• 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!

50 soldiers killed in ISIS attack on Egyptian Army's Sinai checkpoints

I'm pretty sure Nixon claimed the same for South Vietnam too :(

No doubt.
Turned out his "secret plan" to end the Vietnam wa... I mean police action was to declare victory and leave. Look how well that turned out!
 
Bush era conservatives blame Obama for not doubling down on the multi-trillion-dollar cluster**** they created in the Middle East. That's the bottom line. Obama is not a neocon, and he was elected to change course rather than continue the Project For a New American Century.
 
Bush era conservatives blame Obama for not doubling down on the multi-trillion-dollar cluster**** they created in the Middle East. That's the bottom line. Obama is not a neocon, and he was elected to change course rather than continue the Project For a New American Century.

But he didn't change that course and his MEFP has been as belligerent as his predecessors. But then Obama informed us in 2008 that he would attack Al Qaeda in Pakistan with or without the Pakistani governments position. For all with an ear to hear, there was going to be no change in the Bush/PNAC doctrine, and the destabilization of the ME would continue!!
 
But he didn't change that course and his MEFP has been as belligerent as his predecessors. But then Obama informed us in 2008 that he would attack Al Qaeda in Pakistan with or without the Pakistani governments position. For all with an ear to hear, there was going to be no change in the Bush/PNAC doctrine, and the destabilization of the ME would continue!!

The Neocons/PNAC wanted to transform the Middle East by toppling/destabilizing regimes. The Obama Admin is aggressive with terrorist targets. You could argue that the policies overlap in certain areas, but there is a massive difference in their end goals.
 
One would think that a "stable and sovereign" nation could have stood on its own without having the US military keeping it stable.
Then perhaps Obama was lying again? Or was it only stable while the military was there to keep it stable, just as all the advisers insisted.

The fact is that it was stable only while troops are there, much like in other areas of the world, though they often call them \Peace Keeping Forces"

We knew the Islamists wanted Iraq because they were the ones firing on the Coalition troops at the time and murdering Muslims in suicide missions, etc. Obama created this mess and id 100% accountable for it.
 
The Neocons/PNAC wanted to transform the Middle East by toppling/destabilizing regimes. The Obama Admin is aggressive with terrorist targets. You could argue that the policies overlap in certain areas, but there is a massive difference in their end goals.
"Neo-cons" destabilized Egypt? Libya? Iraq? Syria?

How so???
 
. Obama created this mess and id 100% accountable for it.

What a load of US centric party political claptrap. Get real. This entire scenario was of his predecessors making. Hussein was at least the devil we knew
 
There are far larger guerilla armies fighting in other parts of the world that are largely ignored by the Western media
Large does not mean the same as dangerous nor brutal nor efficient. As well, they are ignored by Western media when they pose little to no threat to Western interests or the US itself.

The only way these guys are of any significance is in the way they use western victims to further their ends via our media. They have been singularly successful in this regard and now have many believing they are ten feet tall, bent on world domination .... yadda yadda. They are basically a small group of religious fanatics that will go the way of many other such groups in the fullness of time, taken down by their own infighting.

Apparently they are too well entrenched and capable so far. Granted they haven't been really tested yet and they probably won't be if the current administration has anything to say about it. They continue to attract followers, they continue to use social media to broadcast their message and sickening brutality - so whether they are a paper tiger or not, in the short term they win and they will continue to win and gain until something stops them. You want to underestimate them - that's classic bad strategy going back nearly 3,000 years to 500 BC and Sun Tzu's time.
 
No doubt.
Turned out his "secret plan" to end the Vietnam wa... I mean police action was to declare victory and leave. Look how well that turned out!
It was a war, an episode in the Cold War, but we can use that as another example of what happens when leftists, especially those who have no knowledge of international power and its dynamics, get involved in foreign policy decision making.
 
You want to underestimate them - that's classic bad strategy going back nearly 3,000 years to 500 BC and Sun Tzu's time.

