Discussion for article #236336
Now they’re falling all over themselves to prove that they wouldn’t have done what G.W. Bush did…and yet, we all know they’re lying. they already want to get us involved in another war in Iran!
2 Likes
But but but “something something Magog and jibba jabba the apocalypse!”
It’s so damn easy to say this based on these past twelve years and what we now know. Seriously, who besides theDick Cheney would repeat that little mistake.
What I want to know is what they’d have done in the aftermath of the “MY Pet Goat” debacle. Would they have been desperate to display their manliness by invading Iraq?
3 Likes
Invading Iran would make Iraq seem like Grenada in comparison.
It would make those in the world who don’t already hate us fucking despise us.
1 Like
Nope. Sorry.
You will not be POTUS either.
Carol Merrill has your parting gifts.
Thanks for playing!
jw1
1 Like
First sensible answer yet. I’m hoping he’ll be the ultimate nominee. I wouldn’t vote for him, necessarily, but I could sleep nights if he were POTUS. Felt the same way about Poppy Bush. As a Democrat I’m just hedging my bets and hoping for a semblance of sanity in any event.
1 Like
So, now we are going there?
IRAQ was a “good idea”?
Really?
Man, it must be hard to have to work this much to appeal to the Stupid.
I know, but those desperate for an American Empire don’t care if the world hates us.
1 Like
Kasich is the Republicans dark horse candidate if you ask me. I’d keep a leery eye him if I were the DNC. He’s the most formidable of the bunch should he get in. Don’t know where his approval ratings are in OH but he’s a slippery one.
3 Likes
Other declared and likely 2016 contenders have weighed in — both New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) have both very directly said they would have not have ordered an invasion.
Christie “weighed in.” Got it.
♫ Hello muddah
Hello fadda ♫
3 Likes
I wouldn’t be too relaxed about him:
http://jpupdates.com/2015/04/27/kasich-obama-administration-has-fallen-in-love-with-iran-deal/
Kasich said Netanyahu’s speech reiterated his own concern that the U.S. is negotiating a “bad deal” with Iran, and he cautioned the U.S. against “falling in love with your goal.”
He’s a union-busting, socially retrograde godfather of Ryan budgeting and member of the “Gingrich revolution” Congressional class with a Fox News pedigree – and just enough canniness and/or humanity to have an occasional Medicaid-expansion moment (though the beneficiaries of that expansion will have to pay a couple hundred bucks a year or more in premiums). Which, to me, makes him perhaps the most dangerous of the GOP contenders: someone who might have significant appeal in the general but whose policies and appointments would be virtually identical to those of any other Republican.
Former GOP chair Michael Steele has said that cosmetics and crazy quotient aside, the entire field of potential nominees have the same positions on pretty much everything. Today’s Republican Party doesn’t allow for any real deviation; don’t be lulled into a false sense of security on any of them. Certainly not this one (though Chris Matthews will, since his Rust-Belt accent means he’s a reglur guy). I’m with @SRfromGR: he’s a slippery one.
I stick by my assessment - he’s not totally acceptable, but remember we’re grading on the curve here. And just look around - sheesh!
Let’s just ask them if they agree with the Bush doctrine. We’ve learned a great deal about candidates in the past that way.
Just saying that with no difference in policies and appointments (from DoJ to EPA to SCOTUS) that would ensure lasting and significant damage to the country, I’d much rather face an opponent voters would see accurately than a Trojan horse.
How DARE John Kasich disrespect the troops!
Hrrmpf!
Their feelings are immaterial…they WILL be assimilated.
“You shall have your government upgraded. All others shall be deleted”…
My question is what if there had been say Chemical weapons in Iraq, what would be different?
I mean does anyone really think that the result would be any different had Sadam had WW1 weapons technology that was obsolete by WW2? Except that had Sadam had Chemical Weapons the only difference with the result of Iraq War would be that terrorists would have those weapons because Bush failed to secure any suspected WMD sites instead securing ONLY the oil fields and the oil ministry, NOTHING would be different.
The Iraq War was a disaster because Bush and the others in the GOP including Kasich (but not Rand Paul) supported a war for their fellow citizens but not Bush or his supporters in which to die. That is regardless of the WMD lie, which we know Bush never believed from his from his failure to secure suspected WMD sites, the Iraq War was never in America’s vital national interests as far as Kasich and the GOP were concerned.