• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jeb Bush Says Taking Down Saddam Hussein Was 'Pretty Good Deal'

Ockham said:
That's my post and my document and link - it identifies that stored mustard gas from the 1980's was still highly toxic even in 1992 - directly rebutting the statement by Kobie saying that Mustard Gas has a very short viability lifespan.
Click to expand...

You may have provided that link somewhere, but the post I was responding to wasn't yours...it belonged to reinoe. http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...-good-deal-post1064926733.html#post1064926733

Perhaps he screwed up and didn't intend to make that post in connection to his conversation with CanadaJohn.
 
SlevinKelevra said:
Jeb Bush Says Taking Down Saddam Hussein Was 'Pretty Good Deal' - ABC News



Good deal for who? ISxx? Halliburton? Iran?
:shock:


And he's "the smart one"?
Click to expand...

I think Jeb was told to say that even though he obviously does not believe it due to his own original statement that knowing then what we know now he would not have invaded like GW did.

Romney has shown that as a GOP candidate you must lie like a dog to get the party nomination.

Unfortunately by the time you are done lying enough, then the IND's won't vote for you anymore because you then are obviously a liar.
 
DA60 said:
Jeb is an idiot...a spineless idiot.

He will probably get the Rep nod (after Trump inevitably self destructs)...which speaks volumes for America in general and the Republican Party in particular.

Of course, Hilary is corrupt, arrogant and politically inept...which speaks volumes for America and the Democratic Party in particular.

Basically, America (on it's present path) is fornicated...only most Americans are either too stupid and/or too arrogant to realize it.
Click to expand...

Jeb is a poor speaker indeed, and so he is coming across as an idiot, sure.

Maybe there is hope with Rubio and Carly.
 
Saddam was a monster. Liberals WISH HE WAS STILL ALIVE and running the largest country in the middle east. Then all of our problems would be solved, right you morons?
 
Mycroft said:
You may have provided that link somewhere, but the post I was responding to wasn't yours...it belonged to reinoe. http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...-good-deal-post1064926733.html#post1064926733

Perhaps he screwed up and didn't intend to make that post in connection to his conversation with CanadaJohn.
Click to expand...

No, he was directing it at me because I indicated I believed that Hussein had been manufacturing his own stockpiles of mustard gas and reinoe was claiming that the US supplied it to him in order to murder Kurds. His link didn't prove anything other than that mustard gas, in the right environment, can stay potent and viable a long time.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Yeah, I think Bush 1 made the right decision to leave Saddam in power. He was a evil vicious SOB, but with him in power the ME was more 'stable', not great, but better. Current events are showing us that he was the lesser of 2 evils.
Click to expand...

True, in hindsight maybe that was the best decision all the way around. I remember being in Charleston in 2004 and talking to this lady whose son had served in the first Gulf War, and he wished they could have finished Saddam off then and there. But like you say current events are proving that it would not have been a good idea.
 
DA60 said:
Jeb is an idiot...a spineless idiot.

He will probably get the Rep nod (after Trump inevitably self destructs)...which speaks volumes for America in general and the Republican Party in particular.

Of course, Hilary is corrupt, arrogant and politically inept...which speaks volumes for America and the Democratic Party in particular.

Basically, America (on it's present path) is fornicated...only most Americans are either too stupid and/or too arrogant to realize it.
Click to expand...

Oh Lord! Jeb vs Hillary. God help us all!
 
Riveroaks said:
Jeb is a poor speaker indeed, and so he is coming across as an idiot, sure.

Maybe there is hope with Rubio and Carly.
Click to expand...

I doubt it.

I really do not see any standouts for the Reps...and they need a standout.

Preferably a woman (preferably 'black')...who is very smart, decent and flexible.

Republicans have to get away from emphasizing silly things like the war on drugs, same sex marriage and religion. All of these are vote losers as the demographic that supports these things is old and getting older. Most young/younger people are for pot legalization, SSM and are FAR less religious then their parents/grandparents.
Plus, whining about Obamacare is stupid...it makes the Reps look heartless. Leave it more or less alone until they get back into the White House, then just kill it and replace it with a far, FAR smaller program that JUST insures those that cannot afford it.

Reps have to get back to fiscal responsibility, lowering taxes (for EVERYONE...NOT just the rich - trickle down is politically dead), sensible foreign policy (not paranoia) and above all...smaller government.

Lately, they barely talk about these things...big mistake.

Leave morality to the masses...focus on government.
 
Last edited:
SenorXm/Sirius said:
I think Bush 1 was a good president. I have few problems with anything Bush Senior did. On the other hand I don't know how Jeb can say anything good came out Bush 2's decision to go to war in 2003, or anything good about that war. I understand what you are saying, but the 2nd Iraq war was a cluster **** even before it started. And it still is today. It's putting lipstick on a pig type of thing.
Click to expand...

I don't think ANY President since at least Hoover was 'good'...but I do rank Bush 1 high on the list. He spent WAY too much - which I hate. To me, outside of a declared war, you NEVER run big deficits.
But in most other ways, he seemed to handle things pretty well. And foreign policy wise, he was as good as any POTUS in decades, IMO.
Gulf War 1 was almost perfect. He got international consensus, took his time, kicked Saddam's ass, did not take Saddam out (so as to not leave a gaping power vacuum like now which resulted in kaos) and even got the Saudi's to more or less pay for it.
He let the Kurds get slaughtered - that was bad. But otherwise...I give him an 'A' for that war.
Strange that his son was so staggeringly bad at exactly what his father was so good at...but I hear GWB was pretty rebellious.
 
Last edited:
CanadaJohn said:
No, he was directing it at me because I indicated I believed that Hussein had been manufacturing his own stockpiles of mustard gas and reinoe was claiming that the US supplied it to him in order to murder Kurds. His link didn't prove anything other than that mustard gas, in the right environment, can stay potent and viable a long time.
Click to expand...

In fact Mustard Gas is being used now. Islamic State Gets Mustard Gas - WSJ

That will probably be their weapon of choice until nuclear capability is achieved, and the billions Obama gave them will buy a lot of mustard gas.
 
DA60 said:
I don't think ANY Presdient since at least Hoover was 'good'...but I do rank Bush 1 high on the list. He spent WAY too much - which I hate.
But in most other ways, he seemed to handle things pretty well. And foreign policy wise, he was as good as any POTUS in decades, IMO.
Strange that his son was so staggeringly bad at exactly what his father was so good at...but I hear GWB was pretty rebellious.
Click to expand...
Bush 43 brought stability, democracy, self reliance and sovereignty to Iraq.

The situation has changed dramatically since Barrack Obama took over.
 
Grant said:
Bush 43 brought stability, democracy, self reliance and sovereignty to Iraq.

The situation has changed dramatically since Barrack Obama took over.
Click to expand...

Whatever.

Arguing with Iraqi Freedom lovers is pointless...they wear rose-coloured glasses.

Iraqi Freedom was a mess (no fault of the troops, of course...they did well considering) from beginning to end. A stupid war instigated by an arrogant, ignorant POTUS. Neocons at their worst.


Good day.
 
Last edited:
Iraq turned out how nay-sayers said it would.

As noted pre-war, the Invasion was not well planned. Remember we were only going to be in Iraq for about six weeks, or at the outside six months.

In addition, once the country had been ostensibly taken, the poorly made plans were badly executed. For example, the de-Baathification process where cronies of the WH were given positions of power which were abused for their own [and Iranian] ends. Yeah, GWB Admin had an Iranian agent in their midst. They gave that agent info that we had cracked one of the Iranians codes. The agent gave that info to Iran. Our military had to raid the compound in secret so that the GWB admin wouldn't let it be known that the raid was coming.

Iraq turned out badly as expected.
It hard to see that as a "pretty good deal."
 
Grant said:
Bush 43 brought stability, democracy, self reliance and sovereignty to Iraq.
Click to expand...
As I asked someone else earlier [who has not answered], by what measure you find that Iraq had obtained these four items?
 
CanadaJohn said:
Well, yes you did imply it by first criticizing Jeb Bush who said taking out Hussein was a good deal and then by claiming Iraq and the US are better off with Hussein still in power and then by sluffing off the killing of at least a million Iraqis at the hands of Hussein and his henchmen.

And yes, that factor alone was sufficient reason for the attack and take over of Iraq just as the same factor alone was sufficient for the attack and take over of Libya. Iraq and Libya - Hussein and Qaddafi - two peas in a pod, both murdering their own people and both supporting terrorists throughout the Middle East and Africa. The major difference is that one was a foreign policy pursuit of a Republican President and one was a foreign policy pursuit of a Democrat President.

And to be clear, the only one here who's all butthurt is you. I support fully what the US has led and done in both circumstances but you choose to think ill of your own country for political reasons.
Click to expand...

No I clearly said it was not a good deal and we didnt get anything good out of it.

And of course you fully support it...I could tell that. Doesnt make you right.
 
It might have been good for some Iraqi's (I'm not completely informed on Iraq's conditions and such post-Saddam) but overall saying it was a pretty good deal is a massive stretch. Basically soon as we decided to take out Saddam, we were screwed. Democracy wasn't going to work right away, hell it certainly didn't here even, because the only people/parties with any sort of foundations are only affiliated with the church(es). Add a country with a divide on religious and ethnic grounds and, well, good luck.

Another dictator while slowly loosing the strings to help make a smoother transition wouldn't likely work either, our appointed dictators never work. Besides the Iraqi's would probably riot in the streets, bringing a western backed dictator in a place that doesn't really like the west is not going to go well.

The only other option would be for us to stay there long-term, which you run into the same problem that it'll start pissing off the locals. That'd be a great way to get the fanatical assholes in power just because they are most willing to screw with us (if that makes sense).


Basically, Saddam was an ass and by no means should he been in power, but we went for this idea that if we bring democracy everything will be lollipops and rainbows. It doesn't quite work like that, and the next time we try it, it probably won't work any better. There was no good option, other then taking none of the above and staying out. Even covert support of a revolution would probably make things worse (Arab spring comes to mind, even when the people rise up and they want change it still goes south). So yeah, all my opinion with some based of an article from long ago I 'll probably never find (thus sticking with all my opinion), but yeah.
 
DA60 said:
I doubt it.

I really do not see any standouts for the Reps...and they need a standout.

Preferably a woman (preferably 'black')...who is very smart, decent and flexible.

Republicans have to get away from emphasizing silly things like the war on drugs, same sex marriage and religion. All of these are vote losers as the demographic that supports these things is old and getting older. Most young/younger people are for pot legalization, SSM and are FAR less religious then their parents/grandparents.
Plus, whining about Obamacare is stupid...it makes the Reps look heartless. Leave it more or less alone until they get back into the White House, then just kill it and replace it with a far, FAR smaller program that JUST insures those that cannot afford it.

Reps have to get back to fiscal responsibility, lowering taxes (for EVERYONE...NOT just the rich - trickle down is politically dead), sensible foreign policy (not paranoia) and above all...smaller government.

Lately, they barely talk about these things...big mistake.

Leave morality to the masses...focus on government.
Click to expand...

It's still extremely early in the process, and so we at least have been given a glimpse of who the GOP player are.

The Nation is now focused on the GOP and that is a good thing.

A lot of important SCOTUS appointments will be made by the next POTUS in the next 2 terms.

Rubio to me is what BHO was early on in his first campaign against McCain. So far Rubio is looking good and getting a lot of good press.

Carly has surprised everyone with a miracle grand slam out of the JV debate.

The 2nd GOP debate should be a blockbuster just like the first one was -- the most watched political event in US history.
 
Amanda1858 said:
If Saddam Hussein had lived, I doubt ISIS would have been able to take over the way they have. Saddam was no angel, but at least he kept the country from the kind of chaos we are seeing.
Click to expand...

Exactly!

GHW and GW really messed up Iraq.

And the unintended consequence was a worse and stronger Iran.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Your source is Obama's say-so. Do you find that Obama is generally a trustworthy source for information?
Click to expand...
No, he is a common enough liar but appeals to those who don't have terribly high standards and will happily elect liars to public office.

Nonetheless in 2011 Iraq was largely stable and the military advised that about 30,000 troops (there are differing recommendations as to the numbers. Some said 50,000) remain on order that this stability remains and is allowed to take hold. You may be familiar with what happened when, against all advice, Obama pulled the troops from Iraq and the subsequent growth of terrorism in the Middle East and its spread into Africa as well.

Do you think Obama never foresaw any of this happening, or was it a deliberate attempt to destabilize much of the world?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom