George W. Bush

George W. Bush Skeptical of Obama's Iran Negotiations, Worried About ISIS

Still appears unaware of his role in helping bring ISIS to life


White House

In remarks at a meeting of the Republican Jewish Coalition in Las Vegas this weekend first reported by The New York Times, George W. Bush address the 2016 presidential elections—avoiding comments on Hillary Clinton and acknowledging he could be a liability for his brother, Jeb, as he runs for presidents—as well as President Obama's handling of foreign policy.

While President Bush has largely declined to make public statements about his successor's policies, he has not been a fan. The Times reports on Bush's comments:

Mr. Bush, whose war in Iraq eventually became deeply unpopular and fueled President Obama's 2008 candidacy, weighed back in on the Middle East and the administration's current pursuit of a nuclear deal with Iran, which was strongly opposed by most the people in the room.

He said he was skeptical about lifting sanctions against Iran at a time when its government seemed to be caving in, attendees said, and regretted the leverage the United States would lose as a result of lifting the sanctions. He questioned whether the Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, under whom the current framework for a deal has been discussed, represents a new policy or a "new spokesman" for the old regime, Mr. Weingarten recalled. He said that Mr. Bush talked about how there is "no transparency in Iran," because the supreme leader, and not the will of the people, picked the presidents.

Bush's comments on Iran are unfortunate, given his own attempts early in his administration to negotiate with North Korea, even after labeling it, along with Iraq and Iran, a part of an "axis of evil." There may be "no transparency in Iran," but there's no transparency in Saudi Arabia either, but that hasn't stopped the U.S. from entangling itself in a costly relationship with the country. In Iran's case, the goal is an agreement over the country's controversial nuclear program, not a relationship in which the U.S. is saddled with more security and cooperation responsibilities in the Middle East.

Although not reported in the Times, speaking about the Middle East Bush also reportedly  asked, "You think the Middle East is chaotic now? Imagine what it looks like for our grandchildren. That's how Americans should view the deal."  That comment is particularly unfortunate—what particular concern is the state of the Middle East to "our" grandchildren, who will most likely live more than 6,000 miles away from the Middle East like we do? Will the Iran deal destabilize the Middle East the way, say, the U.S. invasion of Iraq did? President Bush is concerned about the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) too, but does not appear to have come to terms with his role in helping to bring the group to life.

Via the Times:

And he was animated when speaking about the group calling itself the Islamic State, which he referred to as the "second act" of Al Qaeda.

Several attendees sensed a tacit critique of Mr. Obama and his failure to follow through on his threats to use force when Mr. Bush said "you gotta mean it" when talking tough, and that America's allies and enemies needed to know where an American leader stood. He also discussed his own approach in Iraq, saying he changed course when it was warranted.

"You call in the military and say, 'Here's my goal. What's your plan to help me achieve that goal?'" attendees quoted him as saying. He added that when asked what had to be done with terrorists bent on America's destruction, the answer was "well, you kill 'em," several attendees recalled.

Bush also reportedly criticized the 2011 withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq, something he originally negotiated, arguing the intention was to re-negotiate a new deadline at a later date—President Obama tried, but failed, to do so.

NEXT: VIDEO: Should the Supreme Court Allow Us to "Go to Hell"?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Looking for a libertarian take here and not finding it.
    Could W. still be stupid about the wars? Sure. Could Obo be criticized for continuing, and in some cases enlarging them? You bet!
    Put ’em both in a barrel, roll it down hill. Guaranteed to be an asshole on top.

    1. Sevo is my middle finger and I suck my middle finger with my tongue

    2. Republicans are all for transparency, except in the Republican primaries, particularly in Iowa and Nevada.

    3. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…

  2. Booooosh!

  3. The Times reports on Bush’s comments

    Is this the same Times that calls Democrats “President” and Republicans “Mr.”?

    Mr. Bush, whose war in Iraq

    Oh yeah, that Times.

