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

[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....

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

Learn to read and comprehend...

 

[Jarhead]

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....

Maybe you should use your mind.
The leader of the free world most certainly has the strength and the backing to negotiate a deal that would have made sense.

Instead, he opted to leave. And blame the "deal" on his predecessor.

And he was well aware that folks like you would blindly say the same dam thing.

How pathetic.

 

[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.

Learn to read and comprehend...

I don't understand WIMP...GFY.

 

[JimH52]

All the while the recovering alcoholic sits on his front porch with his pointy cowboy boots and tells war stories to the cows....

 

[BlindBoo]

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.

Really, in 2009? After President Bush had sealed his victory in the Iraqi war with the SOFA he signed in 2008, announced at that great shoe throwing festival (I hear it's become a yearly event). That would have been political suicide for President Obama. He'd never get Republican support after a stunt like that!

But in reality, the President had experienced negotiators that worked with Iraq until late in 2011 trying to keep a residual force in the country. Maliki couldn't accept an agreement without their Parliament voting on it. That's why it never went anywhere and the religious factions in Iraqis got what they wanted.

 

[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.

Really, in 2009? After President Bush had sealed his victory in the Iraqi war with the SOFA he signed in 2008, announced at that great shoe throwing festival (I hear it's become a yearly event). That would have been political suicide for President Obama. He'd never get Republican support after a stunt like that!

But in reality, the President had experienced negotiators that worked with Iraq until late in 2011 trying to keep a residual force in the country. Maliki couldn't accept an agreement without their Parliament voting on it. That's why it never went anywhere and the religious factions in Iraqis got what they wanted.

That's one of the many iterations of what really happened. Put Putin in the equation and speculate on what the outcome would have been. The one who wins the war gets his way...unless he has no clue.

 

[deltex1]

All the while the recovering alcoholic sits on his front porch with his pointy cowboy boots and tells war stories to the cows....

I have no interest in recovering. On the sofa watching the five...Jack and coke to put up with morons.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

9849569.

Obabble should have given Maliki an offer he could not refuse...

Like, what? It was not up to Maliki anyway. It was up to the members of Iraq's Parliament. What could Obama offer Muqtada al Sadr.

Did you back down on overthrowing Iraq's government by killing its leader as your most recent demand of Obama?

 

[deltex1]

The fucking moron made a speech today saying climate change is the biggest threat in this century. This is the fag who lost to the moron Maliki.

 

[deltex1]

9849569.

Obabble should have given Maliki an offer he could not refuse...

Like, what? It was not up to Maliki anyway. It was up to the members of Iraq's Parliament. What could Obama offer Muqtada al Sadr.

Did you back down on overthrowing Iraq's government by killing its leader as your most recent demand of Obama?

The same offer could have been made to all. Sign the agreement or die. This isn't checkers Foo...this is hardball. Do the ragheads understand anything else?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

9849869

The same offer could have been made to all. Sign the agreement or die.

You have not explained why Bush did not use that threat to kill Maliki in 2007 to stop him from writing that letter to the UNSC demanding that the MNF be terminated by the end of 2008.

Bush would have only needed to kill Maliki back then. Why did Bush allow it to become a matter where Obama three years later has to kill all the members of Parliament so he can keep ten thousand troops in Iraq - just in case and to do what? Be Greeted as Liberators Again? Look for WMD's?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

9849591.

Instead, he opted to leave. And blame the "deal" on his predecessor.

Where did Obama blame the 2008 Bush/Maliki deal? I'm here. I, just like our current President, applaud the Bush/Maliki end-the-dumb-war deal.

its the wing nut attempts to scrub the shrub out of the deal that I object to.

That is wrong to deprive Lil Dubya of credit for the only thing he did right on his dumb war. He set the timetable to end it.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

9848725.

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.

Would you say that al Qaeda was an enemy with a serious intent to harm Americans in January 2000?

 

[Politico]

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' .. Obama oversaw the end of the US combat role in Iraq. There is a difference. The war never ended as the amount of violence went down from the peak in 2006 but it never 'ended'. That's the problem. Saying the sectarian strife was ended in 2008 was a lie. The US 'won' nothing but the chance to leave what it should have never entered in the first place. What Obama called it before Bush did it.... a dumb war.

Yes someone did. Obama.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Isn't it interesting that it is EconChick and good friend her Deltex1 that are getting educated on the facts about Iraq. Here is just one example:


023.b.01 9820830

Oh, and btw, Saddam didn't strike our homeland but he did fire on our aircraft. Remember the no-fly zone? You folks tend to forget there were 23 different writs Congress sited for going to war with Iraq. Only 1 was WMD.

023.b.01 9829877

Iraq did not fire on our aircraft after UN Resolution 1441 was passed. If Invading Iraq prior to UN Resolution 1441 was not necessary, how do you explain that it became necessary to invade Iraq when Iraq ceased returning fire after 1441?
You seem to forget that the US and UK bombed the hell out of Iraq during the summer of 2002.
Your writs argument is more foolishness from you. The invasion was about Iraq's supposed violation of UN Res 1441 for hiding 'the most lethal weapons ever devised' from the Res 1441 inspection regime.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

9852225

Yes someone did. Obama.

Where? Cite it?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

9851921

9848725.

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.

Would you say that al Qaeda was an enemy with a serious intent to harm Americans in January 2000?

That enemy assessed Bush 43 and attacked the Pentagon.

 

[Politico]

9852225

Yes someone did. Obama.

Where? Cite it?

9852225

Yes someone did. Obama.

Where? Cite it?

Are you serious? I know pot is legal now but put down your pipe ans step out of your grandmas' basement. There is actual air at sea level.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama's need to declare victory and spike the football cost us all our gains in Iraq. He couldn't have fucked it up worse for the USA if he and Val Jarrett were running AQ and ISIS ISIL

 

[TooTall]

9835736

Like I said this morning Obabble was the weak dick on our end of the sofa...no way to get around that, Foo.

Bush was weak in 2007 when Maliki set up the need for a SOFA after 2008. Did you know that Maliki forced the need for a SOFA at the end of 2008 when Bush was in office? Why did Bush allow Maliki to push him around like that? Why was Bush so weak in the first place? Why did Bush allow the Iraqis tell him where US troops could go and where they couldn't go in Iraq in 2009?

Bush was weak because all of the limp dick Democrats that voted to invade Iraq were undermining him every chance they got. Bush didn't allow the Iraqi's to tell him anything in 2009. Obama was President and he said this after he prematurely pulled all of the troops out of Iraq:

“It’s harder to end a war than begin one,” Obama said at Fort Bragg. “Indeed, everything that American troops have done in Iraq--all the fighting and all the dying, the bleeding and the building, and the training and the partnering--all of it has led to this moment of success. Now, Iraq is not a perfect place. It has many challenges ahead. But we’re leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people. We’re building a new partnership between our nations. And we are ending a war not with a final battle, but with a final march toward home. This is an extraordinary achievement, nearly nine years in the making.”