OT: George H.W. Bush has died at age 94.
- Thread starter YakiCoug
- Start date
The decision to not run roughshod into Baghdad in the first Gulf War was very wise. Dubya didn't get the memo on that one,
He picked and then listened to the right people (like Baker).
A sad day for this country. None of the sleaze and incompetence that we have seen since the end of his presidency. Perhaps not the best to ever sit in the oval office but he had the humility and wisdom to accept that. His quiet wisdom and compassion will be missed. RIP.
No matter what you thought of him, what we have today makes him look like Lincoln
I peraonally wouldn't have fought to get Kuwait back to the damn Kuwaitis...but it was all about protecting the Saudis, with whom we had an agreement to protect since 1946 with the guarantee that they would supply our oil needs. It's a complex world. Oil is a critical strategic commodity.
Interestingly, so much has changed since then as we are the number one oil producer in the world and have all the oil we need for many years (thanks to hydraulic fracking).
Who saw that coming back then?
The Bush and Clinton political dynasties are over (although Hillary 2020??)...or so let's hope.
Tron, WTF are you saying? The Iraq War I was caused by Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, not by us or anything we or anyone else wanted.
Your last two sentences are inappropriate.
Tron way off base on this one.
The last of our Presidents who understood the horror of war thru first hand experience. Something his successors have taken far too casually.
The last of our Presidents who understood the horror of war thru first hand experience. Something his successors have taken far too casually.
No they aren’t. They are absolutely appropriate.
Saddam Hussein was put in a leadership position in Iraq by our government in an effort to try and attack Iran
(which failed even after he used chemical weapons that we turned a blind eye and helped him procure)
https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/2...rove-america-helped-saddam-as-he-gassed-iran/
Bankrupt from a war against Iran that he was told the Gulf States (Saudi and Kuwait) said they would pay for Saddam grew desperate.
The last straw was Kuwait siphoning oil from Iraq’s reserves in the Rumaila region.
https://www.nytimes.com/1990/09/03/...ield-lying-below-the-iraq-kuwait-dispute.html
With Kuwait now stealing the oil from Iraq, Saddam felt like he had to stop Kuwait stealing Iraq’s southern oil reserves and thus invaded.
Kuwait and Saudi fearing that Saddam would take them out paid billions to England and the United States as a mercenary for hire plan to drive him back.
But they needed to cook up a plan to persuade the American public that’s Sadaam was just an unhinged madman coming to kill innocent Kuwaitis.
Thus the “babies in incubators” lie was told to the American people by the Kuwait’s ambassador’s daughter posing as just an innocent civilian.
So what we have here is the U.S. government propping up dictator who use chemical weapons and then attack billionaire monarch’s who mercenary hired American blood to defend them while lying and manipulating the public because they were stealing.
Your tax dollars at work.
Read My Lips. I am glad he’s dead.
All these wars and waste of the countries wealth and lives will stop the moment people realize that they have been lied to and manipulated.
While I’m not going to go down the conspiracy theory path...
Through most of the 80s, Iraq & Saddam were our ally against Iran and the Ayatollah. We funded them and provided weapons. Then the Iran-Iraq war ended. Saddam consolidated power, using chemical weapons against his own people, and we react with strong words and nothing else. We pretty much let him do whatever he wanted until he crossed the Kuwait border and made our rich pals the Saudis squeal. We didn’t care about Kuwait, we cared about cash and oil. And suddenly Saddam isn’t our friend.
In spite of the nonsense basis of the whole thing, at least Bush Sr. had the sense to realize Saddam was the only stabilizing influence in the whole region. Leaving him in power cost Bush a second term, but it was the right move. If his dumbass kid had the same sense, we probably could have avoided the last 15 years of power vacuum there, and a couple thousand of our troops would still be alive.
Through most of the 80s, Iraq & Saddam were our ally against Iran and the Ayatollah. We funded them and provided weapons. Then the Iran-Iraq war ended. Saddam consolidated power, using chemical weapons against his own people, and we react with strong words and nothing else. We pretty much let him do whatever he wanted until he crossed the Kuwait border and made our rich pals the Saudis squeal. We didn’t care about Kuwait, we cared about cash and oil. And suddenly Saddam isn’t our friend.
In spite of the nonsense basis of the whole thing, at least Bush Sr. had the sense to realize Saddam was the only stabilizing influence in the whole region. Leaving him in power cost Bush a second term, but it was the right move. If his dumbass kid had the same sense, we probably could have avoided the last 15 years of power vacuum there, and a couple thousand of our troops would still be alive.
It’s NOT a conspiracy theory. It’s a fact. I sourced everything from credible outlets.
The problem with the Ayatollah and Iran was one we created when we overthrew their democratically elected leader Mosadegh and installed the Shah, who oppressed the people and they rose up trusting their Shia religious leadership (who they knew for sure wasn’t a puppet dictator)
Then we helped to create Sadaam. And used him to gas the Iranian people.
This is why Iran hates America.
- We prop up religious extremist monarchs that want them dead like Saudi Arabia.
- We install puppet dictators that kill and gas them like the Shah and Sadaam
- We overthrew their democratically elected leader in Mosadegh
What reason have we ever given Iran to like us? We haven’t given them a single one. And they aren’t going to get over it until we leave them alone.
George HW Bush, George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Rummsfield etc are all criminals. What they did was criminal, their actions, their lies, their theft of the citizen’s tax dollars and the blood of great Americans and innocent foreigners is one of the darkest and saddest days in American history. And history will not be kind in remembering them. Especially when more of the details of the crimes they committed emerge.
OK, Let’s do some fact checking, Donald.
We didn’t install the Iranian Shah or Saddam. The shah was a hereditary ruler whose clan had ruled Persia for 2,000 years. He had our support, mostly because he wasn’t the flag burning religious radical that his opponents were. And we were not happy about Saddam’s ascent either. He was too cozy with the Soviets. We were actually arming the Kurdish rebels against Saddam in the mid-1970s. He became the lesser of the evils once the Ayatollah took over in Iran.
The CIA backed the removal of Mossadegh at the request of British MI-6), but he was not democratically elected. He was appointed by the Shah and the Iranian parliament. He later was elected in a series of elections that he rigged, and then suspended once his people were in place.
Wrong on the shah.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/06/2...ases-details-of-iranian-coup-iran-tehran-oil/
Would you be okay with China overthrowing our government to install King George because he ruled 250 years ago?
Probably not.
Mosadegh was democratically elected.
He was Prime Minister...of Parliament.
Their constitution of 1906 was based on Belgium’s constitution.
You can read their past constitution here.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Constitution_of_1906
And yes the CIA did overthrow the government and install the shah.
“A previously undisclosed telegram was sent by CIA officials in Washington to instruct their assets in Iran on August 18, 1953. It read:
Operation has been tried and failed […] we should not participate in any operation against Mossadegh which could be traced back to US and further compromise future relations with him which may become only course of action left open to US.
But the CIA agent running Operation Ajax, Kermit Roosevelt (grandson of Teddy), was undeterred. He decided to ignore his instructions and proceed with the coup regardless. Relying on networks established by British intelligence services, the CIA initiated a wave of propaganda and paid-for protests that quickly destabilised the country”
http://theconversation.com/how-the-cia-toppled-iranian-democracy-81628
I suggest you read up on Operation Ajax
http://www.coldwar.org/articles/50s/operationajax.asp
There are 4 similar problems, 3 of which were dealt with by just wars.
1. Hitler, Nazi's
2. Slobodan Milosivic
3. Ruwanda
4. Saddam
All 4 of those problems were problems because they all involved DICTATOR's, that were committing GENOCIDE, WAR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY AGAINST TENS, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE.
Other things all 4 problems had in common was:
A. Enabling the country, leader.
B. Setting up country, leader.
C. Profiting off the problem
D. American Isolationism(A WRONG view that if the problem was not invading the USA, it was not USA business, problem, USA not get involved)
Hitler/Nazi's:
Hitler, Nazi's were enabled by USA. The USA Profited from the problem. The USA said it England, Europe's Problem, and that USA should not get involved. If it had not been for the USA govt secretly selling weapons to the British, against the WRONGFUL will of the people, and if not for the Japanese, USA would not have gotten involved, until too late, and Hitler, Nazi's would have conquered world.
If Today's Republicrats(Extreme Repubs, Far Leftist, would have been alive back then, the LIBTARDS would have TRIED to APPEASE Hitler, Nazi's, would have been Anti War, peace love, would have put in stupid rules of engagement. The Repubs, would have CUT the War Fund, said Mind our own Business. Both would have caused Hitler, Nazi's to win.
And if Tron, others had been alive back then they would have wrongly said:
BUT IT WAS THE EVIL USA WHO SET UP HITLER, AND HITLER, NAZI's are KILLING TO MANY OF OUR TROOPS. BECAUSE OF THAT, WE SHOULD NOT GET INVOLVED OR SHOULDNT HAVE GOTTEN INVOLVED.
But the USA, Democrat President Roosevelt was right to sell weapons to England against Hitler, and was right to get USA into war, and should have done so BEFORE PEARL HARBOR.
SLOBODAN MILOSIVICH
Clinton was right to take out Slobodan Milosivic the GENOCIDAL DICTATOR, WAR CRIMINAL. Repubs were WRONG to try to stop Clinton.
Saddam, Iraq
95coug, and Tron are both semi right about Saddam's, Iraq's History
Tho the USA didnt actually overthrow the Iran govt. The USA did support the Shah, did fund the Shah, did train the Shah faction.
Now should the USA have done that? Maybe, Maybe not.
But the reasons are, were:
A. Shah offered more stability
B. Shah was anti Terrorist, Anti the Extreme Ayattolah Crazy Clerics that supported what was believed to be a rigged election putting the crazy clerics into a powerful crazy democratically elected crazy theocracy, that supported terrorism.
C. The Shah was against the COMMUNIST RUSSIA.
Once the Crazy Clerics REVOLTED, took over the country, and supported the COMMUNISTA, Russians, Terrorist, that's why the Democrats, Repubs, Carter, Reagan, USA Govt, FBI, CIA RIGHTFULLY OPPOSED IRAN.
Now even tho they were RIGHT, they were motivated by PROFIT, and their method of supporting, setting up, establishing, training, etc, Iraq, Saddam, WAS WRONG.
Saddam, Iraq, Kuwait
Now even tho Tron may might probably be right about WHY Saddam went after Kuwait, IT WAS STILL WRONG, BAD, EVIL, FOR SADDAM TO HAVE INVADED KUWAIT, AND WHAT SADDAM, IRAQ DID TO IRAN, KURDS, KUWAITI'S
When I was at College. There was a Kuwaiti Exchange Student, who I became friends with who told everyone that Saddam MURDERED ALL HIS FAMILY, AND THAT THE WAR WAS NOT ABOUT OIL, BUT WAS ABOUT STOPPING SADDAM(THE SAME WAY CLINTON RIGHTFULLY STOPPED SLOBODAN)
The ONLY bad thing about 1990,1991,1992 Iraq War 1, was not FINISHING THE JOB, NOT GETTING SADDAM Like Hitler, Slobodan, until Iraq War 2.
Saddam GASSED IRAN, KURDS, HIS OWN PEOPLE. I saw the National Geographic Magazines, videos, clips, documentaries, photos, etc, of:
Saddam Torture Chambers, with victims hanged from ceiling, standing on chairs, belng shocked, draining victim blood, etc
Saddam Torturer's putting victims into basins, vats filled with acid.
60,000 to 600,000 MASS GRAVES.
AL ZARQARI LEADER OF AL QAEDA IN IRAQ THAT WAS RIGHTLY KILLED BY USA FORCES, OPERATED A AL QAEDA TERRORIST TRAINING CAMP IN NORTHEAST IRAQ PRE IRAQ WAR 2.
