Guess How Many Troops Obama Just Authorized 2B Deployed to Iraq?? Sound Familiar, LOL?

[Moonglow]

Let's start with Afghanistan where Bush abandoned the war on terror to engage in his blunder of an invasion of Iraq

Then let's move on to Iraq where Bush overstated the threat, underestimated the difficulty of the occupation and never contemplated that we would need to be there for decades to shore up his weak political coalition

You forgot to move on to the here and now....how conveeeeeeeenient.

What is convenient is how republicans forget the role they played in pushing us into war and what a blunder that decision was

Your Dear Leader didn't end any wars. He only started new ones. I know that's incredibly difficult for you Obamabots to face, but it is reality.

Which wars did we and Obama start?

Obama has involved us in several military conflicts. He hasn't ended any.

Is that a surprise?

 

[paulitician]

We were never leaving Iraq. Obamabots got duped again. Yet they stay silent. They don't have much credibility left.

 

[paulitician]

You forgot to move on to the here and now....how conveeeeeeeenient.

What is convenient is how republicans forget the role they played in pushing us into war and what a blunder that decision was

Your Dear Leader didn't end any wars. He only started new ones. I know that's incredibly difficult for you Obamabots to face, but it is reality.

Which wars did we and Obama start?

Obama has involved us in several military conflicts. He hasn't ended any.

Is that a surprise?

Not to me.

 

[TooTall]

OK, Iraq = Liberated, and a dictator that was a huge menace to the middle east society at large is now gone. His son's who were also a terror are GONE. His idiot cabinet who would follow him straight into Hell like Hitlers followers did him are GONE.

OK, Libya = a dangerous place that got our ambassador there killed, along with others who couldn't get the help needed by this administration that had left these men behind.

OK, Syria = currently at war, hundreds of thousands dead, and no end in sight.

OK, Egypt = Tried it Obumblers way, but then had to arrest the Muslim brotherhood President and his ilk, even as Obumbler and is gang protested this action in which it had taken against the bru-tha hood.

OK, Ukraine = A notable demonstration that Obumbler has no influence on Russia, and on the stopping of Russia's actions in that country whether it be through negotiations or diplomatic efforts. His cozening up to Putin on the supposedly closed microphone makes him a laughing stock now and/or untrustworthy to us here in this nation all because of.

What part of 5000 Americans killed for no reason can't you comprehend?

There were ample reasons for invading Iraq. If you don't believe me, ask John Kerry and Hillary Clinton as well as a large number of other leading Democrats who voted for the authorization to do so. Their 'I was for it before I was against it' BS is not playing well with most people. Their positions and statements have been posted on USMB dozens of times and I won't waste time doing it again.

Why don't you ask Barack Obama?

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income — to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear — I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences

Barack Obama Oct 2 2002

I am guessing that when he said this he was merely going to HOPE FOR CHANGE. LOL

"Now let me be clear — I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him."

Why did you conveniently leave off the rest of his quote?
Deceptive on your part don't you think

Not in the least. Obama clearly states the reasons for invading Iraq but his solution is to ignore it and HOPE it goes away. All he had was what he has been doing ever since he became President and that is playing the blame game. For example:

"What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne."

And:
"What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income — to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression."

 

[JakeStarkey]

Pauli is not making any important point.

Either he wants ISIS ISIL defeated or not.

His hatred of the President and the American system, like bripat, clouds his vision.

 

[Moonglow]

How do you expect the terrorist to just give up the holy war?

 

[paulitician]

Pauli is not making any important point.

Either he wants ISIS ISIL defeated or not.

His hatred of the President and the American system, like bripat, clouds his vision.

Yeah but you're a wingnut who's still pretending to be a Republican, So, you just don't have credibility. No one can take you seriously.

 

[TooTall]

OK, Iraq = Liberated, and a dictator that was a huge menace to the middle east society at large is now gone. His son's who were also a terror are GONE. His idiot cabinet who would follow him straight into Hell like Hitlers followers did him are GONE.

OK, Libya = a dangerous place that got our ambassador there killed, along with others who couldn't get the help needed by this administration that had left these men behind.

OK, Syria = currently at war, hundreds of thousands dead, and no end in sight.

OK, Egypt = Tried it Obumblers way, but then had to arrest the Muslim brotherhood President and his ilk, even as Obumbler and is gang protested this action in which it had taken against the bru-tha hood.

OK, Ukraine = A notable demonstration that Obumbler has no influence on Russia, and on the stopping of Russia's actions in that country whether it be through negotiations or diplomatic efforts. His cozening up to Putin on the supposedly closed microphone makes him a laughing stock now and/or untrustworthy to us here in this nation all because of.

What part of 5000 Americans killed for no reason can't you comprehend?

There were ample reasons for invading Iraq. If you don't believe me, ask John Kerry and Hillary Clinton as well as a large number of other leading Democrats who voted for the authorization to do so. Their 'I was for it before I was against it' BS is not playing well with most people. Their positions and statements have been posted on USMB dozens of times and I won't waste time doing it again.

You can post your nonsense as often as you want. People based their support for the war in Iraq on misinformation at best and outright lies at worst. But that's only the first part. No one expected us to become an occupying force that would fight an insurgency war for a decade. We got suckered into that. No one expected Bush and company to be such horrible war leaders and tacticians. They turned victory into defeat and it had nothing to do with the war on the people who attacked us on 9/11. Instead of defeating al Qaeda they made them stronger.

You have a very selective perspective and sloppy logic. What victory did bush turn into defeat? That was your hero's doing.

The war against al Qaeda in Afghanistan was lost when we failed to follow them into Pakistan and instead decided to nation build.
Iraq was lost when after defeating the Iraqi military and capturing Saddam we failed to obtain a surrender with conditions and instead decided to nation build.

The war was lost when Obama ignored his military advisers and did not leave a residual force in Iraq to train and advise the Iraqi Army. His excuse was he was unable to get a SOFA from Iraq to protect US forces from being arrested and prosecuted for off duty crimes against Afghans. That doesn't seem to be a factor now that he has sent 3100 US troops back into Afghanistan.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Pauli is not making any important point.

Either he wants ISIS ISIL defeated or not.

His hatred of the President and the American system, like bripat, clouds his vision.

Yeah but you're a wingnut who's still pretending to be a Republican, So, you just don't have credibility. No one can take you seriously.

You are a wing nut who hates that I am, indeed, a republican, while you are just wing nut who does not influence anyone on the Board.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"That doesn't seem to be a factor now that he has sent 3100 US troops back into Afghanistan." Because the new Iraq govt gave in and won't prosecute our troops in Iraqi courts.

 

[Camp]

Let's start with Afghanistan where Bush abandoned the war on terror to engage in his blunder of an invasion of Iraq

Then let's move on to Iraq where Bush overstated the threat, underestimated the difficulty of the occupation and never contemplated that we would need to be there for decades to shore up his weak political coalition

You forgot to move on to the here and now....how conveeeeeeeenient.

What is convenient is how republicans forget the role they played in pushing us into war and what a blunder that decision was

Your Dear Leader didn't end any wars. He only started new ones. I know that's incredibly difficult for you Obamabots to face, but it is reality.

Which wars did we and Obama start?

Obama has involved us in several military conflicts. He hasn't ended any.

Wait, getting involved in an alliance with other counties to accomplish a distinct well defined mission is not anything like
"starting a war". Which war did we commit ourselves to "ending"?

 

[kiwiman127]

Leaving US Troops in non-combat roles to support the ISF, just like Bush planned.

That Obama is a genius!

I didn't know Bush and Obama were military strategists! I always thought that presidents left strategy to military generals.
Thanks Frank for enlightening me.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We are involved in war activities because the neo-cons destabilized the ME in the first place. The US needs to bring its troops home and continue to work on energy independence.

 

[rightwinger]

You can post your nonsense as often as you want. People based their support for the war in Iraq on misinformation at best and outright lies at worst. But that's only the first part. No one expected us to become an occupying force that would fight an insurgency war for a decade. We got suckered into that. No one expected Bush and company to be such horrible war leaders and tacticians. They turned victory into defeat and it had nothing to do with the war on the people who attacked us on 9/11. Instead of defeating al Qaeda they made them stronger.

You have a very selective perspective and sloppy logic. What victory did bush turn into defeat? That was your hero's doing.

Let's start with Afghanistan where Bush abandoned the war on terror to engage in his blunder of an invasion of Iraq

Then let's move on to Iraq where Bush overstated the threat, underestimated the difficulty of the occupation and never contemplated that we would need to be there for decades to shore up his weak political coalition

You forgot to move on to the here and now....how conveeeeeeeenient.

What is convenient is how republicans forget the role they played in pushing us into war and what a blunder that decision was

Your Dear Leader didn't end any wars. He only started new ones. I know that's incredibly difficult for you Obamabots to face, but it is reality.

Which wars did he start and which ones did he ignore the whining of the war Hawks and keep us the hell out?

 

[deltex1]

We are involved in war activities because the neo-cons destabilized the ME in the first place. The US needs to bring its troops home and continue to work on energy independence.

We can do the same with the 4000 troops in west Africa ..bring them home and work on ebola immunity. Fuck the world ehhhh jake?

 

[rightwinger]

What part of 5000 Americans killed for no reason can't you comprehend?

There were ample reasons for invading Iraq. If you don't believe me, ask John Kerry and Hillary Clinton as well as a large number of other leading Democrats who voted for the authorization to do so. Their 'I was for it before I was against it' BS is not playing well with most people. Their positions and statements have been posted on USMB dozens of times and I won't waste time doing it again.

Why don't you ask Barack Obama?

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income — to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear — I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences

Barack Obama Oct 2 2002

I am guessing that when he said this he was merely going to HOPE FOR CHANGE. LOL

"Now let me be clear — I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him."

Why did you conveniently leave off the rest of his quote?
Deceptive on your part don't you think

Not in the least. Obama clearly states the reasons for invading Iraq but his solution is to ignore it and HOPE it goes away. All he had was what he has been doing ever since he became President and that is playing the blame game. For example:

"What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne."

And:
"What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income — to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression."

It is obvious that in 2002 even a "community organizer" like Obama had a better understanding of the ground situation in Iraq than Bush and his war hawk advisors

 

[rightwinger]

We are involved in war activities because the neo-cons destabilized the ME in the first place. The US needs to bring its troops home and continue to work on energy independence.

We can do the same with the 4000 troops in west Africa ..bring them home and work on ebola immunity. Fuck the world ehhhh jake?

Shows the difference in using troops for humanitarian purposes rather than nation building doesn't it?

 

[JakeStarkey]

We are involved in war activities because the neo-cons destabilized the ME in the first place. The US needs to bring its troops home and continue to work on energy independence.

We can do the same with the 4000 troops in west Africa ..bring them home and work on ebola immunity. Fuck the world ehhhh jake?

You might want to, I don't. I do wish we send the neo-cons to the Hague for a just trial for war crimes.

If we can reel ISIS ISIL back with 4000 troops, yeah, that would be good until the 25 Iraqi brigades that are still functional are trained and up to speed.

However, we neo-cons on this Board posting that they want huge numbers of American troops in Iraq again.

I do say no to that.

 

[hipeter924]

-> Libya: Now a mess with two governments, and Islamists causing trouble.
-> Syria: Held by Assad and by Islamists worse than him i.e. IS and Free Syria Army.
-> Iraq: After supporting an ineffective Shiite administration and knocking off Saddam - Islamists now control a large part of Iraq.
-> Ukraine: Much like Georgia, Ukraine is trying to hold on to more than it can chew. The blame game with Moscow, and the sanctions, are hurting American investments in Russia and not accomplishing peace.
-> Nation X: To be continued...

Or we could get ourselves out of the mess that is the Middle East, end the sanctions with Russia, and be glad we got out before things got worse.

 

[paulitician]

You have a very selective perspective and sloppy logic. What victory did bush turn into defeat? That was your hero's doing.

Let's start with Afghanistan where Bush abandoned the war on terror to engage in his blunder of an invasion of Iraq

Then let's move on to Iraq where Bush overstated the threat, underestimated the difficulty of the occupation and never contemplated that we would need to be there for decades to shore up his weak political coalition

You forgot to move on to the here and now....how conveeeeeeeenient.

What is convenient is how republicans forget the role they played in pushing us into war and what a blunder that decision was

Your Dear Leader didn't end any wars. He only started new ones. I know that's incredibly difficult for you Obamabots to face, but it is reality.

Which wars did he start and which ones did he ignore the whining of the war Hawks and keep us the hell out?

Look, your Dear Leader has gotten us involved with several military conflicts. He hasn't ended any. That's just the way it is. But hey, you're free to live in denial all you want. I understand you have your Obamabot programming. It is what it is.