    1. I just love this Man

      1. I love playa and I love all the merchants of amazing on the threads of this place……
        the gods call themselves playa and the rest of the lasers

    2. They called Bush “President Bush” during his term as president.

      They call Obama “Mr. Obama” in the second mention and beyond, even during his term. As, I would add, they did with Bush.

      1. But what do they call Carter?

        1. History’s Greatest Monster.

        2. Senor Carter?

          Aaannnd…don’t you people sleep?

        3. Elmer Fudd, rabbit killer.

          1. Wabbit Slayer

      2. Beat it, Mr. Hugh.

      3. And now I’ve used up all of my free articles at the NYT, you monster!

        1. He’s just saving you from yourself.

          1. That cookie will expire in four days. I doubt Playa will have even sobered up by then.

            1. For his sake, I hope not.

  4. The old bush is stroking his cock off in the middle of the night while the old lady obviously sleeps because no one would want to fuck her so the tuff old tired dude lays on his couch in TexaPussy and strokes the Bush tip with slippery fingahs… and the old man Bush shakes a love penis spurt onto his white chest and he looks down and decides to paint his Bush jizz with acrylics and the dude does this and maybe well…. but no fucking way the brother of the universe can paint his jizz as well as I can but fist bump to the former prez and existing prez if he’s in the same hot tibx…….

  5. Ed is fucking with old time craw with the old deep times where this bitch feels the tunes of booze and drugs and I’ll bet the Bush’s do their drugs cuz they’re rich but the rest of society is horrible when they practice what the Bush’s in the bathtubs do….. When you are no longer relevant and your family gets off on booze and drugs for decades the secret service has an interesting job. How to work hard at being normal while the former president becomes a fucking agile cyborg.

    1. Bitches. I love my bros and sistas…… don’t pretent that these threads aren’t being visited by great minds because you all visit here. I visit here. You visit here. Why? Minds travel…. in the spokes of lights. This is a center of rainbows. I actually am fucked up beyond even reality right now I am floating and my fingers type this letters and I hope the fuck I don’t offend all the great minds here I have made many mistakes in these trippings and hammerd places and I sincerely seek to apologize if I haves offended the readers and scribes of this stone hammer….

      1. You’re no Alan Ginsberg.

        1. I think we can all agree that this is a good thing.

  6. Booooosh likes Obaaaaama cuz the current dummy makes the other dummy look like a genius.

    1. Even a Libertarian doesn’t believe that.

  7. My screen pulled lights and I actuallog scream face pulses and I floated these bot botes…….. so this things are scramming the blush… of stone…..

    1. *Snaps fingers*

  8. “Still appears unaware of his role in helping bring ISIS to life”

    That sounds like a catchy jingle: “George Bush, he brings bad things to life…”

    1. I am falling into the stones of boobs GKC…….. I wish i know where your placifiaction shrieked.

      1. Um, if I knew I’d tell you.

      2. if your boobs have stones you need to have that looked at, fyi

        1. Perhaps the Agile one was referring to British units of measurement, stone. Stones of boobs would be really big ones.

    2. It’s so catchy it almost sounds familiar…

    3. Obama has our troops in Iraq with a SOFA that just has Iraqi executive approval. When asked why Obama’s insistence before we left Iraq that he could only accept a SOFA with Parliamentary approval was no longer true, we were told that this was urgent. So, by Obama’s own words, leaving or staying in Iraq wasn’t urgent when we left-or he would have done what he’s doing now, used executive approval (Maliki agreed to do this with Obama almost at the last minute-a week before the SOFA would expire). Obama could have had our guys there, no ISIS, and if he still wanted Parliamentary approval he could keep plugging away and tried to get it. But by his own words, deeds, and simple known historical fact, it was Obama’s choice to leave. Not “W’s.”

  9. is anoyone travelin right now? I am ….when I leave I will go an adventure into the stones and boulders. I will fall on the places and sleep into vaginas and boobs…

    1. Just traveling unwillingly into another monady.

  10. I am travelling and I ahve to extend the love of power to all the bros and sistras. best and greatist minds ever but I need to travel beyound into the arc of sexuality of multiple lovers and this makes relating very difficult so I love all the masters and mistresses in the lands of loves but I have to lose this creature int he space of raining comets…e

  11. I am travelling and I ahve to extend the love of power to all the bros and sistras. best and greatist minds ever but I need to travel beyound into the arc of sexuality of multiple lovers and this makes relating very difficult so I love all the masters and mistresses in the lands of loves but I have to lose this creature int he space of raining comets…e

  12. AC, it was said of Zero Mostel that he had no un-expressed emotions, and having seen him on stage, I can accept that. You may be approaching his reputation.

  13. *mental note to read Cyborg’s drive-by in the wee sober hours of tomorrow morning*

    1. Sober tomorrow morning? Why bother drinking?

  14. Reason might be dumb enough to bleeve its own narrative regarding ISIS and the liberation of Iraq but informed people such as myself are not. Last time I checked, ISIS invaded Iraq from Syria, which did not get invaded by America but does experience just as much chaos as Iraq ever did. Assad created ISIS. He released hundreds of Islamists from prison at the earliest days of the uprising, many of whom joined ISIS or other Salafist groups. His army nakedly coordinated with ISIS. What do you think would have happened without the liberation of Iraq in 2003? There’s no reason to suspect Syria would be better off. Indeed ISIS and Nusra would be as one and probably funded by Sadaam Hussein along with possibly other Salafist crazies, ending the barrier between Sadaam and Islamists that was already pretty sketchy by 2003. Glad that wasn’t allowed to happen.

    1. I guess there would be one major difference: the Kurds would not be in as strong a position to fight the Islamists. Hmmm.

    2. Cytotoxic|4.27.15 @ 12:22AM|#
      “Reason might be dumb enough to bleeve its own narrative regarding ISIS and the liberation of Iraq but informed people such as myself are not. Last time I checked, ISIS invaded Iraq from Syria, which did not get invaded by America but does experience just as much chaos as Iraq ever did.”

      And this belief is a result of a Canadian war monger’s hope that others might not imagine the results of an activity could ever pass beyond national borders, right, Canadian war monger?
      BTW, “informed people” = assholes hoping others will pay for their war boner.

    3. ISIS is what became of al-Qaeda in Iraq, which was a small, insignificant group (and not formally part of al-Qaeda) prior to the 2003 invasion. They became much larger and more significant after the invasion for obvious reasons.

      1. Actually, ISIS founding father was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who the US went after in Afghanistan, and then followed to Iraq, where we finally killed him dead with a giant bomb. They were almost defeated until the Syrian civil war when Assad emptied the prisons.

        Good piece here- Under the Black Flag

        1. “They were almost defeated until the Syrian civil war when Assad emptied the prisons.”

          Uh, that’s a claim that needs careful attention; do you have any other sources?
          ‘We almost had ’em, General, but…’

          1. Zarqawi went to Iraq (and Iran and Syria) after getting chased out of Afghanistan. Part of the AUMF in Iraq was specifically to go kill degenerates like him who were already responsible for several attacks prior to 9/11.

            We did finally kill him and the Anbar Awakening did wipe out much of Al-qaeda in Iraq.

            Then we left, they became ISIS with help from Assad’s disaster in Syria.

            The link above has several sources, but just read Zarqawi’s bio or anything about the Anbar Awakening.

            1. Zarqawi was a disgusting figure and I will never mourn his killing, nor its method.

        2. Nothing you said is contrary to what I said. ISIS’s predecessor organization originated prior to 9/11. They became much more prominent following the 2003 US invasion, and in 2004 pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda and became known as al-Qaeda in Iraq. Eventually, they became ISIS in the midst of the Syrian Civil War.

          1. The early form of ISIS lost numbers and foothold in Iraq following the surge. Iraqi civilians turned on them (and ratted on them to American soldiers) because they killed so many of their own. Captured Al Qaida members readily gave up their comrades.