2 Artillery Shells found in a bunker in Iraq, filled to the brim with VX Nerve gas, ACCORDING TO ABC NEWS.
Absolutley both the Iraq Wars were JUSTIFIED.
THE ONLY BAD THING WAS THE INCOMPETANCE BY BOTH BUSH's in that the war should have been over, Saddam removed during the first Iraq war.
To those who say BUT THE USA CREATED SADDAM, therefore no war.
Doesnt matter in a way whether thats true or not, as THAT IS NO EXCUSE NOT TO DO THE RIGHT THING, FIX, CLEAN UP THE MESS, ETC.
If going to use such a LAME excuse, reason to not goto war with Saddam, Iraq, then would have to say same about Hitler, Nazi's
To those who say too many USA Soldiers lost, as reason no war with Iraq, Saddam
About 350,000 USA Soldiers were killed in WW2, and therefore WW2 should not have been fought by USA
To those who say BUT THE USA PROFITING OFF THE OIL
THE USA PROFITED OFF OF WW2
To those who say BUT GETTING RID OF SADDAM CREATE VOID FOR ISIS, TERRORIST
A. THE SAME COULD HAVE BEEN SAID IN WAR AGAINST HITLER, SLOBODAN, BUT THAT DIDNT STOP THOSE WARS because it was RIGHT TO GET RID OF HITLER, SLOBODAN, SADDAM NO MATTER WHAT BECAUSE OF THEIR CRIMES.
JUSTICE should be served.
B. Bin Laden, Alqaeda, ISIS didnt become problem until about 1994, A LONG WELL TIME AFTER IRAQ WAR 1. If Saddam, Iraq had been toppled back in 1990, 1991,1992, there would not have been the void for terrorism, would not have had the terrorist, ISIS, etc, problems, in Iraq,etc, that there was post Iraq war 2.
C. Saddam, Iraq's Militiary weapons, ability, etc, was A LOT BETTER IN IRAQ WAR 2, THEN IN IRAQ WAR 1.
D. Also USA armed forces was only about 100,000 to 150,000 in Iraq war 2. USA had 500,000 forces in Iraq War 1. USA did Not have enough forces(150k), in Iraq War 2. 500,000 would have been enough to Topple Saddam, Iraq in Iraq War 1.
The only bad things about Iraq Wars WAS INCOMPETANCE
IRAQ WAR 1(BUSH SR)
A Little tiny bit incompetant
Iraq War 2(Bush Jr)
Horribly, Extremely INCOMPETANT
Only Carter, Obama were more incompetant then Bush Jr.
Clinton Was extremely COMPETANT in Removing Slobodan Milosivic, QUICKLY, with Minimal Losses, with minimal forces
1. Hitler, Nazi's
2. Slobodan Milosivic
3. Ruwanda
4. Saddam
All 4 of those problems were problems because they all involved DICTATOR's, that were committing GENOCIDE, WAR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY AGAINST TENS, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE.
Other things all 4 problems had in common was:
A. Enabling the country, leader.
B. Setting up country, leader.
C. Profiting off the problem
D. American Isolationism(A WRONG view that if the problem was not invading the USA, it was not USA business, problem, USA not get involved)
Hitler/Nazi's:
Hitler, Nazi's were enabled by USA. The USA Profited from the problem. The USA said it England, Europe's Problem, and that USA should not get involved. If it had not been for the USA govt secretly selling weapons to the British, against the WRONGFUL will of the people, and if not for the Japanese, USA would not have gotten involved, until too late, and Hitler, Nazi's would have conquered world.
If Today's Republicrats(Extreme Repubs, Far Leftist, would have been alive back then, the LIBTARDS would have TRIED to APPEASE Hitler, Nazi's, would have been Anti War, peace love, would have put in stupid rules of engagement. The Repubs, would have CUT the War Fund, said Mind our own Business. Both would have caused Hitler, Nazi's to win.
