the US and UK broke Iraq they should 'fix' it. Of course, it doesn't work that way.

You ask whats the point then answer it.. We pulled out too soon after obligating ourselves to be there.

As far as breaking it - not exactly a utopia before being they tried to annex a country, gassed their own people, and did things like torture athletes when they did not perform well. There are a million should-have, could-have from both Iraq wars but once the west was responsible for dismantling their government it had an obligation - and we just left.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You ask whats the point then answer it.. We pulled out too soon after obligating ourselves to be there.

As far as breaking it - not exactly a utopia before being they tried to annex a country, gassed their own people, and did things like torture athletes when they did not perform well. There are a million should-have, could-have from both Iraq wars but once the west was responsible for dismantling their government it had an obligation - and we just left.

Well I don't think this thread was posted with any searching analysis of the issues in mind.

Obviously it isn't that simple.

The War on Iraq was controversial from the beginning back in 2002/2003 and the next President (even if it weren't Obama who was elected) would have had to listen to the political climate in the country around the time that people are looking to elect a new president. Do you honestly think that there was a climate for continuing the war when Obama was running for President? That's not what I remember.

[GBCW 397]

Well I don't think this thread was posted with any searching analysis of the issues in mind.

and yours are?

Edited August 26, 2014 by intheshadows

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

The War on Iraq was controversial from the beginning back in 2002/2003 and the next President (even if it weren't Obama who was elected) would have had to listen to the political climate in the country around the time that people are looking to elect a new president. Do you honestly think that there was a climate for continuing the war when Obama was running for President? That's not what I remember.

Yeah I can't honestly argue against any of that. I was surprised (but pleased) with the pullout timetables at the time and I am playing a bit of hindsight 20/20 now.. I got nothing.

[GBCW 397]

hindsight is always 40 40~!!!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hindsight wasn't needed - it was predictable that Iraq would end up in a ghastly civil war and it was predictable that the US and it's allies would leave the Iraqis to their fate.

[GBCW 397]

yeah you so smart you knw all

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

Hindsight wasn't needed - it was predictable that Iraq would end up in a ghastly civil war and it was predictable that the US and it's allies would leave the Iraqis to their fate.

Hindsight comment was about Obamas pulling out which - in hindsight - was a very stupid thing to do.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Hindsight comment was about Obamas pulling out which - in hindsight - was a very stupid thing to do.

If only his father had

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hindsight comment was about Obamas pulling out which - in hindsight - was a very stupid thing to do.

I'm not sure stupid is the right word really, since the issue is about putting American self-interest before the interest of Iraqis. You might say that this is a shortsighted view, but Iraq is a very complicated situation and it's reasonable to ask how long the US should be involved there. 10-15-20 years? What about 50 years? 100?

If you're a voter and your taxpayer's $$$ are being used to pay for a situation that doesn't seem to improve, you sort of have a right to ask whether it's being spent in the best way. Even if that means cutting your losses. There is no good option in a situation like that.

I mean, it's not as though the President has to respond to public opinion, or anything like that.

Edited August 26, 2014 by Hail Ming!

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

He has to lead.. He can choose to cow-tow to public opinion, that is a specialty of his party and of most politicians... He took a chance and was wrong. We have the luxury of judging him in hind-sight.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You see a failure to lead. I see a decision that was made with a different set of priorities in mind.