            They were on the run for a while, even Obama said as much. The current ISIS was formed in the power vacuum resulting from the Arab Spring, which Obama participated in.

            Bush cleaned up some of the mess he created. But Obama bailed out on former (secular / moderate) allies and helped out the rebels that toppled them. So he made a bad situation worse.

          2. Yes it does. Zarqawi and his band of degenerates that we chased out of Afghanistan in to Iraq were not a “small, insignificant group”, they were very significant which is why they were mentioned in the AUMF for Iraq. OIF did not suddenly make them more significant, but you can say that US involvement in Iraq did add to their numbers. The fact remains that the Anbar Awakening had almost destroyed them completely, and it was not until we pulled out of Iraq and Syria emptied its prisons that ISIS took over the mantle from the then-defeated al-qaeda in Iraq.

      2. Yes, but… we then defeated Al Qaeda in Iraq. Resoundingly. The much mocked surged, combined with a change to COIN strategy, worked very well.

        It was only when Obama stupidly pulled out all our troops that the fuse was lit for IS. The day after the last US soldier left, Maliki (Prime Minister at the time, a Shia) had the Sunni vice president charged with treason. Things went downhill from there. The timing was no accident.

        Obama, through his stated intent and consequent actions, made it clear to the Iraqi government that their only ally was Iran. Iran, of course, was happy to let IS do its thing (after all, it’s cats paw, Syria, allowed IS to rise).

    4. Saddam Hussein was not a Salafist. He was secular.

    5. Seriously?

      ISIS invaded from Syria but started in Iraq. Its predecessor was actually chased out.

      The group took advantage of Syria’s civil war (as well as being the location of multiple early Islamic historical sites) to make a base before coming back to Iraq. Assad, yes, may have stupidly tolerated the group as an effort to ‘help’ him with other rebel groups but he’s powerless now. Most of ISIS’s leaders from the beginning have been Iraqi, disillusioned Baathists providing the organizational framework for an autocratic state and radicalized fundamentalist Sunnis to provide the caliphate veneer.

      1. Asad also helped create AQI. He happily funneled Sunni fighters into Iraq during our occupation.

  15. re: “unfortunate” comments

    is that what a pundit says when they don’t have the balls to actually say someone’s “Wrong”?

    I’m not a fan of GWB, but i fail to see how sputtering “BUT BOOOOOSH!!!” at every opportunity amounts to any kind of foreign affairs insight.

    Yes, the Iraq invasion begat an oppressive shia regime, which begat a nascent sunni insurgency which begat a coalition of regional jihadis…
    …most of whom were in camp bucca prison in iraq 2008, but released in 2009-2010 ….
    …and many of whom coincidentally immediately found work helping out with the ‘Syrian Rebellion’…

    …which along with arms and money from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, had – Ta Da! – plenty of assistance from Obama’s CIA as well….

    but hey, really, we shouldn’t go suggesting a tenuous connection like US/Saudi support for Syrian rebels might have had a hand in helping *create ISIS*? Why create a complex parentage when “BOOOOSH!” just sounds so much simpler?

    I mean…. it makes much more sense to go back to a time when proto-ISIS were all in a US military prison…. and blame *that guy*. Because he should have seen that shit coming.

    1. Careful Gilmore – there are several commenters here who will try to tear you apart for the slightest suggestion that the US is laying in the bed it made.

      1. there are several commenters here who will try to tear you apart for the slightest suggestion that the US is laying in the bed it made.

        Several? I thought the general consensus here was that all violence in the ME is a result of the US making it that way. The violent expansion of Islam since it’s inception clearly has nothing to do with anything, nor does tribalism. Blowback, blowback, blowback, right? Everything is all about US.

      2. Which US? The one that conquered Iraq and then defeated Al Qaeda in Iraq and the Iranian backed Shia militias?

        Or the one the stupidly pulled out all troops after the victory?

  16. File Under: Memory Hole

    Oct 2012 =

    “…..Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups that the West wants to bolster, according to American officials and Middle Eastern diplomats.

    That conclusion, of which President Obama and other senior officials are aware from classified assessments of the Syrian conflict that has now claimed more than 25,000 lives, casts into doubt whether the White House’s strategy of minimal and indirect intervention in the Syrian conflict is accomplishing its intended purpose of helping a democratic-minded opposition topple an oppressive government, or is instead sowing the seeds of future insurgencies hostile to the United States.

    “The opposition groups that are receiving the most of the lethal aid are exactly the ones we don’t want to have it,” said one American official familiar with the outlines of those findings, commenting on an operation that in American eyes has increasingly gone awry.”

    1. I’m go with ‘ what is sowing the seeds of future insurgencies hostile to the United States’ as my final answer, Alex.

  17. Damn it George.

    You were doing so well. All you had to do was sit back and stay out of the limelight – just continue the ‘ex-presidential tradition’ of keeping you mouth shut – and every day of your successor’s reign made you look better and better. 10 years from now people would have compared you to Clinton, in 30 to Reagan.

    But no, you had to open your mouth and remind everyone what a vicious, violent, mouth breather you are.

    Just because they ask you a question doesn’t mean you have to answer it.

    1. I was thinking the same thing. Given the heavy criticism of his administration and some of its controversial decisions you’d think he’d keep quiet; especially during Obama’s tenure.

    2. In an odd way, it makes me miss ‘Ol Dubya. Every now and then he says something completely unfiltered, allowing a brief glimpse behind the curtain.

    3. Turd 44 hasn’t made Turd 43 look any better. But that’s just me. Depends what size and consistency of shit you prefer, I guess.

      1. Turd 44 has continued and expanded on every program and war of Turd 43 and created some horrible new shit.

        G W Bush was the worst president in my lifetime (which goes all the way back to the end of the Nixon administration) until Obama was elected.

        1. You have concluded that the wars in Iraq and Afganistan have been ramped up with more
          casualties and the economy is still getting worse? I doubt your grasp on reality.

        2. My lifetime extends back to the Eisenhower administration, and I’ll certainly agree with your Bush 43 assessment.

          The Obama comments, not so much.

      2. At least he promptly closed Gitmo and ended all the illegal wars he inherited from his predecessor. Now peace reigns in the Middle East. I know that because there are no nightly casualty reports on the news and no anti war demonstrations.

        1. soflarider, there is a fine line between clever and stupid.

  18. I care about this about as much as I’ll care about what cabaret has to say about ObamaCare 8 years from now.

    1. How did autocorrect turn ‘Obama’ into ‘cabaret’?

      1. Your auto-correct is clearly pining to work on broadway

  19. Bomb the evildoers!

  20. When Dumbya slinked out of office with a 22% rating Team Red insisted that we would have to wait to see how Iraq turned out before judging his presidency.

    Well, Iraq is still an unmitigated disaster and his presidency is considered the most incompetent since Buchanan.

    It won’t change.

    1. Buchanan is beginning to look good.

    2. Iraq is an unmitigated disaster because Obama pulled out all the troops after the US had solidly pacified the place.

      To make Bush into a monster, you need to demonstrate the validity of two assertions:

      1) Leaving Saddam in power would have been the right thing to do. Note that Saddam started a war with Iran that killed a million folks in the ’80s and dragged the US into the fight. Note that Saddam then started a war by invading our ally Kuwait, and threatening Saudi Arabia, and we had to send in 500,000 troops to push him out. Demonstrate that he wouldn’t have messed up the oil patch again.

      2) Iraq would have fallen apart if we had left our troops in country and continued with out pacification efforts.

  21. Right. Congress versus American Citizens.

  22. In Foreign Affairs magazine, Rick Brennan, a senior advisor in Operation Iraqi Freedom from 2006 to 2011, describes (link) “the bungling of the Iraq exit” by Obama.

