Bush Was Wrong In 2007. 2012 Troop Pullout Won't Mean Aq Takes Over Iraq.

[NotfooledbyW]

By the way...your excuse for the 2011 Sofa is that the Iraqis didnt want us in their country. Did they want us there in 2003? The difference was W had balls...your boy has none.

If rather have a President with a brain. A brain is useful for a President. Your fascination with balls in a president is too freakin weird. Presidents don't actually put their balls on the front line. .. Bush was just as stupid as he was safely protected from getting his blôwn off in the mess he made of Iraq.

 

[deltex1]

By the way...your excuse for the 2011 Sofa is that the Iraqis didnt want us in their country. Did they want us there in 2003? The difference was W had balls...your boy has none.

If rather have a President with a brain. A brain is useful for a President. Your fascination with balls in a president is too freakin weird. Presidents don't actually put their balls on the front line. .. Bush was just as stupid as he was safely protected from getting his blôwn off in the mess he made of Iraq.

It's not a question of balls, Foo...good dodge though. Its a question of excuses for inaction. If we didn't need Saddams permission to kill him in 2003, why did we need Maliki's permission to stay in 2011? We do what is in our national interest. Your boy wanted no part...he made a political promise...and that is what he does...all politics all the time.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

9846762.

Its a question of excuses for inaction. If we didn't need Saddams permission to kill him in 2003, why did we need Maliki's permission to stay in 2011?

Bush acknowledged that our troops needed Maliki's permission to stay when the unwise big balled invader agreed to negotiate and cut the deal that US troops had to be out of Iraq's cities by June 2009.

If Bush had the kind of brass balls you are yearning for, Bush would have told Maliki and the UN to go to hell and he would have began Shock and Awe all over again.

So American troops start getting killed again so Hoo can sit on his SOFA at home glowing with wet emotions over how big Bush's brass balls really were.

Hoo, your Bush wimped out. Do you know why Bush wimped out in 2008 to the will of Maliki and the UNSC and most of the civilized world?

Because after four years of mismanaged and unjustified war it was NOT in the US national interest to start a new war against the legitimate government in Iraq that 4584 Americans gave their lives to help set up.

Bush gave Iraq their sovereignty and unless that new government in some way threatened our national security in 2011 there was no justification to on any way use military force to impose US will on a sovereign nation.


You have lost whatever marbles you may have had.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

• 9846762.

  If we didn't need Saddams permission to kill him in 2003, why did we need Maliki's permission to stay in 2011?

al Qaeada did not need permission to kill innocent Americans working behind their desks at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 while on Bush and Cheney's watch, did they?

Bush killed more innocent Iraqis than that in his 'desire' to change the Regime in Iraq. So Bush tops al Qaeda in that regard. You seem proud of it.


Think about what you have asked in a proper context.

 

[deltex1]

9846762.

Its a question of excuses for inaction. If we didn't need Saddams permission to kill him in 2003, why did we need Maliki's permission to stay in 2011?

Bush acknowledged that our troops needed Maliki's permission to stay when the unwise big balled invader agreed to negotiate and cut the deal that US troops had to be out of Iraq's cities by June 2009.

If Bush had the kind of brass balls you are yearning for, Bush would have told Maliki and the UN to go to hell and he would have began Shock and Awe all over again.

So American troops start getting killed again so Hoo can sit on his SOFA at home glowing with wet emotions over how big Bush's brass balls really were.

Hoo, your Bush wimped out. Do you know why Bush wimped out in 2008 to the will of Maliki and the UNSC and most of the civilized world?

Because after four years of mismanaged and unjustified war it was NOT in the US national interest to start a new war against the legitimate government in Iraq that 4584 Americans gave their lives to help set up.

Bush gave Iraq their sovereignty and unless that new government in some way threatened our national security in 2011 there was no justification to on any way use military force to impose US will on a sovereign nation.


You have lost whatever marbles you may have had.

Surely you jest. We needed to restart a war we already won? You love to describe a situation that favors your presupposed conclusions. We kicked iraqi ass and now they tell us what to do? Forget bush, foo...deal with the deck Obabble had...and pissed down his leg. He orchestrated the over throw of Mubarak and Gaddafi but couldn't handle Maliki? I ain't buying your play Foo. It's not believable.

 

[EconChick]

By the way...your excuse for the 2011 Sofa is that the Iraqis didnt want us in their country. Did they want us there in 2003? The difference was W had balls...your boy has none.

If rather have a President with a brain. A brain is useful for a President. Your fascination with balls in a president is too freakin weird. Presidents don't actually put their balls on the front line. .. Bush was just as stupid as he was safely protected from getting his blôwn off in the mess he made of Iraq.

It's not a question of balls, Foo...good dodge though. Its a question of excuses for inaction. If we didn't need Saddams permission to kill him in 2003, why did we need Maliki's permission to stay in 2011? We do what is in our national interest. Your boy wanted no part...he made a political promise...and that is what he does...all politics all the time.

Deltex my good friend, you were right the first time. It takes brains ANDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD balls. Or for academics it's called inner strength or inner core. Or backbone.

The reason that matters is because the enemy assesses that before they assess anything else. If the leader doesn't have resolve, the rest doesn't matter.

This is where limp ass liberals miscalculate. They probably don't read much history. Neville Chamberlain is their role model and the entire world knows where THAT led us.

The Kumbaya crowd is crashing and burning. As it always has.

 

[deltex1]

• 9846762.

  If we didn't need Saddams permission to kill him in 2003, why did we need Maliki's permission to stay in 2011?

al Qaeada did not need permission to kill innocent Americans working behind their desks at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 while on Bush and Cheney's watch, did they?

Bush killed more innocent Iraqis than that in his 'desire' to change the Regime in Iraq. So Bush tops al Qaeda in that regard. You seem proud of it.


Think about what you have asked in a proper context.

Earth to Foo...negative contact......earth out.

 

[Siete]

• 9846762.

  If we didn't need Saddams permission to kill him in 2003, why did we need Maliki's permission to stay in 2011?

al Qaeada did not need permission to kill innocent Americans working behind their desks at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 while on Bush and Cheney's watch, did they?

Bush killed more innocent Iraqis than that in his 'desire' to change the Regime in Iraq. So Bush tops al Qaeda in that regard. You seem proud of it.


Think about what you have asked in a proper context.

think about it ? .. you're asking too much

 

[BlindBoo]

By the way...your excuse for the 2011 Sofa is that the Iraqis didnt want us in their country. Did they want us there in 2003? The difference was W had balls...your boy has none.

If rather have a President with a brain. A brain is useful for a President. Your fascination with balls in a president is too freakin weird. Presidents don't actually put their balls on the front line. .. Bush was just as stupid as he was safely protected from getting his blôwn off in the mess he made of Iraq.

It's not a question of balls, Foo...good dodge though. Its a question of excuses for inaction. If we didn't need Saddams permission to kill him in 2003, why did we need Maliki's permission to stay in 2011? We do what is in our national interest. Your boy wanted no part...he made a political promise...and that is what he does...all politics all the time.

In 2007, the Iraqi Parliament insisted the U.N. resolution that recognized the U.S. as the occupying authority for 2008 should not be renewed. The Security Council ignored Iraq's Parliament in 2007, but made it clear 2008 would be the last renewal.

 

[kaz]

9836004

So all that time that the liberals were constantly pointing out that Obama was so damn wonderful because he ended the war in Iraq they were talking out of their collective asses.

No one said Obama 'ended the war in Iraq

Bull, all the liberals said that. I was always pointing out to you all that it was W's timeline and asking how he ended it. Now that it's politically expediency, all of a sudden it was W's timeline again. Every time you flip flop, you wipe all long term memory.

What would anyone expect from a guy anyway who named himself after a President who left office 5 1/2 years before he created his account?

 

[deltex1]

9836004

So all that time that the liberals were constantly pointing out that Obama was so damn wonderful because he ended the war in Iraq they were talking out of their collective asses.

No one said Obama 'ended the war in Iraq

Bull, all the liberals said that. I was always pointing out to you all that it was W's timeline and asking how he ended it. Now that it's politically expediency, all of a sudden it was W's timeline again. Every time you flip flop, you wipe all long term memory.

What would anyone expect from a guy anyway who named himself after a President who left office 5 1/2 years before he created his account?

To be fair to Foo...he has carried that name for at least 10 years....that's how long I have been telling him he is a partisan hack. He will not change. Most stubborn blockhead I have encountered. I suppose that's why Siete wants to blow him.

 

[kaz]

9836004

So all that time that the liberals were constantly pointing out that Obama was so damn wonderful because he ended the war in Iraq they were talking out of their collective asses.

No one said Obama 'ended the war in Iraq

Bull, all the liberals said that. I was always pointing out to you all that it was W's timeline and asking how he ended it. Now that it's politically expediency, all of a sudden it was W's timeline again. Every time you flip flop, you wipe all long term memory.

What would anyone expect from a guy anyway who named himself after a President who left office 5 1/2 years before he created his account?

To be fair to Foo...he has carried that name for at least 10 years....that's how long I have been telling him he is a partisan hack. He will not change. Most stubborn blockhead I have encountered. I suppose that's why Siete wants to blow him.

OK, his join date says July, 2014, I assume you mean you know him from other boards?

 

[deltex1]

9836004

So all that time that the liberals were constantly pointing out that Obama was so damn wonderful because he ended the war in Iraq they were talking out of their collective asses.

No one said Obama 'ended the war in Iraq

Bull, all the liberals said that. I was always pointing out to you all that it was W's timeline and asking how he ended it. Now that it's politically expediency, all of a sudden it was W's timeline again. Every time you flip flop, you wipe all long term memory.

What would anyone expect from a guy anyway who named himself after a President who left office 5 1/2 years before he created his account?

To be fair to Foo...he has carried that name for at least 10 years....that's how long I have been telling him he is a partisan hack. He will not change. Most stubborn blockhead I have encountered. I suppose that's why Siete wants to blow him.

OK, his join date says July, 2014, I assume you mean you know him from other boards?

Yes...two or three others that I was thrown off for being too mean to LIBTARDS.

 

[Siete]

9836004

So all that time that the liberals were constantly pointing out that Obama was so damn wonderful because he ended the war in Iraq they were talking out of their collective asses.

No one said Obama 'ended the war in Iraq

Bull, all the liberals said that. I was always pointing out to you all that it was W's timeline and asking how he ended it. Now that it's politically expediency, all of a sudden it was W's timeline again. Every time you flip flop, you wipe all long term memory.

What would anyone expect from a guy anyway who named himself after a President who left office 5 1/2 years before he created his account?

To be fair to Foo...he has carried that name for at least 10 years....that's how long I have been telling him he is a partisan hack. He will not change. Most stubborn blockhead I have encountered. I suppose that's why Siete wants to blow him.

OK, his join date says July, 2014, I assume you mean you know him from other boards?

Yes...two or three others that I was thrown off for being too mean to LIBTARDS.

you were probably tossed for being an idiot.

try growing up and see how that works out ..

 

[deltex1]

9836004 No one said Obama 'ended the war in Iraq

Bull, all the liberals said that. I was always pointing out to you all that it was W's timeline and asking how he ended it. Now that it's politically expediency, all of a sudden it was W's timeline again. Every time you flip flop, you wipe all long term memory.

What would anyone expect from a guy anyway who named himself after a President who left office 5 1/2 years before he created his account?

To be fair to Foo...he has carried that name for at least 10 years....that's how long I have been telling him he is a partisan hack. He will not change. Most stubborn blockhead I have encountered. I suppose that's why Siete wants to blow him.

OK, his join date says July, 2014, I assume you mean you know him from other boards?

Yes...two or three others that I was thrown off for being too mean to LIBTARDS.

you were probably tossed for being an idiot.

try growing up and see how that works out ..

The only reason you're here is the USMB minority quota.

 

[Siete]

Bull, all the liberals said that. I was always pointing out to you all that it was W's timeline and asking how he ended it. Now that it's politically expediency, all of a sudden it was W's timeline again. Every time you flip flop, you wipe all long term memory.

What would anyone expect from a guy anyway who named himself after a President who left office 5 1/2 years before he created his account?

To be fair to Foo...he has carried that name for at least 10 years....that's how long I have been telling him he is a partisan hack. He will not change. Most stubborn blockhead I have encountered. I suppose that's why Siete wants to blow him.

OK, his join date says July, 2014, I assume you mean you know him from other boards?

Yes...two or three others that I was thrown off for being too mean to LIBTARDS.

you were probably tossed for being an idiot.

try growing up and see how that works out ..

The only reason you're here is the USMB minority quota.

Caucasian, born in America. I'm not a minority yet, but you're still an idiot.

 

[deltex1]

To be fair to Foo...he has carried that name for at least 10 years....that's how long I have been telling him he is a partisan hack. He will not change. Most stubborn blockhead I have encountered. I suppose that's why Siete wants to blow him.

OK, his join date says July, 2014, I assume you mean you know him from other boards?

Yes...two or three others that I was thrown off for being too mean to LIBTARDS.

you were probably tossed for being an idiot.

try growing up and see how that works out ..

The only reason you're here is the USMB minority quota.

Caucasian, born in America. I'm not a minority yet, but you're still an idiot.

Retards are a protected group...certainly a minority of sorts...though not in the Libtard world.

 

[JimH52]

What price will be paid for you to be able to say bush was wrong? We have to fight another war to win back what we won in 2008...and your warped mind says that's a good Deal? You have fallen off the cliff Foo.

So you were willing to keep US troop in Iraq even if they would be libel for criminal acts and war crimes? It is al-Maliki who should be pushed over a cliff. He was the Thug that harassed the Sunni's into accepting ISIS. It was the idiot who basically threw us out of Iraq.

Obama wanted to leave contingency in Iraq and al-Maliki would not grant them immunity against prosecution. Use you mind....

 

[Siete]

OK, his join date says July, 2014, I assume you mean you know him from other boards?

Yes...two or three others that I was thrown off for being too mean to LIBTARDS.

you were probably tossed for being an idiot.

try growing up and see how that works out ..

The only reason you're here is the USMB minority quota.

Caucasian, born in America. I'm not a minority yet, but you're still an idiot.

Retards are a protected group...certainly a minority of sorts...though not in the Libtard world.

go to Riverwalk and take a bath before it gets too cold. Maybe you'll, wash off some stupid and say something intelligent after you dry off.

 

[deltex1]

What price will be paid for you to be able to say bush was wrong? We have to fight another war to win back what we won in 2008...and your warped mind says that's a good Deal? You have fallen off the cliff Foo.

So you were willing to keep US troop in Iraq even if they would be libel for criminal acts and war crimes? It is al-Maliki who should be pushed over a cliff. He was the Thug that harassed the Sunni's into accepting ISIS. It was the idiot who basically threw us out of Iraq.

Obama wanted to leave contingency in Iraq and al-Maliki would not grant them immunity against prosecution. Use you mind....

Obabble should have given Maliki an offer he could not refuse...but that is not in the community organizers makeup.