Bush Proves it

[Cosworth]

Alot of people did watch and they learned very well. Several corporations learned that war, if done right, can be very profitable. Take a look at Halliburton's stock over the past 5 years. They are really hurting.

 

[Tug McGroin]

US troops were in Berlin (Don't we still have troops there?) to keep Russia out, not to keep the "Berliners" from killing them selves. US troops were/are in Japan to have a presence in the Pacific not to prevent the Japanese from killing each other.

Troops are in Iraq to prevent a civil war (3 factions who want to see the others dead) as well as prevent Iran and Syria from filling the vacuum that the US created in the first place.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/#iran

Bring Our Troops Home

Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.

Iraq has a population in the tens of millions and a military to number in the hundreds of thousands. To suggest that a US military presents of 150K members represents an “occupying†or “nation building†force is ridiculous. Obama has not indicated that he plans on pull our military from Iraq rather conversely plans to keep “some†troops there. He has not explained what number “some†represents nor has he explained how long “some†troops we remain in Iraq.

Stating Obama’s plan, how is his plan for military presents in Iraq any different from his opponents plan or for that matter, the plan of the current administration? Where is this “change†Obama keeps talking about?

 

[Veritas]

Stating Obama’s plan, how is his plan for military presents in Iraq any different from his opponents plan or for that matter, the plan of the current administration? Where is this “changeâ€￾ Obama keeps talking about?

Do you actually read what you post? 🙄

I suggest that you reread what you copied from Obama's campaign website:

Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months.

 

[EastUS]

Do you actually read what you post? 🙄

I suggest that you reread what you copied from Obama's campaign website:

"Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months."

Umm... "one to two combat brigades each month"? " one to two"? Heck: Why not 3-4?...5-6?/etc. How about ALL if you're strategically going that way? Egrees south and leave. Is that based upon his military "experience" and "expertise" and brilliant potential as Commander in Chief?...or just another attempt to maximize our troop losses while ever-so-Slowwww-ly exiting? OR...here's just a thought = perhaps even that pathetic, but charismatic dingbat, has some awareness, via advisers of the situation, and really has no honest plans to just "give up" entirely on the region...and is merely lying his arse off. For all the liberal-dem's military geniuses out there..a question = How long will it take, at a rate of "one to two combat brigades each month"..to extract all forces from Iraq?...Do you even have the slightest clue therein?...Just curious. Aww..nevermind...clues aren't required..just so long as it "sounds good" I guess.

 

[Cosworth]

I remembered hear or reading something about the logistics involved in with drawing from Iraq. The numbers were quite impressive. It's not a matter of just saying we are done, hopping on a plane and bingo ... you're home. I found this article that address a few of the issues. Form the sounds of the article he is using a time line with the assumption that everything goes smoothly. When is the last time anything this government did went according to plan.

Anyway, perhaps Mr. Obama was aware of these issues when he made the comment regarding the removal of troops at the rate of 1-2 brigades a month? Nah, he has no experience so how could he know that. Must have been a lucky guess.

Colonel Douglas Macgregor


You seem to know what everyone is doing wrong and how incompetent they are. Why don't you list a few ideas of what should be done. So far all I have seen is a lot of wasted binary bits on what people are doing wrong.

 

[EastUS]

Good opinion piece/situational estimate by the Colonel imho:

"DM: The number one priority has to be the protection of the force as it leaves, because it will undoubtedly be under attack." Translation = A LOT of our young people would die withdrawing. There's no "Time Outs" in warfare, and collapsing and/or retreating forces are the very most vulnerable within any conflict scenario.

"MJ: And in the event of a U.S. withdrawal, what becomes of the Iraqis who have been working with U.S. forces, such as translators, embassy employees, etc.?

DM: Most of the translators are double agents. I suspect that some of these double agents will be fine, but the rest who have profited from our position inside the country are dead. And the Arabs won't waste time on reeducation camps like the North Vietnamese did. They are going to kill them. And their families."

So..with Obama's "plan"...umm....Everything still rainbows, pink fluffly clouds, and warm radiant sunshine now?

Robin Williams: "Reality!?....What a Concept!!!"............🙄

PS: Jumping threads here, but: Given that there's such a fuss raised over a sniper shoooting the Koran..and thusly, "offending" the "sensibilities" of some....ummm...Why are some of the same people loudly crying over that...apparently so utterly "fine" with planning on leaving those Iraqis that have worked with us, trusted us, and their extended families, to the tender mercy of torture and death? Just curious..as the "values" displayed by such "thinking" do indeed, seem "curious" to me.

"And the Arabs won't waste time on reeducation camps like the North Vietnamese did. They are going to kill them. And their families." Yeah...Sigh....let's always make darn sure that we kiss such people's arses fully, and never, ever "offend" any such superb examples of the very heights of fine and noble humanity.

 

[Cosworth]

Who said it was O to leave the Ira's who helped the US in Iraq? The US government (specifically the US State Department) has reneged on it's promise to bring all those who helped the US and are now in jeopardy, to the US and relocate them. Seems the US State Dept cannot conduct back ground check quick enough? So does that mean we have Iraqi civilians helping US troops who have not had a though back ground check? Please. What load of crap.

Why not just include them with the US troop with draw down? Seems easy enough to me.

Interesting that you seem to assume that the troops are capable to be over there fighting but not capable of defending them selves in an orderly withdrawal.

 

[Tug McGroin]

Do you actually read what you post? 🙄

I suggest that you reread what you copied from Obama's campaign website:

The quote “Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 monthsâ€￾ has remained unchanged since the conception of Obama’s website. At the time this promise was made, the war in Iraq appeared “hopelessâ€￾, a “quagmireâ€￾ with “no end in sightâ€￾.

Fast forward. The war in Iraq has changed dramatically, powerful Democrats Durbin and Murtha acknowledge the surge is working and Obama has awakened to this realization.

In September 07, Tim Russert asked Obama “Will you pledge that by January 2013, the end of your first term, more than five years from now, there will be no U.S. troops in Iraq? Obama replied “I believe that we should have all our troops out by 2013, but I don't want to make promises, not knowing what the situation's going to be three or four years out".

In early 2007 Obama didn’t know what the situation in Iraq would be in January 2009 but promised to “remove one or two combat brigades each month and have all of our brigades out of Iraq within 16 monthsâ€￾. Today Obama can’t promise to have the troops out of Iraq by 2013 because he doesn’t know what the situation’s going to be in three or four years.

I’m still looking for “changeâ€￾ I can believe in.

 

[EastUS]

Who said it was O to leave the Ira's who helped the US in Iraq? The US government (specifically the US State Department) has reneged on it's promise to bring all those who helped the US and are now in jeopardy, to the US and relocate them. Seems the US State Dept cannot conduct back ground check quick enough? So does that mean we have Iraqi civilians helping US troops who have not had a though back ground check?

"Why not just include them with the US troop with draw down? Seems easy enough to me." I'm hardly surprised that it would "seem easy enough" to you. Evidently, you're blessed with far greater situational, military acumen than that of the Colonel who's material you sited to supposedly enhance your case...(and naturally...in any armchair "warrior"... "liberal" norm..far more than my own service experience taught me). Your referenced Colonel..obviously but another silly officer he, also sees abundant bloodshed arising from a withdrawal. I'm well pleased that we now, by way of your arrogant, personal assurance..need have no fears on that score at all. After all..disengaging troops in the face of a hostile insurgency's always a piece of cake..and really "easy"...and taking along any/ALL Iraqis, that actually help us, wouldn't be even the slightest problem whatsoever......yeah...completely knowing who to fully trust, and keep within the same defensive perimeters..aw heck..that's "easy" :blink: 🙄

"Please. What load of (utterly clueless) crap."

 

[Cosworth]

"Why not just include them with the US troop with draw down? Seems easy enough to me." I'm hardly surprised that it would "seem easy enough" to you. Evidently, you're blessed with far greater situational, military acumen than that of the Colonel who's material you sited to supposedly enhance your case. He..silly career officer him, sees abundant bloodshed arising from a withdrawal. I'm well pleased that we now, by way of your assurance..need have no fears on that score at all. After all..disengaging troops in the face of a hostile insurgency's a piece of cake..and really "easy"...and taking along any/ALL Iraqis, that actually help us, wouldn't be even the slightest problem whatsoever......yeah. :blink: 🙄

"Please. What load of (utterly clueless) crap."

I did not see where he said there would be abundant bloodshed. I did a search and neither word appears in the article. I did see where he mentioned that they "undoubtedly be under attack". As I recall, they are under attack now so how would it be any different? Never said the withdrawal will be easy. I said taking the Iraqis who have risked their lives to help our troops and include them in the withdrawal seems like it would be easy enough. Perhaps I am wrong in that judgment. You have presented no information to prove me wrong. Just insults and fabrications of information not contained in the article.

Are you implying that the US government has Iraqis assisting our troops who have not gone through a complete background check? Are you saying that the US government has no idea who is helping them?

As for including the people who are helping us in the withdrawal, how hard could it be to include them with our troops? He makes no comment on it one way or the other so where are you getting your information? Are you saying that our military is not capable of defending them selves or the people entrusted to their protection? If they cannot protect them as they are withdrawing, how on earth can they be expected to protect the entire nation? I believe our troops are far more capable than you give them credit for.

What would you suggest we do with the estimated 100,000 Iraqis who helped us? Shall we just abandon them? We did make promises to them? Whether it be easy or hard, we made a promise and I would think that should be honored.

Just so I am clear on your rules. Is it OK for you to insult others but not OK for them to insult you?

 

[EastUS]

I did not see where he said there would be abundant bloodshed. I did a search and neither word appears in the article.

"Are you implying that the US government has Iraqis assisting our troops who have not gone through a complete background check? " ????...You're seriously joking right?..That was for completely hysterical giggles and grins?...NO ONE, not even the staunchest, clueless, liberal moron....could even possibly be so utterly clueless 😉..or..can they???? A "Background check"??? in Iraq??..and..that'll ensure everything's beautifull??....ROTFLMAO....too funny.

Ah!..Then my knowledge of the area's situation, personal "Professional Military Expertise"/etc..sigh.... must be completely wrong as well!...After all...you couldn't just google up an easy "solution" to serious slaughter


"Just so I am clear on your rules. Is it OK for you to insult others but not OK for them to insult you?" 🙄 OK..that proves you a "liberal" beyond all doubt = Discussing mass slaughter/warfare..and yet, you can even imagine that I'm personally concerned with "insults"? = "Reality Check" and "Clues Time" 🙄 Insult away at your pleasure..we're talking about war here.

"I did not see.." In my honest estimation?..you never will "see", and you should properly thank The Allmighty (whatever your "beliefs"l, or lack thereof)..that you've never, had the need to personally ever "see". Have a good life.

 

[Cosworth]

All that typing and you still have nothing to say.

The State Department stated that it is running back ground checks before allowing the people who have been with our troops and supplying them services to come into the US. If you say it is not true then supply your information.

What is your military background?

I have no interest in insulting you. You made a post a while back complaining about someone insulting you. You are obviously a hypocrite since it seems when you do not have an argument you resort to insults. Your last post is littered with them. You are not worth the effort, if you must resort to insults for what ever reason that is your problem, not mine.

We have used the services of over 100,000 Iraqis. They have placed their lives and the lives of their families at risk by helping the US. We promised to get them out of there. We need to honor that promise.

Yes most of my beliefs do fall in the liberal camp, some are conservative. You say it like it is a bad thing. I guess I should be flattered and thankful coming from someone with views such as yours.

 

[delldude]

Do you actually read what you post? 🙄

I suggest that you reread what you copied from Obama's campaign website:

Hey...hey...hey......who you talking to?

 

[EastUS]

All that typing and you still have nothing to say.

The State Department stated that it is running back ground checks ...

Whew!..and I was actaully worried about having treacherous individuals around...Sigh. No worries now that the state department's "runniing background checks" within Iraq.where all information's naturally trustworthy, and no one lies at any level/etc......everything's just fine...Sigh...I WAS worried for a moment.....Umm..are you really ,and truly that hopelessly stupid?..or are you just pretending to be so, for our collective amusement? :blink: 🙄 "the state department's running background checks"..Thanks..I haven't laughed so hard all week. 😉

Disregard..It's evident that: "are you really , and truly that hopelessly stupid?..or are you just pretending? "...must reasonably be considered as a purely rhetorical question.. 😉 NO ONE can possibly be THAT stupid...and still even have sufficient brain fuction so as to allow for autonomic responses = breathing.

 

[Cosworth]

So no we agree that the State Dept is running checks but that they may not be sound. Trying to argue with you is like trying to hit a moving target blindfolded. I never commented on the accuracy of the checks. The only thing I commented on was the fact that the State Dept is using the slow background checks as an excuse for not bringing over the Iraqis who helped the US forces and whos lives are not in grave jeopardy in a timely manner. What ever background checks the State Dept is capable of doing should have/could have/probably were done when they were embedded with our troops in the first place. One argument that I heard presented was that the US is purposefully delaying the immigration of these people because to do other wise would open up another question. The question of why the US cannot even provide for the security of the few people who helped our troops. The question of if the security for them cannot be provided, how can the US say that the security in Iraq in general is improving. Seems plausible to me.

Yes people really can be that stupid. You have been proving that with most of your posts. Your convoluted arguments, your twisting of words, your use of facts not in evidence, your petty insults, your smug, holier than thou attitude and your extreme opposite alternative scenarios are all a strong indication that it is indeed possible.