[551199]

Obama administration bombed every one of those countries in 2016 to the tune of 72 bombs per day (some this year as well). Might make some sense why those countries were selected..[0]

[0]http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2017/01/05/bombs-dropped-in-2016/

Edit: I get several downvotes for stating a fact? Please.

[mtanski]

I wish you wouldn't just quote these numbers without any context. I will not say that Obama administration was Dovish. And I'm personally not happy with other things he did (expanding spy powers, the prosecution of whistleblowers)

If you look at the list and you see the top places Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan are all areas Obama inherited. If you remember Bush II our previous president got us into Afghanistan and Iraq. Syria and Iraq bombs are primarily us fighting ISIS which again is because Bush fucked up Iraq nation building.

There lots of good books / documentaries about the rise of ISIS, long. The long and short is we invaded iraq -> we fired everybody in government -> we occupied the country -> lead to resentment and extorts insurgency (pre ISIS) -> we left to early -> ISIS was allowed to form.

Then Lybia was a NATO operation to create a no fly zone (and destroy air defences) to prevent Kadafi from bombing his own people. If we remember correctly the Obama administration mostly stayed out the conflict. We didn't even arm the rebels that was Quatar. We we mostly ignored that or even secretly agreed, but we mostly stayed out of it.

So again, it's easy to throw out numbers. But without context your statements runup against false attribution fallacy.

[lend000]

> If you look at the list and you see the top places Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan are all areas Obama inherited.

No one is denying that Bush set the stage for (most) of the conflicts, but quite frankly it was Clinton's bombing campaigns in Sudan and Saudi Arabia that stoked the fires of radicalism that led to 9/11. And then of course the entire region has never been given a chance to recover from the CIA's initial 1952 coup that overthrew Iran's first Democratically elected PM (who wanted to nationalize oil) so they could re-instate the Shah, a dictator: http://www.globalresearch.ca/a-timeline-of-cia-atrocities/53...

Most of the blame goes to the US and our allied coalitions (read: US), although some certainly falls on the Soviets and China a few decades ago. The current state of the region is mostly the fault of US Presidents, though.

It's perfectly sound to criticize Obama for not doing anything to improve the situation and to actually add new conflicts, instead of trying to wrap up our initial two as cleanly and quickly as possible (Afghanistan and Iraq). Campaign promises broken, lies, and millions of people have paid the price. And what are we left with? More radicalism than we ever had before (including a savage radical 'country' with non-negligible amounts of land). Obama is a failure at best -- a war criminal, at worst.

[jessaustin]

If we remember correctly the Obama administration mostly stayed out the conflict.

That is 100% bullshit. USA bombed Gaddafi out of Tripoli (don't believe me, just read NATO press releases), and then supplied the arms to those who hunted him down (and incidentally, the bayonet that was located in his rectum when he died). And if you ever believed the "bombing his own people" pap peddled by political rivals hiding out in Switzerland, I got a bridge to sell you.

[lend000]

There's a lot of denial on HN about the magnitude of Obama's foreign policy belligerence. I guess it challenges Dem's beliefs that he was a 'good' president, since foreign policy is the one item that is fully attributable to the POTUS.

[Mithaldu]

Please be more detailed. How is it belligerence? Is he doing it against these countries' governments' wishes?

From all i can glean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_Joint_Task_Force_–_Op... is aimed against terrorist and rebel organizations, in cooperation with 58 other countries, while the entire world is screaming at the USA to finally destroy those terrorist organizations. Particularly in Iraq this is being done in cooperation with the iraq government as well. And from what i hear from friends who read more about this the usa is actively by the countries in question to help their efforts by doing these things.

So where exactly does the belligerence come in?

[achamayou]

With the notable exception of Iran, with which diplomatic relationships had improved to a significant extent following the creation of the nuclear framework.

[thomasahle]

This becomes more relevant, when (if) Trump makes any big changes regarding bombing.

Right now he has just made the life terrible for a lot of people's coworkers, friends and family; so that fact that Obama bombed some other people doesn't really help.

(You still shouldn't be down voted though)

[potatosoup]

I'm sorry you're being downvoted (even though you're off by a couple of countries). These were useful and scary stats. 26,000+ bombs...

[rsync]

"Edit: I get several downvotes for stating a fact? Please."

I downvoted you for talking about your downvotes.

Don't interrupt the discussion to meta-discuss the scoring system.

[lend000]

By your logic, you should absolutely be downvoted for making an entire comment dedicated to meta-discussing the scoring system. Your point would have been better made with a silent downvote.

Mine should be, too, if I subscribed to your espoused scoring logic.

[rjtobin]

Well, not Iran (thankfully)