Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

And the first person to blame Bush for the current crisis in Iraq is…
Hotair ^ | 06/12/2014 | Noah Rothman

Posted on 06/12/2014 2:27:03 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

The explosion of bloodshed in Iraq has created the temptation for many to revisit their support for or opposition to the 2003 invasion of Iraq and to ascribe blame for the recent surge in violence to their preferred boogieman.

Not all have succumbed to the enticing lure of nostalgia. Not even consistent Iraq War and George W. Bush critic Fareed Zakaria allowed himself himself to take a swipe at the former commander-in-chief for looming over the present crisis.

Appearing on CNN on Thursday, Zakaria blamed Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for undoing what he said was the good accomplished by Gen. David Petraeus following the 2007 Iraq surge. The CNN analyst said that, in the wake of U.S withdrawal, the Iraqi prime minister fostered the resentments among average Iraqis which have created the conditions in which a surge can flourish.

That’s significant for a number of reasons. Zakaria opposed the surge in 2007 for the same reasons he opposed Barack Obama’s surge into Afghanistan – it was a military operation when it should have been a political and economic one. Today, however, Zakaria appears to have moderated his position on the Iraq War in light of the last seven years.

Zakaria is owed some credit. Not everyone can shed a once favored but clearly defunct political narrative as gracefully as he has. Take, for instance, MSNBC host Joy Reid who educated her audience on the origins of the ISIS threat on Thursday.

“And now to the events in Iraq, which actually began with the invasion of Iraq,” she said. “The dissolution of its army later in 2003, a subsequent civil war, a surge that was supposed to give Iraq time to form a stable government and become a modern state, and the internecine political process that resulted instead.”

“Now, it’s this unpleasant recent history that helped set the stage for the bloody events that we’re seeing in Iraq right now,” Reid said. The MSNBC host conveniently forgot to include the fact that the ISIS rebellion was incubated in Syria – a civil war characterized by the use of chemical weapons on civilians and which the United States world failed to do anything about. The very name of the organization rampaging across Iraq today pays homage to its origins in that Mediterranean state.

Instead, Reid prefers to go back in history to the very roots of the modern Democratic Party, forged in opposition to the Iraq War. She might as well have gone back to the British Mandate of Mesopotamia or Iraq’s 1958 coup to “set the stage” for present events.

But even Reid did not go so far as to blame Bush by name for crisis in Iraq. No, that dubious distinction must be awarded to Republican-turned-independent-turned-Democratic governor of Rhode Island, Lincoln Chafee.

Seeing a moment of political opportunism, Chafee jumped at the chance to remind his state’s liberal voters that he opposed the Iraq Ware while serving in the U.S. Senate.

“I never understood the original push for war in Iraq, never understood the logic of regime change,” Chafee said. “These neocons [neo-conservatives] all through the ’90s were talking the importance of regime change in Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein, the strongman. I just didn’t understand stirring up the hornets’ nest that is the Middle East. It just never made any sense to me, and now we’re seeing some of the ramifications of having deviated from our Cold War containment strategy.”

Channeling George Kennan, Chafee insisted that the United States could have and should have contained Iraq 11 years ago. “It worked in Russia,” he said. “It worked in China.” Maybe he forgets that the West functionally abandoned containment in the 1950s in favor of a policy advocating the “rollback” of the Communist world. That shift in tactics eventually resulted in the liberation of Eastern Europe.

But, anyway, back to Chafee’s melancholy romp through events in the distant past:

“I always thought our Cold War strategy depended on strong alliances,” the Ocean State’s governor said, vividly recounting the heated cable news segments of 2002. “Those have been fractured through this misadventure.”

*Obviously, it’s happening in Syria. I just believe in multinational approaches that are respectful of everybody’s positions. We deviated from that respect. We’ve got to try rebuilding those alliances with the Saudis, the Turks, the Jordanians — that’s going to be the key.”

And that project has been going swimmingly.

Credit where credit is due; more than a handful of political commentators have been able to take into account that Barack Obama has been president for nearly six years while commenting on the renewed violence in Iraq. For some, though, it will always be those heady 22 months leading up to the Iraq War.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bhomiddleeast; bush; bushsfault; iraq; postwariraq; soskerry

1 posted on 06/12/2014 2:27:03 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
This is our President Obama’s fault.
2 posted on 06/12/2014 2:29:13 PM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy

I wouldn’t necessarily say it’s his fault as much as it’s his plan.


3 posted on 06/12/2014 2:32:10 PM PDT by JudyinCanada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
This is our President Obama’s fault.

He's not my president.

F U B O!

4 posted on 06/12/2014 2:36:20 PM PDT by unixfox (Abolish Slavery, Repeal the 16th Amendment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
The issue of why we went to Iraq is distinct from the issue of what we must do once we are entrenched in Iraq.

Why we went to Iraq is a Bush thing. The origins of Iraq was convoluted and confused, not unlike the origins of Vietnam. Bush owns that.

But once we were in there it's a different story. With Saddam removed, Iraq became another potential Taliban/Al-Qaeda/Islamo-terroist front. Obama owns what we do now in Irag.

5 posted on 06/12/2014 2:36:37 PM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JudyinCanada

This will make vets love Obama even more.


6 posted on 06/12/2014 2:36:50 PM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Not sure how Bush can be blamed AFTER their proud announcement linked below, but I am sure the OMG will provide the usual cover for the most corrupt lying pResident of my 70+ year lifetime.

Joe Biden: Success In Iraq Is Obama Administration’s Achievement

"On the Larry King Live show last week, Vice President Joe Biden took credit for the success in Iraq, stating that the United States involvement in the war-torn country "could be one of the great achievements of [the Obama] administration."
7 posted on 06/12/2014 2:36:51 PM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unixfox
Well I know what you mean, but he is the USA President and I don't live in Tunis, so this turd is our President technically though we disapprove in every way with the guy.
8 posted on 06/12/2014 2:38:32 PM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: unixfox
Well I know what you mean, but he is the USA President and I don't live in Tunis, so this turd is our President technically though we disapprove in every way with the guy.
9 posted on 06/12/2014 2:38:40 PM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I do think we did not destroy these modern day Nazis as much as we should have during the Bush years.

But Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader this Caliphate movement was captured and held captive in the Bucca camp in Iraq during the Bush years.

Obama released him (and others) as soon as he could.

I don’t think the self absorbed chattering class know how important and dangerous this formation of a Caliphate state is.


10 posted on 06/12/2014 2:40:42 PM PDT by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

I heard that tape played on Rush today.


11 posted on 06/12/2014 2:40:54 PM PDT by entropy12 (Term limits is the right (may be only) way to eliminate corrupt politicians via seniority system.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Bill Clintoon said, “It all depends on what the meaning of ISIS is.”


12 posted on 06/12/2014 2:44:14 PM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew

Not really.

Iraq was in cahoots with al Qaeda and was a threat to provide WMD for more or even worse attacks.

The mistake was not going from south to north and neutralizing all pro-Caliphates as we occupied the entire Arabian peninsula and Afghanistan.

We were way too soft and it has and will come back to bite us.


13 posted on 06/12/2014 2:44:26 PM PDT by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan

What does it take for Boehner to begin Articles of Impeachment for the Democrat’s Obama?


14 posted on 06/12/2014 2:45:57 PM PDT by Graewoulf (Democrats' Obamacare Socialist Health Insur. Tax violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Graewoulf

It would take him starting to care.


15 posted on 06/12/2014 2:50:00 PM PDT by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan
Sadaam was not a religious fanatic. He only care about political power and he was a savage dictator. Reportedly, he did not support these Islamic radical terrorists.

Bush's reason were convoluted and confused. The WMD thing was dropped like hot potatoes and changed to the equally screwy, anti-American "Bush Doctrine" justifying our invasion to make other countries "democratic." What a load of H.S.

16 posted on 06/12/2014 2:50:01 PM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Uh, didn’t the Bush dooshes go out of their way to treat ol’ Lincoln with kid gloves? You know, as NE elitists to another?


17 posted on 06/12/2014 2:51:07 PM PDT by x1stcav ("The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew

Stop parroting the left lines.

Bush admin poorly communicated.

But there was no way in Hell to not invade and make damn sure there was not going to be a nuke made available.


18 posted on 06/12/2014 2:52:49 PM PDT by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Saddam was no threat to the USA and kept the various tribal and religious groups inline with the necessary force. Removing him from power was a mistake.

This is Bush's fault just like the ongoing open borders disaster.

19 posted on 06/12/2014 3:05:33 PM PDT by Count of Monte Fisto (The foundation of modern society is the denial of reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan
So a valid complaint about Bush is a "leftist line?"

Dang man, we're distinguished from the Left because we're supposed to be on the side of the truth and for what's right, not for partisanship but for America. If it's true, its true. It's not left, right or anything else.

Otherwise what we say is empty and meaningless. If you don't hold Bush accountable for his actions, how can you hold Obama accountable for his actions?

There was nothing about a "nuke" involved. Bush got his eye off the ball. He did a great job going after the bad guys in Afghanistan. Then he got his eye off the ball and wanted to finish what his Dad had started. His reasons were convoluted. IMO, he screwed up.

20 posted on 06/12/2014 3:05:48 PM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew
Bush's reason were convoluted and confused. The WMD thing was dropped like hot potatoes and changed to the equally screwy, anti-American "Bush Doctrine" justifying our invasion to make other countries "democratic." What a load of H.S.

It was only 'convoluted and confused' if you were getting your news from MSNBC or Ron Paul - the 'WMD thing' you casually dismiss was taken quite seriously by the Democrats in the House and Senate, and most other other national and international intelligence agencies.

21 posted on 06/12/2014 3:06:48 PM PDT by AzSteven ("War is less costly than servitude, the choice is always between Verdun and Dachau." Jean Dutourd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew; ifinnegan

The Iraqi nukes were trucked into Syria before the kickoff of OIF.

There are pics all over the Web that have been declassified.

The Leftist talking point of “No WMD’s In Iraq” was and is a lie.


22 posted on 06/12/2014 3:13:56 PM PDT by Old Sarge (TINVOWOOT: There Is No Voting Our Way Out Of This)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
“I never understood the original push for war in Iraq, never understood the logic of regime change,” Chafee said. “These neocons [neo-conservatives] all through the ’90s were talking the importance of regime change in Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein, the strongman. I just didn’t understand stirring up the hornets’ nest that is the Middle East. It just never made any sense to me, and now we’re seeing some of the ramifications of having deviated from our Cold War containment strategy.”

Would it have made more sense to continue the sanctions that had already killed at least 500,000 Iraqi children and teenagers?

23 posted on 06/12/2014 3:15:05 PM PDT by TwelveOfTwenty (See my home page for some of my answers to the left's talking points.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AzSteven
There was a lot of debate about the existence of WMD's. And there was also a lot of debate about WMD's justifying an invasion.

Why did Bush early on, replace the WMD's for the "Bush Doctrine" as justification for invasion?

24 posted on 06/12/2014 3:15:13 PM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew; HiJinx; ASA Vet; Progov; Seizethecarp; darkwing104; 2ndDivisionVet; LonePalm; ...
Reportedly, he did not support these Islamic radical terrorists.

Salman Pak.

You don't know what you're talking about.

25 posted on 06/12/2014 3:15:45 PM PDT by Old Sarge (TINVOWOOT: There Is No Voting Our Way Out Of This)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge
There was a lot of debate about the existence of WMD's. And there was also a lot of debate about WMD's justifying an invasion.

Why did Bush early on replace the WMD's for the anti-American "Bush Doctrine" as justification for invasion?

26 posted on 06/12/2014 3:16:56 PM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: AzSteven
It was only 'convoluted and confused' if you were getting your news from MSNBC or Ron Paul


27 posted on 06/12/2014 3:17:25 PM PDT by Old Sarge (TINVOWOOT: There Is No Voting Our Way Out Of This)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew

There was a lot of PROOF about them, too - which you choose to ignore.


28 posted on 06/12/2014 3:18:33 PM PDT by Old Sarge (TINVOWOOT: There Is No Voting Our Way Out Of This)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Count of Monte Fisto
No, Saddam was a threat to the entire region, he had to go.

He should have been removed in 91, but Bush Sr. had no guts.

29 posted on 06/12/2014 3:22:33 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Nation Building down the toilet. Too much money and lives lost in this cess pool. This falls into all of those suits and ties that created this mess. Both sides of the ailses are to blame.


30 posted on 06/12/2014 3:22:37 PM PDT by Busko (The only thing that is certain is that nothing is certain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew

Look. Nothing personal, but...

You don’t get anything. You don’t know anything but spiel from the left.

I guess you are a libertarian.

Your comments are irrational, illogical and delusional.


31 posted on 06/12/2014 3:27:24 PM PDT by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge

And even if there were no nukes, chem weapons, anything. — there is no way we could take any chance after 911.


32 posted on 06/12/2014 3:28:32 PM PDT by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan

You argue like the Left. Label and assert without actual reasoning on the substantive issue at hand.


33 posted on 06/12/2014 3:31:49 PM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew

America gave Iraq it’s freedom, A$$ Hat!
It’s not the fault of anyone but the Iraq people that do not want to retain the gift we gave!
Now go find a hole to live in like Saddam!


34 posted on 06/12/2014 3:43:21 PM PDT by DocJhn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew

I’m not arguing.


35 posted on 06/12/2014 3:47:03 PM PDT by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan
“I do think we did not destroy these modern day Nazis as much as we should have during the Bush years.”

That's true...

IF I were President on 9/11, every muzzie religious site, and every known terrorist training camp in the middle east would have been turned to glass within 45 minutes of the second tower coming down.

The muzzies view it as total war where everyone who isn't a satan worshiper is a legitimate target.

36 posted on 06/12/2014 3:49:00 PM PDT by 2CAVTrooper (If you ain't CAV, you ain't.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DocJhn

The Bush Doctrine is expressly anti-American, Dork.


37 posted on 06/12/2014 3:53:38 PM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew

Why do you people go off? Just because your name was at the top did you not realize the A$$ Hat was for the Cat making the statement in the article! DORK!


38 posted on 06/12/2014 4:44:35 PM PDT by DocJhn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew

Date 18 Feb 1998
Read the transcript. Practically word for word the same in Clinton era as the Bush era.

Sec. Berger emphasized the U.S. desire for a diplomatic settlement. “We
want to resolve this peacefully,” Berger said, “but there are some
things worth fighting for. And those include fighting aggression,
fighting people who threaten their neighbors, and fighting to make
this world a safer and more secure place for my children and for
yours.”

The problem became when the enemy within drummed the Vietnam mantra.
Better have the helicopters ready for personnel pick up in Baghdad.


39 posted on 06/12/2014 6:24:24 PM PDT by griswold3 (I was born heI're in America. I will die here in a third world country. Obama succeeded.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
Our President? That arrogant pos is not my president, Buster. He might be yours, but he certainly isn't mine. Never was was never will be.

Now that I got this out of the way, I blame the whole fiasco one the rat party and that arrogant pos occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave

40 posted on 06/13/2014 2:46:09 PM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I’m sorry there isn’t another President. I think this first black gem is responsible, but I think stupid comes in all colors.


41 posted on 06/13/2014 3:39:08 PM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson