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

[Camp]

Permanent War is the Globalist Elite agenda. It's all about plundering resources. For example, why are we still in Afghanistan? Terrorism? Drugs? Nope. It's about a pipeline.

So after their ISIS Boogeyman fades into oblivion, they'll just invent a new Boogeyman. The People need to stand up and demand an end to Permanent War. They have to stop sending their children to die so Globalist Elite assholes can get richer. The vicious circle of death & carnage has to be broken.

You think evil bad people (Boogeymen) have to be invented? If left alone, the world will not create evil men who wish to plunder the weak. When in the history of man has their been a time when evil men intent on murder, rape a pillage not been present?

 

[paulitician]

Permanent War is the Globalist Elite agenda. It's all about plundering resources. For example, why are we still in Afghanistan? Terrorism? Drugs? Nope. It's about a pipeline.

So after their ISIS Boogeyman fades into oblivion, they'll just invent a new Boogeyman. The People need to stand up and demand an end to Permanent War. They have to stop sending their children to die so Globalist Elite assholes can get richer. The vicious circle of death & carnage has to be broken.

You think evil bad people (Boogeymen) have to be invented? If left alone, the world will not create evil men who wish to plunder the weak. When in the history of man has their been a time when evil men intent on murder, rape a pillage not been present?

'Wag the Dog.' The Globalist Elites have perfected it. Entertainment spectaculars. Most Sheeple in the world believe everything they see on TV or the Internet. And guess who controls Mass Media? Governments and a handful of large Corporations.

Inventing a Boogeyman like ISIS involves very little effort for them. Just film something, and then show it on TV and the Internet. The Sheeple will likely go along with just about anything. It's why they continue to support Permanent War.

 

[Camp]

Permanent War is the Globalist Elite agenda. It's all about plundering resources. For example, why are we still in Afghanistan? Terrorism? Drugs? Nope. It's about a pipeline.

So after their ISIS Boogeyman fades into oblivion, they'll just invent a new Boogeyman. The People need to stand up and demand an end to Permanent War. They have to stop sending their children to die so Globalist Elite assholes can get richer. The vicious circle of death & carnage has to be broken.

You think evil bad people (Boogeymen) have to be invented? If left alone, the world will not create evil men who wish to plunder the weak. When in the history of man has their been a time when evil men intent on murder, rape a pillage not been present?

'Wag the Dog.' The Globalist Elites have perfected it. Entertainment spectaculars. Most Sheeple in the world believe everything they see on TV or the Internet. And guess who controls Mass Media? Governments and a handful of large Corporations.

Inventing a Boogeyman like ISIS involves very little effort for them. Just film something, and then show it on TV and the Internet. The Sheeple will likely go along with just about anything. It's why they continue to support Permanent War.

You are saying you know and understand something that most people are not able to know and understand. We can trust your judgement that ISIS and al Qaeda can be left alone and they will not become a danger to us. We could have left the Nazi's and Tojo alone. We didn't have to go to war with them. You want all of us to gamble the lives and futures of our children and grandchildren on your opinion and concepts about how the world works. What makes you so sure the majority of humans that disagree with you are the sheeple? Perhaps it is easier to herd the extremist that can be convinced to follow cult like belief systems and need no real empirical data to confirm odd ball ideas. Perhaps you are part of sheeple class and those who disagree with you are the real thinkers.

 

[TooTall]

Can't blame Obama for GWB's failed Iraqi state, and the mess removing Saddam set in motion. At worst it can be argued that Obama was 'negligent' or unprepared for the rise of ISIS. But he was following public opinion by trying to get out of Iraq.

Following public opinion is a political decision that only a President with no leadership skills would make. I can blame Obama for pretending to know more about the situation in Iraq than the experts in the Pentagon and ignoring their advice.

 

[TooTall]

Make no mistake Econospic takes glee in seeing people die to prove her political hack jobs...

