Seeking Alpha

Iraq in flames again, rebounding oil industry threatened

From other sites
Comments (41)
  • P. Dennis
    , contributor
    Comments (387) | Send Message
     
    I will always regret the two votes I foolishly cast for George W. Bush to be our Commander In Chief.
    11 Jun 2014, 10:52 AM Reply Like
  • Lakeaffect
    , contributor
    Comments (1137) | Send Message
     
    Don't feel too bad, Dennis. They're all just two sides of the same coin.
    11 Jun 2014, 11:17 AM Reply Like
  • Jolly_Rancher
    , contributor
    Comments (558) | Send Message
     
    The commander in chief function should probably be taken from the president and placed in a general who is appointed by the president for a 6 year term -- similar to the Fed chairmanship (it's only 4 years). There's no logical reason to think that a person who is de facto guilty enough to become president should have any military expertise whatsoever. We should also return to the constitutional requirement that war must be supported by a vote of Congress. Of course, war is any military action against another entity. Somehow, war never happens anymore, it having been defined out of existence.
    11 Jun 2014, 11:32 AM Reply Like
  • Overanalytical
    , contributor
    Comments (842) | Send Message
     
    An unappointed Commander in Chief paves the way for coups. I think this is more about demanding that candidates for President be competent in military management and strategy.
    11 Jun 2014, 11:52 AM Reply Like
  • Moon Kil Woong
    , contributor
    Comments (11474) | Send Message
     
    I agree Bush Jr. was terrible but Obama has just made things worse. So it seems Republicans and Democrats are terrible at foreign policy. They play according to what lobbyists want and not what is best for America, its people, or its armed forces.

     

    On a positive note Bush Sr. and Clinton played foreign policy much better. So its not like it can't be done on both sides of the isle.
    11 Jun 2014, 12:01 PM Reply Like
  • TAS
    , contributor
    Comments (2416) | Send Message
     
    I voted for Bush. 9/11 was a large issue to address. In war, mistakes are made and strategies need revised continually except for one: winning.

     

    I regret that the current CIC lost not only Iraq but has been at the controls for one diplomatic and military debacle after another.
    11 Jun 2014, 12:10 PM Reply Like
  • TAS
    , contributor
    Comments (2416) | Send Message
     
    I submit that there are a large number of voters who would support a strong man CIC/General that defends the Constitution. Maybe even a majority of legal voters.

     

    They feel the country has been betrayed.
    11 Jun 2014, 12:13 PM Reply Like
  • aeroguy48
    , contributor
    Comments (753) | Send Message
     
    Bush is still president? Oh ok living in the past.
    11 Jun 2014, 12:14 PM Reply Like
  • pagreen1966
    , contributor
    Comments (640) | Send Message
     
    Likewise regarding Tony BLIAR over here in Blighty!
    11 Jun 2014, 12:36 PM Reply Like
  • Lakeaffect
    , contributor
    Comments (1137) | Send Message
     
    If we depended on the draft to man the military, we wouldn't have gone into Iraq in the first place. Nixon's shift to a standing military of "volunteers" opened the door to this.
    11 Jun 2014, 01:21 PM Reply Like
  • Overanalytical
    , contributor
    Comments (842) | Send Message
     
    Are you implying they aren't volunteers?
    11 Jun 2014, 01:30 PM Reply Like
  • Michael Nau
    , contributor
    Comments (972) | Send Message
     
    I don't think this is a partisan issue. Fact of the matter is that the U.S. military has a limited ability to impose political control over the Middle East, regardless of whether the CIC is a Democrat or Republican. Our military is designed to win wars, not occupations or revolutions.

     

    We should just focus on those few who actively target the U.S., provide non-military aid to our friends and otherwise mind our own business.
    11 Jun 2014, 01:39 PM Reply Like
  • Overanalytical
    , contributor
    Comments (842) | Send Message
     
    "We should just focus on those few who actively target the U.S., provide non-military aid to our friends and otherwise mind our own business."

     

    Agreed but I do believe in military alliances, people at the top need to ask themselves, "Would I be willing to die for [X]?" That question would have changed a lot over the last hundred years.
    11 Jun 2014, 01:49 PM Reply Like
  • User 195396
    , contributor
    Comments (378) | Send Message
     
    Agree completely! Stay the hell out of situations where our national interests are not at risk. Jeez, the list is endless and mindless; on the energy sector, Libya worked out well thanks to our meddlesome State Dept and complicit president.
    11 Jun 2014, 01:49 PM Reply Like
  • Lakeaffect
    , contributor
    Comments (1137) | Send Message
     
    Ever notice how when recruiting numbers aren't delivering there's a recession? Most of they guys I know went into the military because they couldn't find a job. Now, they're getting ready to offer citizenship to illegals who enlist (or would prefer to say Volunteer?) Sure, there's a few gung-ho types, and some that are carrying on the family tradition, there will always be those.

     

    The draft was a brake on the MI Complex, as we saw in the '60's. Nixon saw that and he implemented a workaround. In today's Iraq or Syria, the populace just leaves things up to the politicians, assuming that they're not going to get sucked into the mess anyhow.
    11 Jun 2014, 01:51 PM Reply Like
  • Ishi Kenjo
    , contributor
    Comments (207) | Send Message
     
    B.O. will prove to be much worse a choice for president. He can not stop the cascading scandals and failure. that is what comes from corruption & abuse of power. He has 2 more years to punish everyone that disagrees with him and certainly will continue. Other than fundraising and political attacks it is about all he thinks about. The whole environment at the oval office is toxic and will bring more bad kharma.
    11 Jun 2014, 01:55 PM Reply Like
  • 31October
    , contributor
    Comments (891) | Send Message
     
    Don't regret it, if it was made with the information and PERCEIVED choices you had at the time. It is good to learn from experience, but the worst mistake one could ever make is to assume that the alternative is be to embrace the other party, which is just as corrupt.
    Ignore trash-pop media: There are more than 2 parties. In fact, there is currently ONE party, the Corrupt Government Party, and it has two marketing divisions, the Democrats and Republicans.
    Every face on Mt. Rushmore was a 3rd party at one time. Until the greedy little piglets in Congress are forced off the ratepayers' sore teats be people who refuse the false dichotomy, they will continue to suck us dry.
    27 Jun 2014, 07:23 PM Reply Like
  • coolcat28
    , contributor
    Comments (158) | Send Message
     
    You're doin' a heckuva job Baracki!
    11 Jun 2014, 10:55 AM Reply Like
  • Tricky
    , contributor
    Comments (1588) | Send Message
     
    Please explain what you would be doing differently, that would have a substantially different outcome.
    11 Jun 2014, 11:41 AM Reply Like
  • coolcat28
    , contributor
    Comments (158) | Send Message
     
    Sure, the war was won in Iraq, he screwed up the status of forces agreement, because he wanted out at all costs, and now it will revert to the extremists, just like it will revert to the taliban in Afghanistan. I figure he is so unserious in Afghanistan why risk any american lives there, bring everyone home now instead of doing that pretend routine that he's in it to win it. It's obvious that he isn't serious when he announces a surge with less soldiers than the generals asked for and at the same time announces when he's pulling the troops out. No reason to risk american lives with a foreign policy that is that crazy. If he doesn't want war then pull everyone out and have a strict policy of not letting anyone immigrate from muslim countries.
    11 Jun 2014, 11:52 AM Reply Like
  • anarchist
    , contributor
    Comments (1490) | Send Message
     
    @coolcat, sorry to inform you that the war in Iraq was never won, the US just stated "we won" and went home. The war in Iraq was never "winnable", at least not the way the US jumped in. The US turned out Saddam, a moderate (however a psychopath) Sunni and installed a whole group of radical Shiites (all psychopaths). I think Obama was handed a ME mess that it was too late to fix, any move he makes is a bad one.
    I do agree that we should pull out all of the troop AND quit paying for the soldier of fortunes (Blackwater, etc.).
    11 Jun 2014, 12:10 PM Reply Like
  • orangutan
    , contributor
    Comments (238) | Send Message
     
    In a place like Iraq or Afghanistan, the only way to secure militarily gains permanently is through permanent military occupation. If the US was not ready to permanently occupy those countries and run their governments, it should never have invaded in the first place.
    11 Jun 2014, 12:14 PM Reply Like
  • anarchist
    , contributor
    Comments (1490) | Send Message
     
    I agree Orangutan however even Powell ignored the "Powell doctrine" and went before the UN to embarrass himself with his funky charts and diagrams.
    11 Jun 2014, 12:26 PM Reply Like
  • Ooi
    , contributor
    Comments (305) | Send Message
     
    16 years is a long time for the world's most powerful country to suffer under subpar leadership. The strain is showing.
    11 Jun 2014, 10:58 AM Reply Like
  • The Last Boomer
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    The group that overtook Mosul is ISIL, the same Islamist group that fights Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Suddenly, the USA and Bashar have a common enemy. Oh, the irony! And how was that: "the enemy of my enemy is my ..."
    11 Jun 2014, 11:04 AM Reply Like
  • june1234
    , contributor
    Comments (3066) | Send Message
     
    Operation Iraqi freedom appears to have been a rousing successs.
    11 Jun 2014, 11:07 AM Reply Like
  • TAS
    , contributor
    Comments (2416) | Send Message
     
