Ted Cruz says Middle East was safer with Saddam Hussein: ‘That's not even a close call’

Discussion in 'Politics' started by kyredneck, Dec 10, 2015.

  1. kyredneck

    kyredneck
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    10,555
    Likes Received:
    273
    Wow. I wonder if there'll be others to come out of the closet and fess up, it's not like it takes a genius to figure this out. Maybe Cruz is going to pull a Trump and start saying what's already on people's minds:

    "Republican Presidential Candidate Ted Cruz said that the Middle East was more stable before the United States helped topple dictators Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Moammar Gadhafi in Libya.

    The Texas senator went into detail about his foreign policy strategy in an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” He said that the United States should be concerned primarily with defending its vital national security interests – not overthrowing brutal regimes in the Middle East.

    From Cruz’s perspective, it is the lesser of two evils to have stable, though cruel tyrants in charge of Muslim-majority nations than vacuums for ISIS and other jihadists to exploit.

    “Now what has been a mistake – and we’ve seen a consistent mistake in foreign policy – is far too often, we’ve seen Democrats and a lot of establishment Republicans in Washington get involved in toppling Middle Eastern governments. And it ends up benefiting the bad guys. It ends up handing them over to radical Islamic terrorists,” Cruz said.

    In response, show host Joe Scarborough asked if the Middle East had been more secure when Hussein and Gadhafi were in power and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was not fighting for his life in Syria.

    “Of course it was,” Cruz said. “That’s not even a close call.”....

    He said that that Assad is a “bad man” and “a monster” but that if he were ousted ISIS terrorists would take over even greater swaths of the region than they already control – a far worse alternative."
    https://www.yahoo.com/politics/ted-cruz-says-middle-east-was-safer-with-saddam-181023443.html

    ...And what's with this "establishment Republicans", is that code name for neocons?
     
    #1 kyredneck, Dec 10, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2015
  2. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,900
    Likes Received:
    295
    I think Bush made one major miscalculation.

    He thought the people there would seize the chance to be free and determine their own destiny.

    What we found out is , basically, that islam and self governance are incompatible.
     
  3. Zaac

    Zaac
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    13,757
    Likes Received:
    220
    He's mad at Jeb.
     
  4. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,900
    Likes Received:
    295
    Pretty much. At least for what passes for "neocons". A lot of people associate purely with a hawkish foreign policy, but it also includes the fact they are usually big spenders and big government and strong advocates of national defense. Usually, they are socially conservative and not much else.

    But the "establishment" republicans are also dealmakers and when matched against an ideologue like Obama, they routinely get their clocks cleaned. They deal. He doesn't.
     

Share This Page

Loading...