# Withdrawal Time Tables, That Will Encourage the Terrorists



## rayboyusmc (Aug 21, 2008)

> BAGHDAD - Iraq and the U.S. have reached preliminary agreement to withdraw American forces from Iraqi cities by next June, six years into the increasingly unpopular war, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said Thursday after meeting with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.




US, Iraq have draft to pull US troops out - Yahoo! News


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Aug 21, 2008)

Ohh look, Col Mustard has returned and is at his usual moronic claims again. He insisted we would never be at a point where we could even consider leaving and demanded we abandon them , cut and run. Now he is whining cause we have reached a point where we can talk about no more US daily security.

Must suck to be on the shitty end of that stick Col Mustard. Seen Commander Dumb shit around, he too insisted we would never be at this point.


----------



## Article 15 (Aug 21, 2008)

It's great that Bush has finally seen the light ... grab your popcorn and watch his minions pull an about face on timetables ... you see folks ... this is what happens sometimes when you spend so much time investing in rhetoric designed to demonize the other side of an issue like this ... you end up having to eat your words and shit them out in public and hope nobody notices.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Aug 21, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> It's great that Bush has finally seen the light ... grab your popcorn and watch his minions pull an about face on timetables ... you see folks ... this is what happens sometimes when you spend so much time investing in rhetoric designed to demonize the other side of an issue like this ... you end up having to eat your words and shit them out in public and hope nobody notices.



I suggest you go back and read the INTENT and the MISSION as stated over the last 6 years, you will discover ( shocking indeed) that the ENTIRE plan has been to train the Iraqis to take over their own security. What a concept. The entire plan of the democrats has been to LEAVE now not when the job was done and in fact Obama had the SAME exact plan, to leave in 16 months NO MATTER the conditions on the ground.

This is nothing more than us actually achieving our goals. Goals that have always been the same from day one.  

But you keep claiming other wise, makes you look as stupid as it sounds. Or such a partisan hack that you wouldn't know reality if it smacked you in the face.


----------



## Article 15 (Aug 21, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> I suggest you go back and read the INTENT and the MISSION as stated over the last 6 years, you will discover ( shocking indeed) that the ENTIRE plan has been to train the Iraqis to take over their own security. What a concept. The entire plan of the democrats has been to LEAVE now not when the job was done and in fact Obama had the SAME exact plan, to leave in 16 months NO MATTER the conditions on the ground.
> 
> This is nothing more than us actually achieving our goals. Goals that have always been the same from day one.
> 
> But you keep claiming other wise, makes you look as stupid as it sounds. Or such a partisan hack that you wouldn't know reality if it smacked you in the face.



The point came in straight, waist high, and right over the plate ... you still swung and missed.


----------



## rayboyusmc (Aug 21, 2008)

I suggest  you just read, retired.

Why is okay now for your Bushits to set a timetalbe when McCain attacked Obama for doing the same thing.

I may be Kernel Mustard, but at least I haven't been butt fucked by Bush for the last 8 years and am still smiling like you are. 

You are exactly what they need to suceed.  Funny how some of his neocon buddies are now bidding for oil contracts.  Yep, this was all about freeing Iraq and making a Democracy.  4000 + dead Americans.  What the fuck have we gained?  The war was a mistake from the begining, but you just can't admit that.

You still can't argue without your little name calling can you?


----------



## rayboyusmc (Aug 21, 2008)

> that the ENTIRE plan has been to train the Iraqis to take over their own security.



No it wasn't. It was about WMDs and mushroom clouds etc.  They were a threat to US.  You can lie all you want, but it is all on the internet.


----------



## Denny Crane (Aug 21, 2008)

rayboyusmc said:


> I suggest  you just read, retired.
> 
> Why is okay now for your Bushits to set a timetalbe when McCain attacked Obama for doing the same thing.



I'm sort of wondering the same thing. Good point.


----------



## wihosa (Aug 21, 2008)

The fact is we will leave sometime and after we are gone the Iraqis will figure out who will be in charge.

One thing for sure, it woun't be what Bush and the Neo-Con want.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Aug 23, 2008)

rayboyusmc said:


> No it wasn't. It was about WMDs and mushroom clouds etc.  They were a threat to US.  You can lie all you want, but it is all on the internet.



You sure you were actually a Lt Col of Marines? You sound like a draft dodger to me? That you can claim we had no plan to stabilize Iraq after the invasion is hilarious on its face and is a BALD faced lie. You know, I know it and every other military person knows it.

You may be able to fool the yocals but don't try it with me, you lying turd.


----------



## blunt (Aug 24, 2008)

Another retarded fuking thread full of lies and bullshit allowed to stay in current events.
Just post one word of thruth and it's moved, post a hundred fuking lies and it stays...you silverpoon liars are a fuking joke.


----------



## Red Dawn (Aug 24, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> I suggest you go back and read the INTENT and the MISSION as stated over the last 6 years, you will discover ( shocking indeed) that the ENTIRE plan has been to train the Iraqis to take over their own security. What a concept. The entire plan of the democrats has been to LEAVE now not when the job was done and in fact Obama had the SAME exact plan, to leave in 16 months NO MATTER the conditions on the ground.
> 
> This is nothing more than us actually achieving our goals. Goals that have always been the same from day one.
> 
> But you keep claiming other wise, makes you look as stupid as it sounds. Or such a partisan hack that you wouldn't know reality if it smacked you in the face.




Worst.  Spin.  Ever. 


60 days ago, you Repukes were saying that the insurgents would just wait us out, if we announced any kind of withdrawl target date.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Aug 24, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Worst.  Spin.  Ever.
> 
> 
> 60 days ago, you Repukes were saying that the insurgents would just wait us out, if we announced any kind of withdrawl target date.



The only retards here are those claiming we would never leave and that we never planned to turn control over to the Iraqis. I suggest you go back and read all the times we have said we would leave when the Iraqis were able to provide their own security. Claiming we did not intend that is the biggest lie of all. You losers have said for 6 years we lost and now faced with the fact your lies have come home to roost you are trying to claim we were never gonna turn security over to the Iraqi Government. I guess we spent 5 years training their police and army as a joke right? Arming them and pushing them to take over responsibility was a side show?

You partisan hacks can not stand the fact you have been shown for the lying fools you are.


----------



## dilloduck (Aug 24, 2008)

Denny Crane said:


> I'm sort of wondering the same thing. Good point.



The timetable from day one has been to stand down once the Iraqis could stand up. You were brazenly hoping that this would never be accomplished and being the politically motivated chumps you are, you started to demand ARTIFICIAL timetables instead of dealing with the reality of the conditions on the grounds. 
*Artificial* time tables are what is being criticized. Learn to distinguish bewteen the two.


----------



## Sunni Man (Aug 24, 2008)

It's Vietnam all over again. As soon as we withdraw,(cut and run), the Iraqie people will decide with weapons what direction they want for THEIR country. 

Good for them!!!


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Aug 24, 2008)

Sunni Man said:


> It's Vietnam all over again. As soon as we withdraw,(cut and run), the Iraqie people will decide with weapons what direction they want for THEIR country.
> 
> Good for them!!!



You may want to reread history. South Vietnam never fell to an internal rebellion. It was over run by 25 North Vietnamese Divisions.


----------



## Sunni Man (Aug 24, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> You may want to reread history. South Vietnam never fell to an internal rebellion. It was over run by 25 North Vietnamese Divisions.


I was a part of that history. 70-71

The NVA united the country when they toppled the American puppet government of the South. 

The North and South was an artificial division created by the Western colonial powers.

Now Vietnam is a single country and the people finally are able to chart and choose their own destany without foriegn interferance.


----------



## Denny Crane (Aug 24, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> The timetable from day one has been to stand down once the Iraqis could stand up. You were brazenly hoping that this would never be accomplished and being the politically motivated chumps you are, you started to demand ARTIFICIAL timetables instead of dealing with the reality of the conditions on the grounds.
> *Artificial* time tables are what is being criticized. Learn to distinguish bewteen the two.



Don't talk down to me, I don't think your qualified. You have no idea what I want to see take place because you don't know shit about me and you aren't going to tell me much I don't already know about Iraq. If I get brazen you'll be the first to know. I don't give out shit and I don't take it so find some other target for your smartass comments. 

If you want to discuss timetables fine but if you want to impress your audience practice on someone else because that shit bores the hell out of me.

For your information I had a son in Iraq not too long ago and I know EXACTLY what the conditions are on the ground.

How you managed to make the above quote into an insult on my knowledge about Iraq is beyond me.


----------



## editec (Aug 24, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Worst. Spin. Ever.
> 
> 
> 60 days ago, you Repukes were saying that the insurgents would just wait us out, if we announced any kind of withdrawl target date.


 

Word, _dat!_


----------



## TAM (Aug 24, 2008)

Cut and run will really encourage them, then.


----------



## sealybobo (Aug 24, 2008)

The Republican Plan For 2008 Begins Today        
Published on Tuesday, May 29, 2007

ThomHartmann.com - The Republican Plan For 2008 Begins Today

The political calculus being pursued by Karl Rove and the Republican Party with regard to Iraq and the 2008 elections is a simple four-step process: 

1. Shift ownership of the downside of the war and occupation of Iraq to the Democrats. 

2. Begin to wind down American involvement in the occupation of Iraq no later than mid-2008. 

3. Claim victory and get out of direct combat in Iraq by the early fall of 2008. 

4. Win big in the 2008 elections by having won a war.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Aug 24, 2008)

Sunni Man said:


> I was a part of that history. 70-71
> 
> The NVA united the country when they toppled the American puppet government of the South.
> 
> ...



Ya that would be why so many died leaving after the North one. In sinking boats and across the killing fields of Cambodia. Cause they were all happy that the "fake" Government was overthrown. That also would be why the out numbered, out gunned 11 Divisions of the South Vietnamese Army fought for over 30 days against that invading army.

That would be why in 72 when they lost some land to North Vietnam they were so busy trying to recapture it right up to the invasion of the North.

My Dad fought there too . He went twice, nearly dieing the second time. He remained in the army to retirement but eventually that old wound lead to his death. Cost him both his legs before he died.


----------



## dilloduck (Aug 24, 2008)

Denny Crane said:


> Don't talk down to me, I don't think your qualified. You have no idea what I want to see take place because you don't know shit about me and you aren't going to tell me much I don't already know about Iraq. If I get brazen you'll be the first to know. I don't give out shit and I don't take it so find some other target for your smartass comments.
> 
> If you want to discuss timetables fine but if you want to impress your audience practice on someone else because that shit bores the hell out of me.
> 
> ...



I would think that uindertanding the conditions on the ground would require a bit more information than the perception of one soldier. You wanna try discussing timetables again ?


----------



## stivex (Aug 24, 2008)

I can't believe some of the crap I am hearing. Who actually believes that we never planned to leave Iraq? Our plan all along was to set up a democracy in Iraq. After doing that was to make them self-sufficient, not a territory of the US. Once they are able to handle their own security, we will leave (although leaving some troops is always a possibility as we NEVER leave a place we go to, i.e. Germany, Japan, Korea, Bosnia, Kosovo, etc.). 

The problem with setting timetables has been to officially announce when we were leaving, so the terrorists could sit back and wait for that time and attack to topple the government. Well, once they are able to deal with such a problem (themselves), we can back off and let them handle it. This means they need their military, police forces, infrastructure, government, etc.to be able to handle adversity. T

he vast majority of combat missions in Iraq have been under Iraqi control for some time now. Their own forces are getting experienced and trained very quickly. Want more information on what is really going on? Go to centcom.mil and read the news. Sign up for the newsletter like me if you like. I am not going to babysit you.

Anyway, if we are able to pull our troops out, that is a good thing. Who doesn't want our troops out? The problem is leaving before the job is done. If the job can be done on a timetable, that is good. That wouldn't have been possible before the surge. The country was in chaos, and our presence was necessary. What is important is that Iraq remains stable after we leave. The current discussion is to have troops out in 2012. That means 4 more years. I can see that as a possibility. Obama's 16 months proposal, is just political silliness. 

The problem with the Dems' previous proposals and political stunts to defund the troops is it leaves Iraq to fail/fall. Then, they can blame Bush and Republicans and use that politically to win various seats, to include the presidency. Playing politics with the lives of our soldiers makes me ill. Some of us aren't so blind by unconceivable dreams of world peace to see the reality of things. Some of us who have spent time in the military (US Army, 1996 - 2005) have seen a few things in this world so vile that hippies would turn violent over.


----------



## sealybobo (Aug 24, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Ohh look, Col Mustard has returned and is at his usual moronic claims again. He insisted we would never be at a point where we could even consider leaving and demanded we abandon them , cut and run. Now he is whining cause we have reached a point where we can talk about no more US daily security.
> 
> Must suck to be on the shitty end of that stick Col Mustard. Seen Commander Dumb shit around, he too insisted we would never be at this point.



 The Republican Plan For 2008 Begins Today        
Published on Tuesday, May 29, 2007 by CommonDreams.org 

 The political calculus being pursued by Karl Rove and the Republican Party with regard to Iraq and the 2008 elections is a simple four-step process: 

1. Shift ownership of the downside of the war and occupation of Iraq to the Democrats. 

2. Begin to wind down American involvement in the occupation of Iraq no later than mid-2008. 

3. Claim victory and get out of direct combat in Iraq by the early fall of 2008. 

4. Win big in the 2008 elections by having won a war. 

Bush is using the Democrats plan as his own!!!

The Surge didn't work.  Paying the terrorists millions of dollars worked.  And promising to leave worked.  

Now Bush is trying to get Al Malaki to sign an agreement that would keep us there past January 2009.  

Ultimately either one of two things will happen.  We will either bankrupt ourselves trying to control Iraq, or we will give up and Sadr will rule Iraq and Iraq will become great friends and neighbors with Iran.

Even if we do stay, we can't stop the latter from happening.  What did we actually win?

How much has gas gone down since we won?  

How much do we pay each month for this level of victory?

Why does Iraq have $90 billion in surplus but we are going broke paying for reconstuction?  

How much has Blackwater & Haloburton & Exxon made in Iraq so far?

How is political reconciliation going?

Are we now going to have a problem with the Kurds and/or the Sunni's?  Eventually?  Do you even know schmuck?


----------



## AllieBaba (Aug 22, 2008)

You're just too much of an idiot to reason with.


----------



## AllieBaba (Aug 22, 2008)

There is something very funky going on with this site....


----------



## AllieBaba (Aug 22, 2008)

Ok, I don't know what's going on.

My post was in response to bobo's latest rant, and at first it didn't post at all, then it triple posted. So I deleted two of them, and now it's in the middle of the thread, on page one.....

And I still have a notice that I have 4 new reputation comments, which has been there all afternoon. 

I'm having trouble posting, getting weird messages, and when I don't, my post doesn't show up until later, when it's injected in the middle of earlier posts.

What the heck?


----------



## AllieBaba (Aug 22, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Ok, I don't know what's going on.
> 
> My post was in response to bobo's latest rant, and at first it didn't post at all, then it triple posted. So I deleted two of them, and now it's in the middle of the thread, on page one.....
> 
> ...



And crap, it happened again..why aren't these posts going on the end of the thread, instead of being plunked in the middle?


----------



## AllieBaba (Aug 22, 2008)

Really? Point out the lie, and explain who the silver spooners are. Then tell us how much you make a year, and the circumstances of your upbringing.


----------



## Red Dawn (Aug 22, 2008)

This thread is some of the worst conservative spin ever. 

It was mere weeks ago, that NeoCons and Bush voters we're telling us that we couldn't publically give a withdrawl target date.   

Because once that date became public knowlege, the insurgents would just lay low and wait us out.  Jesus, I spent years having NeoCons tell me that insurgent would just lay low, if we ever gave them a target date for withdrawawl.  Why did that talking point get abandoned, just in the last 30 days for some strange reason?

Were you Neocons lying before?  Or, did you just have to flip flop, to match the latest GOP talking points?


----------



## sealybobo (Aug 24, 2008)

Denny Crane said:


> Don't talk down to me, I don't think your qualified. You have no idea what I want to see take place because you don't know shit about me and you aren't going to tell me much I don't already know about Iraq. If I get brazen you'll be the first to know. I don't give out shit and I don't take it so find some other target for your smartass comments.
> 
> If you want to discuss timetables fine but if you want to impress your audience practice on someone else because that shit bores the hell out of me.
> 
> ...



You're son being in iraq doesn't mean you know the politics that are going on just like you only listening to the corporate media doesn't mean you do either.

You and your son only know what they want you to know.

The guys stationed in the green zone might have a different reality from the guy in the hotzone.  Or you might hear different stories from sunni's than you would if you talked to a shiite.

Listen to rachel maddow.  I think she just got a show on msnbc too.  she tells you what the mainstream doesn't.  the politics in iraq are amazing.  if you knew the facts, you'd know this is all about oil, and what we are doing is going to divide the country in 3, and that means the sunni's are going to get screwed out of oil revenues and that is going to create future terrorists!  All we are doing is raping that countries resources.  A small few iraqi's will help us do it and get rich, and the american and iraqi middle classes will pay the way.

its hard to not talk down to you when you don't know what you are talking about.  

I hope your son is safe.  I hope no future president sends another troop into harms way over money.  We were getting food for oil CHEAP before we invaded iraq.  But invading allowed bush and his buddies to rape the treasury.

gop proved gov. doesn't work by breaking it.


----------



## rayboyusmc (Aug 25, 2008)

> Who actually believes that we never planned to leave Iraq?



The people who started this war believed that.  Here we have the perfect opportunity to produce a pure supply side society.  Create a democracy was never part of the plan until it fit the spin later.

NeoCon don't have the Midas touch, they have the "turn it to turds" touch.


----------



## Article 15 (Aug 25, 2008)

Maliki sides with the terrorist ...

Iraqi leader insists on deadline for troop pullout - Yahoo! News


----------



## stivex (Aug 25, 2008)

rayboyusmc said:


> The people who started this war believed that.  Here we have the perfect opportunity to produce a pure supply side society.  Create a democracy was never part of the plan until it fit the spin later.
> 
> NeoCon don't have the Midas touch, they have the "turn it to turds" touch.



You seriously believe that? Do you think we intended on making Iraq a US territory? Are we a conquering empire now? Even you you are a partisan hack, you have to acknowledge that we want to leave Iraq. The difference is what condition do we want to leave Iraq in when we leave.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Aug 25, 2008)

stivex said:


> You seriously believe that? Do you think we intended on making Iraq a US territory? Are we a conquering empire now? Even you you are a partisan hack, you have to acknowledge that we want to leave Iraq. The difference is what condition do we want to leave Iraq in when we leave.



You will find Col Mustard is more interested in make democrats and liberals look good. The country, the troops, be damned, Bush can not get credit for anything and a lose in Iraq would have seen to that. Now that that is not going to happen they are in spin mode to twist what ever they can out.


----------



## Red Dawn (Aug 25, 2008)

stivex said:


> You seriously believe that? Do you think we intended on making Iraq a US territory? Are we a conquering empire now? snip




Anyone who is informed, and doesn't rely on Matt Drudge and Sean Hannity for news, knows exactly why we invaded iraq.  Its a historical, documented fact that we wanted to establish a pro-american, client state.  One that would privatize their oil resources, and be a pro-american free market economy. 

That's why the hapless BushCo thought they could put Ahmed Chalabi in charge of iraq.


----------



## Gunny (Aug 29, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Anyone who is informed, and doesn't rely on Matt Drudge and Sean Hannity for news, knows exactly why we invaded iraq.  Its a historical, documented fact that we wanted to establish a pro-american, client state.  One that would privatize their oil resources, and be a pro-american free market economy.
> 
> That's why the hapless BushCo thought they could put Ahmed Chalabi in charge of iraq.



Pure conjecture on your part.  Your "historical, documented facts" don't exist.  

Guess what the most under-reported story of the past 8 years is?  All of you loudmouthed leftwingnuts and your high drama completely drowning out the fact the withdrawal timetables have been started under the CURRENT administration.  

That rug was stolen completely out from under Obama's, Reid's and Pelosi's feet.

That won't stop y'all from claiming the whole thing if Obama is elected since the withdrawlas will be scheduled during the next Presidential term.

Intellectually dishonest to a fault, the lot of you.


----------

