Trump doesn't have the Iranian problem without the Iraq War.
What reasoning makes you come to that conclusion?
He failed to mention absolving Islam of blame and allowing millions of Islamists into the U.S.
We don't have millions of Islamists. We have between 4.5 and 5.5 Muslims in the US (estimated) and only some portion of those would qualify as Islamists.
He failed to mention absolving Islam of blame and allowing millions of Islamists into the U.S.
We don't have millions of Islamists. We have between 4.5 and 5.5 Muslims in the US (estimated) and only some portion of those would qualify as Islamists.
This is your principled conservative and card carrying member of the Republican party openly defending the jihadists.
He failed to mention absolving Islam of blame and allowing millions of Islamists into the U.S.
We don't have millions of Islamists. We have between 4.5 and 5.5 Muslims in the US (estimated) and only some portion of those would qualify as Islamists.
This is your principled conservative and card carrying member of the Republican party openly defending the jihadists.
There you go solidifying your place atop the Dumbest Posters in WC History list. I in no way defended Jihadists. If I was still in the military, I'd happily kill Jihadists given the opportunity. How the f*ck did you get that out of my post? There's only one way possible - you're dumb as f*ck.
This is interesting.
@aloha-hoosier no it was a rush to judgment. It was emotions. There was a feeling of wanting retribution somewhere. Anywhere. And the claim was that Iraq harbored terrorists so a crooked self dealing administration marketed unverified claims of weapons of mass destruction and killed off a ton of U.S. kids for no reason.
sad. And evil. Like republicans of that time. There’s a reason why they never won anything since. What Brad wrote is spot on
@aloha-hoosier no it was a rush to judgment. It was emotions. There was a feeling of wanting retribution somewhere. Anywhere. And the claim was that Iraq harbored terrorists so a crooked self dealing administration marketed unverified claims of weapons of mass destruction and killed off a ton of U.S. kids for no reason.
sad. And evil. Like republicans of that time. There’s a reason why they never won anything since. What Brad wrote is spot on
People forget why Trump prevailed in 2016 when everything was stacked against him.
Nails it.
https://twitter.com/fischerking64/status/2097425791990820870?s=46
He failed to mention absolving Islam of blame and allowing millions of Islamists into the U.S.
How awful it must be to hate a multitude for the actions of a few.
You're just deathly afraid of anyone with a uterus and working vocal chords, or those with darker skin.
Get over your fear, Frodo. Its not their fault you were born stunted.
In closing,
Nails it.
https://twitter.com/fischerking64/status/2097425791990820870?s=46
He failed to mention absolving Islam of blame and allowing millions of Islamists into the U.S.
https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2097780044395409914
The admin ginned up the support, it wasn’t reacting to it. So disingenuous.For those of you on here who backed the Iraq war at the time--it's not about you being right. It's OK to admit you're wrong. Nobody blames you. You're inconsequential. This is about viewing what happened and what was lost with clear eyes.
We don't have 20-20 hindsight and we're not time travelers. Backing the Iraq war at the time given all that we knew and thought we knew (for example our intelligence services and those of most of the world assessed that Saddam had WMD) was a justifiable decision. In fact, most of Congress and Americans at the time backed that decision. The military execution was nearly flawless; the problem was how we handled the aftermath of the military victory. Of course, if we knew then what we know now, we would have had different opinions and if we invaded, we'd have done many things differently. Beating ourselves up over something that cannot be changed is a dumb exercise.
Learning from your mistakes is always worthwhile. That’s not “beating ourselves up over something that can’t be changed.” It’s how we learn not to repeat stupid mistakes. Bush Admin made a lot.
First, Hussein was the biggest check on Iranian influence in the region. We eliminated that and created a power vacuum. Guess who filled it? And with that increased power, Iran became more capable of influencing Hamas, Hezbollah etc. since they had nothing to worry about right next door.Trump doesn't have the Iranian problem without the Iraq War.
What reasoning makes you come to that conclusion?
Second, the war and resulting chaos (hey there ISIS) resulted in the US and probably the entire West to not pay enough attention to Iran and it’s growing power.
Third, taking Hussein out for the trumped up reason that he had WMDs (something only the blind and dumb still argue over) created a lot more incentive for every rogue nation to get a nuke and prevent a reckless, irrational invasion against them while also proving that WMD justifications work on Americans, no matter how weak. So if you want one, hide your intentions and hurry up, lest the US comes after you.
Fourth, and unrelated to the Iran problem as it existed in 2025 but relevant to alternative history, we probably don’t get Trump or MAGA without all the disaffected and pissed off people caused by Bush era decisions.
Where you and I agree, though, is that I don’t think GWB and Cheney did it for corrupt reasons and our military obviously took care of business quickly. But that last point doesn’t really matter if you fuck up the aftermath. And boy did we do that.
I'm one of the few libs here who actually supported W back in the day. I didn't vote for him in 2000, because I was 22 and an upperclassman finishing a POLS degree, and I wanted to make a protest vote to prove I understood the American system and why every vote matters (an argument I continually had with a friend who refused to vote in any election on the grounds that a single vote never mattered), but I still supported him. On election night, I watched with my friends in our apartment, and I cheered whenever they groaned, and groaned whenever they cheered. I quickly had a falling out with him, because I thought he started his term off in the worst way possible (or maybe I was just finally growing into my leftist self), but when the war came, I fell back into support. I didn't think we should go into Iraq, but I still supported the mofo, anyway. Why do I relate all this nonsense? Simply to stress that I wasn't some IUB commie who was opposed to Bush for ideological reasons. At the time, he was my guy. I was with him.
