Why no one should consider voting for Jeb Bush.

[werepossum]

Toppling Saddam Hussein helped them more than you give it credit for but our heavy involvement in that region dates back to FDR meeting with the Saudi King... probably because WWII really drained our oil reserves.
....

Probably confirmation bias prevents her from doing so... either that or the really smart people don't ascribe to either party but just vote for the lesser of the two evils atm.


....

Or it was a joke. Wouldn't want to rule that one out.

 

[blankslate]

After September 11th we could have driven our war machine anywhere. Bush chose Iraq and spent all our energy, capital, and investment there instead of on Iran. In a choice of destroy one or the other we chose Iraq because the Bush family had an axe to grind against Saddam.

He should have just approved plans to killed Bin Laden. There was a special forces team in the area... probably more than one. But this one had its commander interviewed by CBS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmtPBTybQ9k&t=3m10s

Delta developed an audacious plan to come at bin Laden from the one direction he would never expect.

"We want to come in on the back door," Fury explains. "The original plan that we sent up through our higher headquarters, Delta Force wants to come in over the mountain with oxygen, coming from the Pakistan side, over the mountains and come in and get a drop on bin Laden from behind."

But they didn't take that route, because Fury says they didn't get approval from a higher level. "Whether that was Central Command all the way up to the president of the United States, I'm not sure," he says.

The next option that Delta wanted to employ was to drop hundreds of landmines in the mountain passes that led to Pakistan, which was bin Laden's escape route.

"First guy blows his leg off, everybody else stops. That allows aircraft overhead to find them. They see all these heat sources out there. Okay, there a big large group of Al Qaeda moving south. They can engage that," Fury explains.

But they didn't do that either, because Fury says that plan was also disapproved. He says he has "no idea" why.

"How often does Delta come up with a tactical plan that's disapproved by higher headquarters?" Pelley asks.

"In my experience, in my five years at Delta, never before," Fury says.

And it turns out that this team sent not one but two plans to get Bin Laden in Tora Bora up the chain of command and were told "negative" twice... if it was a Democratic Administration when that happened it'd be a Neocon / conservative / Fox News talking point... a hypothetical President Gore would've been "that chicken who let Bin Laden escape Tora Bora" but since it was their team they don't mention it.

Also if the approval was given and Bin Laden died in the Afghan mountains then there'd be no "Well, President Bush only gave the order..." from the right.



....

 

[blankslate]

Or it was a joke. Wouldn't want to rule that one out.

Wait is that a joke? Are you Joking? There's no Joking in P&N! </Hanks>


....

 

[cabri]

Libya was in the middle of a civil war when we intervened.

What difference does that make.

Without our intervention; he would have solved the issue.

Now, there is an unstable government; we have a dead ambassador and ISIS potentially has another foothold.

I did not see us putting up a no-fly zone over Syria or Ethiopia or any other African country that has a civil war going on.

 

[glenn1]

Also @rudeguy comparing death tolls in various wars only works if they were all fought for similarly sound reasons... which only happens in the bizarro-land that warmongers inhabit.


....

Fine with that caveat, and a free no-prize to anyone who can give the "sound reason" for intervening in basically any conflicts in the past 50 years or so. Heck, Iraq might not even make the top 5 list even if we limit it to strictly Dem President stupidity as Vietnam, the invasion of the Domican Republic, the former Yugoslavia, Haiti, and Bay of Pigs. Or top 10 once you add other Repub fails like invading Panama, Grenada, various clashes with Libya, etc.....

 

[fskimospy]

What difference does that make.

Without our intervention; he would have solved the issue.

Now, there is an unstable government; we have a dead ambassador and ISIS potentially has another foothold.

I did not see us putting up a no-fly zone over Syria or Ethiopia or any other African country that has a civil war going on.

You asked why Libya was a disaster before we intervened. I classify being in the middle of a civil war to be 'a disaster', but I guess your mileage may vary.

As for the idea that he would have 'solved the issue', I would suggest you look to other countries that had 'solved' the issue of an uprising, like say... Yemen for example.

 

[blankslate]

Fine with that caveat, and a free no-prize to anyone who can give the "sound reason" for intervening in basically any conflicts in the past 50 years or so. Heck, Iraq might not even make the top 5 list even if we limit it to strictly Dem President stupidity as Vietnam, the invasion of the Domican Republic, the former Yugoslavia, Haiti, and Bay of Pigs. Or top 10 once you add other Repub fails like invading Panama, Grenada, various clashes with Libya, etc.....

Well, given that imo the only real reason to declare war is an attack against country no one is going to win that prize.

