Bush’s 6th Term Continues…Bill Clinton Blames ISIS Takeover Of Iraq On Iraq War

Spread the love

Loading

bill-clinton-frowning

You gotta love this from the guy who signed off on regime change in Iraq, warned repeatedly about Saddam’s WMD’s and whose wife voted to invade Iraq:

“I believe if they hadn’t gone to war in Iraq, none of this would be happening.”

Allah plays devil’s advocate:

What would have happened to Iraq during the Arab Spring and Syrian uprising if Saddam had endured? Clinton implicitly assumes that ISIS advancing on Baghdad is the worst possible outcome of the past 10 years, which is the smart play politically when your wife’s desperate to appease the anti-war left en route to her party’s nomination. Is it true, though? Assume that Egyptians had toppled Mubarak in 2011 with Saddam watching from Baghdad. At a minimum, he would have cracked down hard on Iraq’s Shiites to suppress an insurrection before it caught fire, and if you know anything about the 1991 Shiite uprising, you know how much blood a Saddam “crackdown” could draw. Meanwhile, maybe the Sunnis across the border in Syria, inspired by Mubarak’s ouster, still would have revolted against Assad. What would have been Saddam’s move then? He could have come to Assad’s rescue, one Baathist defending another from a rebellion in the name of protecting autocracy, but his relations with Assad were poor so he may well have stood pat — in which case Iran might have moved to defend Assad, fearing that the Sunnis in Syria would overrun the Shiite regime just as Saddam was crushing the Shiites in Iraq. That would have put Iranian forces on two of Iraq’s borders, an encirclement Saddam couldn’t tolerate. In which case, maybe he’d throw in with Syria’s Sunnis in the name of bleeding Iran. He wasn’t above cooperating with terrorists when it served his interests; in fact, one of his chief henchmen is rumored to be working with ISIS right now against Maliki. Would a long proxy war in Syria, with Saddam and Sunni jihadis on one side and Iran, Hezbollah, and Assad on the other, have been better or worse for the region?

Why don’t we change Clinton’s quote a bit:

I believe if Obama hadn’t of cut and run from Iraq, none of this would be happening.

or

I believe if Bill had of killed Osama when he had the chance, none of this would be happening.

Meanwhile Obama wants to spend a half a billion dollars training fanatical Islamists in Syria.

Worst President Evah!!!!

0 0 votes
Article Rating
7 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

It appears liberals are pretty much the same when it comes to foreign policy. Clinton believed Hussein had WMD’s and was personally a threat to Iraqis and the world in general. So, he passed a law. He also passed along to Bush that Hussein needed to be eliminated and that al Qaeda and bin Laden were major threats. However, Clinton did nothing…. even when presented with excellent opportunities to kill or capture bin Laden, he did nothing.

Bush before him saw a threat to peace and the world economy and took action. Bush after him saw a threat to national security and took action. Clinton in between talked a big game, but took NO action. Obama after Bush draws red lines, gives stern looks and wags many a finger, but does nothing.

And, as birds of a feather go, when their failures result in another President having to make all the tough decisions and take action, they unanimously blame the misfortunes of their mismanagement, inaction and miscalculation on others.

There is no continuity in US foreign policy any more. With the exception of Carter, US foreign policy has been pretty consistent in how it addresses foreign threats. Now, a threat can sit back, wait for four years and challenge the next administration with threats to national security or other nations.

Bill is right, as usual.

@This one: Thanks, appreciate it.

@This one you are so right Bills post is great as usual

Curt forgot one thing; at least ten more years of Saddam-purchased bombings and terror attacks within Israel, with $25,000 a pop going to the families of the “Shahid.”

So, This one, why do you hate Jewish babies and young Israeli mothers?

The ISIS takeover is a result of the Iraq War. This shouldn’t be difficult to figure out.

@Greg:

The ISIS takeover is a result of the Iraq War. This shouldn’t be difficult to figure out.

Right. It is also the result of the Big Bang. However, the door was left open by one Barack Obama, who golfed and vacationed instead of making sure Iraq REMAINED secure (as it was when Bush handed it off to him).