It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Middle East is 'Bush's' Fault !

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 02:15 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I guess they didn't care when old Bill Clinton was urging the U.S. to go to war with Iraq.




posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 05:28 AM
link   
sorry---changed my mind ---this post will become a thread instead.

edit on 17-6-2014 by FairAndBalanced because: edit



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 07:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Auricom
a reply to: neo96

I guess they didn't care when old Bill Clinton was urging the U.S. to go to war with Iraq.

That's not fully the truth. Clinton stated that it is the policy of the United States to support democratic movements within Iraq. It was the Republicans in congress that wrote the bill that pushed for military action against Iraq. Even back then the nation building scumbags were foaming at the mouth to get into Iraq.



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Let me see if I understand just what you are saying.

Are you telling us ...

If some one causes a large fuel spill at a gas station, we should not blame the fire on the guy who struck a match?

I had just noticed your replies to another thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Its kind of sad when a person is so sold on an "alternate reality" they refuse to consider any other.



edit on 17-6-2014 by teamcommander because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-6-2014 by teamcommander because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

The Middle East is not Bush's fault...that has a long history of fighting and power struggle.

However, the current situation in Iraq is definitely Bush's fault. Iraq was a fairly stable country...maybe not the most humanitarian, but stable. But when you create a void, something will fill it.

So sorry, but you trying to defend Bush on this is just laughable.



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: [post=18044607]kruphix[/post

Doesn't Saddam even get "honorable mention"? How about Bush 41? He made the agreement not to invade Iraq just to form a politically correct "coalition" that included middle-east members-members that contributed next to nothing to that coalition-when the western powers should have kept on going and finished the job the first time around.

All of this would be academic.

With Saddam already toast, G.W. doesn't have that on his plate after 9/11....

Bah, who knows....



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: [post=18044607]kruphix[/post



Doesn't Saddam even get "honorable mention"? How about Bush 41? He made the agreement not to invade Iraq just to form a politically correct "coalition" that included middle-east members-members that contributed next to nothing to that coalition-when the western powers should have kept on going and finished the job the first time around.



All of this would be academic.



With Saddam already toast, G.W. doesn't have that on his plate after 9/11....



Bah, who knows....


We can play "would-a, could-a, should-a" all day but history has to stand on its own.
When all else is said and done, the "real blame" for our fiasco in the middle east falls on those who bend, twist, and lie about the intelligence in order to cover their own agenda, along with those who are duped into believing them.








posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: teamcommander

I don't disagree. I guess my feelings on this is the blame game is a grey area almost as much as the choices Bush had in the first place.

No one is without blame and none of the choices were clear cut/black and white.

That hasn't changed one whit today either.



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 10:36 AM
link   
My opinion on the matter of imputing blame to Bush (it actually should read "Bush Family" even all the way back to Prescott...........

To the extent that G. W, Bush and his administration conspired to bring about 9/11 it can be said that he is culpable for the chaos in the Middle East. Employing that same logic (mine) - the extent to which the political process in America has devolved to the point that presidents have become dictators then, and only then, could we say that G. W. Bush is individually responsible and personally to blame for the terrible goings on 'over there.' But, as far as Iraq is concerned we all know how tricky this kind of logic can be, because the notion of 'dictatorship' would certainly apply more to Sadaam Hussein than to G. W, Bush - at least for the casual political observer. As for myself, I can hardly distinguish between the dictatorships of S Hussein, G.W.Bush or B.H Obama.

That said - the blame for the present (2014) chaotic state of affairs in the Middle East lies not in 2,000 year old sectarian arguments and the political consequences that stem from them; not in the power hungry madness of individual dictatorships; not in religious and/or cultural differences, but the blame lies squarely with the United States as a political entity whose hegemonic stratagem for the Middle East led directly to the false flag conspiracy known as 9/11 along with its terrible Geo-political and economic aftermath and the results of that conspiracy brings us to where we are today.

Therefore, most of the current political reasoning regarding what's occurring 'over there' lies at the doorstep of the Twin Towers. Along with several co-conspirators we (the USA) did the deed, and now we shall - we must - pay in full for the God awful mess we have created - nay, that we have 'conjured' in the manner of having called upon the spirits of the underworld. Remember Faust who sold his soul to Satan? Well entire nations can do the same.



edit on 17-6-2014 by FairAndBalanced because: edit



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   
The Middle East is the Middle Easts fault. Other countries can jump in and reset ... they can try to set them on a non-extremist course ... but it always goes back to violence and bloodshed .... with or without other countries involved.



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan
The Middle East is the Middle Easts fault. Other countries can jump in and reset ... they can try to set them on a non-extremist course ... but it always goes back to violence and bloodshed .... with or without other countries involved.


At the risk of seeming overly critical I am rather puzzled by your entire assertion, which is actually a classic example of a non-sequitur - and possibly a 'reductio ad absurdum' as well. This is not to say that what you said is ridiculous - its just that your choice of terms are in contradiction to one another. For instance we often encounter such examples in everyday speech, i.e., a non sequitur is a statement in which the final part is totally unrelated to the first part: an example would be "Life is life and fun is fun, but it's all so quiet when the goldfish die."

I you could - I would really appreciate it if you were to re-state your comments so that I might better understand them. - Thank you.
edit on 17-6-2014 by FairAndBalanced because: edit



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: FairAndBalanced In your dissertation, you omitted the Non-sequitur that you refer to.

Personally, I think you view of the U.S. is garbage. That somehow the U.S. conspired to have a dozen or so Saudis commit this act is so beyond any reasonable assertion to such a degree as to approach outright lunacy.

At best, some could have been aware of the plans and didn't intervene. Israel, a select few within the C.I.A., possibly others. Anything beyond that is so unbelievable that even Hollywood wouldn't script it. AT BEST.

It amazes me that individuals of obvious education and intellect can be so fixated in their own need for some simple cubby hole to explain away basic human stupidity.

The only thing the U.S. dramatizes, in my opinion, is it has the power to "magnify" that basic stupidity. To make it blatant, so to speak.

All that's occurred here is the supplanting of the Kennedy family mantra with the Bush family.

By the way, you understand Flyer Fan's post perfectly!



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
That somehow the U.S. conspired to have a dozen or so Saudis commit this act is so beyond any reasonable assertion to such a degree as to approach outright lunacy.



The "U.S" doesn't do these types of acts as a collective but rather a few Americans individually on their dime.

"U.S" is literally 330+ million people. I'm going to guess that all 330 million didn't have a say in the invasions of Afghanistan or Iraq, or Libya, or arming rebels in Syria and propping up govt's in Ukraine, Egypt and Tunisia etc.

Those actions are made by a few people under the banner and behind the collective.


edit on 17-6-2014 by yourmaker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: yourmaker Of course your right. The "U.S." is generality so enjoyed by the "bashers".

Still, look at the recent track record of the collective. (U.S.) There isn't many examples of where they haven't screwed it up, by any definition. War, economic, political, educational, socialized medicine...you name it.

Now it is proposed-and accepted by the intellectually lazy- that individuals within the U.S. set up 9/11, planned and executed, perfectly, foreign nationals(Saudis) suicide bombings, convinced Bin Laden to accept responsibility for the act-ensuring his death- don't make me laugh.

If 9/11 was a U.S. operation, they'd have screwed it up. Check out the C.I.A.'s track record...

Now toss in a heavily democrat inquest into 9/11, laden with lawyers, who despise anything and everything Republican and you expect some lockstep belief that none would go after Bush, or the C.I.A. or Israel or anyone else for that matter, including the media??

Then I'm either senile with old age or there's some overactive imaginations out there.....

But that's off topic. I say again, I surely wouldn't want to be in Bush's boots with the pressures that must have been unbelievable, the opposition saying he was too slow going into Afghanistan, too quick going into Iraq, so on.

Now Obama has a very similar situation on his hands, damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

What goes around, comes around.



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: yourmaker
that sort of reasoning doesn't stop many Americans similarly labeling "Islam" for the actions of a few thousand of the 1.something-billion moslems out there....



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker ......... You seem to be under the impression that because I implicated the Bush administration (among others) as co-conspirators in the 9/11 fraud that I intended for the reader to understand from those observations "That somehow the U.S. conspired to have a dozen or so Saudis" etc.

Nothing could have been further from my mind and nothing could be further from the truth. Why? Because your comments implied that there really were 19 Arabs with box cutters on four planes; members of a rag-tag band of terrorists bearing the name Al Queda guided by Osama Bin Laden from a cave somewhere in Afghanistan, whose country of origin (for the 19) would have been Saudi Arabia. Your contention(s) in that regard are not only patently absurd but eminently laughable.

This is not to call into question either your intelligence nor your sincerity in trying to understand what really happened on 9/11. I also am not attempting to discount the remainder of your post merely because I am calling you out on one particular point. For example: I think it would benefit us all if you were to go into greater detail with respect to your observation regarding the possibility of Israeli complicity in 9/11.

Quoting you on that particular point "At best, some could have been aware of the plans and didn't intervene. Israel, a select few within the C.I.A., possibly others. "

edit on 17-6-2014 by FairAndBalanced because: e



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: FairAndBalanced The whole scenario is laughable...yet occurred. No matter who was behind it.

Unless, of course, the flight crews and passengers were in on it and willingly sacrificed themselves. That's a bit if a stretch, to say the least.

Israel. I find it beyond any reasonable argument that Israel was behind it. The risk of discovery and the potential consequences are stunning in their finality. The only one that is even remotely possible is a joint effort by individuals within the U.S. and Israel, not unlike the U.S.S. Liberty "false flag". That was a "walk in the park" in comparison. Order two military units of the two nations, put a lid on it...it still got out.

Utilize Saudi nationals, civilians, that have an antipathy to both nations? Spread out over the U.S.and left to their initiative?? Insanely complex. Sorry, I can't buy it. Even more implausible than the official version.

Frankly, Israel's situation is far more dire now than it was in the two years leading to 9/11- the estimated planning time necessary to implement 9/11-by anybody, at a guess.

As bizarre as 9/11 looks, the alternatives are even more so.

To avoid a potential aneurism, I go with the least inconceivable. A sign of the times....



posted on Jun, 17 2014 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Anyone that doesn't place blame squarely on both parties likes to keep their head in the sand... Democrats rolled over and gave bush everything he wanted without much in the way of dispute... standing on the sideline doing nothing while you think something bad is happening means you are culpable in my book.

Other than that... I agree... we get involved they will try to kill each other.. we don't get involved they will still be trying to kill each other.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 08:49 AM
link   
the middle east issues are the results of wwi and nothing else, go read your history of how the lines of countries were drawn



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 09:11 AM
link   
My problem with Bush was that nation building/democracy failed philosophy. You cannot force Christianity or Democracy down religious zealots throats. How would Bush have liked having Islam and Sharia law forced on his country?







 
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join