    In Politico, Emma Sky, an official and senior advisor in Operation Iraqi Freedom, laments (link) the progress and opportunities lost in Iraq due to Obama’s sharp deviation from Bush with an approach that favored Iran’s encroachment in Iraq.

    Blaming President Bush for current events in the Middle East relies on the fallacy of attenuated causation. When Bush left office, Iraq was stabilized and progressing well following the Counterinsurgency “Surge” and Anbar Awakening. The Arab Spring hadn’t happened yet. The proximate causes of the subsequent crisis in Iraq are, one, the construction of ISIS in Syria in the degeneration of the Arab Spring that combined with, two, the US-abandoned vulnerability of Iraq. Both conditions arose from post-Bush events that are related to fundamental errors made by President Obama, such as the ‘lead from behind’ approach to the Arab Spring and disengagement from Iraq, that sharply deviated from President Bush’s course.

    1. And, for the record, explanation (link) of the law and policy, fact basis for Operation Iraqi Freedom.

    2. To argue otherwise is to claim that Obama has acted, for over six years, entirely without effect.

      1. My Dem friends do sort of believe that. Anything bad that has happened directly goes back to Bush and no further. Clinton had no lasting effects. Anything good that has happened goes directly to Obama. When I point out nothing good has happened they gleefully point out Osama dead, Dow up, as if the Dow being up affects anything, or means anything. When I point that out, Obama is off the hook because Congress wouldn’t let him do anything. That darn Congress!

        The ME in chaos – a direct result of overthrowing Saddam. It all would have been peachy keen if we had just left Saddam, the Peacemaker from the religion of Peace, in place. Bush’s fault again.

        The economy stagnating – Bush, all the way down the line. Clinton changing Glass-Steagal had no effect, although they all want Glass-Steagal back.

        Race relations at arguably the worse they have been in since Selma – Republicans fault. Somehow Dick Cheney gets thrown in to this argument.

        Gay marriage – it is like they all got religion at the same time on this one. Fifteen years ago very few people were pro gay marriage. Now, a few pastors in Alabama are against it and it is like they are fighting Selma again, with all of them in the role of MLK.

        The reality is, Obama’s principal effect is to have had no effect. He created one thing and one thing only – a power vacuum, everywhere. And, nature abhors a vacuum.

        1. Iraq and Afghanistan needed the same treatment Germany, Japan and Italy got during and after WW2. The people of those three areas had been trying to conquer the world for over a millennia before they finally got their heads knocked in in the 1940’s.

          Go in no holds barred until they’re defeated, then enforce the peace while helping them rebuild and educate them on how to participate civilly in world civilization – basically sit on the tantrum throwing brats until they learn to behave and play nice with their neighbors.

          That plan was going along pretty good, until Obama turned the rotten little shits loose to terrorize the neighborhood worse than they ever have.

          So now it’s all going to have to be done all over again since more generations of middle easterners have been “educated” solely on the Koran, Jihad and doing violence unto others, with an addition of madly running about destroying all the historical artifacts and knowledge they can. The barbarians are burning the Library of Alexandria again…

  23. You know, somehow I find it difficult to believe that essentially making peace with one country will destabilize the middle east as much as murdering over 1 million people in another.

    1. I’ll also never understand how people continue to take these politicians seriously after they make such patently absurd, self-serving statements.

    2. Becuz it isn’t ‘essentially making peace with one country’. There is no peace available with Iran. It is their stated objective to blow us to smithereens, and Israel too.

      You can sign 100 peace treaties with them, and they won’t honour them, as their word to an infidel means nothing.

      1. I still have a hard time swallowing the comparison between the United States killing a million people in Iraq and lifting sanctions on Iran.

      2. This nuclear deal with Iran is realpolitik, writ large. Everybody, including the mullahs, want something in this world, and what they want the most now is a return to something approaching normal economic activity. There comes a time when you can lift your boot of the other guy’s neck, right?

        It surprises me that the GOP doesn’t understand what it means to be a Republican anymore. Do some business with these guys. They have zero capability of blowing us to smithereens. Anybody in any real position of power in both countries fully understand that calculus, in spite of the overblown rhetoric.

        The entire opposition to the current deal are those still wedded to the foreign policy of the previous administration. Times change.

  24. “…Bush’s comments on Iran are unfortunate, given his own attempts early in his administration to negotiate with North Korea…”

    Could it be that he’s “grown”, and learned from his earlier mistakes?
    No, that can’t be it because only Progressives can “grow”.

    As to Mr. Bush’s “role” in bringing ISIS to life, there was no ISIS activity in Iraq when he left office.
    ISIS sprang to life in Iraq with the complete withdrawal of US forces in 2011 – all it would have taken to prevent it was to keep the SOF Agreement in force that the Bush Administration had inplace.
    But, it was more important to this administration to adhere to a silly campaign promise than it was to face the reality that is the ME, and that nature abhors a vacuum, and when you create one, someone will step in to fill the space.
    But, Hey, it’s only “ragheads” being killed – they don’t count for sh*t.

    1. The offensive term for Muslims appeals to our lower nature-as one who was over there, I saw that while it’s easy to see them all as doomed to live there, its also possible for most to contain offensive comments that serve only to cultivate that lower aspect of ourselves. Some Muslims support us and are truly grateful-mainly the Kurds (most of who are Muslim). Their troops are the best local Iraqi units, called the Peshmurga. By learning to work with Muslims, we can work towards a more functional relationship than the weird, dysfunctional one we have with Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, and the Gulf states. We can agree on the main point of your post-you can see from my other post in this section that I agree with your position on who to blame for ISIS-namely “O,” for the reasons you gave.

    2. Far too may clich?s and “scary” quotes to take you seriously. SOF! SOF!

  25. When “W” turned Iraq over to “O”, Iraq was on a success path with many metrics improving each year. Our Army training had resulted in Sunni and Shia officers and enlisted working together, and containing corruption to a great degree.
    “O” declined to accept what he accepts now to provide SOFA protection for our troops – an executive agreement with the Iraqi President. Maliki publicly accepted this-he switched from opposing to accepting with week to go. From that point, “O’s” refusal to accept give him ownership of our pull out.
    Abandoning what was turning into an American success was acceptable to “O,” because it was also a “W” success ? and if the success continued, it would highlight that he and all who reviled “W” for his failure in Iraq were wrong. With failure, he could simply blame “W.” Much as this article does.

    1. That is the most ridiculous assessment of post-Bush Iraq I have ever heard. No one in their right
      mind believes “Iraq was on a success path” after Bush’s term.

  26. So FDR and Churchill are responsible for Neo-Nazis because they got rid of Hitler?

  27. uptil I looked at the paycheck which was of $6898 , I have faith …that…my father in law was actually erning money parttime from their computer. . there neighbor had bean doing this for less than nine months and at present cleard the loans on there apartment and got a great new Nissan GT-R:…… ??????

  28. No one has displayed a more tenuous grasp of foreign affairs then George W. Bush and his administration. One can only assume that we fought the Iraq war on the supposition that it would turn a profit.

    1. Although some of the current GOP aspirants are giving them a good run for their money in the unhinged foreign policy department.

  29. my roomate’s half-sister makes $71 /hr on the computer . She has been laid off for 5 months but last month her pay was $17321 just working on the computer for a few hours
    …… ??????

  30. Bush should have kept to his MO the last 6 years of being quiet. That way he can’t embarrass himself anymore than he did while he was president. EVERYTHING that man touched turned to shit. Now he’s passing it on to his brother, ha, ha.

    There never would have been an Obama destroying the country now if there hadn’t been a W Bush destroying the country then.

    IT’S ALL OVER FOLKS! And the socialists won.

  31. I hate ISIS I think IRAQI Gov. And Iran Gov. who made ISIS

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.