GWB's Prophetic Warning In 2007

[NightTrain]

Dubya knew what the consequences would be to withdraw prematurely from Iraq.

Not everything is politically driven, something he understood and he made tough choices that were unpopular by those with no understanding of military matters or history or even basic common sense and his policies in Iraq were ultimately correct.

The undoing of his work by Obama and utter lack of leadership on the world stage has led us and the world to where we are now.


This speech in 2007 was right on the money :
<iframe src="//video.foxnews.com/v/video-embed.html?video_id=3768333397001&loc=debatepolicy.com&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.debatepolicy.com%2Fshowthread .php" width="466" height="263" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>








http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6336&stc=1

[Gaffer]

His biggest mistake was in assuming a competent president would replace him and carry on what he had started.

[Gunny]

Dubya knew what the consequences would be to withdraw prematurely from Iraq.

Not everything is politically driven, something he understood and he made tough choices that were unpopular by those with no understanding of military matters or history or even basic common sense and his policies in Iraq were ultimately correct.

The undoing of his work by Obama and utter lack of leadership on the world stage has led us and the world to where we are now.


This speech in 2007 was right on the money :
<iframe src="//video.foxnews.com/v/video-embed.html?video_id=3768333397001&loc=debatepolicy.com&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.debatepolicy.com%2Fshowthread .php" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" height="263" width="466"></iframe><noscript>Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com (http://video.foxnews.com)</noscript>








http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6336&stc=1

Any competent person knows we left Iraq too early. Obama declaring victory is about like someone in a message board debate declaring victory. He pulled us out before the government was well-established and had a means of defending itself militarily. Incompetence at its highest level. Obama played partisan politics using human lives in Iraq as pawns.

Oh, and that is one LOUSY looking cowboy hat GWB is wearing. :laugh:

[aboutime]

Remember how everyone who hated Bush...just because they were as ignorant as Obama, called Bush a liar, and War monger?

Nobody wanted to listen, and they still refuse to listen...as Obama now blames Bush again, for proving how STUPID Liberals like Obama really are.

[Olivia]

He did not miss a single point did he? It is like Obama has a checklist.

[revelarts]

Chenney had it more Right in 1994.
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/6BEsZMvrq-I?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[NightTrain]

Chenney had it more Right in 1994.

The world and the players were very different in 1994 compared to 2007. Neighboring countries didn't openly take advantage of Iraq's weakened state after we toppled Saddam, contrary to Cheney's beliefs in '94, although I have no doubt that unofficially there were efforts to destabilize.

AQ and IS weren't nearly the threat that they are today or in '07, and certainly no one ever imagined that they could possibly field an army of sorts. Ragtag terrorist mobs taking control and holding wide swaths of territory like they are now is due to a feckless American Presidency and utter lack of leadership by the USA in the UN and NATO.

Bush nailed it on the head with his speech. Whatever else you think his shortcomings were, he knew the situation and correctly predicted what would happen by exiting Iraq before it was time. Obama scored points with his ignorant base at the expense of throwing away all we'd fought for and accomplished. Now there will be a need to have boots on the ground and the quagmire Cheney predicted is a very real possibility to correct the situation.

Refreshing to see a VP that was knowledgeable and intelligent.

[revelarts]

Saddam wasn't any weaker in 2003.
Bush claims he was STRONG.

AQ and IS were never a threat to Saddam
And neither would have grown as fast if there was no recruiting tool banners of the U.S. illegal invasion, torture and gitmo if W had not attacked Iraq.

plus AQ terrorist were being trained by the U.S. against the Russians.
AND we are still supporting AQ in Syria, Libya etc and other terrorist group elsewhere, it's BS to claim the U.S. "war on terror" has been consistent or hasn't fed the beast on several occasions.
OR that Rs have been wearing white hats throughout.
.

W's iraq war has created the quagmire Chenney described

[Gunny]

Saddam wasn't any weaker in 2003.
Bush claims he was STRONG.

AQ and IS were never a threat to Saddam
And neither would have grown as fast if there was no recruiting tool banners of the U.S. illegal invasion, torture and gitmo if W had not attacked Iraq.

plus AQ terrorist were being trained by the U.S. against the Russians.
AND we are still supporting AQ in Syria, Libya etc and other terrorist group elsewhere, it's BS to claim the U.S. "war on terror" has been consistent or hasn't fed the beast on several occasions.
OR that Rs have been wearing white hats throughout.
.

W's iraq war has created the quagmire Chenney described

To say we trained AQ is rather disingenuous at best. We supported the muhajadeen in Afghanistan. That bin Laden LATER became the face of AQ was irrelevant at the time.

There's a lot of stupidity and naivete in our government in regards to the ME, and always has been. But if you say, look, those people don't think like us, then you get labeled a racist by an ignorant left that thinks all those Arabs and Persians want is democracy when they have NO notion of what the word means.

People like bin Lade, AQ, Hezbollah, Hamas, ISIS .... they make their living on killing and keeping a war going. WTF are they going to do if they win and there is no war? There will ALWAYS be a war with people like that because they make more money at it than they could selling shoes. If we were completely out of there, they'd be killing each other over one pretext or another.

The recruiting attraction is because there is no middle class in the ME. You're poor or rich. Sure, we have given them ammo to use in recruiting, but it wouldn't mean a thing in the long run. They'd find a reason.

[NightTrain]

Saddam wasn't any weaker in 2003.
Bush claims he was STRONG.

In 2003, Iraq had the 4th largest standing army in the world.

How can you say he wasn't strong?

Sure, the Iraqis suffered an efficient man-handling by the US and coalition partners, but that doesn't negate the fact that Saddam's military was strong - it just wasn't nearly the same caliber as our military.

Saddam's military was feared throughout the ME.


AQ and IS were never a threat to Saddam
And neither would have grown as fast if there was no recruiting tool banners of the U.S. illegal invasion, torture and gitmo if W had not attacked Iraq.

Of course they weren't. That's because Saddam's military was strong. :smoke:

Yes, Rev, and I'm sure that's why muslims continue to flock to IS to this day... because of Gitmo and waterboarding. Mmmmhmmm.

I'm sure someone can work Haliburton and Oil into the world's terrorist woes, too.


plus AQ terrorist were being trained by the U.S. against the Russians.

Yup. It worked great, too, but no one had a Crystal Ball handy to see where that would come back to bite us in the ass.


AND we are still supporting AQ in Syria, Libya etc and other terrorist group elsewhere, it's BS to claim the U.S. "war on terror" has been consistent or hasn't fed the beast on several occasions.

It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Personally, I think both sides in Syria should be allowed to eliminate each other. I like the idea of them wiping themselves out, rather than us having to do it.


OR that Rs have been wearing white hats throughout.

I'd say the Rs have generally been much more responsible with our role as the world's sole Superpower. I don't need to point out what happens when we put our collective heads in the sand and hope the world takes care of itself.
.


W's iraq war has created the quagmire Chenney described

Whatever. Saddam's gone, the plan was working just fine until Obama got behind the wheel.

Let's place the blame where it belongs, shall we? The current Iraq mess is squarely Obama's fault.

[Olivia]

Saddam wasn't any weaker in 2003.
Bush claims he was STRONG.

AQ and IS were never a threat to Saddam
And neither would have grown as fast if there was no recruiting tool banners of the U.S. illegal invasion, torture and gitmo if W had not attacked Iraq.

plus AQ terrorist were being trained by the U.S. against the Russians.
AND we are still supporting AQ in Syria, Libya etc and other terrorist group elsewhere, it's BS to claim the U.S. "war on terror" has been consistent or hasn't fed the beast on several occasions.
OR that Rs have been wearing white hats throughout.
.

W's iraq war has created the quagmire Chenney described
It was not Bush's war. He took world wide intelligence to the congress and received bilateral support. Did I agree with that decision? No I did not.

[revelarts]

In 2003, Iraq had the 4th largest standing army in the world.

How can you say he wasn't strong?

Sure, the Iraqis suffered an efficient man-handling by the US and coalition partners, but that doesn't negate the fact that Saddam's military was strong - it just wasn't nearly the same caliber as our military.

