• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

College Student to Jeb Bush: "Your Brother Created ISIS"

Status
Not open for further replies.
1. So what? She asked about his brother, not him. We're not bound by familial legacies.

2. This feels like Obama's saber comment from 2012 - a point louder than logic, but emptier than a real talking point.

3. Non-issue. Terrorist groups are created by economic developments, shitty commander in chiefs, and poor leaders internationally. Always has been this way. It's just now people think they stumble into genius arguments because of social media vacuums.

4. I fought overseas. There have been just causes, and there have been horrendously awful causes. It doesn't have to be the defining moments of our lives.

5. Also - Obama did as much to create ISIS as any president before him. The vacuum created by a hasty pullback of troops had to be filled by someone.
Did you miss Jeb's comments over the past week?

and lol at 5.
 
1. So what? She asked about his brother, not him. We're not bound by familial legacies.

Apparently when you were paying attention enough to write 4 bullet points you failed to notice that Jeb commented on his brother being his foreign affairs advisor.

I don't agree with their policies, but you need to watch where you're throwing those phrases around. "Ever" is a long time.


iSIS hasn't been around that long.
 
Ms. Ziedrich was not finished. “You don’t need to be pedantic to me, sir.”
Fuckouttahere with that weak shit.

Invading Iraq was a disaster, but to ignore the role the current administration's hands off approach with respect to Malaki played in Iraq's destabilization is to deny reality.
 
Did you miss Jeb's comments over the past week?

and lol at 5.

No - read them all. But embracing the good of your past doesn't mean repeating the errors.

And 5 is very true - ISIS (and many terrorist groups in the past) have come from power vacuums. That's an acknowledged point, and one that has repeated itself with terrorist or militant groups in history. Try discussing the point instead of laughing of it.
 
1. So what? She asked about his brother, not him. We're not bound by familial legacies.

2. This feels like Obama's saber comment from 2012 - a point louder than logic, but emptier than a real talking point.

3. Non-issue. Terrorist groups are created by economic developments, shitty commander in chiefs, and poor leaders internationally. Always has been this way. It's just now people think they stumble into genius arguments because of social media vacuums.

4. I fought overseas. There have been just causes, and there have been horrendously awful causes. It doesn't have to be the defining moments of our lives.

5. Also - Obama did as much to create ISIS as any president before him. The vacuum created by a hasty pullback of troops had to be filled by someone.
Did you not see the video over the weekend when Jeb said that he wouldve back the invasion of Iraq even knowing what the inevitable outcome would be?

Here's a link just in case you missed it:
https://youtu.be/O6LuvK1c10s
 
No - read them all. But embracing the good of your past doesn't mean repeating the errors.

And 5 is very true - ISIS (and many terrorist groups in the past) have come from power vacuums. That's an acknowledged point, and one that has repeated itself with terrorist or militant groups in history. Try discussing the point instead of laughing of it.

We pulled out at the request of Iraq IIRC.
 
Apparently when you were paying attention enough to write 4 bullet points you failed to notice that Jeb commented on his brother being his foreign affairs advisor.




iSIS hasn't been around that long.

Apologies - didn't know you were talking just about ISIS. And isn't it expected that you'd listen to what someone who's been there would have to say? I don't support the guy, but he's shown himself a little more progressive domestically than his brother. I'm willing to bet he's not quite that stupid.
 
ISIS is not some new entity that formed because of Bush. It is simply an amalgamation of a bunch of entities that existed prior.

Iraq's Government did a good job in fucking its own people over so they would form a group to fight against the fucking over. If we want to lay the blame on a particular we should be blaming every single politician who champions Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is the real enemy
 
I get where she's going, but I do have a problem with her holding him responsible for what his brother did.

Now, if he doubles down on the, "my brother is my foreign policy guy" stuff, then there's a real issue.
 
Then does Obama get the blame for not pushing harder to have a SOFA renewed once he took office? Does George H.W. Bush get the blame for not ousting Hussein during the first Gulf War or for getting involved in that conflict at all? Or do we go all the way back and blame the Europeans for dividing up the Ottoman Empire so freely following the end of WWI and the end of the Islamic Caliphate?

A. Obama
B. W
C. H.W.
D. Conquering Europeans
E. All the above

I'm picking E.
 
Did you not see the video over the weekend when Jeb said that he wouldve back the invasion of Iraq even knowing what the inevitable outcome would be?

I did. But that's probably true of just about any president - he mentioned he'd probably do things differently as well.

Listen - I'm not a fan of the guy. But it's very easy to criticize when hypotheticals are involved.

We pulled out at the request of Iraq IIRC.

True. What's funny though is how quickly that change occurred - there was a horrible, horrible perception of our purpose there for years. It was an awful time to be there.
 
I did. But that's probably true of just about any president - he mentioned he'd probably do things differently as well.

You have got to be fucking kidding me.

I would not be surprised if Jeb is alone among GOP potential nominees in saying he'd be willing to invade Iraq knowing the outcome today.
 
That's pretty dumb of her to mention. What good does this do?
 
You need to read more about the creation of ISIS.

A lot of people are commenting on this thread without knowing much about what happened out there in the last few years.

She is probably right and I don't have any sympathy for Bush.

I just feel like this isn't a fair debate to throw questions like that and to start pushing him to make a public mistake. She was provoking a shitstorm by the way she was talking. That was a malicious question the way I see it. That's why I'm not a fan of it.
 
You have got to be fucking kidding me.

I would not be surprised if Jeb is alone among GOP potential nominees in saying he'd be willing to invade Iraq knowing the outcome today.

It's a loaded question. Agreed. Can't say I'd rather have a dictator in charge either - it's a volatile situation, and the evil you know is sometimes better than the evil you don't.

Fuckouttahere with that weak shit.

Invading Iraq was a disaster, but to ignore the role the current administration's hands off approach with respect to Malaki played in Iraq's destabilization is to deny reality.

Yes. Agreed.
 
What a blow to Jeb's public image and career, I'm sure this will directly and substantially affect his chances in the presidential campaign going forward
 
Ouch.

Still when your family is two former presidents you know there is going to be a lot of shit you got to deal with due to what they did.
 
Considering the majority of ISIS's high ranking command are from Saddam's dismantled military, and we are the ones that dismantled that military, I would say the US has a very high percentage of blame for the creation of ISIS.

The one thing everyone conveniently forgets about all of this is that Iraq's postwar government is Shia. If we hadn't dismantled iraq's predominantly Sunni military leadership, the new government almost certainly would have.
 
tumblr_n5tudu7Wpy1r3a6jho1_500.gif

I see she finished political science 101. 2samrt4me.

Man I got lucky I even pass that class with a C. Who ever thought of putting this as a GE requirement is out their goddamn minds.
 
Then does Obama get the blame for not pushing harder to have a SOFA renewed once he took office? Does George H.W. Bush get the blame for not ousting Hussein during the first Gulf War or for getting involved in that conflict at all? Or do we go all the way back and blame the Europeans for dividing up the Ottoman Empire so freely following the end of WWI and the end of the Islamic Caliphate?

I'm not saying that Bush doesn't deserve A LOT of heat for the situation in the Middle East but you cannot simply put all the blame on one man for the situation currently going on right now. It's a bit more complicated than that.

The third one. The blame for all this shit was that land-grab treaty.
 
It's far too complex of an issue to say that one man is responsible.

Though it does show how toxic the Bush Administration is. Jeb has one hell of a political mountain to climb in this election.
 
The third one. The blame for all this shit was that land-grab treaty.

Yep. History's far more convoluted than a simple straw-man who's responsible for the world's current evil.

It's far too complex of an issue to say that one man is responsible.

Though it does show how toxic the Bush Administration is. Jeb has one hell of a political mountain to climb in this election.

And that's the truth. I won't vote for him, but it'll be interesting to see how he tries to do it.
 
The one thing everyone conveniently forgets about all of this is that Iraq's postwar government is Shia. If we hadn't dismantled iraq's predominantly Sunni military leadership, the new government almost certainly would have.

I think the argument goes that if we had just left Saddam in power then everything would be hunkydory. I can't say I disagree entirely tbh. It would probably be better at least. Considering that all his boasting about nuclear weapons was because of Iran, if we had tried to return to being allies with him he probably would have relented to some extent. The only reason we became enemies in the first place was because of the idiot Saudi leadership who should have been told to go fuck themselves.
 
ISIS is the puppet arm of one side in a Religious Civil War. I cannot fault Bush when Obama, Clinton and every other modern US President is a knowing accomplice to one party in this civil war.

Iraq's government let it's religious divide dictate policy towards the other unworthy Muslims and as a result Saudi Arabia and Iran now fight a proxy war. The United States Government current and past is to blame for actively supporting one arm of Extremist Islam while saying the other side is the sponsor of terrorism while the United States itself has more often than not experienced terrorism from the arm it defends
 
I think the argument goes that if we had just left Saddam in power then everything would be hunkydory. I can't say I disagree tbh. Considering that all his boasting about nuclear weapons was because of Iran, if we had tried to return to being allies with him he probably would have relented to some extent. The only reason we became enemies in the first place was because of the idiot Saudi leadership who should have been told to go fuck themselves.

Saddam also had a large history of ethical and humane violations - he was a truly horrible dictator. It served our interests to remove him, but that doesn't change how we truly despised him as a person, not to mention the leader of a country.

Saudis should always be ignored. It's rare that we agree on anything, and we should have asked what the hell was wrong with us when we did.
 
I think the argument goes that if we had just left Saddam in power then everything would be hunkydory.

That's not the argument that's being used, though. Every time this pops up, it traces back to the decision to dismantle the Iraqi military. You see several posters here referring to it, and its been mentioned in several other threads in the recent past.
 
Missed opportunity.

When he said "Is that a question?"

She should've said, "No. It's a fact." and dropped the mic.
 
ISIS is not some new entity that formed because of Bush. It is simply an amalgamation of a bunch of entities that existed prior.

Iraq's Government did a good job in fucking its own people over so they would form a group to fight against the fucking over. If we want to lay the blame on a particular we should be blaming every single politician who champions Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is the real enemy

Pretty much. But the disbandment of the Iraqi army definitely had an impact. There are tons of thousands of 30 or 40-something men with combat and leadership experience, almost all Sunni and many of them Wahhabists. The Bush administration should have seen this coming.
 
Come on though...I'm the furthest thing from a bush supporter but what she said / asked was a gross oversimplification.
 
He probably believes it is a gross oversimplification of the conflict. I'm just guessing though.

I'm going to say he would be right.

Also: that wasn't a fucking question.

"oh no! A smartass thought she was going to totally overwhelm some guy who happens to be related to a former president by posing a statement as a question!"
"hah, just kidding. "
* sends of hot space potato into space *
 
She is probably right and I don't have any sympathy for Bush.

I just feel like this isn't a fair debate to throw questions like that and to start pushing him to make a public mistake. She was provoking a shitstorm by the way she was talking. That was a malicious question the way I see it. That's why I'm not a fan of it.

You're making good points and I actually agree with you. But again she's 19 and she's talking to a nasty politician who comes from a long lineage of terrible rulers. Plus if she hadn't phrased her question that way, she wouldn't be making " headlines ". That's unfortunately the way it works ...

I don't blame her that much.
 
Seems like a bit of an oversimplification. Maybe if she should've said, "Your brother helped contribute to the rise of ISIS". That would probably be more accurate but then you can make that claim against the last 4 presidents.
 
Saddam also had a large history of ethical and humane violations - he was a truly horrible dictator. It served our interests to remove him, but that doesn't change how we truly despised him as a person, not to mention the leader of a country.

What interests exactly other than what the Saudi's wanted? I don't think it really served our interests at all. Better someone on friendly terms that you hate but keeps things stable and won't dare hurt you than allies that are better people but that are a complete fucking train wreck and are through incompetence breeding enemies that want to do damage to you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom