• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

American influence is over.

Thanks Bush.
 
You can hate Bush all you want but leaders around the world had no doubt that he would act. Why should we care? Well if you don't understand the problems created by Iran controlling the entire Middle East then there is no reason to try to explain it to you. Russia is also currently massing troops on the Ukraine border but I am sure you think that is no big deal either.
 
89DeaconMike said:
You can hate Bush all you want but leaders around the world had no doubt that he would act. Why should we care? Well if you don't understand the problems created by Iran controlling the entire Middle East then there is no reason to try to explain it to you. Russia is also currently massing troops on the Ukraine border but I am sure you think that is no big deal either.
Click to expand...

You do realize that Bush is directly responsible for the ascent of Iran in the Middle East when he removed the Iraqi counter-weight? If we are strictly talking geopolitics, Saddam's regime was a Sunni-led autocracy that saw Islamic extremism as a threat. We traded that for a weak Shia-led government and a breeding ground for extremism. You are now surprised that they are buddies with Iran? Hilarious.

I can respect people with different opinions but you border on moronic when you value action for the sake of action. To what end? History will judge the Iraq invasion as a boondoggle based on faulty intelligence that led to more deaths, displaced persons, and regional insecurity than existed in the region at the time we decided to "act". Yet, you see that as a success because we were able to shake our dicks at the world. Obama is not without faults, but the era of shoot first and think later is over and mental midgets like you need to go back to rubbing one out and polishing your guns next time you feel your pent up aggression is getting out of hand.
 
Last edited:
P4nthers11 said:
You do realize that Bush is directly responsible for the ascent of Iran in the Middle East when he removed the Iraqi counter-weight? If we are strictly talking geopolitics, Saddam's regime was a Sunni-led autocracy that saw Islamic extremism as a threat. We traded that for a weak Shia-led government and a breeding ground for extremism. You are now surprised that they are buddies with Iran? Hilarious.
Click to expand...

This.
 
89DeaconMike said:
You can hate Bush all you want but leaders around the world had no doubt that he would act. Why should we care? Well if you don't understand the problems created by Iran controlling the entire Middle East then there is no reason to try to explain it to you. Russia is also currently massing troops on the Ukraine border but I am sure you think that is no big deal either.
Click to expand...

Bush would act stupidly plunging countries into non-sensical war based on intentionally misrepresented "intel". Then as more Americans were being killed needlessly he'd play dress up on a Navy ship to lie and say "Mission Accomplished".

You had no problem sending US heroes to their deaths based on lies.

You defended the use of torture which led to the deaths of more US heroes.

You have no legitimacy to speak about anything in this sphere with all the blood you supported spilling based on lies.
 
P4nthers11 said:
You do realize that Bush is directly responsible for the ascent of Iran in the Middle East when he removed the Iraqi counter-weight?
Click to expand...
You do realize that the Iraq counter weight was based on a flawed artificial "balance of power" philosophy that predated Bush, and that the Iraqi counter-weight power wise was neutered by 12 years of isolation...mostly under Clinton. One can't claim Iraq was powerless and everyone knew it (so going in was stupid) and then simultaneously claim they were actually a real counter-weight to Iran. We were the ones that became the counter-weight, protecting the Saudis from their guard dog while ensuring their guard dog appeared powerful vs Iran.

History will judge Iraq for exactly what it was: we finished the conflict we started in 1991. The same end game was going to happen the moment we crossed the border 20+ years ago. The mistake is pretending it was something separate and blaming the guy trying to end it.....and of course not finishing the job back in 1992.
 
89DeaconMike said:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/24/us-iraq-iran-arms-idUSBREA1N10D20140224

Not one country has any fear that this administration will do anything about anything. Obama, Biden, Hagel, Kerry all make big speeches. The rest of the world just laughs.
Click to expand...

Alright, it is time to choose which path you take at the fork in the road. Is Obama a massive pussy, or is he stomping on the constitution by authorizing drones strikes overseas and killing people like a dictator? Is he not projecting power, or is he infuriating other countries with his aggressive tactics such as conducting operations in an "allies'" and nuclear power's backyard? Is he wrong for not jumping into every conflict in the world head first, or is he bankrupting the country?

Everyone knows we still have the best military in the world, and nuclear bombs, and can fly missiles through the windshield of their car.

So who do we fuck up first to re-establish dominance?
 
pourdeac said:
You do realize that the Iraq counter weight was based on a flawed artificial "balance of power" philosophy that predated Bush, and that the Iraqi counter-weight power wise was neutered by 12 years of isolation...mostly under Clinton. One can't claim Iraq was powerless and everyone knew it (so going in was stupid) and then simultaneously claim they were actually a real counter-weight to Iran. We were the ones that became the counter-weight, protecting the Saudis from their guard dog while ensuring their guard dog appeared powerful vs Iran.

History will judge Iraq for exactly what it was: we finished the conflict we started in 1991. The same end game was going to happen the moment we crossed the border 20+ years ago. The mistake is pretending it was something separate and blaming the guy trying to end it.....and of course not finishing the job back in 1992.
Click to expand...

I guess I must have missed the date that everyone came together and had a philosophy meeting where they decided that having a large, hostile country on your border with a government that is antithetical to your system of political Islam and led by your historic enemies, and which you fairly recently fought an almost decades long violent conflict utilizing non-conventional weapons was in fact not a counter-weight. This situation doesn't seem ripe for reevaluating the traditional paradigm that hostile countries located next to each other with governments that detest each other tend to influence the behavior of each other.
 
I was thinking Greenland just to keep everybody on their toes.
 
P4nthers11 said:
I guess I must have missed the date that everyone came together and had a philosophy meeting where they decided that having a large, hostile country on your border with a government that is antithetical to your system of political Islam and led by your historic enemies, and which you fairly recently fought an almost decades long violent conflict utilizing non-conventional weapons was in fact not a counter-weight. This situation doesn't seem ripe for reevaluating the traditional paradigm that hostile countries located next to each other with governments that detest each other tend to influence the behavior of each other.
Click to expand...

+1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top