Can't recall, was there a federal, hate crimes investigation into this incident? Of all the police shootings this is by far the most egregious.
No need to wait to judge this one elk. But why did it take so long to get this indictment? Why was the video held from the public for so long? Couldn't be politics could it?
Oh elk, get your head out of it - when a country talks of regime change in another, it's not a friendly gesture. When a country makes it stated policy, it's serious business. While the act did not permit US military action, it authorized supporting other groups with military assistance for the stated purpose. Are you really so naive?
Rob, while they didn't plan for an up rising once it did happen that required a change in tactics which meant Obama should have kept troops in Iraq. They may have been able to stop ISIS from growing into the threat that it now is. While the Syrian civil war would have still happened, ISIS may not have played a major role.
Rob, how was there to be an orderly transfer of power when factions there harbored abject hatered for each other? Remember the elections? I will concede that no one planned for the situation that emerged following the removal of Hessein. They erroneously assumed that the Iraqi people would embrace democracy - the people being Shia and Kurds to some extent, but no the Sunni's. That why we never should have taken all the troops out.
But still, the original point of the post is that regime change was the policy of this country and that policy was signed into law by Bill Clinton
Now who said this? Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld?
'Now, let's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal....'
Seems someone had this idea before Bush - Sorry Elk.
The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq. It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, and states that it is the policy of the United States to support democratic movements within Iraq. The Act was cited in October 2002 to argue for the authorization of military force against the Iraqi government.
Where do you come up with this Krap elk!? Seriously? What you describe is someone who'll vote democrat and be a ward of government. What republican/capitalists want is vibrant, healthy consumers. Can't you understand that?
Flop,,ya don't get it. Unless and until you live under other systems it's easy to poke holes in ours. Certainly not perfect, nor will it ever be, but by far better than any other option.
I'll concede he yielded little power from 2003 to 06. While he formally took over in 1979 he was a top if not de facto leader from the late 60's. All ya do with condensing the time line is increase the average killed per year.
Im not saying that he was indirectly involved in 1m deaths, Im saying he was directly involved. If you want to talk tangential deaths it will be much higher let alone the rape and torture.
You are really a convuluted dolt on this in ANY way trying to minimize the #$%$ that this guy was. He was a terrorist to a vast majority of his people. #$%$ just like you. If you think that the Shia majority would have ever accepted his military staying in charge you're just fecking stupid or a hack - maybe a combo. Kurds, NEVER. The right way was to keep our troops there - the alternative is on clear display today in Obama's disastrously failed strategy.
As the LEADER of his country he killed millions of his own people. Why doesn't that bother you? Your priorities are warped
You live in La La Land elk. 'Further, is (sic) clearly the case that many more people, especially civilians were brutalized and killed subsequent to our bungled invasion than before.'
Huessein was in power from the late '60s to 2006. In just the Anfal attack approximately 182,000 Kurds were killed. Following the 1st Gulf war estimates are he killed between 80,000 - 230,000 of his own people. Other estimates put the number of his citizens killed at north of a million. This leaves out those tortured and raped. This not by an insurance, but by a sovereign government on its own people. Of course this also leaves out those killed in the Iran and 1 st Gulf war. You believe that there was a 'RIGHT' way to keep this military apparatus in place? Are you trying to suggest these guys were just following orders? Where have we heard that before? If they did, than they sure retained much of their zeal since they are just as brutal today.
And flop,,of course we were looking to draw down troops. Most of the country had been secured. They would have left what was necessary. But Obama took out everyone which left a huge vacuum which was filled quickly by al Qaeda in Iraq and subsequently ISIS.
Obama certainly inherited a difficult situation, but he certainly made things significantly worse.
You can be some accommodating to tyrants sometimes elk. Unfortunately, this was the same Iraqi military that brutalized the majority of their population for decades. How do you think the citizens would have felt about that? The Kurds and Shia who had been gassed? You think that they guys from the military that are now ISIS needed training to become as brutal as they are now? WAKE UP. You've seen the videos of these guys throwing people off of building rooftops. Gassing cities. Brutal prisons - I can only imagine how you Libroids would have reacted. You just make it seem all so easy elk. But you are wrong in many aspects. Biggest problem is that Obama failed to get the status of forces agreement - and don't give me any Krap about what the Iraqi's would or wouldn't do. We held all the cards.
Elk, what I always find interesting about these kind of pieces, is what the landscape would look like if you'd follow the opposite of what the piece is critical. (Yes, I know that you feel the war shouldn't have happened in the first place, but there are plenty of scenarios to play with under that course as well) not enough space to cover here, but consider what would have happened had we left the Iraqi military in place post Huessein. The failure to reach an agreement on keeping troops in Iraq was a key turning point - I'd argue that the Obama Administration was all to happy to have that red herring issue as a way to exit.
The piece is also very light on Syria - how did they go from peaceful demonstrations to having their country partitioned?
Again, what the article isn't helpful with is what to do now? Bellyaching over prior errors is a waste of time except that it hopefully avoids similar mistakes in the future. ISIS need to be defeated. How is that accomplished? I will say that the absence of U.S. leadership is an important missing ingredient right now and is a more pointed answer to why other Arab nations aren't participating.
Yes, you're the moron equating spontaneous abortion, aka God, with human choice. Using your STUPID argument, why doesn't God just get rid of guns or why did he invent them in the first place? Fecking moron.