Saddam's military was feared throughout the ME.


Train follow the conversation better buddy.
I was correcting someone here who made the claim that AQ and ISIS would be prone to take over Saddam's Iraq. But I was making the point that Saddam had a "strong" military by M.E. standards and would have been able to destroy or effectively fight any fledgling AQ or Isis uprising. (which would never have the momentum it W hadn't attacked in the 1st place)
And as you say Saddam was never a serious threat to the U.S military..:smoke:



Yes, Rev, and I'm sure that's why muslims continue to flock to IS to this day... because of Gitmo and waterboarding. Mmmmhmmm.
I'm sure those actions never have and never will be again mentioned as an excuse to kill Americans, AQ and Isis are known for forgiving and looking forward and not backwards.:rolleyes:



Yup. It worked great, too, but no one had a Crystal Ball handy to see where that would come back to bite us in the ass. But this is what many here are praising W for his powers of prognostication, and i give credit to Chenny for his.



...supporting... AQ and other terrorist...It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Personally, I think both sides in Syria should be allowed to eliminate each other. I like the idea of them wiping themselves out, rather than us having to do it.
The West now has a 30-40+ yr track record of supporting terrorist that bite us in the arse. there's no one that should assume otherwise at this point. supporting Hamas or Hezbo over PLO? And how exactly is AQ better than Khadaffi, he was FIGHTING AQs Our enemy from 911 and Iraq!. and his people are NOT better off.
no, it's another game being played the war on terrorist is a cover for other activity as well.



Whatever. Saddam's gone, the plan was working just fine until Obama got behind the wheel.
Let's place the blame where it belongs, shall we? The current Iraq mess is squarely Obama's fault.

If were going to try to give Bush CREDIT for a good prediction here,
then we need to give him credit for the quagmire he created in Iraq,
which you an others want to now blame Obama for.

[NightTrain]

Train follow the conversation better buddy.
I was correcting someone here who made the claim that AQ and ISIS would be prone to take over Saddam's Iraq. But I was making the point that Saddam had a "strong" military by M.E. standards and would have been able to destroy or effectively fight any fledgling AQ or Isis uprising. (which would never have the momentum it W hadn't attacked in the 1st place)

I'm not seeing anyone making that statement in this thread...? Maybe I need more coffee.

And as you say Saddam was never a serious threat to the U.S military..:smoke:

Right. Not directly. Trying to kill a former U.S. President and funding & encouraging terrorism is still a threat to the USA, like it or not.


I'm sure those actions never have and never will be again mentioned as an excuse to kill Americans, AQ and Isis are known for forgiving and looking forward and not backwards.:rolleyes:

There you go. An excuse.

They're going to hate us and try to kill us anyway, because we're not a muslim nation. We're viewed with almost as much hatred as Israel for the same reasons - we're all infidels.

It's not because we waterboarded a few terrorists, when they commit unspeakable atrocities with glee to this day.


But this is what many here are praising W for his powers of prognostication, and i give credit to Chenny for his.

Cheney held the same view as Bush in '07 - it evolved as the game and players changed. The ME is very dynamic.


The West now has a 30-40+ yr track record of supporting terrorist that bite us in the arse. there's no one that should assume otherwise at this point. supporting Hamas or Hezbo over PLO? And how exactly is AQ better than Khadaffi, he was FIGHTING AQs Our enemy from 911 and Iraq!. and his people are NOT better off.
no, it's another game being played the war on terrorist is a cover for other activity as well.

I don't subscribe to the nutty conspiracy theories, Rev, as you know. We didn't go to Afghanistan for a gas pipeline and we didn't go to Iraq for the oil at Haliburton's request. 9/11 wasn't an inside job.


If were going to try to give Bush CREDIT for a good prediction here,
then we need to give him credit for the quagmire he created in Iraq,
which you an others want to now blame Obama for.

Nope. Bush took care of the Iraq problem, and the plan & strategy was sound and working. Things went to hell when Obama didn't follow through and abandoned the plan for cheap political points and sheer ignorance.

The good news is that Obama's golf game has never been better!