Iraq's status (from bad to critical) was elevated because those in power at the time had an agenda. I don't think there's any question that the Admin had an Iraq fixation.

-spence

"I don't think there's any question that the Admin had an Iraq fixation."

If that's true, it wasn't just the administration Spence. You must necessarily concede, then, that most of the Democrats in the Senate also had that same fixation, and many of those democrats are in the current administration. Shouldn't that frighten you? If senators Biden, Kerry and Clinton all agreed to war because of some irrational fixation, do they belong in the positions of VP and Secstate? Good luck! Let's see how you move the goalposts on this one!

also Spence, do you agree that Saddam repeatedly kicked out the weapons inspectors? And that was in violation of the terms that ended the first war? What would you have done with that fact? Nothing? The US-led coalition gave him all kinds of chances to comply with the weapons inspectors, and there would have been no war had he agreed to the treaty that he signed.

Bush's and the UN's red lines were clear to the world . They didn't go to save face or to back up tough talk. The reason Bush had support was because he had credibility and a incredible talented cabinet .
Not so much this time around .
I'm thinking the negotiations are coming along much like Obamas try at securing the Olympics for the US
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hey, after 9/11 I thought the same thing. Thank god we have that team in place...

Makes it even more astounding that they got nearly everything wrong.

-spence

Help me out here Spence. How many attacks after 9/11 on their watch ?
Nearly everything ??? How's Obama doing?? His records a little worse I think.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I believe there were 11 attacks under Bush's watch after 9/11 to US consulates, embassies and places where Americans congregate.

Funny, you didn't hear about most or any of these from the evil liberal media or Democrats trying to make air time. Yet, on 9/11 just last week you had republicans still out beating the Benghazi drum. It's shameful...

-spence

we've listed them before, no Americans died, no lies were told by the administration and they were not the result of incompetence from the administration...you get dumber by the post :uhuh:

I think Scott covered this quite well .
Amazing you found nothing shameful about the way this Administration handled Benghazi .
You're just getting annoying at this point. I keep waiting for you to say you were just kidding around for the last 5 years. A 5 year practical joke would be amusing :)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Seriously Scott, you should think before you post. You're wrong of course, and the ad hominem stuff is just juvenile.

-spence

Btw I just gave you a way to save face Spence. I would take the cue from your dear leader and run with it .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I just like it when you post. Seeing Reagan and knowing that you don't agree with so much that he stood for makes me happy.

-spence

Really ? Coming from somebody with an abstruse view of reality, that's funny
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Spence, the Bush administration was wrong about WMDs. How come you won't talk about the fact. that many prominent liberals were equally wrong. Bill and Hilary Clinton, Senators Kerry, Edwards, Biden, Boxer, Feinstein, Schumer. Does it concern you that many in the present administration (Biden, Clinton, Kerry) were every bit as wrong? Or are Republicans the only ones who can be labeled as incompetent for being wrong about Iraq?

Ok you peaked my curiosity ! What did Reagan stand for that you think I oppose? A strong military, tax cuts to promote growth , against socialized health care, that people were better off with investing there own $$ instead of SS, pro life, capital punishment , against the dept of education , pro free market ????
Help me out here.....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

been through this..the usual revisionist tripe....you are enabling him to change the subject, spout even more bs and sound like an even bigger dope...oooooh...on third thought...go right ahead :uhuh:

pretty good article on the toothlessness of this agreement...

"Odds are that in agreeing to sign the CWC, Assad knew he was enrolling in a treaty that is cumbersome to apply and easy to manipulate. Indeed, U.S. authorities believe that Russia, now proposing to help rid Assad of his chemical weapons, has itself been cheating on the chemical-weapons treaty. According to the State Department’s 2013 report to Congress on compliance with the CWC, “the United States assesses that Russia’s CWC declaration is incomplete with respect to chemical agent and stockpiles.”



http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...claudia-rosett

I'm not sure about the Gas itself. I keep reading it's not the first attack but the 3rd or 4th by both sides.
There is no doubt in my mind that the rush Kerry and Obama were in to bomb, which completely contradicted there previous stances on war, makes me question the motivation. It was worse though to watch those 2 paint themselves right into a corner and Putin shut the door.




http://www.infowars.com/us-military-...tack-in-syria/

This presidency has been an epic failure, for the same reasons that I would be a failure if I was hired to be chief engineer at a nuclear reactor. Obama does not understand this country, its history, how it works, or most importantly, why it does what it does. And to be fair, how can he? Examine his associations. Everything he thinks he knows about America he "learned" at the feet of Marxist gasbags at Harvard or in the faculty lounge at the University of Chicago (infested by other Marxist gasbags who were educated at Harvard) or by his political cronies in the Democrat establishment (who are all Marxist gasbags who were educated at Harvard).

Irag did have WMD's ...if U call the gassing of about 5,000 Kurds, men, women and children in one village just a coincidence then I do not know what WMD are.....the problem is we gave Irag time to remove them.

http://www.jpost.com/Syria-Crisis/Re...to-Iraq-326141

uh..oh...

they should send in Iranian inspectors, Jimmy Carter and Dennis Rodman immediately to get control of this situation

Here is what our president said in his Syrian speech...

"With modest risk and effort, we can [resolve the crisis, in essence]. That is what makes America exceptional. That is what makes us unique."

Obama is saying that what makes America exceptional, is our willingness to undertake "modest risk and effort" on behalf of those who are suffering. MODEST risk and effort?

Those teenagers who stormed the beaches of Normandy, were only taking a modest risk? The hundreds of thousands of union soldiers who died during the Civil War...only took a "modest" risk to try to free the slaves? The kids who stormed the beaches at Tarawa and Iwo Jima, only were asked to make a "modest" effort? The firemen and cops who ran INTO the burning buildings on 09/11, their sacrifices were merely "modest".

This is what you get from a guy who spends his life (1) in academia, and then (2) engaging in racial, divisive politics.

I cannot imagine the last time a president said something so stupid, inaccurate, offensive, and demonstrably false. To Obama, "real" effort is what kids do at Harvard, while the teenager on Seal Team 6 kicking down doors in Fallujah is only making a "modest" effort.

He's such a jerk.

.

"modest risk" is lobbing missiles into a country to punish a dictator whom you and many of your closest progressives were only recently enabling and licking the toes of, but who has fallen out of favor with you because he's embarrassed you in some way and so now you assume the even more "modest risk" of arming the rebels opposing the dictator with the tasty toes despite the fact that they are increasingly proven to be radical islamists/jihadists...

the enemy of my friend turned enemy is my friend/enemy

it's quite a pickle

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...es-report.html

"Significant" effort and risk is what is asked of people who teach law school, I suppose.

Pat Tillman, NFL all-star who quit the NFL and joined the Army Rangers after 09/11 and was killed, only made a "modest" sacrifice.

And the former Seals who worked security in Benghazi, who ran to the annex to help and paid for it with their lives? According to the SecState at the time, the woman who will likely be our next president, their sacrifice was so modest, that it "doesn't matter" to inquire as to the circumstances of their deaths.

This is what you get from Ivy League, elitist gasbags, who never, ever have to ante up themselves. They just sit back, drinking apple-tinis, disparaging those who roll up their sleeves and accomplish the actual good in the world.

It's repugnant.