In hindsight, there may not be a greater crime against the American polity in modern history than the disingenuous drumming up of the march to war in Iraq. Afghanistan, sure, you could call that a righteous war, but Iraq was never such a thing. Iraq was misguided, misrepresented, ill-planned, and it bore all the hallmarks of men who made a decision first, then looked for the facts to justify it next, and, quite frankly, it stunk of happening for personal reasons. It felt like Bush and his cronies just didn't like Saddam and wanted an excuse to go after him. That's why you fight wars in 1490. It's not why you fight wars in 2003.
History has not been kind to the people who pushed for that war, and it will be less kind as time moves on. Colin Powell's infamous role in justifying it is already indelibly marked as a stain on his legacy that will never wash away. The term "neoconservative" will for generations be a synonym for "warmonger." The concept of "nation-building," which in theory could have been a legitimate exercise, will be a joke until long after all of us have passed beyond this realm.
The damage done to the history of the world, the ideals of the West, the stature of the good ol' USA, by the Iraq war, it's practically immeasurable. The reverberations in the Middle East are even worse. Brad said something like, without Iraq, we wouldn't have Iran, and he's right. The Saudi-Iranian cold war was a direct consequence of the destabilization of the Hussein regime. I mean, it didn't give birth to it, of course, it's been going on since the 80s, but the War cemented it as the central dividing line in the region. And the permanent US presence in the region was a huge factor in the death of the two-state solution. I actually don't think it was the deciding factor. I think the failure of Camp David set that fate in motion, anyway, but our post-9/11 stance in the region sped things up and removed any chance for us to ever be a fair broker in peace talks moving forward. And without us, there are no other possible brokers.
Long story short, 9/11 changed us and the world forever, and the response of the Bush administration helped insure it would not be for the better.
@snarlcakes I hate gov too. They only make things worse
yes
the question is who will fvck things up the least and do it slowest
it's getting harder to tell
Twist of mood, here is a link to one of my most favorite memories of 9/11, the memorial service at St. Paul's in London. CSPAN has the entire thing (link below). Speed forward to 51:10 to see the most moving part: the archbishop's address followed by a nation of monarchists singing the Battle Hymn of the Republic.
https://www.c-span.org/program/international-telecasts/british-memorial-service/131001
I'm one of the few libs here who actually supported W back in the day. I didn't vote for him in 2000, because I was 22 and an upperclassman finishing a POLS degree, and I wanted to make a protest vote to prove I understood the American system and why every vote matters (an argument I continually had with a friend who refused to vote in any election on the grounds that a single vote never mattered), but I still supported him. On election night, I watched with my friends in our apartment, and I cheered whenever they groaned, and groaned whenever they cheered. I quickly had a falling out with him, because I thought he started his term off in the worst way possible (or maybe I was just finally growing into my leftist self), but when the war came, I fell back into support. I didn't think we should go into Iraq, but I still supported the mofo, anyway. Why do I relate all this nonsense? Simply to stress that I wasn't some IUB commie who was opposed to Bush for ideological reasons. At the time, he was my guy. I was with him.
In hindsight, there may not be a greater crime against the American polity in modern history than the disingenuous drumming up of the march to war in Iraq. Afghanistan, sure, you could call that a righteous war, but Iraq was never such a thing. Iraq was misguided, misrepresented, ill-planned, and it bore all the hallmarks of men who made a decision first, then looked for the facts to justify it next, and, quite frankly, it stunk of happening for personal reasons. It felt like Bush and his cronies just didn't like Saddam and wanted an excuse to go after him. That's why you fight wars in 1490. It's not why you fight wars in 2003.
History has not been kind to the people who pushed for that war, and it will be less kind as time moves on. Colin Powell's infamous role in justifying it is already indelibly marked as a stain on his legacy that will never wash away. The term "neoconservative" will for generations be a synonym for "warmonger." The concept of "nation-building," which in theory could have been a legitimate exercise, will be a joke until long after all of us have passed beyond this realm.
The damage done to the history of the world, the ideals of the West, the stature of the good ol' USA, by the Iraq war, it's practically immeasurable. The reverberations in the Middle East are even worse. Brad said something like, without Iraq, we wouldn't have Iran, and he's right. The Saudi-Iranian cold war was a direct consequence of the destabilization of the Hussein regime. I mean, it didn't give birth to it, of course, it's been going on since the 80s, but the War cemented it as the central dividing line in the region. And the permanent US presence in the region was a huge factor in the death of the two-state solution. I actually don't think it was the deciding factor. I think the failure of Camp David set that fate in motion, anyway, but our post-9/11 stance in the region sped things up and removed any chance for us to ever be a fair broker in peace talks moving forward. And without us, there are no other possible brokers.
Long story short, 9/11 changed us and the world forever, and the response of the Bush administration helped insure it would not be for the better.
Dubya had always been the black sheep of the family and he was determined to prove to everyone that he could finish what Daddy didn't.