Iraq does not welcome US ground troops in fight against Daesh - huge blow to RW myth makers

[thanatos144]

Again what complete bullshit. Iraq invaded a neighboring country and lost and then never compiled with the cease fire agreement and constantly attacked our fighter jets. That isn't a peaceful country

Iraq was sanctioned for invading Kuwait and paid the price everybody was comfortable with for several years. Attacking Iraq for that reason 13 years later is not acceptable in a civilized world.

We had Iraq's anti-aircraft sites well under control.

You really are ignorant of what happened

Maybe, you won't honestly debate because you just love war.

Listen little boy I have family putting their lives on the line every day for pukes like you so take your accusations of me loving war and shove them you childish little bitch.

If you continue to support a war that was totally unnecessary, when that has been clearly shown, it is a distinct possibility it is because you love war whether you realize it or not. Especially when you fail to give but a few reasons why and contradiction is your only avenue.

It is necessary dumb ass . Your is islamonazi heroes are still trying to kill all of us.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Iraq was sanctioned for invading Kuwait and paid the price everybody was comfortable with for several years. Attacking Iraq for that reason 13 years later is not acceptable in a civilized world.

We had Iraq's anti-aircraft sites well under control.

You really are ignorant of what happened

Maybe, you won't honestly debate because you just love war.

Listen little boy I have family putting their lives on the line every day for pukes like you so take your accusations of me loving war and shove them you childish little bitch.

If you continue to support a war that was totally unnecessary, when that has been clearly shown, it is a distinct possibility it is because you love war whether you realize it or not. Especially when you fail to give but a few reasons why and contradiction is your only avenue.

It is necessary dumb ass . Your is islamonazi heroes are still trying to kill all of us.

We only have been talking about your support of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

 

[thanatos144]

You really are ignorant of what happened

Maybe, you won't honestly debate because you just love war.

Listen little boy I have family putting their lives on the line every day for pukes like you so take your accusations of me loving war and shove them you childish little bitch.

If you continue to support a war that was totally unnecessary, when that has been clearly shown, it is a distinct possibility it is because you love war whether you realize it or not. Especially when you fail to give but a few reasons why and contradiction is your only avenue.

It is necessary dumb ass . Your is islamonazi heroes are still trying to kill all of us.

We only have been talking about your support of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Same war dummy since saddam was bank rolling them and training them in his country. So try again you America hating asshole

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Maybe, you won't honestly debate because you just love war.

Listen little boy I have family putting their lives on the line every day for pukes like you so take your accusations of me loving war and shove them you childish little bitch.

If you continue to support a war that was totally unnecessary, when that has been clearly shown, it is a distinct possibility it is because you love war whether you realize it or not. Especially when you fail to give but a few reasons why and contradiction is your only avenue.

It is necessary dumb ass . Your is islamonazi heroes are still trying to kill all of us.

We only have been talking about your support of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Same war dummy since saddam was bank rolling them and training them in his country. So try again you America hating asshole

No, it is not the exact same war.

You made that lame statement before. ISIS did not even exist to "bankroll" during Saddam's rule. Wanting peace and a country that does not go to war unless absolutely necessary is hate now, huh idiot? That is not the America we had before we invaded Iraq and Libya, and unless we understand our mistakes well, rather than denying everything like you have, the invasions can continue in the future on a much greater scale than just drone attacks.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

thana 10813007

Same war dummy since saddam was bank rolling them and training them in his country. So try again you America hating asshole

Show this forum evidence that S. Hussein prior to 2003 was bankrolling and training Al Qaeda or any apocryphal end of times cultist like Al Baghdad - the leader of DAIISH terrorist scum that have joined themselves to the Sunni minority that was forced from power in Iraq for not having WMD after idiot Bush refused to accept the UN inspectors who found no evidence that WMD stockpiles or programs existed in Iraq in March 2003.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

QHC 10813407

That is not the America we had before we invaded Iraq and Libya,

There was no reason to invade Iraq after UN inspectors were,allowed back in. Bush violated the UN agreement (UNSC res 1441) and there was no provocation to our national security by Iraq at that time. There was no genocide in progress or pending in March 2003 either.

