Jump to content

American Sniper


Proud Tiger

Recommended Posts

A war on terrorism that actually created more terrorism.

Like the saying goes "The War on Drugs gave us more drugs. The War on Terror gave us more terrorists. Maybe we should declare a war on jobs and education and see where it goes."

I laughed. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

A war on terrorism that actually created more terrorism.

Like the saying goes "The War on Drugs gave us more drugs. The War on Terror gave us more terrorists. Maybe we should declare a war on jobs and education and see where it goes."

This WH ALREADY HAS!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

J agree with the comments on Iraq but hindsight is always 20/20. We could say the same about Viet Nam.

Vietnam was part of the failed Domino Theory. Iraq was Jr. trying to finish his Daddy's job, right or wrong.

Thus demonstrating exactly why Daddy didn't want to "finish it". :rolleyes:/>

Not the reason but good try. Senior had an agreement in place with the Arab partners. He stood by that agreement.

What makes you so sure there was only one reason?

Or to put it another way, why assume Bush was conceding anything by agreeing to that?

If that was important to getting cooperation with the Arabs, I'd say it was pretty damn shrewd of him to get something you are willing to concede anyway. After all, we can assume there were people around him providing that council.

He stuck to the agreement. You can think however you like but this is what took place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

J agree with the comments on Iraq but hindsight is always 20/20. We could say the same about Viet Nam.

Vietnam was part of the failed Domino Theory. Iraq was Jr. trying to finish his Daddy's job, right or wrong.

Thus demonstrating exactly why Daddy didn't want to "finish it". :rolleyes:/>

Not the reason but good try. Senior had an agreement in place with the Arab partners. He stood by that agreement.

What makes you so sure there was only one reason?

Or to put it another way, why assume Bush was conceding anything by agreeing to that?

If that was important to getting cooperation with the Arabs, I'd say it was pretty damn shrewd of him to get something you are willing to concede anyway. After all, we can assume there were people around him providing that council.

He stuck to the agreement. You can think however you like but this is what took place.

So, my post was correct. It's only the motivation in question.

I was curious if you had any information that would prove he didn't personally want to avoid taking over the country. Having an agreement with other nations does not disprove it. Is there any evidence that Bush wanted to take Baghdad and the entire country?

I haven't found it. However, there is evidence that suggests he personally agreed with that policy, security council aside.

For example:

http://www.ontheissu...ce.htm various excerpts:

1991: continuing conflict into Baghdad would be un-American

"I remember very clearly Colin Powell saying that this thing was turning into a massacre," Robert Gates, then the deputy national security adviser later recalled. "And that to continue it beyond a certain point would be un-American, and he even used the word unchivalrous." Bush agreed, and drew the war to a quick close. After the war ended, President Bush urged Iraqis to "take matters into their own hands."

--------

2003: Invasion of Iraq undid a lifetime of work

In the book that George Herbert Walker Bush and Brent Scowcroft wrote, "A World Transformed," they detailed the "incalculable human and political costs" of occupying Iraq. Further, in April 2003, after his son had taken the country to war against Iraq, the former President agonized with his friend Scowcroft. Partners in the Scowcroft Group recalled both men bemoaning the son's actions, saying that George W. Bush "was undoing a lifetime of work."

-------

Called for an uprising against Saddam, but didn’t support it

If Saddam Hussein was so bad, why stop with liberating Kuwait? Among the American leaders calling for action to remove Saddam Hussein from power was President Bush himself, who suggested that the people of Iraq overthrow him. The common expectation in Washington was that his defeat would, one way or the other, result in Saddam’s loss of power in Iraq.

Inside Iraq, the aftermath of the war was complicated. Incited by the US and its victory over Saddam, Shiite Muslims in the south, long sympathetic to neighboring Iran, and the Kurdish minority in the north began rebellions that threatened Saddam’s rule. The insurrections were brutally repressed by Saddam, and the US failed to intercede. In the north Saddam’s campaign against the Kurds was blocked by the imposition of an Iraqi no-fly zone, a humanitarian relief mission, and threats of U.S. intervention should Saddam attempt to repress the Kurdish elements there. What followed was an angry cessation of hostilities.

--------

Avoided “mission creep” in not attacking Baghdad

By Feb. 27, it was over. Saddam’s army-what was left of it-was fleeing. Cheney and Powell came over to the Oval Office and told me we had achieved our objectives. We called Schwarzkopf from the Oval Office and asked him if he agreed it was time to end the fighting. After checking with his commanders, he said yes. 100 hours after the ground war had begun, I announced to the nation that the war was over.

I was convinced, as were all our Arab friends and allies, that Hussein would be overthrown once the war ended. That did not and has still not happened. We underestimated his brutality and cruelty to his own people and the stranglehold he has on his country. We were disappointed, but I still do not regret my decision to end the war when we did. I do not believe in what I call “mission creep.” Our mission, as mandated by the UN, was clear: end the aggression. We did that. We liberated Kuwait and destroyed Hussein’s military machine so that he could no longer threaten his neighbors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A war on terrorism that actually created more terrorism.

Like the saying goes "The War on Drugs gave us more drugs. The War on Terror gave us more terrorists. Maybe we should declare a war on jobs and education and see where it goes."

:thumbsup:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...