real footage of ISIS or ISIL (warning extremely graphic)

[MavsSuperFan]

its always about whats best for america eh??
disgusting creature.
just as disgusting as the guys in the video you posted. but more subtle

I honestly believe a pro american dictator would have yielded the best practical results for the iraqi people.

We are fine in america either way. If iraq explodes in a civil war it wont affect us in america in any meaningful way, except increasing gas prices.

This civil war will cost many lives and displaces many others. Its kind of our fault for cracking the lid on the pressure cooker, by getting rid of Saddam unleashing the volatile sectarian ambitions

the worst case scenario is that what is happening in Iraq triggers a massive war between the Sunni Powers in the region and Iran, Assad's syria and shia iraq. that would be a tragedy, and the primal reason for it will have been the bush administrations poor management of the occupation of Iraq

[Marlo_Stanfield]

I honestly believe a pro american dictator would have yielded the best practical results for the iraqi people.

We are fine in america either way. If iraq explodes in a civil war it wont affect us in america in any meaningful way, except increasing gas prices.

This civil war will cost many lives and displaces many others. Its kind of our fault for cracking the lid on the pressure cooker, by getting rid of Saddam unleashing the volatile sectarian ambitions

the worst case scenario is that what is happening in Iraq triggers a massive war between the Sunni Powers in the region and Iran, Assad's syria and shia iraq. that would be a tragedy, and the primal reason for it will have been the bush administrations poor management of the occupation of Iraq

you are truly disgusting.
you guys killed Saddam and his regime, who were the only reason for the middle east to be somewhat stable.
YOU are the reason those disgusting terrorists now can take over TWO countries and kill INNOCENT people.
doesnt that fell bad at all?? oh wait its not affecting America so i guess not
sorry for ran t now after i read your entire post i shouldnt have ranted like that.
at least you admit that it is Bushs fault.
but Obama is not really any better.
running out of Iraq only because he promised it when he got elected.
why not close Guantanamo first you dumb nikka(Obama)??

[MavsSuperFan]

you are truly disgusting.
you guys killed Saddam and his regime, who were the only reason for the middle east to be somewhat stable.
YOU are the reason those disgusting terrorists now can take over TWO countries and kill INNOCENT people.
doesnt that fell bad at all?? oh wait its not affecting America so i guess not
sorry for ran t now after i read your entire post i shouldnt have ranted like that.
at least you admit that it is Bushs fault.
but Obama is not really any better.
running out of Iraq only because he promised it when he got elected.
why not close Guantanamo first you dumb nikka(Obama)??

My point was america is going to be fine either way, one of the main reasons I think assigning a pro american dictator in Iraq would have been a good idea is because I legitimately think it would benefit the innocent people of Iraq and the whole region.

American foreign policy is selfish, no doubt, but america is overall a moral country and would lead to better outcomes in the long run imo. Eg. how we ran the occupation of Japan after WW2

How I rank the possible outcomes in this situation:
1. establish a pro american moderate sunni dictator. An Iraqi Hosni Mubarak basically.

IMO ideally we would have kept in place Saddam's military and the Baath party. The Baath party had all the experienced technocrats and Saddam had one of the strongest armies in the middle east (they tied with Iran during the iraqi-iran war)

We would have chosen a moderate among the sunni elite, a non-crazy person.

Iraqis would benefit because the order that would have been kept in place by not dismantling the military and government institutions. Also the guy we chose would have been less crazy than saddam, Qusay, or Uday.
Eg. the rape rooms would have been gotten rid of.

2. Leave Saddam in power. Saddams crazy sons (read up on them, they were worse than he was) would have also been left in power.

3. what we actually did, push for democratic elections, which inevitably would have resulted in civil war given the historical and demographic context of Iraq

[Draz]

No matter how you cut it, religion is and always will be the downfall of mankind.

[andgar923]

Hate to state the obvious, but people are people.

If it isn't religion, it's drugs, politics, money, power etc. etc.

These people will use whatever they can to justify their deplorable acts. Nobody is truly innocent, almost every country has had their fare share of savage behavior and sick way of justifying their actions.

Sadly, people follow, people blame/point finger, people be people.

[andgar923]

the mutts of the word. like black people here.

or white people just about everywhere else, specially history.

[BasedTom]

or white people just about everywhere else, specially history.

Look at Australia before and after. How dare those evil imperialists bring schools, technology, and hospitals to the lands they colonized.

Not every place was the Belgian Congo...And let's be real here, Belgium should never have entered the race in the first place.

[LJJ]

ISIL, another byproduct of the "Arabic Spring" supported by the west, composed in a large part of European fighters.

The most brutal, the most barbaric, the most Islamic. Sickening the way we have facilitated this suffering in the Middle East and sickening the way ISIL has the support of the majority of the Muslims in the west.

[tomtucker]

you are truly disgusting.
you guys killed Saddam and his regime, who were the only reason for the middle east to be somewhat stable.
YOU are the reason those disgusting terrorists now can take over TWO countries and kill INNOCENT people.
doesnt that fell bad at all?? oh wait its not affecting America so i guess not
sorry for ran t now after i read your entire post i shouldnt have ranted like that.
at least you admit that it is Bushs fault.
but Obama is not really any better.
running out of Iraq only because he promised it when he got elected.
why not close Guantanamo first you dumb nikka(Obama)??

no, that was donald rumsfelt and bush.........not the US population

[tomtucker]

ISIL, another byproduct of the "Arabic Spring" supported by the west, composed in a large part of European fighters.

The most brutal, the most barbaric, the most Islamic. Sickening the way we have facilitated this suffering in the Middle East and sickening the way ISIL has the support of the majority of the Muslims in the west.

and when they are tired they go back to the euro country they live in, to rest , and continue to collect some wellfare and child support money.........nice to have shit like that in europe, thank you euro goverments and islam-loving bitches

[masonanddixon]

or white people just about everywhere else, specially history.

Nah, whites just had the technical power to do the same shit everyone has been doing since the dawn of man but to a much more devastating and definitive effect.

Man is inherently evil, unfortunate as it is to say.

[eriX]

Look at Australia before and after. How dare those evil imperialists bring schools, technology, and hospitals to the lands they colonized.

Not every place was the Belgian Congo...And let's be real here, Belgium should never have entered the race in the first place.

i dont think you know australian history but tons of indigenous people died amongst other things when Cook arrived at Australia...

[MavsSuperFan]

you are truly disgusting.
you guys killed Saddam and his regime, who were the only reason for the middle east to be somewhat stable.
YOU are the reason those disgusting terrorists now can take over TWO countries and kill INNOCENT people.
doesnt that fell bad at all?? oh wait its not affecting America so i guess not
sorry for ran t now after i read your entire post i shouldnt have ranted like that.
at least you admit that it is Bushs fault.
but Obama is not really any better.
running out of Iraq only because he promised it when he got elected.
why not close Guantanamo first you dumb nikka(Obama)??

You should've read the full post, but i just wanted to be clear

I said that there really is no american interest in this situation because you said I only wanted what's best for america.

Just pointing out that america will be fine either way. I think currently a partition of the country is the only hope to avoid a civil war, if not a massive regional war.

America would imo bear a significant amount of responsibility for any Sunni-shia war, as our push for democracy in Iraq triggered it imo. We should have just let saddam control iraq if the alternative was this.

[Marlo_Stanfield]

My point was america is going to be fine either way, one of the main reasons I think assigning a pro american dictator in Iraq would have been a good idea is because I legitimately think it would benefit the innocent people of Iraq and the whole region.

American foreign policy is selfish, no doubt, but america is overall a moral country and would lead to better outcomes in the long run imo. Eg. how we ran the occupation of Japan after WW2

How I rank the possible outcomes in this situation:
1. establish a pro american moderate sunni dictator. An Iraqi Hosni Mubarak basically.

IMO ideally we would have kept in place Saddam's military and the Baath party. The Baath party had all the experienced technocrats and Saddam had one of the strongest armies in the middle east (they tied with Iran during the iraqi-iran war)

We would have chosen a moderate among the sunni elite, a non-crazy person.

Iraqis would benefit because the order that would have been kept in place by not dismantling the military and government institutions. Also the guy we chose would have been less crazy than saddam, Qusay, or Uday.
Eg. the rape rooms would have been gotten rid of.

2. Leave Saddam in power. Saddams crazy sons (read up on them, they were worse than he was) would have also been left in power.

3. what we actually did, push for democratic elections, which inevitably would have resulted in civil war given the historical and demographic context of Iraq

one day you will wake up from your delusions.
not ONCE in the history of mankind has a pro American dictator EVER benefited the people in that region. NOT ONCE.

[Marlo_Stanfield]

You should've read the full post, but i just wanted to be clear

I said that there really is no american interest in this situation because you said I only wanted what's best for america.

Just pointing out that america will be fine either way. I think currently a partition of the country is the only hope to avoid a civil war, if not a massive regional war.

America would imo bear a significant amount of responsibility for any Sunni-shia war, as our push for democracy in Iraq triggered it imo. We should have just let saddam control iraq if the alternative was this.

not only in Iraq.
to a lesser extend look at Libya and the north african countries. CIA and similar western institutions of other countries boosted the revelution there.
America destroyed Gaddafis regime.
and now look what a once quite wealthy and well developed country has become: an absolute SHITHOLE.
that happens everytime America claims they "free" a country. EVERY single time.
yet American people still let their politicians get away with it or even support the wars