Libya was a different matter. We did not ground invade Libya. The UN Security Council passed an authorization to use force against Qaddafi if he did not stop using his Air Force and armored units against civilians. It was a NATO operation. It was approved by the league of Arab Nations. There is a huge difference between the war in Iraq and the war in Libya.

 

[Londoner]

Given its energy resources, and given how vital those resources are to the functioning of the American and global economies, we cannot afford to be concerned with what Iraq wants. It is simply a false premise that we are spreading democracy and giving the Iraqis the freedom to choose their own political and resource destiny. Iraq and the Middle East have one choice, and that is to act in the interest of the superpower which governs them.

Problem is: Washington does not have the budget or competence to carry out this goal without bankrupting our nation and creating terminal instability. The plan of controlling the Middle East, which was created by PNAC in the late 90s (Chaney/Wolfowitz/Bolton et al) is insane because it asks Washington to do something too big and too complex. Of course, don't tell Republicans this... Because they alway trust Washington to do big things.

They believe in Big Government, and we are paying dearly for it.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Londo10814502

. Iraq and the Middle East have one choice, and that is to act in the interest of the superpower which governs them.

I agree with much of what you said except the above. Iraq and other Arab states need to defend themselves and go on the offensive in the ground campaign against the DAIISH terrorist scum that are ravaging their part of the world. Air and intelligence and adviser support by the US is fine with me. No person opposed to everything DAIISH is doing Including those danger fool Republicans should demand that Americans give their lives so the men living in the region can sit back and watch in safety.

Obama's policies against DAIISH are the best choices we have available. The more Republicans want Americans on the front lines over there the harder it is to get the locals to grow a spine and show up for the fight.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Libya was a different matter. We did not ground invade Libya. The UN Security Council passed an authorization to use force against Qaddafi if he did not stop using his Air Force and armored units against civilians. It was a NATO operation. It was approved by the league of Arab Nations. There is a huge difference between the war in Iraq and the war in Libya.

UN Resolution on Libya Allows Invasion

Francis Boyle, a professor of International Law spoke about UN Security Council Resolution 1973 on Libya.

If you read the resolution, it does not authorize regime change.

By getting rid of Gadaffi, we opened the door to the Islamic extremists, and by demonstrating that possibility of a new wide open country for them in Libya, that ideology quickly spread that radical fight to Syria also, where now the extremists could envision their cause there. The uprising in Syria started after the invasion of Libya.

Because a ground war was not needed for overthrow in Libya does not make getting it done by air any less of an invasion. There are many weak countries we could invade and conquer by air and then work with whatever takes hold afterwards.

You can try forever, but you cannot pussyfoot around the fact that Libya and Syria have been incredibly tremendous boons for Islamic terrorists, and millions are paying the price for it, whereas the battle before we invaded Libya was localized.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

If you read the resolution, it does not authorize regime change.

The Libyans did the regime change. The coalition was authorized to destroy Qaddaffi's military armored units and air defenses. Had Qaddafi ordered his armored units such as tanks to point their pivoting gun turrets down they would not have been targeted. Qaddafi ignored and defied the UN resolution. Saddam Hussein did not. He complied with Res 1441 but Bush is the one that defied it. That the point I am making. We did not instigate the rebellion in Syria. In fact Republicans were bitching at Obama for not helping the rebels. Obama's success in getting the WMD arsenal removed and destroyed was favorable accomplishment. Many say focusing on that helped Assad and hurt the rebel cause. But I am glad real chemical weapons were removed and destroyed. There were nine in Iraq.

 

[paulitician]

There was no provocation, something there must be with such a serious thing as invading a country. Peaceable countries have lived by this rule throughout history.

Yeah, should have left things alone in Iraq. Hussein was no threat to the U.S. And he despised the Islamic Terrorists. He instantly killed any he found in his country.

The same goes for Syria. We had no business involving ourselves in that war. Assad has never done anything to the U.S. The attempt at 'Regime Changing' him was misguided and wrong.

Dummy he was funding terrorism.

We've been doing that for many years. ISIS is the latest horrific example of that. Now Assad, Iranians, and Russians have to clean up our mess. We should have minded our own business.

Son we have been fighting evil since our founding. Isis and all the terrorists you seem to think are heroes want US DEAD . Why? Because I dont worship the pedophile they do.

Total ignorance like yours about the sovereignty of countries no matter how much we dislike them caused this horrible mess with ISIS to begin with.

We cannot go from country to country overthrowing endless dictators and governments we really do not like trying to desperately make them in our image. It won't work and will result in millions of needless and innocent deaths. Permanent change has to come from within and takes long periods of time.

Do what Dr. Paul has always suggested. Go with the Bible... "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

That's how we should approach Foreign Policy. We would never accept the awful things we do to others, being done to us. 'Regime Change' is a perfect example of our arrogant aggression. We don't have the right to tell others who their leaders will be. We certainly wouldn't accept others doing that to us.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The righties cannot explain this:, it destroys the myth that Obama could have negotiated keeping combat troops in Iraq with immunity to engage in a combat role since the start of 2012. That myth has been nothing but pure nonsense since it was first brought up.

.
“The message that Iraq has submitted to the (United Nations) Security Council never included a request for ground forces to enter Iraqi territory to conduct such operations,” Ibrahim al-Jafaari told a press conference after meetings with Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop on Thursday.

The minister further said that Iraqi armed forces were making gains against the extremist militants on their own and were not in need of more troops.

“We have established a set of guidelines” for the US-led coalition, including air support for Iraqi forces as well as providing training and intelligence, Jaafari said, emphasizing that “no country has regular armies or ground troops present in Iraq except for providing training and counseling.”

Iraqi foreign minister condemns deployment of additional US troops Al Bawaba

The Iraqis don't want US troops beyond an advisers role even now. They want to fight the ground war on their own and they should be applauded for that.

Why do right wingers want to see Americans dying and getting wounded in Iraq again? Do they long for the Bush days that much?

Can anyone explain why they want Americans dying in Iraq again?

Well, if that's true, then that does tend to enhance the potential target... reliving US Forces from liabilities, where 'the innocent' may be mixed in and around the terrorists.

As individual's who are complicit with the enemy... are the enemy.

 

[Edgetho]

liberturdians are dirtbags

 

[JakeStarkey]

Dummy he was funding terrorism.

You neo-cons have been proven liars time and again. SH was no threat to the USA and growing less a threat to his ME neighbors.

You were told the Iraqis would ally with the Iranians when they got the chance.

Bush's invasion ensured this because we can never make Iraq a trusted ally of the US.

Hipeter has the right of it above.

 

[paulitician]

Wake up peeps. They just put another puppet in power in Iraq. They're increasing troop numbers there, and they'll likely be getting us involved in war with Syria as well. It's all about that Permanent War for the Elites. Doesn't really matter who the U.S. President is. The Permanent War agenda will be continued.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Many conservatives make the mistake of believing that ISIS can be 'defeated,' never to be heard from again, when in fact nothing could be more untrue.

ISIS, or something similar, would simply reconstitute once American ground forces leave the region, to take advantage of the political instability in Iraq that would only be exacerbated by an American military incursion.

The best chance of indeed defeating ISIS is to allow the Iraqi government to do it on its own, having the effect of uniting the country's factions and bringing about greater stability that would decrease the likelihood of another terrorist organization reforming.

Great post. By learning to be successful, they become successful, and any interference with that prevents crucial steps. Getting heavily involved only makes the Iraqis permanently dependent on us.

 

[thanatos144]

Yeah, should have left things alone in Iraq. Hussein was no threat to the U.S. And he despised the Islamic Terrorists. He instantly killed any he found in his country.

The same goes for Syria. We had no business involving ourselves in that war. Assad has never done anything to the U.S. The attempt at 'Regime Changing' him was misguided and wrong.

Dummy he was funding terrorism.

We've been doing that for many years. ISIS is the latest horrific example of that. Now Assad, Iranians, and Russians have to clean up our mess. We should have minded our own business.

Son we have been fighting evil since our founding. Isis and all the terrorists you seem to think are heroes want US DEAD . Why? Because I dont worship the pedophile they do.

Total ignorance like yours about the sovereignty of countries no matter how much we dislike them caused this horrible mess with ISIS to begin with.

We cannot go from country to country overthrowing endless dictators and governments we really do not like trying to desperately make them in our image. It won't work and will result in millions of needless and innocent deaths. Permanent change has to come from within and takes long periods of time.

Do what Dr. Paul has always suggested. Go with the Bible... "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

That's how we should approach Foreign Policy. We would never accept the awful things we do to others, being done to us. 'Regime Change' is a perfect example of our arrogant aggression. We don't have the right to tell others who their leaders will be. We certainly wouldn't accept others doing that to us.

I dont take advise from lying asshole scumbags who hate their own country.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Dummy he was funding terrorism.

We've been doing that for many years. ISIS is the latest horrific example of that. Now Assad, Iranians, and Russians have to clean up our mess. We should have minded our own business.

Son we have been fighting evil since our founding. Isis and all the terrorists you seem to think are heroes want US DEAD . Why? Because I dont worship the pedophile they do.

Total ignorance like yours about the sovereignty of countries no matter how much we dislike them caused this horrible mess with ISIS to begin with.

We cannot go from country to country overthrowing endless dictators and governments we really do not like trying to desperately make them in our image. It won't work and will result in millions of needless and innocent deaths. Permanent change has to come from within and takes long periods of time.

Do what Dr. Paul has always suggested. Go with the Bible... "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

That's how we should approach Foreign Policy. We would never accept the awful things we do to others, being done to us. 'Regime Change' is a perfect example of our arrogant aggression. We don't have the right to tell others who their leaders will be. We certainly wouldn't accept others doing that to us.

I dont take advise from lying asshole scumbags who hate their own country.

You are projecting your own self loathing on others.

 

[paulitician]

Dummy he was funding terrorism.

We've been doing that for many years. ISIS is the latest horrific example of that. Now Assad, Iranians, and Russians have to clean up our mess. We should have minded our own business.

Son we have been fighting evil since our founding. Isis and all the terrorists you seem to think are heroes want US DEAD . Why? Because I dont worship the pedophile they do.

Total ignorance like yours about the sovereignty of countries no matter how much we dislike them caused this horrible mess with ISIS to begin with.

We cannot go from country to country overthrowing endless dictators and governments we really do not like trying to desperately make them in our image. It won't work and will result in millions of needless and innocent deaths. Permanent change has to come from within and takes long periods of time.

Do what Dr. Paul has always suggested. Go with the Bible... "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

That's how we should approach Foreign Policy. We would never accept the awful things we do to others, being done to us. 'Regime Change' is a perfect example of our arrogant aggression. We don't have the right to tell others who their leaders will be. We certainly wouldn't accept others doing that to us.

I dont take advise from lying asshole scumbags who hate their own country.

'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.'

If we stick to that approach in regard to Foreign Policy, we'll become an even greater Nation.

 

[thanatos144]

We've been doing that for many years. ISIS is the latest horrific example of that. Now Assad, Iranians, and Russians have to clean up our mess. We should have minded our own business.

Son we have been fighting evil since our founding. Isis and all the terrorists you seem to think are heroes want US DEAD . Why? Because I dont worship the pedophile they do.

Total ignorance like yours about the sovereignty of countries no matter how much we dislike them caused this horrible mess with ISIS to begin with.

We cannot go from country to country overthrowing endless dictators and governments we really do not like trying to desperately make them in our image. It won't work and will result in millions of needless and innocent deaths. Permanent change has to come from within and takes long periods of time.

Do what Dr. Paul has always suggested. Go with the Bible... "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

That's how we should approach Foreign Policy. We would never accept the awful things we do to others, being done to us. 'Regime Change' is a perfect example of our arrogant aggression. We don't have the right to tell others who their leaders will be. We certainly wouldn't accept others doing that to us.

I dont take advise from lying asshole scumbags who hate their own country.

'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.'

If we stick to that approach in regard to Foreign Policy, we'll become an even greater Nation.

Thus why all terrorist scum your hero Dr. Paul admires so much needs to be dead. Your savior is a America hating asshole.