The Former Secretary of Defense Just Dropped a Bombshell That Barack Obama is Going t

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Revmitchell, Oct 4, 2014.

  1. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,287
    Likes Received:
    780
    Leon Panetta, former secretary of defense and CIA director under President Barack Obama, has said that the president is largely responsible for the current state of Iraq.

    In “Worthy Fights: A Memoir of Leadership in War and Peace,” Panetta describes his concerns about leaving Iraq without a residual military force to help train and bolster the Iraqi army. The book, Panetta’s memoir, is due to be released on Oct. 7, and was previewed by the Washington Free Beacon.

    The former secretary of defense said that it was clear to him as 2011 drew to a close and the United States had ceased active combat operations in Iraq that “withdrawing all our forces would endanger the fragile stability” of Iraq, allowing the country to become a “new haven” for terrorists.

    He said that many others in the Obama administration thought the same way.

    But, Panetta said, the White House was “so eager to rid itself of Iraq that it was willing to withdraw” without leaving behind anything that might help to guarantee the nation’s stability — despite the president’s claims at the time.

    Get our daily email alert by entering your Email:
    What the nation needed was Obama’s leadership to negotiate a Status of Forces agreement that would give legal protection to troops left in Iraq. Internal political turmoil made such an agreement impossible without White House leadership, Panetta said.

    That leadership was never forthcoming.

    Click here to watch the video of George W. Bush predicting the rise of the Islamic State that went viral so quickly that it broke records at Fox News.

    Panetta said that the United States had options it could have used to force a deal — threatening to “withdraw reconstruction aid,” for example.

    But the president never actively engaged in efforts to broker a deal, and the opportunity slipped away.

    “To this day,” Panetta concluded, “I believe that a small U.S. troop presence in Iraq could have effectively advised the Iraqi military on how to deal with al-Qaeda’s resurgence and the sectarian violence that has engulfed the country.”

    http://conservativetribune.com/former-secdef-bombshell/
     
  2. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    Right on the money:



    Must really chap the inept Obama administration. Never right in a fight. Always wrong about our enemies.
     
  3. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    When Bush was asked how he could have known what would happen, he said "I know the enemy".

    That's the same enemy Obama refuses to recognize or even name.

    How in the world did this lazy idiot get elected? :BangHead:
     
  4. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,502
    Likes Received:
    40
    Personal opinion - God allowed slewfoot to mesmerize enough of the teat suckers and anesthetize enough conservative voters to guarantee that the ZERO would be elected.
    I see this as His way of judging this country for all it's crap since we, as a nation, decided that we did not want him to mess with our lives, as He is too restrictive.
     
  5. Judith

    Judith
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    982
    Likes Received:
    10
    There is no question that this current lawless President has made things worse because of his policy, but let me remind everyone that there would not be anything to make worse if George Bush had not started an illegal war. George Bush is the one who holds the most responsibility in this for his war mongering. Even if Sadam had WMD's the US has no buseness telling another country what kind of weapons they can have, and we certainly have no business invading a country that has not attacked us.
    Although Sadam was an evil president he knew how to keep the area in check. He kept terrorists out of Iraq and Syria in line. We can thank George Bush for much of what is happening today.
     
  6. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,287
    Likes Received:
    780
    George Bush did not start and illegal war.
     
  7. JonC

    JonC
    Expand Collapse
    Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    6,920
    Likes Received:
    366

    I understand your cautions, but this was exactly the argument many used to urge non-involvement in WW2. I am not buying the charge of warmongering.
     
  8. Use of Time

    Use of Time
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2014
    Messages:
    2,323
    Likes Received:
    98
    They are not even close to comparable and she is exactly right. You want to know what the Iraqi's told me during a tour of one of their electrical substations? "Saddam was bad but at least we had running water, power and terrorist cells weren't running rampant."

    Invading Iraq was so mind blowingly stupid that even W's father cautioned him against it and we will be cleaning up that mess for the rest of my natural born life. It is inexcusable.
     
    #8 Use of Time, Oct 5, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 5, 2014
  9. JonC

    JonC
    Expand Collapse
    Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    6,920
    Likes Received:
    366
    Why are they not even close in comparing?

    We were not, in some's eyes, attacked in WW2. Hawaii wasn't even a state, and our military base abroad was attacked. This was the crux of the argument Judith suggested in post #5. Personally, I believe the mass murders of Hitler would have been enough justification...but I know many disagree with mere "moral arguments." Similarly, I know several who fled Saddam and arrived on US soil without their parents, wives, and children because they were slaughtered. So personal opinions aside, show me where there is no comparison.
     
    #9 JonC, Oct 5, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 5, 2014
  10. Use of Time

    Use of Time
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2014
    Messages:
    2,323
    Likes Received:
    98
    First of all. We were attacked. No question about it. They sunk U.S. Naval vessels and blatantly attacked U.S. installations. This isn't even close to debatable. Second of all, if you need me to explain to you why Adolph Hitler isn't comparable to Saddam Hussein then I have no words. There are atrocities being committed to this very day in Africa that the U.S. has turned a blind eye too for decades. There is a reason W wanted to go into Iraq and it wasn't to be the a liberator to the oppressed.
     
    #10 Use of Time, Oct 5, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 5, 2014
  11. JonC

    JonC
    Expand Collapse
    Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    6,920
    Likes Received:
    366

    First of all, an issue was that our military, not the US was attacked. I agree with you, but not that some didn't object on those grounds. Second, I may also agree on your second point, however those tortured and killed may not see much difference.
     
  12. Use of Time

    Use of Time
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2014
    Messages:
    2,323
    Likes Received:
    98
    I don't know how your first point makes the situation any better. If your second point is really the case then why did we wait for so long to go in and help them? Why wait for 9/11? I walked through the streets with these people and to be honest, they didn't see us heroes. 9/11 was an excuse to extend the Afghanistan "war on terror" into Iraq and we have been in trouble ever since. There is and has never been a reason for us to involve our servicemen in that quagmire.
     
  13. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    No kidding! Did you really think they would?

    Sounds familiar, going back a couple of hundred years.
     
  14. Use of Time

    Use of Time
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2014
    Messages:
    2,323
    Likes Received:
    98
    No, I never did. That is the point.
     
  15. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    Panetta is adamant and sticking to his points that Obama was warned.

    He is now the third major figure to break with Obama on this serious issue and I imagine that Obama is finished with Panetta.

    The other two that said that they warned against Obama's policies were Gates and Hillary.

    Panetta has done major damage to Obama's credibility but he may have saved the nation if we do more than bomb a couple of pickup trucks in Iraq here and there.

    We need a massive bombing campaign and we need to destroy more than an occasional pickup truck.
     

Share This Page

Loading...