Us overestimating them serves their purposes far better
 
Overestimating them serves their purposes far better

Hardly. Show me how many wars were lost because the enemy was overestimated.
 
Bush era conservatives blame Obama for not doubling down on the multi-trillion-dollar cluster**** they created in the Middle East. That's the bottom line. Obama is not a neocon, and he was elected to change course rather than continue the Project For a New American Century.
N, the bottom line was that Iraq was stable, all you need do is check the stats. But in order to keep it stable troops had to remain. Instead Obama moved them out, claiming an end to the war. That Obama would claim that it takes only one side to end a war is just anther example of his profound ignorance on foreign policy and power politics.
 
It was a war, an episode in the Cold War, but we can use that as another example of what happens when leftists, especially those who have no knowledge of international power and its dynamics, get involved in foreign policy decision making.

Instead of worrying about right and left perhaps you should care more about whats right and wrong. That war was most definitely wrong by what ever measure you choose to judge it by and I'm not using 20-20 hindsight here either
 
Hardly. Show me how many wars were lost because the enemy was overestimated.

Overestimating them simply buttresses this rag tag bunch of zealots It makes them think they can win and assists their recruitment
 
Overestimating them simply buttresses this rag tag bunch of zealots It makes them think they can win and assists their recruitment

So let me answer since you will not. Zero wars have been lost due to overestimating an enemy. Zero.
 
So let me answer since you will not. Zero wars have been lost due to overestimating an enemy. Zero.

Perhaps before going in again to kill who knows how many more hundreds of thousands of collateral victims, it might be better to take a more realistic view of the magnitude of the threat first.
 
Overestimating them simply buttresses this rag tag bunch of zealots It makes them think they can win and assists their recruitment

And what, you want another fiasco like the Clinton administration totally missing Al Qaeda?

Obama get tired of defending "his" Islamic faith to the world so decides there is no more war on terror, ISIS is the JV team.....

Sorry, but we've heard this story topo many times before. either fight the ****ing war or get out of the way and let adults do it
 
He can't explain it, so he'll probably ignore it.

One was made in 2001 and the other 2003 when we invaded Iraq. interesting how all you want to do is relive history and ignore reality of today. All you do is divert from the present to focus on the past just like you ignore all the Democrat quotes prior to the invasion and the fact that Saddam violated the cease fire and continued to focus on WMD development.
 
One was made in 2001 and the other 2003 when we invaded Iraq. interesting how all you want to do is relive history and ignore reality of today. All you do is divert from the present to focus on the past just like you ignore all the Democrat quotes prior to the invasion and the fact that Saddam violated the cease fire and continued to focus on WMD development.

Yes one was made when they didn't want to invade Iraq the other was made when they did . Funny that ? :cool:

Here are some other nuggets that got circulated once Iraq had been chosen as the scapegoat for 9/11

Twenty Lies About the Iraq War | Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

Yet for all that BS it was really these guys who were by far the most culpable

http://7online.com/news/calls-to-re...-11-attacks-saudi-links-investigation/816141/

It also transpires that America's teflon buddy is a big supporter of these guys too

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...audi-role-in-911-has-helped-isis-9731563.html
 
Last edited:
Perhaps before going in again to kill who knows how many more hundreds of thousands of collateral victims, it might be better to take a more realistic view of the magnitude of the threat first.

Agreed. Just when that threat assessment is done don't make the "JV Team" mistake again. ISIS isn't going anywhere because no one is forcing them out - hell they just minted their own currency.
 
Instead of worrying about right and left perhaps you should care more about whats right and wrong. That war was most definitely wrong by what ever measure you choose to judge it by and I'm not using 20-20 hindsight here either

Again, what does it matter today? Do you have a solution for ISIS and their desire for world domination? In real life do you always react vs. being proactive? Again, you don't seem to under evil nor do you understand the conditions in Iraq in 2008 vs. today. You are blinded by an ideology and hatred for GW Bush. You really need to seek help to cure that disease
 
Back
Top Bottom