General Discussion

Chathamization

(1,638 posts)

109. I’m not sure how anyone could view Bush’s stance as “cautious isolationist”

Tue Sep 9, 2014, 08:58 AM

Sep 2014

His two areas of criticism with the prior administration are that 1. The US military should be used for fighting wars, not peacekeeping and 2. That the military has to be strengthened and needs to be tougher on foes like Saddam Hussein (he specifically mentions rebuilding a coalition opposed to Hussein and getting tougher on him). The quote you mentioned does a good job reflecting that mentality – use troops to overthrow the dictator, have other people clean things up.
In many ways this was the mentality of the early Bush administration, which is why there wasn’t much of a plan in Iraq and Afghanistan past “kick out the bad guys” (and even then, the plan was pretty poor). But seriously, I don’t see how anyone can view that mindset as being a “cautious isolationist”.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

119 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Warren: Destroying ISIS should be 'No. 1 priority' [View all] wyldwolf Sep 2014 OP

Move over Fonzie Hari Seldon Sep 2014 #1

Welcome to DU... SidDithers Sep 2014 #4

more like ... Tuesday Afternoon Sep 2014 #13

Good one discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2014 #24

I don't think there is any foundation to your assertion Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #70

I am sure it is.....outwardly we are being told that they are just part of the terrorism we have VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #2

Your post reminds me of a line from one of the Babylon 5 TV movies: Proud Liberal Dem Sep 2014 #6

Its true....my Grandmother was a very wise woman..... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #7

I like that somewhat better than '...Beware the fury of a patient man.' ~ John Dryden. freshwest Sep 2014 #65

Ok. Then we need to destroy their funding sources first. n2doc Sep 2014 #3

exactly. n/t Tuesday Afternoon Sep 2014 #14

HELLO yes, and who is funding them? randys1 Sep 2014 #30

A lot of their funding is coming from ransom paid for the release of prisioners. Thinkingabout Sep 2014 #40

I thought certain folks in Saudi Arabia would be as with 9/11 randys1 Sep 2014 #42

They probably are some of the same and now some US citizens have joined. Thinkingabout Sep 2014 #47

yep, there are some good online sources Duppers Sep 2014 #48

Destroying their funding AnalystInParadise Sep 2014 #43

Attacking Saudi Arabia (which I presume is what you meant) would be the worst thing the US could do YoungDemCA Sep 2014 #103

How does it get paid for? grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #5

Looks like she got on the War on Terra bandwagon. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2014 #8

My first thought was AgingAmerican Sep 2014 #113

I take her seriously. She has a lot of credibility with me, so if she's worried, TwilightGardener Sep 2014 #9

What a fucking joke whatchamacallit Sep 2014 #10

As usual, Warren nails it sub.theory Sep 2014 #11

Poverty, Jobs, Healthcare, Election reform.....? NightWatcher Sep 2014 #17

ISIS isn't a boogeyman sub.theory Sep 2014 #19

Yah, I remember hearing the same thing 12 years ago. The more things change... N/T Chathamization Sep 2014 #20

The danger of crying wolf sub.theory Sep 2014 #22

Of course, "this time the threat is unmistakably real" is said every time. Keep in mind that this Chathamization Sep 2014 #27

I agree in part sub.theory Sep 2014 #37

There are three armies in the region to face them Scootaloo Sep 2014 #53

Syria knows where ISIS is. TwilightGardener Sep 2014 #54

Only Iran can confront them sub.theory Sep 2014 #57

What gets called ISIS is an assortment of armed Sunni groups, a small minority of whom seem to be in Chathamization Sep 2014 #64

wow, real discussion! thx Vattel Sep 2014 #73

I haven’t really found one source that’s good. If I had to choose one I’d probably choose Wikipedia, Chathamization Sep 2014 #110

how is ISIS a threat to the US? Vattel Sep 2014 #76

As I see it sub.theory Sep 2014 #90

Thanks for the response. Vattel Sep 2014 #93

We shouldn't spend billions AgingAmerican Sep 2014 #115

"Why can't you take them at their word?" AgingAmerican Sep 2014 #114

Totally steelsmith Sep 2014 #41

Not really AnalystInParadise Sep 2014 #44

Explain that. TwilightGardener Sep 2014 #45

What needs to be explained? AnalystInParadise Sep 2014 #46

In terms of the threat to the US and its interests--why is Boko Haram worse? TwilightGardener Sep 2014 #49

Geography AnalystInParadise Sep 2014 #56

You are aware that ISIS is taking in oil revenue, as it controls oil fields? TwilightGardener Sep 2014 #58

what vital US interests are threatened by ISIS? (sincere question: I am trying to get more informed) Vattel Sep 2014 #75

Allies in the region, oil, military bases and assets, diplomatic personnel, American TwilightGardener Sep 2014 #89

They could try to attack us, but I am still not seeing any potential military threat. Vattel Sep 2014 #94

Three areas of concern: Iraq itself, where we do bear some responsibility for their TwilightGardener Sep 2014 #95

Thanks for your response. I need to think more about this. Vattel Sep 2014 #96

This may be why we have no war criminals. If we did then we would be totally responsible... L0oniX Sep 2014 #112

Looks like Warren wants more NSA surveillance against Americans traveling abroad. Cali_Democrat Sep 2014 #12

at least now I hope people realize how foolhardy it was to back the Syrian opposition and try to Douglas Carpenter Sep 2014 #15

Plus the 2003 Iraq War sub.theory Sep 2014 #18

the funding issue of ISIS is a bit complicated as this BBC article points out Douglas Carpenter Sep 2014 #23

Good points sub.theory Sep 2014 #25

Not just a power vacuum loyalsister Sep 2014 #59

War is hell sub.theory Sep 2014 #100

"war should never be entered into lightly or falsely" - Absolutely! loyalsister Sep 2014 #107

i agree Puzzledtraveller Sep 2014 #29

I backed them shaayecanaan Sep 2014 #77

I would that all tyrants be disposed - but in some cases - particularly in the Middle East Douglas Carpenter Sep 2014 #81

If you'd heard the screams coming out of one of Assad's police stations, you might think differently shaayecanaan Sep 2014 #87

Foreign policy has never been her strong suit. ucrdem Sep 2014 #16

Yeah, she's very good on some issues and I'm glad she's in the senate, but I wish people would Chathamization Sep 2014 #35

Back in 2000, Bush and Cheney ran to the left of Gore on Middle East policy ucrdem Sep 2014 #83

Eh, not really. Bush said that we needed a stronger military and should get tougher on Iraq. He was Chathamization Sep 2014 #91

The 2nd one too, especially. Bush played the cautious isolationist ucrdem Sep 2014 #92

I’m not sure how anyone could view Bush’s stance as “cautious isolationist” Chathamization Sep 2014 #109

Bush's shtick was to promise to "make sure the return is good." ucrdem Sep 2014 #116

Bush brings up Iraq number of times, and again, being tougher was one of the main differences he was Chathamization Sep 2014 #118

Bush mentions Iraq and Hussein each twice. Gore mentions Hussein three times, Lehrer once. ucrdem Sep 2014 #119

I somewhat disagree. Hugin Sep 2014 #21

You had no fun posting this at all BeyondGeography Sep 2014 #26

it actually makes me like her more... even though she seemed to be making it up as she went along wyldwolf Sep 2014 #28

Yup, pretty political response BeyondGeography Sep 2014 #32

p.s. Who thinks Warren is different from Obama and Clinton? if so on what exactly? randys1 Sep 2014 #31

TPP. djean111 Sep 2014 #38

We hear the same thing over and over again. ZombieHorde Sep 2014 #33

No, we really don't. Saddam and his regime were saying they werent a threat and didnt have WMD. stevenleser Sep 2014 #117

So we can throw another trillion at the military industrial complex for another stalemate? Initech Sep 2014 #34

we could send the Ferguson police dept. to fight ISIS. wyldwolf Sep 2014 #36

no wonder she supports hillary JI7 Sep 2014 #39

. MohRokTah Sep 2014 #50

Clearly, TPTB got to her. JoePhilly Sep 2014 #51

Is that sarcasm, or sincere? TwilightGardener Sep 2014 #55

Fair question on DU. JoePhilly Sep 2014 #63

"with other countries" MannyGoldstein Sep 2014 #52

A "Coalition of the Willing", if you will. Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #60

oooga boooga GeorgeGist Sep 2014 #61

Another Reagan-crat joins the Generals? RandiFan1290 Sep 2014 #62

Too bad that arming them was the number 1 priority a year ago n/t eridani Sep 2014 #66

She turned it up to 11. Major Hogwash Sep 2014 #67

Certainly, the heroic IDF can handle this ragtag group. nilesobek Sep 2014 #68

You think Israel should attack ISIS forces in Iraq and Syria? oberliner Sep 2014 #71

ISIS has claimed they will raise their flag over Jerusalem. nilesobek Sep 2014 #72

Not sure how the governments of Syria and Iraq would respond oberliner Sep 2014 #86

The Caliphate marches on, ra, ra, ra. nilesobek Sep 2014 #97

"ISIS is only a threat to some distant oil exploration and exploitation outposts..." oberliner Sep 2014 #98

Its a dumb move really nilesobek Sep 2014 #106

Gee, for someone who is "absolutely, positively, no-way no-how running" Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #69

Since she has credibility with the more liberal Dems, loyalsister Sep 2014 #84

My wife (who is not political) saw Elizabeth Warren this week on Letterman and said B Calm Sep 2014 #74

I am starting to think there might be something to that, seeing as how Hillary supporters are djean111 Sep 2014 #79

Disappointing. Orsino Sep 2014 #78

Maybe she sees that as us being her first priority? Cha Sep 2014 #99

Then she is not as smart, or maybe not as well-intentioned, as I'd thought. Orsino Sep 2014 #108

what does she propose to replace the Islamic state with shaayecanaan Sep 2014 #80

This is a good question sub.theory Sep 2014 #105

"It's the economy stupid" - TBF Sep 2014 #82

I'm pretty sure Obama and Hillary agree with her on this. Autumn Sep 2014 #85

The number one priority should be NOT CREATING terrorists. JEB Sep 2014 #88

Bombing the middle east hasn't seemed to work yet. RedCappedBandit Sep 2014 #101

Reminds me of a Klingon bit from Star Trek DS9. Jester Messiah Sep 2014 #102

Has she said who will pay for this? n/t factsarenotfair Sep 2014 #104

"assault on all of our humanity." like folks torturing folks is? L0oniX Sep 2014 #111