And if Tron, others had been alive back then they would have wrongly said:
BUT IT WAS THE EVIL USA WHO SET UP HITLER, AND HITLER, NAZI's are KILLING TO MANY OF OUR TROOPS. BECAUSE OF THAT, WE SHOULD NOT GET INVOLVED OR SHOULDNT HAVE GOTTEN INVOLVED.
But the USA, Democrat President Roosevelt was right to sell weapons to England against Hitler, and was right to get USA into war, and should have done so BEFORE PEARL HARBOR.
SLOBODAN MILOSIVICH
Clinton was right to take out Slobodan Milosivic the GENOCIDAL DICTATOR, WAR CRIMINAL. Repubs were WRONG to try to stop Clinton.
Saddam, Iraq
95coug, and Tron are both semi right about Saddam's, Iraq's History
Tho the USA didnt actually overthrow the Iran govt. The USA did support the Shah, did fund the Shah, did train the Shah faction.
Now should the USA have done that? Maybe, Maybe not.
But the reasons are, were:
A. Shah offered more stability
B. Shah was anti Terrorist, Anti the Extreme Ayattolah Crazy Clerics that supported what was believed to be a rigged election putting the crazy clerics into a powerful crazy democratically elected crazy theocracy, that supported terrorism.
C. The Shah was against the COMMUNIST RUSSIA.
Once the Crazy Clerics REVOLTED, took over the country, and supported the COMMUNISTA, Russians, Terrorist, that's why the Democrats, Repubs, Carter, Reagan, USA Govt, FBI, CIA RIGHTFULLY OPPOSED IRAN.
Now even tho they were RIGHT, they were motivated by PROFIT, and their method of supporting, setting up, establishing, training, etc, Iraq, Saddam, WAS WRONG.
Saddam, Iraq, Kuwait
Now even tho Tron may might probably be right about WHY Saddam went after Kuwait, IT WAS STILL WRONG, BAD, EVIL, FOR SADDAM TO HAVE INVADED KUWAIT, AND WHAT SADDAM, IRAQ DID TO IRAN, KURDS, KUWAITI'S
When I was at College. There was a Kuwaiti Exchange Student, who I became friends with who told everyone that Saddam MURDERED ALL HIS FAMILY, AND THAT THE WAR WAS NOT ABOUT OIL, BUT WAS ABOUT STOPPING SADDAM(THE SAME WAY CLINTON RIGHTFULLY STOPPED SLOBODAN)
The ONLY bad thing about 1990,1991,1992 Iraq War 1, was not FINISHING THE JOB, NOT GETTING SADDAM Like Hitler, Slobodan, until Iraq War 2.
Saddam GASSED IRAN, KURDS, HIS OWN PEOPLE. I saw the National Geographic Magazines, videos, clips, documentaries, photos, etc, of:
Saddam Torture Chambers, with victims hanged from ceiling, standing on chairs, belng shocked, draining victim blood, etc
Saddam Torturer's putting victims into basins, vats filled with acid.
60,000 to 600,000 MASS GRAVES.
AL ZARQARI LEADER OF AL QAEDA IN IRAQ THAT WAS RIGHTLY KILLED BY USA FORCES, OPERATED A AL QAEDA TERRORIST TRAINING CAMP IN NORTHEAST IRAQ PRE IRAQ WAR 2.
2 Artillery Shells found in a bunker in Iraq, filled to the brim with VX Nerve gas, ACCORDING TO ABC NEWS.
Absolutley both the Iraq Wars were JUSTIFIED.
THE ONLY BAD THING WAS THE INCOMPETANCE BY BOTH BUSH's in that the war should have been over, Saddam removed during the first Iraq war.
To those who say BUT THE USA CREATED SADDAM, therefore no war.
Doesnt matter in a way whether thats true or not, as THAT IS NO EXCUSE NOT TO DO THE RIGHT THING, FIX, CLEAN UP THE MESS, ETC.
If going to use such a LAME excuse, reason to not goto war with Saddam, Iraq, then would have to say same about Hitler, Nazi's
To those who say too many USA Soldiers lost, as reason no war with Iraq, Saddam
About 350,000 USA Soldiers were killed in WW2, and therefore WW2 should not have been fought by USA
To those who say BUT THE USA PROFITING OFF THE OIL
THE USA PROFITED OFF OF WW2
To those who say BUT GETTING RID OF SADDAM CREATE VOID FOR ISIS, TERRORIST
A. THE SAME COULD HAVE BEEN SAID IN WAR AGAINST HITLER, SLOBODAN, BUT THAT DIDNT STOP THOSE WARS because it was RIGHT TO GET RID OF HITLER, SLOBODAN, SADDAM NO MATTER WHAT BECAUSE OF THEIR CRIMES.
JUSTICE should be served.
B. Bin Laden, Alqaeda, ISIS didnt become problem until about 1994, A LONG WELL TIME AFTER IRAQ WAR 1. If Saddam, Iraq had been toppled back in 1990, 1991,1992, there would not have been the void for terrorism, would not have had the terrorist, ISIS, etc, problems, in Iraq,etc, that there was post Iraq war 2.
C. Saddam, Iraq's Militiary weapons, ability, etc, was A LOT BETTER IN IRAQ WAR 2, THEN IN IRAQ WAR 1.
D. Also USA armed forces was only about 100,000 to 150,000 in Iraq war 2. USA had 500,000 forces in Iraq War 1. USA did Not have enough forces(150k), in Iraq War 2. 500,000 would have been enough to Topple Saddam, Iraq in Iraq War 1.
The only bad things about Iraq Wars WAS INCOMPETANCE
IRAQ WAR 1(BUSH SR)
A Little tiny bit incompetant
Iraq War 2(Bush Jr)
Horribly, Extremely INCOMPETANT
Only Carter, Obama were more incompetant then Bush Jr.
Clinton Was extremely COMPETANT in Removing Slobodan Milosivic, QUICKLY, with Minimal Losses, with minimal forces
His pardons in the Iran-Contra affair were horrible, he was party to a lot of Cold War decisionmaking that had bad outcomes, and the economy crapped out after 12 years of the same policies, but there's a couple positives I can point to: His handling of the fall of Soviet Communism certainly wasn't perfect in retrospect (we're seeing the fallout from that live on our screens as we speak) but it could have been a LOT worse. He also conducted the Persian Gulf War correctly once he put himself in that position. His greatest achievement may be keeping Cheney from taking batches of mercs and stealing Iraqi oil fields. He also gave that veneer of genial white respectable Republicanism that kept the Birchers and bigots in their box, even if he subtley appealed to them to get votes. Basically the best Republican president of my lifetime, but there hasn't been a good Republican president since Ike.
You're glad he's dead? Geez dude, pretty harsh. I mean, it's fine to disagree with a man's politics and how he did things. Diverse beliefs and opinions are one of the things that sets this country apart. I have disagreed and full-on campaigned against the policies of more than one president in my life. But never would I say I was glad any of them died. It's not like we're talking about Pol Pot, Idi Amin or Hitler here.
You may absolutely despise how he ran the country but to say you're glad he's dead smacks of either immaturity or a blind, single minded political viewpoint.
"Glad he's dead"...wow.
This is the new mentality in the world. See also that prof in Cali who immediately jumped on Barbara Bush's death as a political statement. Seriously? Barbara Bush?
Common dignity and remembrances of one's life service is no longer respected or observed. It immediately goes to an analysis of their political stance and a critical view of their impact.
If and when Jimmy Carter dies, he deserves respect for his service. If and when Bill Clinton dies, he deserves respect for his service, not whether or not he inhaled or had sex. Same with Obama, Bush 2 and, yes, even Donald Trump.
These are extraordinary people who achieved the highest office in the country. They deserve at least a few days of honor and respect - no matter where they were at on the political spectrum, the motives behind what they did or didn't do. If not, go troll the obituaries online and badmouth people as they die. It's not that much different between George HW Bush and your next door neighbor or parent. Just classless and tacky otherwise.
I was in agreement right up until you said Dump—a pathological liar and egotistical idiot who has turned the office into a mockery, and who would turn the presidency into a dictatorship and lock up his political enemies if not for the few checks and balances that remain deserves zero respect or honor. He’s a simply a horrible human.
Mr Congeniality is back on brand.
Tron must get in fistfights with family at Thanksgiving dinner, tell his wife she’s fat bc he HAS to because he’s Honest Abe and that’s his job as a life partner, and start riots in the break room at work.
I stand by what I wrote and will afford that dignity to all those mentioned.
As I get more years of life behind me than in front of me, I have come to appreciate the complexities of our foreign policy. It is incredibly complicated and seemingly hypocritical in many ways.
But lets consider that the US established an alliance with Josef Stalin in our fight against Hitler. Stalin was one of the most horrible people who has walked this earth. He was responsible for killing millions of his own people and also starving millions of Ukrainians. We also opened up relations with China, just a few years after Mao killed some 60 million of his own people in "The Great Leap Forward." We allowed them to join the World Trade Organization in 2001, and look what we have created.
The ultimate goal of our foreign policy has been to keep the US as the preeminent power on the planet. Sometimes that means doing unsavory things with unsavory regimes. We play countries off of each other to support the goal of keeping our status as the world's number one power. It is a messy world. Self-righteous indignation toward decisions to work with corrupt and murderous regimes ignore the complexities of geopolitics.
Unfortunately, for about 100 years, starting with horrible president Woodrow Wilson, we shifted to fighting wars based on ideology...as opposed to the preferred (and historical) reason of fighting only when it is in our narrowly defined self-interest. We can't impose our way of governing on other nations with the hope that somehow they'll adopt representative government. That is foolish.
Fighting wars against Communism (ie Vietnam), unwise "nation-building" wars, etc. all were misdirected and unwise...and have taken a huge toll on our country.
You may hate Trump, but he is right in his harsh criticism of past wars we have unwisely fought (ie Iraq). We need to get out of Afghanistan...and I hope he will soon make that decision. He is right to work against allowing Iran to become a regional power in the Middle East too. Iran's rise was made possible by G.W. Bush's Iraq war and Obama's policy of elevating them in the region. Both were mistakes.
Don't get me wrong, I detest the Saudi regime, but will take them over Iran if forced to make a choice.
We need to get involved only in conflicts if its in our narrowly defined self-interests. Fortunately, we are no longer so dependent on foreign countries to obtain critical oil supplies, so that has been a positive development since fracking was invented (in the US, I should add).
Recommend watching lectures and interviews by George Friedman, founder of Geopolitical Futures. He really has a good grasp of world geopolitics. He is fascinating.
But lets consider that the US established an alliance with Josef Stalin in our fight against Hitler. Stalin was one of the most horrible people who has walked this earth. He was responsible for killing millions of his own people and also starving millions of Ukrainians. We also opened up relations with China, just a few years after Mao killed some 60 million of his own people in "The Great Leap Forward." We allowed them to join the World Trade Organization in 2001, and look what we have created.
The ultimate goal of our foreign policy has been to keep the US as the preeminent power on the planet. Sometimes that means doing unsavory things with unsavory regimes. We play countries off of each other to support the goal of keeping our status as the world's number one power. It is a messy world. Self-righteous indignation toward decisions to work with corrupt and murderous regimes ignore the complexities of geopolitics.
Unfortunately, for about 100 years, starting with horrible president Woodrow Wilson, we shifted to fighting wars based on ideology...as opposed to the preferred (and historical) reason of fighting only when it is in our narrowly defined self-interest. We can't impose our way of governing on other nations with the hope that somehow they'll adopt representative government. That is foolish.
Fighting wars against Communism (ie Vietnam), unwise "nation-building" wars, etc. all were misdirected and unwise...and have taken a huge toll on our country.
You may hate Trump, but he is right in his harsh criticism of past wars we have unwisely fought (ie Iraq). We need to get out of Afghanistan...and I hope he will soon make that decision. He is right to work against allowing Iran to become a regional power in the Middle East too. Iran's rise was made possible by G.W. Bush's Iraq war and Obama's policy of elevating them in the region. Both were mistakes.
Don't get me wrong, I detest the Saudi regime, but will take them over Iran if forced to make a choice.
We need to get involved only in conflicts if its in our narrowly defined self-interests. Fortunately, we are no longer so dependent on foreign countries to obtain critical oil supplies, so that has been a positive development since fracking was invented (in the US, I should add).
Recommend watching lectures and interviews by George Friedman, founder of Geopolitical Futures. He really has a good grasp of world geopolitics. He is fascinating.
Last edited:
I vehemently disagreed with the politics of a lot of presidents going back 50 years. However only 2 were of such poor character that they deserved to be considered unfit for office. I believe there is a better than 50% that the current one will suffer a similar fate to the first one.
Many of the rest in hindsight made horrendous decisions in world matters, but I think they all believed those decisions were in the best interests of the country.
This is from a Vietnam era student who would argue that venture was at least on par with anything we have done in the middke east during the last 25 years
Many of the rest in hindsight made horrendous decisions in world matters, but I think they all believed those decisions were in the best interests of the country.
This is from a Vietnam era student who would argue that venture was at least on par with anything we have done in the middke east during the last 25 years
You are entitled to your opinion, but I hope you realize the person you would honor in death would just as soon put you in jail if you were in his political sights if he could get away with it.
Ok, these damn political threads, I'm checking out now cuz I hate them and do my best not to get involved with them.
I care much more about a president's policies than his crude behavior and words.
Policies are what affects us. We have had some crude presidents in the past. We will have more in the future.
The left created this culture bob...and now you have the chutzpah to object to what has resulted? Amazing.
What is the point of this? You could have had a really good political discussion, but instead with the end of your response, you had to throw a bomb. That bomb has ruined a lot of legitimate points you are making. You could make your point without being an ass.
you need to look up the difference between 'honoring' someone and afforded them 'dignity'.
At least wait until the corpse is cold before pissing on the body.
No it doesn't ruin anything. The attitude HAS to be that We the People. Who are supposed to be running this country don't forget or forgive people that kill millions and bankrupt the country while lying and manipulating people.
You want to be fondly remembered. Then be a leader worthy of fond memories.
And what dignity do they deserve when they killed millions and ruined lives and spent the hard earned tax dollars of Americans who today struggle to pay for education, housing, and healthcare. There is no dignity to be given to the corrupt.
Please take this the right way.. read my lips ...you are vile and disgusting .
The same diginity and grief the families killed would have been afforded.
Though you'll never get it because you're all about 'being right' as opposed to doing the right thing.
Good day. I said, good day, sir.
The right thing for those families of innocent murdered, those soldiers who were maimed and killed and murdered on lies is bringing those who caused suffering to justice.
That IS the right thing.
But hey throw a flag over a casket play reville and pretend the politicians who made this all possible are heroes and keep wondering why things never change as the countries wealth deteriorates debt skyrocketed, more dead, families ruined.
That is your current everyday....sir.
You are a real POS Tron. I will never engage with you on this board again. What a horrible thing to say, then you double down on it. You are a disgusting human being.
And I was not a Bush fan (41 or 43). But at least 41 had the guts to start us on the road to balanced budgets, which were achieved under Clinton. Cost 41 the election, but it was the right thing to do.
Every President and Congress since has been a bunch of gutless wimps on this issue.
I lose no sleep standing up against those who wasted trillions of taxpayer dollars / the lives of the innocent / and played reckless for profit with the blood of great American soldiers on needless and senseless wars
I can sleep at night, I can look myself in the mirror knowing I have principles and values that are never compromised, and that I am not living a lie or making excuses for those who bring suffering to the world. It’s a nice feeling.
Wow, the second coming of Jesus standing in judgement. Get over yourself.
I never said I was Jesus. I just know what the constitution and Declaration of Independence are actually about and hold myself to those values and principles.
Go read George Washington’s farewell address and you’ll understand what America was supposed to be, and how far we have fallen. Part of the reason is we don’t hold our politicians accountable. That needs to change.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp
