I was joking

Increased premiums and clients caused the local insurance company to explode and they invested in flipping houses, which raised the property value of the houses around him. It could happen.

I opposed the war from the start. My reasoning was Iraq was a sovereign nation and so long as they weren't attacking anyone or posed an imminent threat, they were free to own and create whatever their technology allowed.

Once we invaded, none of that mattered. We had an obligation to finish it through and leave the region stabilized. If that meant a permanent presence ala South Korea, Germany or Japan, so be it. Having military assets in the region was a positive for US interests and negating radical Islam.

Bush set the SOFA and timetable to end US offensive missions, but Obama failed to attempt to negotiate a defense force agreement and we all but left the country. Radicals quickly resumed power and rather than take them serious, called them the JV team. With a lack of US reprisal, they expanded to their current state. Assad's civil war allowed the climate for them to get a foothold in Syria.

Creating a battleground for radicals via Iraq was a sound strategic decision. Better to fight them there and have central intelligence than let them spread everywhere.

The power and influence of Radical Islam during and after the war is indisputable.  9/11, Madrid and London happened because Radical Islam wasn't centralized. Monitoring all their behavior was a challenge. Iraq fixed that. Now they're operating in a central location without real dispute, though progress has been made, and with that allow them to coordinate attacks while expanding their networks.

The only real solution is to start a light ground war to create a focus for radicals while using special forces and intelligent agencies to remove pockets that appear outside the designated area.  Use the occupation and forced stability to bring in trade and modern conveniences. Remove the ignorance and poverty and you neuter radicalism.

I'm not advocating anything. Simply pointing out there are 300+ million guns in this country and a large contingent of loser, white males who were too craven to wear the uniform but fantasize about the revolutionary war. 

None of Bush's executive orders were ruled unconstitutional nor nearly as brazen as some pushed by Obama. If you want to compare naming post offices to declaring millions of people here illegally are now A-ok, we're not having have an honest discussion.

If Clinton is unable to break from Obama and continues to refuse to compromise, and passes executive orders as legislative fiats, some angry Americans will respond.

If you're going to argue the 13 year old's rape claim is credible, you have to believe Bill Clinton fucked the same children. After all, he rode the Lolita Expresss no less than 5 times with no secret service detail. And since Hillary has openly defended him against the other claims, she's either complicit with his rape or actually enabling it.

I don't want to make that claim, so I caution people to go down a road they aren't interested in going down.

Do we really need to repeat all the proven lies from Hillary's mouth that cost others their careers, but you folks handwaive?