• 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!

White House Promises to Bomb Ramadi Until City Retaken From ISIS

Clearly our withdrawal was a success. The Islamic State is a peaceful, just, and virtuous crowd of misunderstood Muslim Westerners who seek to create better lives for the people of Iraq and Syria! As you can see by one of the charts posted earlier by another member, the amount of deaths in Iraq have skyrocketed after our withdrawal - more than doubled.

Do you believe the Middle East, more specifically Syria and Iraq, is better-off now under the Islamic State than it was under American occupation?

I think Iraq was best under Saddam than either American occupation or IS.
 
How many Islamic Extremists are there in Germany, South Korea or Japan? Do you happen to have any more absurd comparisons?
The point clearly went over your head. Get someone to explain it to you.

Moreover, if international forces would not be responsible for maintaining order, what would the be the point of having them there? The Iraqi military has over 270,000 active duty members, yet they can't maintain order and safety in their own country. We would have to fill that roll if we were there.
You can pretty much take it as a given thet they are not there and they are feeling that they are risking their lives for no support will be arriving from anyone. Thats quite a different situation fron IS who is recruiting members from all over the world. Are you equating Iraqi forces with American or Coalition forces?
 
This has nothing to do with being "The World's Police". The American people committed themselves to a war, lost many good people, spent billions of dollars, eliminated an insanely murderous dictator, introduced democracy to the country for the first time in its history and then made an ignoble retreat by throwing it all away.

That has absolutely nothing to do with being the "World's Police", something Congress never approved anyway.

Please. Saddam was our buddy until it was politically unfavorable for him to be. There was no moral ground there. We destabilized an entire region, spent trillions of dollars on foreign occupation with no plan on how to secure the country for the long term, more than doubled our losses from 9/11, emboldened terrorists and created an environment ripe for terrorist generation.

Our intervention made things worse. When you go in blind and stupid, you have no chance to arrive at a proper conclusion. We are not the World Police, we are not imperials, we were not meant to fight Forever War.
 
They did that under that madman Hussein too. Pansies. :lol:

What did you miss? They are now US equipped and trained, under your "madman", they were not!!!
 
Sorry, democracy was NOT introduced. That was a facade of democracy. The US, nor a combination of the coalition of the willing, waved a magic wand, and suddenly Iraq was a democracy. And we spent trillions, and eliminated in Powell's words a leader that provided relative peace and stability.
Democracy did arrive in Iraq, people voted and people were elected. All went well and the citizens defied terrorist threats. Maybe its best to show you in pictures. https://www.google.ca/search?q=imag...QIY6zogT-o4HoDQ&ved=0CCAQsAQ&biw=1600&bih=742

On the Democracy Index, Iraq ranks poorly. Of the 167 countries ranked for 2013, Iraq was classified as a “hybrid regime” (between a “flawed democracy” and an “authoritarian regime”) and came in at a ranking of 113. In 2013, according to Transparency International, Iraq ranked among the eight most corrupt nations and territories in the world* (with corruption defined as “abuse of entrusted power for private gain”). Freedom House simply says: "Iraq is not an electoral democracy. Although it has conducted meaningful elections, political participation and decision-making in the country remain seriously impaired by sectarian and insurgent violence, widespread corruption, and the influence of foreign powers." Freedom House has also noted that hundreds of professors were killed and many fled the country during the height of the sectarian fighting, a blow to academic freedom; the judiciary's independence is threatened by political pressure, and sectarian violence continues to threaten religious freedom.

In 2013, two years after Obama pulled the troops? What did you expect? Naturally the Islamists would be taking over as soon as the retreat was accomplished, and just as the military and everyone predicted. Everyone expected a new SOFA would also be renegotiated, which would have been easy enough.

IS is overrunning the country and now you claim that Iraq is an imperfect Democracy, claiming in the previous paragraph that it was not even introduced at all.

You may want to give this further thought before you respond.
 
Last edited:
Democracy did arrive in Iraq, people voted and people were elected. All went well and the citizens defied terrorist threats. Maybe its best to show you in pictures. https://www.google.ca/search?q=imag...QIY6zogT-o4HoDQ&ved=0CCAQsAQ&biw=1600&bih=742
On the Democracy Index, Iraq ranks poorly. Of the 167 countries ranked for 2013, Iraq was classified as a “hybrid regime” (between a “flawed democracy” and an “authoritarian regime”) and came in at a ranking of 113. In 2013, according to Transparency International, Iraq ranked among the eight most corrupt nations and territories in the world* (with corruption defined as “abuse of entrusted power for private gain”). Freedom House simply says: "Iraq is not an electoral democracy. Although it has conducted meaningful elections, political participation and decision-making in the country remain seriously impaired by sectarian and insurgent violence, widespread corruption, and the influence of foreign powers." Freedom House has also noted that hundreds of professors were killed and many fled the country during the height of the sectarian fighting, a blow to academic freedom; the judiciary's independence is threatened by political pressure, and sectarian violence continues to threaten religious freedom. [/QUOTE]

In 2013, two years after Obama pulled the troops? What did you expect? Naturally the Islamists would be taking over as soon as the retreat was accomplished, and just as the military and everyone predicted. Everyone expected a new SOFA would also be renegotiated, which would have been easy enough.

IS is overrunning the country and now you claim that ISIS is an imperfect Democracy, claiming in the previous paragraph that it was not even introduced at all.

You may want to give this further thought before you respond.















In 2013, two years after Obama pulled the troops? What did you expect? Naturally the Islamists would be taking over as soon as the retreat was accomplished, and just as the military and everyone predicted. Everyone expected a new SOFA would also be renegotiated, which would have been easy enough.

On the Democracy Index, Iraq ranks poorly. Of the 167 countries ranked for 2013, Iraq was classified as a “hybrid regime” (between a “flawed democracy” and an “authoritarian regime”) and came in at a ranking of 113. In 2013, according to Transparency International, Iraq ranked among the eight most corrupt nations and territories in the world* (with corruption defined as “abuse of entrusted power for private gain”). Freedom House simply says: "Iraq is not an electoral democracy. Although it has conducted meaningful elections, political participation and decision-making in the country remain seriously impaired by sectarian and insurgent violence, widespread corruption, and the influence of foreign powers." Freedom House has also noted that hundreds of professors were killed and many fled the country during the height of the sectarian fighting, a blow to academic freedom; the judiciary's independence is threatened by political pressure, and sectarian violence continues to threaten religious freedom.

Did the wars bring democracy to Afghanistan and Iraq? | Costs of War[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

What????????? Concerning Iraq and the notion of "democracy" I didn't even speak to the Islamic State.
 
Leading from behind and not leaving a force of 10K troops in Iraq is just working so well (walking backwards).

Lol. A token force of 10K wouldn't accomplish anything.
 
Lol. A token force of 10K wouldn't accomplish anything.

It doesn't take a huge force of well trained troops executing militarily sound operations to accomplish (impact) a many great things.
There is a reason to have a professional military with professional military leaders, and such is much more effective than Militia groups, such as what ISIS's ground troops are composed of.

At this point, one could also point out that what was once thought of as Iraqi professional military competently led clearly hasn't demonstrated itself as such.
 
There wasn't much peace to "lose" in Iraq. That being said, it is true that the Obama administration's approach to jihadi terrorism in general, and the rise of IS in particular, has been pretty pathetic.

There were open elections in Iraq. Even Iraqi Women were allowed to vote.

The UK television show " Top Gear " even did a Middle east special a few years back and drove through parts of the region that are now littered with ISIS fighters.
 
The UK television show " Top Gear " even did a Middle east special a few years back and drove through parts of the region that are now littered with ISIS fighters.

Oh my God. It's all Jeremy Clarkson's fault!
 
Leading from behind and not leaving a force of 10K troops in Iraq is just working so well (walking backwards).

"Leading from behind?"

As opposed to what?
 
Please. Saddam was our buddy until it was politically unfavorable for him to be.
Saddam was never an American "Buddy". He was being used during a period when he was necesssary and usefel to American interests.

There was no moral ground there. We destabilized an entire region, spent trillions of dollars on foreign occupation with no plan on how to secure the country for the long term, more than doubled our losses from 9/11, emboldened terrorists and created an environment ripe for terrorist generation.
Releasing people from a degenerate dictatorship is always a moral high ground. Surely you must be aware of the genocide, the mass graves, etc. Is all this forgotten now in the revisionist blogs?

Our intervention made things worse.
No it didn't. Once the US and Coalition began the 'surge', which should have been ongoing frrom Day 1, Iraq was pretty much stable, just as Obama repeated so many times. But when he withdrew all that toppled. Thats when your point about "creating an environment ripe for a terrorist generation". There was none of that at the time of this "Greats=est Achievement".
When you go in blind and stupid, you have no chance to arrive at a proper conclusion. We are not the World Police, we are not imperials, we were not meant to fight Forever War.
Not only are you not the World's Police, Americans can no even be trusted to end a war that they themselves initiated, had won, and then threw it all away.

Do you believe that Americans can isolate themselves from the Jihadists when they cant even control their southern borders, or maintain paperwork? Barry Obama made the claim that he was ending the war in Afghanistan and Iraq and expected the Gruberites that this declaration would be accepted by IS, and all the other terrorist groups growing around the world.

What happens when these groups obtain nuclear weapons, either by defeating a nation which has them or from a friendly country who feels sympathetic to their cause? Thinking you are out of this war is just ludicrous.
 
There were open elections in Iraq. Even Iraqi Women were allowed to vote.

The UK television show " Top Gear " even did a Middle east special a few years back and drove through parts of the region that are now littered with ISIS fighters.

And who did those voters elect? Maliki, a sectarian dictator, Iranian sympathizer and a genocidal maniac. He purged the military of Sunni's, sent Shia militia's into Sunni territories to arrest and kill and went back on every promise that was made during the "great awakening". He also kicked us out when the agreement Bush signed was up.
If you call him a democratic leader it only shows you don't know what a democracy is. It was "Democracy" that sealed Iraq's fate as a failed State and emboldened ISIS.
 
There were open elections in Iraq. Even Iraqi Women were allowed to vote.

The UK television show " Top Gear " even did a Middle east special a few years back and drove through parts of the region that are now littered with ISIS fighters.

To the bolded. Lol, and what did that get them.

On the Democracy Index, Iraq ranks poorly. Of the 167 countries ranked for 2013, Iraq was classified as a “hybrid regime” (between a “flawed democracy” and an “authoritarian regime”) and came in at a ranking of 113. In 2013, according to Transparency International, Iraq ranked among the eight most corrupt nations and territories in the world*
 
Lol. A token force of 10K wouldn't accomplish anything.
The Military, and Romney, wanted 30,000 - 50,000 troops to remain while Obama want 3.000 to 5.000, which would only have put these people in harms way, just as he undermanned the troops in Afghanistan
 
The Military, and Romney, wanted 30,000 - 50,000 troops to remain while Obama want 3.000 to 5.000, which would only have put these people in harms way, just as he undermanned the troops in Afghanistan

Americans elected Obama to bring our troops home. Perhaps you can get your Mounties over there to do what you think needs to be done.
 
To the bolded. Lol, and what did that get them.
It got them little after the troops left and IS took over, but of course you claimed earlier that it never made an appearance there at all. The troops should have remained, just as they did in Europe and elsewhere following WWII.
 
It got them little after the troops left and IS took over, but of course you claimed earlier that it never made an appearance there at all. The troops should have remained, just as they did in Europe and elsewhere following WWII.

Democracies don't need troop enforcement. Thanks much for making my point.
 
Democracies don't need troop enforcement. Thanks much for making my point.
You made the claim earlier that Iraq was not a Democracy, then you said it was. Are you now claiming that Iraq was a well established democracy, like Germany, Japan, or South Korea and therefore could stand on its own???

You feel the US will be disbanding their military any time soon?
 
You made the claim earlier that Iraq was not a Democracy, then you said it was. Are you now claiming that Iraq was a well established democracy, like Germany, Japan, or South Korea and therefore could stand on its own???

You feel the US will be disbanding their military any time soon?

Wrong. I claimed that Iraq's "democracy" was/is a facade of such, and backed it up with the following, which is essentially no democracy at all.

On the Democracy Index, Iraq ranks poorly. Of the 167 countries ranked for 2013, Iraq was classified as a “hybrid regime” (between a “flawed democracy” and an “authoritarian regime”) and came in at a ranking of 113. In 2013, according to Transparency International, Iraq ranked among the eight most corrupt nations and territories in the world*

Laugh out loud.
 
And at present, we live in a US dominated uni-polar world.
im·pe·ri·al·ism
imˈpirēəˌlizəm/
noun
a policy of extending a country's power and influence through diplomacy or military force.

I think imperialism is a poor word for it. We aren't trying to annex anything. We're just playing planetary police force again. We need to stop it and take care of the homeland. I like the idea of the islamists killing each other. We should leave them alone and let them proceed.
 
Back
Top Bottom