I believe Bush's foreign policy was a disaster and cost thousands of American lives. That to me is a "disaster".
I brought up his name for context on what a "disaster" looks like. He is a shining example of that.
I work for the army overseas, and talk to soldiers daily. Getting out of Iraq saved untold number of American lives.
The battle for Iraq had to be fought by Iraqis with us playing a back up roll. That is exactly what is happening now.
They are clearly improving, and taking back their country. We have barely lost anyone since we played a supporting roll.
Not to mention saving billions by having a more limited presence there.
With the conflict in the middle east Obamas decisions have kept us out of harms way.
Bush Sr. going into Iraq in the first place. Totally uncalled for, except as a "UN bowery war". "Bowery War" is something I borrow from some analyst from "the New American" magazine, the publication of the John Birch Society. One of my nephews lived in Appleton, the JBS headquarters, and has gone to Shanghai where he works for the Chinese with a really big salary. Putin in Russia reads the JBS literature, and calls it on the UN. Analyzing US foreign policy in the light of UN "New World Order" rhetoric, Putin says the US created ISIS, that ISIS is Obama's brainchild.
So what is a "Bowery War"? It's where the Aztecs historically colluded with a supposed "enemy", a sort of hoity-toity vassal state with a semi-independent elite "king" of it's own, to have a war neither would really win. The royalty of both sides of the "war" would build a bowery, a sort of villa with a shaded pavilion, where they could watch their war, and drink a lot, with some "tomato" girls, lushes, in sexy outfits prancing around. They might cheer for whichever side was winning at the moment. One side would sashay across the battlefield and take some prisoners, then the other side would go get some for themselves. The prisoners taken would be kept as slaves. It was never intended to be militarily anybody's victory.
This is the essence of all wars since the UN was created. Putin criticized Obama and Hillary because, he says, they created ISIS. Hillary and Obama are not just stupid people who would leave a garrison ammo dump unguarded, like Benghazi, they did it deliberately, putting the arms there for the taking. Stupid sincere American staff was just sacrificed, well, ordered to stand down and let it happen, but they somehow got the idea they were Americans and should stand their ground and fight. Putin also says ISIS was selling the oil to American buyers to fund their war of atrocities. The ISIS soldiers are mostly mercenaries, with Western-asset, as in intelligence-service controlled hacks, "leadership". A sort of Iran-contra oil for guns rigged deal. Putin blames us for it all, probably with some reason.
I'm not saying Obama or Hillary are any worse than either of our Bushes, just that our leaders have loyalties to their agenda rather than what really is American interests. I'm not say that Chinese or Russian elites are any better, only that they have their own interests and are acting in their own interests, not ours, and that they are not stupid, either.
JBS is a top-down, little ideological outfit not a really dedicated constitutional republic defender either. Every once in a while, a real journalist gets canned for stepping outta line, as the author of the "Bowery Wars" article, was.
I have friends from Afghanistan, Iran, Palestine, and such. I tell them please don't be foolish and get involved with any American "help". We always betray anyone who trusts us. We intend to manipulate everyone on the world stage for the "cause" of supposedly good management but we are not "good management", we are the worst.
The UN has been a fraud from the gitgo, as was the League of Nations. The whole "progressive" movement of the past 180 years has been a fraud on mankind. The intellectual leadership has come from the core of the British Empire, from "The City of London" sort of mercantile genius, through their Press and their universities like Osford. It was put into high gear with the leadership of Lord Cecil Rhodes. Look at the way the map was drawn by the Brits in the Mideast, almost no country with borders that comprised a homogenous population. Look at how the Brits acted when Ghandhi got so popular with his peaceful challenge to their power. He had Moslem and Hindus united against the colonials, he was raised in a community where elders of both religions, as well as communist ideologues, discussed their ideas openly and peacefully. "Civil Disobedience" was a powerful tool against colonial power. But the Brits got just enough "rednecks" to spread the hate and got India and Pakistan partitioned, at huge cost in human lives.
We have got to stop the insidious spread of division and hate spread by Obama and many others who use it as a tool for holding power. Obama and Hillary, albeit through some second hands, have created the genocide in Syria. Maybe they just like playing a bizarre real-world game of "Risk", and don't really intend for their creation to take power. Maybe it is really evil genius for collecting the rabble of the Mideast and isolating them and cleaning them out. Who knows.
But it is not proper American foreign policy and has little to do with our real interests.
Our best foreign policy was our first one. "Alliance with none, commerce with all".