    Until 2009, it was making very good progress, considering the Arab penchant for Islamic Law.
    11 Jun 2014, 12:14 PM Reply Like
  • june1234
    , contributor
    Comments (3066) | Send Message
     
    Define progress. Aside from the anywhere between 200K to 1 million that died over there bringing it the equivalent of 50,000 Americans die/ died each yr in Iraq from roadside bombs, snipers ,whatever, making Baghad the most dangerous city on earth . Operation Iraqi freedom part 2 maybe?
    11 Jun 2014, 12:42 PM Reply Like
  • coolcat28
    , contributor
    Comments (158) | Send Message
     
    I would not be surprised if it was found out we are arming them either.
    11 Jun 2014, 11:07 AM Reply Like
  • Overanalytical
    , contributor
    Comments (842) | Send Message
     
    Yet another reminder of why we need to become energy independent
    11 Jun 2014, 11:30 AM Reply Like
  • Gary Jakacky
    , contributor
    Comments (2727) | Send Message
     
    Like we did with communism in the post WWII period, our best policy is to contain and confine Islamofascism, and let them rot for a few decades until they collapse from the weight of their own ignorance.
    11 Jun 2014, 11:35 AM Reply Like
  • coolcat28
    , contributor
    Comments (158) | Send Message
     
    You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.
    11 Jun 2014, 11:40 AM Reply Like
  • Darren McCammon
    , contributor
    Comments (1574) | Send Message
     
    America doesn't want to fight foreign battles. We decided we didn't want to be the thankless policemen of the world any longer. North American energy production is allowing us to back out and let foreign nations determine there own future's. The rest of the world gets that we will do nothing. Thus Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine and whoever's next as the balance of power in the world shifts. Folks, we as a country made this decision when we elected the current government. If you didn't realize that was part of what you were voting for, shame on you. While I voted for the opponents, I find it disingenuous to blame this administration for doing what we as a country asked them to do.
    11 Jun 2014, 12:14 PM Reply Like
  • Yorick
    , contributor
    Comments (570) | Send Message
     
    Why Bush didn't pull a Putin while we had the chance in Iraq, I'll never know...sometimes we take our "good guy" status just a little to far...thousands dead, war costs of $1T+ and we walk away from the 3rd largest world reserves of oil...unbelievable.
    11 Jun 2014, 12:14 PM Reply Like
  • Rinascimento
    , contributor
    Comments (1117) | Send Message
     
    Didn't Iraq buy a few tons of gold? that's enough justification to back in
    11 Jun 2014, 12:19 PM Reply Like
  • RS055
    , contributor
    Comments (3091) | Send Message
     
    "....a guilty conscience in a top leader can become the Achilles heel of a whole country. Men of shame who know our road to war was not cricket, are seldom those we can count on to hold fast, stay the course."
    VADM James B. Stockdale, USN ( Retired)
    11 Jun 2014, 12:54 PM Reply Like
  • Ishi Kenjo
    , contributor
    Comments (207) | Send Message
     
    Most of America now regrets voting for B.O. twice. The negative consequences will continue to cascade for 2 more years. All the effects of corruption & abuse of power are illuminating so well whether the media admits it or not. Most of the country suffers from higher costs of living (from food to gas to electric to insurance to housing) and worse job prospects. The new jobs are worse than the old jobs that were dealt away to other countries. This was mostly by design in an attempt to take Detroit to the Federal level. The question is: Are we stupid enough to allow our votes to be bought with ever diminishing entitlements?
    11 Jun 2014, 01:46 PM Reply Like
  • snoopy44
    , contributor
    Comments (952) | Send Message
     
    Ishi:
    Sad but true. To be bi-partisan about it, this is the most corrupt administration since Harding & Nixon. The bottom line is that one should NEVER cast a vote for "hope and change" on someone so inexperienced as B.O. One of the cable TV pundits the other night said that other than foreign policy and economics, Obama was quite competent. That's like asking Mrs. Lincoln, "other than losing your husband how was the play?". There pretty much is nothing else than foreign policy and economics for a President to master. Geez, people. When are you going to wake up?

     

    S.
    11 Jun 2014, 02:11 PM Reply Like
  • Deja Vu
    , contributor
    Comments (1377) | Send Message
     
    Refiners like VLO should be worth a look with as this may drive up the Brent-WTI spread....
    11 Jun 2014, 02:22 PM Reply Like
  • idkmybffjill
    , contributor
    Comments (1706) | Send Message
     
    Oh how I regret selling MPC at 39....
    11 Jun 2014, 02:57 PM Reply Like
  • idkmybffjill
    , contributor
    Comments (1706) | Send Message
     
    This might finally be the catalyst for the "market correction" everyone's been waiting for.
    11 Jun 2014, 02:57 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs