Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (800672)	8/10/2014 12:54:49 AM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1577069

Bush handed Obama a stable Iraq. LOL! It was stable before Bush invaded it! No American wanted us to be Iraq's police and military for perpetuity! You're a clown!

To: i-node who wrote (800672)	8/10/2014 1:01:58 AM
From: RMF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577069

Yeah right, a "stable" Iraq....LOL A stable Iraq with the Sunnis being treated like second class citizens with no future and no rights. That was BOUND to turn out well.... Especially since the Sunnis were always such a nice and mild people with NO relationship with any terrorist entities. Yes, I well remember the Iran Iraq war. In that one we played both sides with a preference for Iraq. I also think the Arab Spring was an outgrowth of the Iraq War. Bush's "freedom agenda" was screwy from the getgo. You can't turn countries upside down with the ruling class suddenly changing places with the underclass and expect everything to be hunky dory. And this stuff about our fighting to keep a small presence in Iraq would have made all the difference is just absurd. Maliki was going to run things the way he wanted to and that meant Sunnis would be excluded, regardless of how many troops we still had there.