• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • 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!

Obama admits what Bush couldn't and Blair won't

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,909
Reaction score
8,841
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
US President Barack Obama has said failing to prepare for the aftermath of the ousting of Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi was the worst mistake of his presidency.
Mr Obama was answering a series of questions on the highs and lows of his time in office on Fox News. Link.

What worries me with the West's meddling in the M.E. is that we don't plan or consider the consequences of our actions; Hussein was removed and that failure to garrison troops or create some form of replacement policing machine created the mess we see now in Iraq and then within 15 years of that salutory lesson we removed Ghaddafi and left even quicker.

I have read that had there been a stationing of western troops as we saw in South Korea then things might have been more peaceful but I'm not so sure as Korea was so different.

Anyhow, at least we have had a confession from one of the wests leaders in these events - time for others to also step forward.
 

Exquisitor

Educator
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jun 16, 2014
Messages
7,196
Reaction score
1,070
Location
UP of Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
What worries me with the West's meddling in the M.E. is that we don't plan or consider the consequences of our actions; Hussein was removed and that failure to garrison troops or create some form of replacement policing machine created the mess we see now in Iraq and then within 15 years of that salutory lesson we removed Ghaddafi and left even quicker.

I have read that had there been a stationing of western troops as we saw in South Korea then things might have been more peaceful but I'm not so sure as Korea was so different.

Anyhow, at least we have had a confession from one of the wests leaders in these events - time for others to also step forward.

What about the consequences of not getting Ghaddafi when we had the chance?

The Arab spring created the mess we now see in Iraq.
 

VanceMack

MSG Benavides TAB
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
77,304
Reaction score
32,900
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Not sure what you are talking about. OK...thats not true. I AM sure what you are talking about. You are creating some sort of pretend argument that has zero basis in reality to then argue against. In other words...you are kicking your own ass. Bush has admitted numerous mistakes and done so since as far back as 2004. Your whole pretense of a premise is just goofy.
 

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The problem here is that Obama never had a foreign policy, he never cared enough about it to develop one. What Obama did was jump from crisis to crisis as needed. I would have been more impressed if Obama had admitted the obvious, which is that we never should have entered the civil war without doing so being in Americans interest. He still cant bring himself to say that American comes first when using US military assets, and he still cant bring himself to say that entering the civil war was a mistake, and he still cant bring himself to say that he is sorry that he allowed Hillary and Samantha Power to talk him into it.
 

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,909
Reaction score
8,841
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,764
Reaction score
20,448
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
What worries me with the West's meddling in the M.E. is that we don't plan or consider the consequences of our actions; Hussein was removed and that failure to garrison troops or create some form of replacement policing machine created the mess we see now in Iraq and then within 15 years of that salutory lesson we removed Ghaddafi and left even quicker.

I have read that had there been a stationing of western troops as we saw in South Korea then things might have been more peaceful but I'm not so sure as Korea was so different.

Anyhow, at least we have had a confession from one of the wests leaders in these events - time for others to also step forward.

While Bush was President, Ghaddafi was neutralized and pretty much under US control. Once Obama became President, Ghaddafi was empowered again to cause havoc in his own country.

As for the aftermath of the NATO take out of Ghaddafi, pretty rich that Obama claims it was a mistake not to do a better job of managing the victory since he was first in line criticizing Bush for the aftermath in Iraq. You'd think a man who wades in his own brilliance wouldn't make the same mistake he attributes to his predecessor. But then, Obama was disinterested in the Middle East from the day he got to Washington, long before he became President. Only a fool is surprised that the Middle East is a bigger mess after 7 plus years of Obama's neglect of the region.
 

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Same as Bush unfortunately: both believe there were mistakes but not that entering was a mistake.

Obama came after Bush, after watching Bush make mistakes and using Bushes mistakes in his argument for putting a D in the chair (him), for Obama to make the exact same mistake as Bush did makes Obama worse, the lesson as fresh, there was no way for him to not know he was making a mistake other than willful ignorance. I have some sympathy for Obama's argument that the Europeans should have stepped up and managed Libya, but there was no way that was going to happen because France and Britain clearly from the start only had interest in Libya so far as domestic political maneuverings go. As the lone superpower and leader of NATO management was always going to be our job, Obama simply refused to do it.
 
Last edited:

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,909
Reaction score
8,841
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Obama came after Bush, after watching Bush make mistakes and using Bushes mistakes in his argument for putting a D in the chair (him), for Obama to make the exact same mistake as Bush did makes Obama worse, the lesson as fresh, there was no way for him to not know he was making a mistake other than willful ignorance. I have some sympathy for Obama's argument that the Europeans should have stepped up and managed Libya, but there was no way that was going to happen because France and Britain clearly from the start only had interest in Libya so far as domestic political maneuverings go. As the lone superpower and leader of NATO management was always going to be our job, Obama simply refused to do it.

European nations just weren't equipped for long term campaigns to bomb Libya, it was a hurried action and stockpiles were low because the action was rushed through - leaving nobody any time to develop a policy for afterwards. It didn't have to be the West that took action; we all should have let local countries deal with the situation or encouraged them to sort Arab affairs. The west getting involved (without a clear policy why and what to do afterwards) was always going to lose us the battle for minds and ideology.

Problems in other parts of Africa were resolved or dealt with through African forces (sometimes with Western nations providing logistics) but in those campaigns there has been no comeback or propaganda of the evil west enforcing western rule whereas involvement in arab nations easily brings about the picture of crusaders or christians meddling in arab or muslim affairs.

While Bush was President, Ghaddafi was neutralized and pretty much under US control. Once Obama became President, Ghaddafi was empowered again to cause havoc in his own country ~

Interesting statement. How did Bush prevent Ghaddafi doing whatever he wanted in his own country?
 

iguanaman

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
55,452
Reaction score
20,408
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
What worries me with the West's meddling in the M.E. is that we don't plan or consider the consequences of our actions; Hussein was removed and that failure to garrison troops or create some form of replacement policing machine created the mess we see now in Iraq and then within 15 years of that salutory lesson we removed Ghaddafi and left even quicker.

I have read that had there been a stationing of western troops as we saw in South Korea then things might have been more peaceful but I'm not so sure as Korea was so different.

Anyhow, at least we have had a confession from one of the wests leaders in these events - time for others to also step forward.

Obama's mistake was letting the Europeans handle the aftermath. He thought they were going to step up given the location of Libya. He thought wrong. The minute the **** hit the fan they backed out.. I'm not so sure it was really the wrong decision for us not to step in unilaterally, there were really no good options short of another long term Iraqi type occupation and the resulting insurgency. That is difference with Korea, the S. Koreans actually wanted us to stay there and there was no insurgency.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,764
Reaction score
20,448
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Interesting statement. How did Bush prevent Ghaddafi doing whatever he wanted in his own country?

Bush threatened invasion if Ghaddafi didn't give up his weapons program and terrorism support and Ghaddafi, wisely, believed him. That's the benefit of having a President who issues redline warnings and then follows through on the threat. Ghaddafi saw what happened to Hussein and decided to stay in power and live until Bush was gone. When he saw Obama take over, an all talk liberal with no backbone, he went back to his old ways. Assad in Syria took advantage of Obama's weakness as well and gave his redline the finger and Obama went golfing.
 

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,909
Reaction score
8,841
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Bush threatened invasion if Ghaddafi didn't give up his weapons program and terrorism support and Ghaddafi, wisely, believed him. That's the benefit of having a President who issues redline warnings and then follows through on the threat. Ghaddafi saw what happened to Hussein and decided to stay in power and live until Bush was gone. When he saw Obama take over, an all talk liberal with no backbone, he went back to his old ways. Assad in Syria took advantage of Obama's weakness as well and gave his redline the finger and Obama went golfing.

Libya's actions came after nine months of secret diplomacy, beginning with an overture from Colonel Qaddafi to London and Washington just as the invasion of Iraq was beginning.

What actually happened..

Mr. Bush's aides, clearly seeking to build on the capture of Saddam Hussein last Saturday, described the Libyan action as directly linked to the Iraq war, suggesting that Colonel Qaddafi had decided to give up his weapons aspirations rather than face off against the United States and its allies.

What Bush presented to the world.

Link.

Try again?
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
54,611
Reaction score
35,875
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
an incisive admission by Obama
i appreciate his honesty
that was a major **** up
 

Lovebug

Let go and let God
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2011
Messages
24,407
Reaction score
10,364
Location
south
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
I have so many questions.
Why did we invade Iraq, and why didn't we follow through once some sort of order was established? I agree with the OP that S Korea might not be a good comparison, but we could consider the what if? Had we stayed there without looming pull out deadline, things might be different now...or may be not.
Why did we really go into Libya and why not Syria? What if we had stayed out? What if we had gone into both?
What criteria was used?
We will never find out for sure but can only speculate, as do most pundits and professional opiners.
I would like to be a fly on the wall, soaking it all in, getting a glimpse of what is really going on behind the scene...the backroom dealings, all the privy information, the greasing of hands...
My friends and I often can't even decide where to go for dinner, so I can only imagine what it would take to lead a country as big and influential as the US of A.
Yeah, we have our opinion about this or that, knowing not even a small percentage of what it takes to do the job. I am no friend of Obama, nor do I have any excuses for Bush, but I trust that they do what they think is best for our country.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,764
Reaction score
20,448
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
What actually happened..



What Bush presented to the world.

Link.

Try again?

You're just proving my point. Bush named Libya as one of the bad actors in the world as he went in and took out the Taliban in Afghanistan and was leading up, through the UN to go after Iraq. Ghaddafi may have been many things, but he wasn't stupid - he saw the writing on the wall and made his overtures. Once Bush finished with the conduct of the wars, he took on Ghaddafi and settled that without war. If you think Ghaddafi just laid down for no reason, you probably believe Obama is a great foreign affairs strategist.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,764
Reaction score
20,448
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I have so many questions.
Why did we invade Iraq, and why didn't we follow through once some sort of order was established? I agree with the OP that S Korea might not be a good comparison, but we could consider the what if? Had we stayed there without looming pull out deadline, things might be different now...or may be not.
Why did we really go into Libya and why not Syria? What if we had stayed out? What if we had gone into both?
What criteria was used?
We will never find out for sure but can only speculate, as do most pundits and professional opiners.
I would like to be a fly on the wall, soaking it all in, getting a glimpse of what is really going on behind the scene...the backroom dealings, all the privy information, the greasing of hands...
My friends and I often can't even decide where to go for dinner, so I can only imagine what it would take to lead a country as big and influential as the US of A.
Yeah, we have our opinion about this or that, knowing not even a small percentage of what it takes to do the job. I am no friend of Obama, nor do I have any excuses for Bush, but I trust that they do what they think is best for our country.

My problem with Obama and Iraq is that he decided, as a campaign strategy, to push getting out of Iraq no matter what. When he got elected, he did just that. It was the wrong thing to do and the US had plenty of leverage to remain in Iraq on US terms. but Obama was and is a politician first, not a leader.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
54,611
Reaction score
35,875
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
My problem with Obama and Iraq is that he decided, as a campaign strategy, to push getting out of Iraq no matter what. When he got elected, he did just that. It was the wrong thing to do and the US had plenty of leverage to remain in Iraq on US terms. but Obama was and is a politician first, not a leader.

Obama could have left American troops in iraq
however, they would have been subject to iraqi law. something the iraqi government refused not to impose
and Obama then made the correct decision to abide by the exit date that the dicknbush regime had previously agreed
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,764
Reaction score
20,448
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Obama could have left American troops in iraq
however, they would have been subject to iraqi law. something the iraqi government refused not to impose
and Obama then made the correct decision to abide by the exit date that the dicknbush regime had previously agreed

So, you're claiming that a few Iraqi politicians controlled the US military? Only under President Obama. If Bush had still been President, it never would have happened. President Obama got exactly what he wanted, to hell with the consequences.
 

Absentglare

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
36,073
Reaction score
6,861
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
So, you're claiming that a few Iraqi politicians controlled the US military? Only under President Obama. If Bush had still been President, it never would have happened. President Obama got exactly what he wanted, to hell with the consequences.

Do you have any idea what you're taking about ?

President Bush 2, himself, agreed to the terms that you're criticizing President Obama for abiding to with the argument that they never would have happened under President Bush 2. You're wrong by definition, they were actually enacted under President Bush 2.
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
11,400
Reaction score
7,499
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Bush threatened invasion if Ghaddafi didn't give up his weapons program and terrorism support and Ghaddafi, wisely, believed him. That's the benefit of having a President who issues redline warnings and then follows through on the threat. Ghaddafi saw what happened to Hussein and decided to stay in power and live until Bush was gone. When he saw Obama take over, an all talk liberal with no backbone, he went back to his old ways.
...and is now dead, in no small part because of the United States. So what exactly are you talking about? How can you present Bush as a strong leader who would have taken Ghaddafi out and Obama as an "all talk liberal with no backbone" and then ignore the fact Ghaddafi was taken out under Obama's watch?

It's almost as if you're wearing a sign on your back right now which says, "I'm partisan".
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
50,521
Reaction score
34,846
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The Arab spring created the mess we now see in Iraq.

Taking out Saddam, and especially doing so without any thought for what would happen if you disband the Iraqi army, ignore it and ignore the police force, and then leave infrastructure unguarded, was the real set-up.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,764
Reaction score
20,448
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Do you have any idea what you're taking about ?

President Bush 2, himself, agreed to the terms that you're criticizing President Obama for abiding to with the argument that they never would have happened under President Bush 2. You're wrong by definition, they were actually enacted under President Bush 2.

Wrong. President Bush did negotiate an agreement with the interim Iraq government that did expire shortly after he left office. But to claim that President Obama was simply abiding by a temporary agreement and not renegotiating a new one or simply extending the old one is just ignorant. You think new President have no responsibility to renew agreements that expire under their term of office? That's just nonsense.

Fact remains, unlike in virtually every other situation where the US has defeated an enemy and then governed that country after the war was over, this time the US had a President who thought more about what was best for himself, politically, then what was best for his country. The results of that decision are seen all across the Middle East.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,764
Reaction score
20,448
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
...and is now dead, in no small part because of the United States. So what exactly are you talking about? How can you present Bush as a strong leader who would have taken Ghaddafi out and Obama as an "all talk liberal with no backbone" and then ignore the fact Ghaddafi was taken out under Obama's watch?

It's almost as if you're wearing a sign on your back right now which says, "I'm partisan".

Shame you can't follow the argument. Perhaps if you went back and read the content of the discussion, it might dawn on you presuming you, yourself, take off your partisan shades.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
54,611
Reaction score
35,875
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So, you're claiming that a few Iraqi politicians controlled the US military? Only under President Obama. If Bush had still been President, it never would have happened. President Obama got exactly what he wanted, to hell with the consequences.

you are mistaken
the USA complied with the exit agreement entered into by the dicknbush regime
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,764
Reaction score
20,448
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
you are mistaken
the USA complied with the exit agreement entered into by the dicknbush regime

Not mistaken at all. The agreement was a temporary one that was subject to renewal. President Obama had zero interest in renewing it for political reasons and thus a convenient excuse was identified so the blame, when it inevitably went bad, would flow back on President Bush. President Obama, a gifted politician, knew all too well how gullible the likes of American voters, such as apparently yourself, are to these kinds of plays.

You rejoiced in President Obama getting American soldiers out, you rejoiced in Vice-President Biden's claim that Iraq was one of President Obama's "greatest achievements" and you blame Bush when it goes south. They have you pegged perfectly.
 
Top Bottom