Has Obama handled ISIS better than Bush would have?

[they don't love you like i love you]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/26/us-led-coalition-air-strikes-isis-syria-iraq

Bush would've f[inks]ed it up big time like he did with everything.

[Modernity has failed us]

Probably. Bush would've tried to declare war on Syria and Libya, then put troops on the ground anyway. Mission accomplished.

[anvi]

Our Iraq policy under both Bush and Obama is what created ISIS.  The precipitous dismantling of the former Iraqi armed forces, our ongoing support of the incredibly repressive Maliki government combined with the sad fate of the "Sons of Iraq" movement all contributed to its formation and strength.  Sporadic bombing forays are not going to deter them all that much.

Piece of Evidence #whatever-hundred-million for the U.S. to decide whether something is important enough to go all-in or to stay the hell out of it entirely. 

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Not really.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

It's very difficult to make a comparison on the basis of policy execution. Obama has done a solid job, but I voted no because Bush likely would've done equally as well. Hard to say for sure.

[Vosem]

Bush wouldn't've withdrawn in 2010, so ISIS in it's current form wouldn't exist. In that sense, the answer is clearly Bush.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Bush would have probably appointed an idiot to lead a ground mission.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Of course he has. Bush was incompetent at everything.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Obama is the more effective evil.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

ISIS wouldn't exist without Bush.

[DrScholl]

ISIS is Bush's fault, he wanted to start the Iraq War and without that, there would be no ISIS.

[ElectionsGuy]

Bush wouldn't've withdrawn in 2010, so ISIS in it's current form wouldn't exist. In that sense, the answer is clearly Bush.

Except that ISIS wouldn't have formed in the first place if the US never invaded, but ok. 

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I wouldn't trust Bush with taking out my trash.

[Deus Naturae]

Yes. That doesn't remotely mean that Obama has handled it well though.

[Cory]

ISIS is Bush's fault, he wanted to start the Iraq War and without that, there would be no ISIS.

This is just silly. If you wanted you could say it was Saddam's fault for empowering the Sunni thus creating resentment whenever the Shia inevitably took over. Or it was the British Empire's fault for creating Iraq in the first place after WWI.

You can push the post back as far as you want and find someone who "fault it is" that IS exists. You could probably even blame the Romans for some action or another that eventually led to the modern arrangement of things.

[pbrower2a]

Dubya -- one blunder after another. President Obama has done what he could with the resources at his limited disposal.

If he should decapitate ISIS leadership he solves a big problem that will not fester. 

[DrScholl]

ISIS is Bush's fault, he wanted to start the Iraq War and without that, there would be no ISIS.

This is just silly. If you wanted you could say it was Saddam's fault for empowering the Sunni thus creating resentment whenever the Shia inevitably took over. Or it was the British Empire's fault for creating Iraq in the first place after WWI.

You can push the post back as far as you want and find someone who "fault it is" that IS exists. You could probably even blame the Romans for some action or another that eventually led to the modern arrangement of things.

Educate yourself. The destabilization of Iraq opened up the country to all sorts of insurgents that have been able to operate because of the instability and ISIS cropped up after the war. Bush's action played a big role in Iraq's current state. But you are entitled to your opinion.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

ISIS is Bush's fault, he wanted to start the Iraq War and without that, there would be no ISIS.

This is just silly. If you wanted you could say it was Saddam's fault for empowering the Sunni thus creating resentment whenever the Shia inevitably took over. Or it was the British Empire's fault for creating Iraq in the first place after WWI.

You can push the post back as far as you want and find someone who "fault it is" that IS exists. You could probably even blame the Romans for some action or another that eventually led to the modern arrangement of things.

Educate yourself. The destabilization of Iraq opened up the country to all sorts of insurgents that have been able to operate because of the instability and ISIS cropped up after the war. Bush's action played a big role in Iraq's current state. But you are entitled to your opinion.

Okay, but Iraq under Saddam Hussein was no walk-in-the park either, and one could argue that the Arab Spring would've happened regardless, and with no Iraq War it would've reached that country's borders, creating even more instability than there was in the wake of Bush's nation-building efforts. So this isn't a game I'll play.

[they don't love you like i love you]

It's quite likely the Arab Spring would've toppled Saddam (he was after all definitely in a weaker position than Gaddafi), but such an organic uprising would've made the possibility of ISIS getting the strength they did more unlikely.

[Cory]

Educate yourself. The destabilization of Iraq opened up the country to all sorts of insurgents that have been able to operate because of the instability and ISIS cropped up after the war. Bush's action played a big role in Iraq's current state. But you are entitled to your opinion.

Nothing you said dismisses my post in any way. My post stands.

[DrScholl]

Educate yourself. The destabilization of Iraq opened up the country to all sorts of insurgents that have been able to operate because of the instability and ISIS cropped up after the war. Bush's action played a big role in Iraq's current state. But you are entitled to your opinion.

Nothing you said dismisses my post in any way. My post stands.

Whatever, like I said, you have your opinion. I'll leave it at that.