The RNC could not have timed the June Daesh invasion into Iraq this year. And the beheadings just before the US midterms were perfect for Republican prospects for political gains.

Mitt Romney even slithered out of his counting house to dance on the graves of the beheaded victims. He wants to send other people's sons over there to be killed trying to stop what's going on.

The GOP is just waiting for another opportunity to send troops into a foreign war. Some of their biggest constituents, such as Halliburton, need to up their profit margin. Hey, the GOP feels it is worth it, even if it does cost a few soldier's lives....the price of war....

Obama is the one sending in the troops and he isn't the GOP.

 

[hipeter924]

hope 10427479

It is obvious that Iraq is an unstable country, split into three. The Iraqi government is weak and has not recovered from their initial losses, and the Kurds struggle to hold onto what they have as well.

Iraq is unstable and government is weak only in Sunni dominated areas. That is not all of Iraq.

Iraq has recovered with victories at the Mosul Dam and Baiiji oil refinery and dozens of towns and villages where DAIISH has been driven out.

Kurds are doing fine - on offensive - helping to defeat DAIISH at Kobani in Syria.

Just some facts to adjust your perspective. Not a huge deal.

It is at least a sizable portion of Iraq a quarter to a third of it in fact. I never said all of Iraq is held by ISIS.

The Iraqi government is weak, as its military in a lot of areas. It is on the defensive in Baghdad. If it was strong as you say it wouldn't have to rely on US airstrikes to hold back ISIS or retake dams.

ISIS has reached the fullest extent it is going to reach in Iraq, and is turning back to claiming territory in Syria. The infrastructure and economy in ISIS held areas is bad, and their conquered populations are unsatisfied. Doesn't stop their propaganda sucking people in though.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Make no mistake Econospic takes glee in seeing people die to prove her political hack jobs...

The RNC could not have timed the June Daesh invasion into Iraq this year. And the beheadings just before the US midterms were perfect for Republican prospects for political gains.

Mitt Romney even slithered out of his counting house to dance on the graves of the beheaded victims. He wants to send other people's sons over there to be killed trying to stop what's going on.

The GOP is just waiting for another opportunity to send troops into a foreign war. Some of their biggest constituents, such as Halliburton, need to up their profit margin. Hey, the GOP feels it is worth it, even if it does cost a few soldier's lives....the price of war....

Obama is the one sending in the troops and he isn't the GOP.

So what? Are worried about the cannon fodder dying? You weren't when Bush was in office.

 

[JimH52]

Make no mistake Econospic takes glee in seeing people die to prove her political hack jobs...

The RNC could not have timed the June Daesh invasion into Iraq this year. And the beheadings just before the US midterms were perfect for Republican prospects for political gains.

Mitt Romney even slithered out of his counting house to dance on the graves of the beheaded victims. He wants to send other people's sons over there to be killed trying to stop what's going on.

The GOP is just waiting for another opportunity to send troops into a foreign war. Some of their biggest constituents, such as Halliburton, need to up their profit margin. Hey, the GOP feels it is worth it, even if it does cost a few soldier's lives....the price of war....

Obama is the one sending in the troops and he isn't the GOP.

How ironic that you point that out on the very day we end the longest running war in US History. albeit a justified war. That is unlike the mistake W made by invading the wrong country in Iraq. We will be paying for the poor judgement of the recovering alcoholic for generations to come.

 

[TooTall]

Make no mistake Econospic takes glee in seeing people die to prove her political hack jobs...

The RNC could not have timed the June Daesh invasion into Iraq this year. And the beheadings just before the US midterms were perfect for Republican prospects for political gains.

Mitt Romney even slithered out of his counting house to dance on the graves of the beheaded victims. He wants to send other people's sons over there to be killed trying to stop what's going on.

The GOP is just waiting for another opportunity to send troops into a foreign war. Some of their biggest constituents, such as Halliburton, need to up their profit margin. Hey, the GOP feels it is worth it, even if it does cost a few soldier's lives....the price of war....

Obama is the one sending in the troops and he isn't the GOP.

How ironic that you point that out on the very day we end the longest running war in US History. albeit a justified war. That is unlike the mistake W made by invading the wrong country in Iraq. We will be paying for the poor judgement of the recovering alcoholic for generations to come.

Bush was merely following the advice of the leading Democrats in the Senate. That was the only poor judgement he made.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

 

[JimH52]

Make no mistake Econospic takes glee in seeing people die to prove her political hack jobs...

The RNC could not have timed the June Daesh invasion into Iraq this year. And the beheadings just before the US midterms were perfect for Republican prospects for political gains.

Mitt Romney even slithered out of his counting house to dance on the graves of the beheaded victims. He wants to send other people's sons over there to be killed trying to stop what's going on.

The GOP is just waiting for another opportunity to send troops into a foreign war. Some of their biggest constituents, such as Halliburton, need to up their profit margin. Hey, the GOP feels it is worth it, even if it does cost a few soldier's lives....the price of war....

Obama is the one sending in the troops and he isn't the GOP.

How ironic that you point that out on the very day we end the longest running war in US History. albeit a justified war. That is unlike the mistake W made by invading the wrong country in Iraq. We will be paying for the poor judgement of the recovering alcoholic for generations to come.

Bush was merely following the advice of the leading Democrats in the Senate. That was the only poor judgement he made.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

PLEASE! You know as well as I do that they all were basing their opinions on cooked books and cherry picked data from Bush and DICK. They actually believed the lies that this Regime handed out. Never has an administration concocted such a mess. They swore there was WMD even when UN inspectors on the ground could not find it. DICK wanted his beloved Halliburton to get rich off of military contracts, and he succeeded.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The dumbass-in-chief to send up to 1500 more troops back to Iraq...somehow the SOFA agreement is no longer an obstacle...imagine that.

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama has authorized the deployment of up to 1,500 additional troops to Iraq in noncombat roles and is asking Congress for $5.6 billion, as the U.S. looks to ramp up the fight against Islamic State militants.

The U.S. military personnel will serve “in a noncombat role to train, advise and assist Iraqi security forces, including Kurdish forces,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said.

Obama Authorizes Up to 1 500 More Troops to Deploy to Iraq - WSJ​

We had this war won, only to have Obumbler snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Libya...another Obumbler mishandling.

Syria...another Obumbler error.

ISIS...another Obumbler foul up. JV my ass.

Russia...Iran...the list goes on and on...

Amateur hour continues indefinitely...

Well... It is certainly understandable how someone could come to such a conclusion.

But my thinking is that obama is not a failure as a President of the US, obama is a raging success as a subversive enemy insurgent in the office of the President of the United States.

The Islamic-Candidate... personified.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The RNC could not have timed the June Daesh invasion into Iraq this year. And the beheadings just before the US midterms were perfect for Republican prospects for political gains.

Mitt Romney even slithered out of his counting house to dance on the graves of the beheaded victims. He wants to send other people's sons over there to be killed trying to stop what's going on.

The GOP is just waiting for another opportunity to send troops into a foreign war. Some of their biggest constituents, such as Halliburton, need to up their profit margin. Hey, the GOP feels it is worth it, even if it does cost a few soldier's lives....the price of war....

Obama is the one sending in the troops and he isn't the GOP.

How ironic that you point that out on the very day we end the longest running war in US History. albeit a justified war. That is unlike the mistake W made by invading the wrong country in Iraq. We will be paying for the poor judgement of the recovering alcoholic for generations to come.

Bush was merely following the advice of the leading Democrats in the Senate. That was the only poor judgement he made.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

PLEASE! You know as well as I do that they all were basing their opinions on cooked books and cherry picked data from Bush and DICK. They actually believed the lies that this Regime handed out. Never has an administration concocted such a mess. They swore there was WMD even when UN inspectors on the ground could not find it. DICK wanted his beloved Halliburton to get rich off of military contracts, and he succeeded.

ROFLMNAO! That's what I love about Hippies... they aren't smart enough to give up on long since discredited cliches.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

TT 10430626.01

Bush was merely following the advice of the leading Democrats in the Senate. That was the only poor judgment he made. "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. …” ..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

We see that TooTall has no ethical upbringing that would tell him that quoting half a statement by someone in order to change the meaning of what they said, is wrong.

TooTall cited half of what Kerry said. He cut Kerry's statement in half. This is what TooTall presented as 'advice to President Bush in January 2003:

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

.

Since you won't post the continuation of that statement TooTall I will. Starting with "but it is not new"

"So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real,


- but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War. Regrettably the current Administration failed to take the opportunity to bring this issue to the United Nations two years ago or immediately after September 11th, when we had such unity of spirit with our allies. When it finally did speak, it was with hasty war talk instead of a coherent call for Iraqi disarmament. And that made it possible for other Arab regimes to shift their focus to the perils of war for themselves rather than keeping the focus on the perils posed by Saddam's deadly arsenal. Indeed, for a time, the Administration's unilateralism, in effect, elevated Saddam in the eyes of his neighbors to a level he never would have achieved on his own, undermining America's standing with most of the coalition partners which had joined us in repelling the invasion of Kuwait a decade ago. In U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441, the United Nations has now affirmed that Saddam Hussein must disarm or face the most serious consequences. Let me make it clear that the burden is resoundingly on Saddam Hussein to live up to the ceasefire agreement he signed and make clear to the world how he disposed of weapons he previously admitted to possessing. But the burden is also clearly on the Bush Administration to do the hard work of building a broad coalition at the U.N. and the necessary work of educating America about the rationale for war. As I have said frequently and repeat here today, the United States should never go to war because it wants to, the United States should go to war because we have to. And we don't have to until we have exhausted the remedies available, built legitimacy and earned the consent of the American people, absent, of course, an imminent threat requiring urgent action."

My god TooTall, have you no shame?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

TT 10430626.01

Bush was merely following the advice of the leading Democrats in the Senate. That was the only poor judgment he made. "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. …” ..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

We see that TooTall has no ethical upbringing that would tell him that quoting half a statement by someone in order to change the meaning of what they said, is wrong.

TooTall cited half of what Kerry said. He cut Kerry's statement in half. This is what TooTall presented as 'advice to President Bush in January 2003:

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

.

Since you won't post the continuation of that statement TooTall I will. Starting with "but it is not new"

"So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real,


- but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War. Regrettably the current Administration failed to take the opportunity to bring this issue to the United Nations two years ago or immediately after September 11th, when we had such unity of spirit with our allies. When it finally did speak, it was with hasty war talk instead of a coherent call for Iraqi disarmament. And that made it possible for other Arab regimes to shift their focus to the perils of war for themselves rather than keeping the focus on the perils posed by Saddam's deadly arsenal. Indeed, for a time, the Administration's unilateralism, in effect, elevated Saddam in the eyes of his neighbors to a level he never would have achieved on his own, undermining America's standing with most of the coalition partners which had joined us in repelling the invasion of Kuwait a decade ago. In U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441, the United Nations has now affirmed that Saddam Hussein must disarm or face the most serious consequences. Let me make it clear that the burden is resoundingly on Saddam Hussein to live up to the ceasefire agreement he signed and make clear to the world how he disposed of weapons he previously admitted to possessing. But the burden is also clearly on the Bush Administration to do the hard work of building a broad coalition at the U.N. and the necessary work of educating America about the rationale for war. As I have said frequently and repeat here today, the United States should never go to war because it wants to, the United States should go to war because we have to. And we don't have to until we have exhausted the remedies available, built legitimacy and earned the consent of the American people, absent, of course, an imminent threat requiring urgent action."

My god TooTall, have you no shame?

ROFLMNAO!

They NEVER give up on trying to make the UN relevant.

It's sorta like the "RIGHT TO CHOOSE to murder your pre-born children"... they actually believe such is POSSIBLE!

But hey... such is the nature of evil.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

TT 10430626

Bush was merely following the advice of the leading Democrats in the Senate.

If Bush had actually followed the advice from Kerry from his January 23, 2003 speech at Georgetown University, Bush would have exhausted the peaceful means of UN inspections and not decided to invade Iraq.

See post 713 for continuation of Kerry's remarks that TooTall failed to cite. NF 10431297

My god TooTall, have you no shame?

But the burden is also clearly on the Bush Administration to do the hard work of building a broad coalition at the U.N. and the necessary work of educating America about the rationale for war. As I have said frequently and repeat here today, the United States should never go to war because it wants to, the United States should go to war because we have to. And we don't have to until we have exhausted the remedies available, built legitimacy and earned the consent of the American people, absent, of course, an imminent threat requiring urgent action."

Bush did not build a broad coalition at the U.N. and exhaust the remedies available.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Wrmk 10431429

They NEVER give up on trying to make the UN relevant.

Therefore TooTall spoke not the truth when he wrote this:

TT 10430626

Bush was merely following the advice of the leading Democrats in the Senate.

Kerry was right but Bush did not follow Kerry's advice to make the UN relevant by granting it time to peacefully disarm Iraq as Bush promised he would do.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Wrmk 10431429

They NEVER give up on trying to make the UN relevant.

Therefore TooTall spoke not the truth when he wrote this:

TT 10430626

Bush was merely following the advice of the leading Democrats in the Senate.

Kerry was right but Bush did not follow Kerry's advice to make the UN relevant by granting it time to peacefully disarm Iraq as Bush promised he would do.

Kerry was right?

ROFLMNAO! Good LORD! That is precious... it's as if Kerry is not an imbecile and has the means to BE correct.

Should we expect to here you extolling the veracity and wisdom of one Joe Biden.

 

[asterism]

The RNC could not have timed the June Daesh invasion into Iraq this year. And the beheadings just before the US midterms were perfect for Republican prospects for political gains.

Mitt Romney even slithered out of his counting house to dance on the graves of the beheaded victims. He wants to send other people's sons over there to be killed trying to stop what's going on.

The GOP is just waiting for another opportunity to send troops into a foreign war. Some of their biggest constituents, such as Halliburton, need to up their profit margin. Hey, the GOP feels it is worth it, even if it does cost a few soldier's lives....the price of war....

Obama is the one sending in the troops and he isn't the GOP.

How ironic that you point that out on the very day we end the longest running war in US History. albeit a justified war. That is unlike the mistake W made by invading the wrong country in Iraq. We will be paying for the poor judgement of the recovering alcoholic for generations to come.

Bush was merely following the advice of the leading Democrats in the Senate. That was the only poor judgement he made.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

PLEASE! You know as well as I do that they all were basing their opinions on cooked books and cherry picked data from Bush and DICK. They actually believed the lies that this Regime handed out. Never has an administration concocted such a mess. They swore there was WMD even when UN inspectors on the ground could not find it. DICK wanted his beloved Halliburton to get rich off of military contracts, and he succeeded.

You give then Governor Bush too much credit. From 1998:

If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program.

President Clinton, Feb 4, 1998

snopes.com Weapons of Mass Destruction Quotes

 

[NotfooledbyW]

If it was strong as you say it wouldn't have to rely on US airstrikes to hold back ISIS or retake dams.

Why not? If Iraq's central government were too weak US air strikes alone could not hold back DAIISH or retake dams. Iraq's government in Shia and Kurdish areas is no weaker than it was in 2008. Iraq's army was not tested back then as it was this year in Sunni dominated areas. That is the major difference.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

You give then Governor Bush too much credit. From 1998:

Bill Clinton never considered a ground invasion.