As far as multi-national actions go. I'd say the kicking of Iraq out of Kuwait and the prevention of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Hervegovina come the closest.

However, both of those were more limited in scope than full-on invasions. Saddam wasn't chased into Iraq and deposed and NATO forces in Bosnia weren't interested so much in deposing heads of state as they were in stopping the ethnic cleansing.


...

 

[BoberFett]

Sanders is the Democratic candidate equivalent of a leftist saying "I'm going to move to Canada." Something they cite as a wish fulfillment when they get tired of the realm of the possibile, but not something they'd actually go ahead with when decision time came. It's akin to someone on the right saying that if taxes are raised they'll just quit their job and live on the dole instead.

I would have loved to have seen an election with a choice between Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul. I'd have been OK with either of them winning, just to shake things up.

Sadly, because most voters are idiots, we're going to get Bush v Clinton. American, fuck yeah.

 

[cabri]

You asked why Libya was a disaster before we intervened. I classify being in the middle of a civil war to be 'a disaster', but I guess your mileage may vary.

As for the idea that he would have 'solved the issue', I would suggest you look to other countries that had 'solved' the issue of an uprising, like say... Yemen for example.

Qaddafi would have been able to defeat the rebels without them having the US support.

The main problem is that others did not like him in charge and were going to remove him; note that the Arab nations asked for assistance to kick him out but did not contribute. the OAC also put "limitations" on the US involvement.

With Yemen; as you state, again there is a civil war; this time we are staying out of it. But we are providing logistical support to those that choose to intervene. That issue is more of the religious battle and sponsorship.

The main focus of this discussion is that Obama's hands are not clean and he intervened to make a situation worse than what it was at the time.

He duplicated the result that Bush created in Iraq. Few of the Muslim countries are able to survive within a democracy - a totalitarian leadership of some sort seems to be required/desired to keep the country stable. When that command influence is removed; the country disintegrates into chaos and all the previous bottled up feuds are then able to be released. Egypt would have been that way except for their military.
Tunisia initially went through chaos.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Huh? I'm not sure what to say. (Although I still suggest you read that politifact article more closely)

What is so confusing here? I'm saying that you generally read sites based on them telling you what you want to hear, which likely contributes to what you've been saying here.

So propaganda sites have nothing to do with our current discussion. Okay...
I think this conversation is over.

 

[Jhhnn]

He duplicated the result that Bush created in Iraq.

That reeks of false equivalence. It sure didn't create the same results for this country, did it?

 

[rudeguy]

So propaganda sites have nothing to do with our current discussion. Okay...
I think this conversation is over.

Are you convinced you should vote for Bush now too?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Are you convinced you should vote for Bush now too?

I don't think I could vote for him or Hillary for that matter...fuck all these people who advocate these insane wars.

 

[First]

I don't think I could vote for him or Hillary for that matter...fuck all these people who advocate these insane wars.

lol

 

[piasabird]

He couldn't do much worse than O-blamer. When was the last time 2 brothers and their father all 3 became president?

I don't really think there is anything to be gained from a female president or any one person becoming president. It is time to demolish Washington, DC, have a constitutional convention, and move the capital of the USA to a central location.

 

[blankslate]

The reason that Governor Jeb Bush's statements about listening to his brother on ME policy is that it ignores the experience of military commanders in the area....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w06I6_aTuHc&t=97m19s
^General McChrystal

If that was said by a democratic party member they'd be called an islamo-sympathizer by Fox News.


....

 

[blankslate]

He couldn't do much worse than O-blamer.

If President Bush didn't blunder from Afghanistan where the person responsible for 9/11 was into Iraq (which had no credible links to Al-Qaeda or 9/11 or any modern WMD nuclear program for that matter) then there wouldn't be much to blame him for...

Additionally Iran and Iraq which used to be adversaries are a lot friendlier now since we got rid of Hussein. Fuck, if a democratic president made such blunders in the middle east then republicans might be pushing for impeachment. Hard to say since it's hard to imagine them finding a war they would say no to.

....

 

[piasabird]

I thought we had no business going into Iraq or Afghanistan. There is no way the west can solve the problems of the Middle East. They are all a bunch of Kings and Potentates that just want to stay in power. If it was not for oil we would not even care if they existed.

 

[blankslate]

I thought we had no business going into Iraq or Afghanistan.

Not many people would have objected if we killed Bin Laden in Tora Bora... the Taliban even offered to send Bin Laden to a "neutral" country for trial... not sure how acceptable that offer was. But it's indicative of the notion that Al-Qaeda was pretty much the only group aside from individual hardcore jihadists that wholeheartedly approved of 9/11.


...

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Jebs clarified his answer again. Why was it so hard to say "given what is known now I wouldn't do it"

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/13/politics/jeb-bush-iraq-2016/index.html

 

[zinfamous]

its funny as I read the leftist canned reply to this (not yours Harvey, the other one that was in an article on it) and the level of incomprehension around his remarks is, well unsurprising...re read what he said, take a minute to actually try and comprehend, and if its still challenging try an internet search for help.

Then again, I presume this seeming bit of misunderstanding by the leftists is intentional spin...heck take a heated topic, completely misreport what someone says on it, and blow it way out of proportion is a play straight out of the liberal playbook no?

I don't think that's the misunderstanding--everyone probably knows he is saying that plenty of people would have gone to war based on that intelligence, based on what was being said.

That's the very simple understanding of the very simple "no shit" sort of statement that one comes to expect from politicians.


What Jeb is missing here is that Iraq was not a situation of a bunch of intelligence officers coming to the admin and saying, "Sir! We need to invade Iraq because terrorists!" Iraq happened because Cheney and Wolfowitz wanted it to happen, from day 1. This was the Wolfowitz Doctrine, and it began well before 9-11.

It is highly disingenuous to suggest that someone like Hillary would have precipitated an invasion of Iraq using specious arguments tying Saddam to 9-11, because there never would have been a desire to invade, and thus actively seek the justification to do so.

I'm not even sure if Jeb would have done the same (though, he likely would have had the same handlers in Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz--and of course the "Revenge for daddy" issue; so it's possible), as he's certainly the smarter of the two, and he certainly does himself no good service in tying his name to Iraq this way. He's completely damaged by the Bush name, simply because of his worthless brother. It's asinine that he doesn't realize this.

 

[zinfamous]

I would have loved to have seen an election with a choice between Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul. I'd have been OK with either of them winning, just to shake things up.

Sadly, because most voters are idiots, we're going to get Bush v Clinton. American, fuck yeah.

that would be pretty awesome. I worry that Rand has started to cater to the loonies of the loonies, and essentially gone back on what were to be his core beliefs, but I want to think that is simply primary speak.

 

[sportage]

Warren nor Sanders are presidential. While I like them both, they operate in a world outside of reality. I think either one of them would need to be anointed king or queen or dictator in order to have their way. Otherwise, within an Warren or Sanders administration all we'd hear is whine whine whine and bitch bitch bitch for 4 to eight years with congress even more dysfunctional than it is now.

They can have their viewpoint if warranted and justified, but the problem is the way they communicate that opinion.
You have to convince people, not just make your little speech and leave the room.
I think the senate is the perfect place for these two, but as president? Heaven forbid.
Welcome back to the world of Jimmy Carter.
Jimmy had a major communication problem as well, but still a nice guy.
It takes more than being a nice guy.

I don't think either Warren nor Sanders could even hold down the job as VP.
And probably if either were chosen as a VP candidate, that would bring down entire the ticket.
I hope Hillary is not that foolish to pick either one of them.
I use to think Hillary/Warren would be a winning ticket.
Now I'm convinced that would be Hillary's disaster.

And beyond that, if in the end Warren is proven to be wrong about TPP, that will probably be the end of her.
He credibility would take a fatal blow.
And.... as far as TPP goes, I think she is totally wrong.
.
.

 

[master_shake_]

Jebs clarified his answer again. Why was it so hard to say "given what is known now I wouldn't do it"

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/13/politics/jeb-bush-iraq-2016/index.html

bullshit, he'd go in anyway.

as if he'd want to disappoint his corporate owners.

 

[blankslate]

bullshit, he'd go in anyway.

as if he'd want to disappoint his corporate owners.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/meet-college-democrat-told-jeb-bush-brother-created/story?id=31041091

Ivy Ziedrich, a 19-year-old student at University of Nevada who said she was a registered Democrat, approached Bush after the event and told the likely presidential candidate he was wrong about the origins of the terror group:

“You stated that ISIS was created because we don't have enough presence and we've been pulling out of the Middle East. However, the threat of ISIS was created by the Iraqi coalition authority, which ousted the entire government of Iraq. It was when 30,000 individuals who are part of the Iraqi military were forced out. They had no employment, they had no income, yet they were left with access to all the same arms and weapons. Your brother created ISIS!”

Maybe she's exaggerating but while Saddam Hussein was a terrible person he was also no friend to religious fanatics like those who formed ISIS.

Yeah he'd go in anyway... too bad Senator / Sec. of State Clinton also supported the war initially although I do believe she was more definitive in saying in hindsight that was a mistake....

I am not happy that we'll probably see Bush v Clinton part Deux