Posted by: thescoundrel | December 13, 2011

Bush-Obama War in Iraq Begins its Fade into History

As the war in Iraq comes to a close, President Obama continues to display his post-2008 election of hawkish Iraq ideology that basically followed the George W. Bush wartime doctrines. According to a Josh Gerstein article on Politico, Obama -the man elected in 2008 by using a Bash Bush about the Iraq War strategy- is quoted as saying “History will judge the original decision to go into Iraq…” .  Huh! That sure sounds like familiar dialogue. I know I have heard that before. Wait – I said that in numerous heated discussions on the Internet as well as in real life, during the heights of Bush Bashing by the Bush Deranged and way before Obama even announced his Presidency. Hell some of our most historically revered political leaders were  loathed while in office by the public, politicos, media and historians for their military decisions. I previously argued and I still stand by my original reflections; it doesn’t matter what I or anyone else currently thinks about the political ethics and reasoning guiding this country during the war in Iraq – history will be the final judge.  And that judgment will most likely swing like a pendulum depending on which politicos, media personalities and historians are in vogue. The pendulum swinging will eventually slow down until the inertia of its pulse is barely visible and then and only then -after the most contentious of the arguments have faded- will history make a final decision about the Bush-Obama Iraq War. Though it is exceptionally strange and unnerving to see a left-wing socialist wannabe ideologue, like Obama, channeling my conservative/libertarian theScoundrely thoughts. He still won’t get my vote!



  1. Obama ends the war in Iraq only to move more troops in to Syria, Pakistan, and Afghanistan (date: TBA) Also leaves a small army of private enforcers in Iraq – I’m sure the people are thrilled. Plus, it only took him 3 years.

    I really wish we could get or troops out of there and rely on diplomacy rather than force. Force is too expensive.

  2. Diplomacy is always preferable but seldom successful unless one of the parties has a leverage on the other. Most diplomacy is little more than a push-me/pull-you event as each side seeks an unbreakable submission hold from the opponent.That is what happened to Nixon with Vietnam. The US citizens wanted Nixon to fulfill his promise of leaving Vietnam and was the underdog at the discussion table. In many ways Obama’s own 2008 campaigning has put him in a similar weakened condition in the Iraq situation. Plus he is further hampered by the continued dislike for the war , by the US populace. When you know you are going to have to seek a debated compromise on any issue,it is best to avoid letting yourself be cornered by previous circumstance.

    I also differ with most modern day authoritative figures in that I feel no real necessity to offer extensive monetary war reparations to the invaded country except those that offer a visible return benefit. In this case I feel Iraq should have shouldered many of the US costs in this war. The people of Iraq wanted rid of the Hussein Family as badly as those of us in the US did – the Iraqi citizenry just lacked either the resources or will to found the event.

  3. All of these articles have saved me a lot of heeaschda.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: