Comments about ‘Thousands of displaced Iraqis flee militants as US warplanes strike’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Aug. 8 2014 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Ogden, UT

America is coming to help," the president said in a somber speech from the White House.

What a joke. Again old lead from behind Obama is engaged,after the dance is over. He could have done this a long time ago and this would not have happened. To little to late.

Durham, NC

It is about time. Obama has been way too slow to respond here. I am not sure we need boots on the ground, but we surely we can put a dent in their ability to expand their reach. We can make a difference here... and we should be making a difference.

clearfield, UT

Well I guess we see the dilemma the U.S. and all Presidents have in this world. Be an isolationist and watch the worst people in the world like Bin Laden, Hussein, Hitler, ect. murder thousands and do nothing to stop them. Or engage with military power and try to stop the slaughter. Isolationism may seem like an ideal, but it doesn't seem realistic to live that way in the world. Much to my chagrin to have to admit that. I didn't like a lot of the Bush wars either, but then what would the Middle East look like if Al Queda had not been attacked, and Saddam Hussein had been left in power. Worse or better? Some wanted to stay out of WW11. How would Europe be today if the Nazis had won. Worse or better? Too bad there are no absolute right or wrong answers to these problems, but it would seem that there are not. Obama is faced with the same problems and choices that Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, Eisenhour, Truman, Roosevelt........... well, you get the picture.

Houston, TX

I wonder why we can help the Kurds and the Zorastrians, but there is nothing we can do for the Christians? The only answer I can think of is that the Christians are not fighting back, so we can't make it a military issue.

Hayden, ID

Why is Obama bombing people in Iraq? To save innocent people from being murdered by jihadists? Well, well apparently GWB was right after all! The similarities are amazing which means liberals can not whine about "Bush's war" because as of today, its Obama's war!

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

too bad BO waited so long and presented the posture of weakness that emboldened ISIS. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, but it looks like we're in for a few pounds of cure because BO hadn't the sense to employ the ounce of prevention.

Durham, NC

Mountainman... difference being that before our invasion, there was no issue with groups like ISIS in Iraq or Syria. We opened up that can of worms, disbanded local military and police, and left with a dysfunctional government in place. I think there is room that in Obama's hast to get us out of Iraq, we didn't assure these groups that we have been fighting in other locations took advantage of that power vacuum. I think history will tell us we left that country in a not yet stable enough state. We may be getting close to that same problem in Afghanistan - hopefully we are learning a thing or two.

But lets be really clear, none of this would be a problem had we not gone in and destabilized the region. We did not invade Iraq to go after ISIS. It never was the justification. But just because the doctor didn't heal the patient right (Obama) - that does not make him equally responsible for the person who caused the accident itself (Bush).

I am frustrated with Obama in this circumstance. He is being way too passive and innocents are paying the price.

Kaysville, UT

American soldiers once again have the opportunity to (potentially) sacrifice their lives for the safety of others. American parents once again have the opportunity to sacrifice their children so others' children may live.

Ball Boy
Payson, UT


We should have left Saddam Hussein in power? I'm having a hard time believing that Iraq would be calm & quiet today if we would have not intervened.

Liberal Ted
Salt Lake City, UT

Remember how calm it was under Saddam Hussein? He only invaded Kuwait and pushed towards Saudi Arabia. He only fought a long bloody war with Iran. He gassed his own people that were hunkered down along the border. Very peaceful liberals? What a bunch of dumb nuts. Which is why they elected a dumb nut president. Who by the way was against the surge, but, had no problem taking credit of the success of the surge.

Iraq was more peaceful with our troops there. Terrorists did make attacks, but, were few. After we withdrew, they have free reign to kill, steal, plunder and shove sharia law down the throats of everyone. Much like liberals like to shove their ideology down everyone elses throats.

We still have bases in Germany, Japan, Philippines, Guam etc. Do you really think we can camp out in a country for 10 years and they would be ready? It was going to take a huge commitment. Which would have huge rewards, such as Germany, Japan, Philippines. Free societies, democratic governments with constitutions. Instead the liberals gave terrorism and the perverted interpretation of the Koran to Iraq. Congrats.

Salt Lake City, UT

"To save innocent people from being murdered by jihadists? Well, well apparently GWB was right after all!"

There was no active slaughter going on when Bush invaded. Also it's air strikes, not a massive ground war.

Virginia Beach, VA

Mountanman -

" . . . as of today, its Obama's war!"


It's still very much Bush's war.

GW Bush has armed our enemy with their most effective weapons. Sure, he didn't mean to do it, but that's exactly what he did.

His UNPROVOKED attack against Iraq that killed over 100 thousand Sunnis not only alienated and enraged tens of thousands of Sunni's who now see it as their DUTY to destroy us . . . it also left Arms in their hands, that are now being turned against us.

GW's Republican Bush administration was and IS extremely detrimental to the United States and its people. Essentially, the Bush Administration, even though it's been gone for almost six years . . . IS a formidable ENEMY to the United States.

We the people of the United States and the free people of the world are currently engaged in a war AGAINST forces armed by the Bush Administration.

The terrible Republican malfeasance of the Bush administration is still harming America and our allies . . . And will for many years to come.

That's what can happen when you vote Republican.

Ogden, UT

@ Rufus

Typical response from conservatives here who criticize the President at every turn.

And your point is? What is not to criticize about failure in totality from the most transparent President in history?

Virginia Beach, VA

Hey Lost in DC -

"too bad BO waited so long and presented the posture of weakness that emboldened ISIS."

You can try to deflect the blame for GW's malfeasance onto Obama, but it's not going to fly.

Obama pulled troops out according to the agreement signed by GW. They never should have been there in the first place. GW's WMD lie is still doing damage to the world.

Your "posture of weakness" rhetoric might be quite the catch phrase in Right Wing La La Land, but here in the real world, it's just indicative of the propensity of "Conservative" politicians to shirk responsibility.

Say What?
Bountiful, UT

Why are we wasting our time going after militants? Wouldn't our efforts be better spent going after terrorists?

The Educator
South Jordan , UT

Still cleaning up after Bush's mess... After all these years... Will it ever end?

Bountiful, UT

Its good to see ISIS take it on the chin. I agree with Obama who said, " I am not against war, just stupid war. " . The occasional bomb drop and giving weapons to the ISIS resistance is smart. Sending troops over there and borrowing trillions more to get bogged down in another war is just plain stupid.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

Stock market liked it. The President has been keeping on the pressure since he authorized the Bin Laden take out.

Anti Bush-Obama
Chihuahua, 00

Isis wasnt a threat to us. We shouldve stayed out of it. We are not the worlds policemen.

Logan, UT

Yes, it would've been better to have attacked ISIS earlier. But better late than even later. So let's now support the president's efforts instead of criticizing.

@ Rufus T. Firefly:

One indisputable fact liberals somehow keep forgetting is that based on the intelligence available at that time, Congress, including leading Democrats (such as Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton) all voted in favor of our incursion into Iraq.

Bush had to make a decision on what intel was available to him at that time. There was no other meaningful way to proceed. It wasn't his fault that part of the intel eventually proved to be incorrect.

Knowing the full truth of that situation, I and other conservatives sleep very well at night... thank you.

@ Schnee:

You'd better do some additional research. There indeed was an active slaughter of civilians going on at that time under Saddam Hussein. It was brutal and ugly and not hard to verify.

@ Say What:

The militants we are now going after are truly terrorists. In fact, they are some of the worst and most extreme terrorists the Middle East has encountered in a very long time. It's totally justifiable.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments