So the folly of removing Saddam from power

[Karl]

is now 'hitting the world over the head'?
...as the current nonsense of being against Syria's strongman unfolds!

As I said on this site long, long ago those strongmen in the Middle East is in our interest. Sure we wish them to veer toward democracy but the way to go about it is 'gentle persuasion' over decades. Not kicking them out and creating a void to be filled by regimes that shall strain every sinew to wipe us from the face of the Earth.

[Islandman]

I agree, partially. Iraq is without a doubt one of the worst failures of US foreign policy and Syria is not shaping up too well. Afghanistan,jury still out but not a great success either.

It is clear that eliminating a strongman or an oppressive regime creates a void which can easily result in conflict until another strongman emerges.

If by 'gentle persuasion' you mean sanctions, restrictions, etc until the people themselves decide to change things, then that does appear to be one of the better options. But it takes LOOONG so it is not a favorite choice of politicians.

Also, there are times when the carnage is so great that the world should not sit by and watch. Rwanda is one such example that should have been acted on.

These are all difficult , centuries-old issues that can only be analyzed and dealt with on a case-by-case basis, and there is no formula which guarantees success.

[Jangle]

Obama just can't catch a break. These international conflicts were germinated long before his time due to greedy American policies. He inherited two wars which were financially draining all while he trying to drag America out of the worst depression since the Great one. Syria, Egypt, Libya, Crimea, and now Iraq....again, after they said "Thank you, we'll take it from here".

[Islandman]

Yes, BUT....we cannot dismiss the reality that Obama is probably president because he was opposed to the Iraq war and Hillary voted for it. No Iraq war debacle, most likely no President Obama. Crisis creates opportunity and he went for it.

[Don1]

i
As I said on this site long, long ago those strongmen in the Middle East is in our interest. Sure we wish them to veer toward democracy but the way to go about it is 'gentle persuasion' over decades. Not kicking them out and creating a void to be filled by regimes that shall strain every sinew to wipe us from the face of the Earth.

This depends on what's mean by "our interest". If by that you mean the interest of the US public you're 1000% correct.

Unfortunately US foreign policy is conducted in the interest of the Military Industrial Complex.. not in the public interest

The Complex is interested in promoting war and strife in order to secure profits and geopolitical arrangements that suit their agenda....

People can believe that or the smoke n mirrors they see in the corporate media matrix i.e. CNN/ABC/NBC etc

[HL]

BTW (not keeping with the tone of this thread): if i recall correctly, the Iraqi prime minister refused Obamas' offer to keep US troops in that country....

[Islandman]

Yes, Obama offered to keep some troops on the ground, IF they were granted legal immunity for their actions while there.

Maliki said he would not,could not grant them that.

[HL]

...well, sad for him.

See, now he is begging for US support...

Silly....no; stupid man.