🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁

Mission Accomplished: Islamists 70 Miles from Baghdad

Tell Dick and Dubya and Bill and Hill to saddle up, militants aligned with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant have taken Mosul and Tikrit and are moving on Samarra, a one hour drive from Baghdad.

"Clashes between Iraqi Security forces and hundreds of Sunni militants aligned with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, an offshoot of al Qaeda) resulted in the capture of Mosul and Tikrit by ISIL earlier today.

"Mosul, Iraq's second-largest city, was overrun -- Iraqi forces reportedly abandoning their posts, shedding their uniforms and dropping their weapons as they fled the ISIL attacks.

"Tikrit, about 135 miles closer to Baghdad, was attacked not long after, with little resistance -- and the AFP is reporting fighting now outside Samarra, only 70 miles north of the capital city.

"The attackers overran a military base, freed hundreds of prisoners, and have seized the Turkish consulate in Mosul, capturing and holding 50 Turkish citizens. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has promised to put a halt to the advances, and called on citizens to take up arms as well."

Iraqi Insurgents Capture Northern Cities, Move Toward Baghdad - In Focus - The Atlantic

Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool. Blame the Bushes...

Bush 41 suckered Saddam into invading Kuwait via U.S. Ambassador to Iraq April Catherine Glaspie who gave Saddam the infamous "green light" to invade. Saddam invaded Kuwait; Bush invaded Iraq. Is the US State Department still keeping April Glaspie under wraps?

Bush 43 conjured up lies to invade Iraq a second time.
I think you're right about the Bush family, but they are fairly recent players in the imperial deceits perpetrated upon the people of the Middle East. When it became obvious the Ottoman Empire was headed for defeat, France and Britain raced to grab the spoils.

The French looked at Mosul, and its oil wealth, as part of Syria; the British saw it differently and incorporated the city into Iraq.

Juan Cole has covered the Middle East since 2001, and he can tell the story better than I:


"When British Prime Minister Lloyd George met with French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau at Versailles, he was eager to push back French claims on Mosul. Since the British and their Arab allies had taken Damascus from the Ottomans, some wanted to renege on the Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 altogether.

"President Woodrow Wilson was also there, with his ideas of self-determination for the peoples of the former empires, and he didn’t want to just see an imperial grab for them.

"Clemenceau is said to have remarked that he felt he was caught between Jesus Christ and Napoleon.

"When Lloyd George met with Clemenceau, the latter is said to have asked him, 'What do you want?' Lloyd George said, 'Mosul.' Clemenceau agreed. Anything else? 'Jerusalem.'

" You shall have it.

"In return, the French were assured of Syria, which meant that Lloyd George had betrayed Sharif Hussein and his son Faisal b. Hussein, then in Damascus, for the sake of Mosul’s oil.

"Afterwards it is said that Lloyd George felt he had gained these boons from Clemenceau so easily that he should have asked for more."

They always want MORE; maybe they are about to get it?

Juan Cole: The Fall of Mosul and the False Promises of Modern History - Juan Cole - Truthdig
 
Tell Dick and Dubya and Bill and Hill to saddle up, militants aligned with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant have taken Mosul and Tikrit and are moving on Samarra, a one hour drive from Baghdad.

"Clashes between Iraqi Security forces and hundreds of Sunni militants aligned with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, an offshoot of al Qaeda) resulted in the capture of Mosul and Tikrit by ISIL earlier today.

"Mosul, Iraq's second-largest city, was overrun -- Iraqi forces reportedly abandoning their posts, shedding their uniforms and dropping their weapons as they fled the ISIL attacks.

"Tikrit, about 135 miles closer to Baghdad, was attacked not long after, with little resistance -- and the AFP is reporting fighting now outside Samarra, only 70 miles north of the capital city.

"The attackers overran a military base, freed hundreds of prisoners, and have seized the Turkish consulate in Mosul, capturing and holding 50 Turkish citizens. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has promised to put a halt to the advances, and called on citizens to take up arms as well."

Iraqi Insurgents Capture Northern Cities, Move Toward Baghdad - In Focus - The Atlantic

Why tell them since the current occupant of the White House is the one who is all rah rah Arab Spring? :lol:

Only an idiot would think that any Arab unrest isn't Islamist and/or militant.
Do you think it's possible to be a militant for democracy?
 
The last time I heard the words "mission accomplished" was when US Navy Seals killed Osama Bin Ladin. Barry Hussein told us the war was over.
Hey lied.
Just like the one before him and the one before him and...
And just like the one that comes next if we continue "choosing" between Republican OR Democrat in the voting booth.:mad:
 
Don't worry about who to vote for. Concern yourself with what to vote for.

1942_USDA.jpg


Both Democrats and Republicans will have to accept free market forces when this license is issued to Americans again.
 
What is happening across the Middle East was predictable and in fact many people did predicate it would happen when we started pulling out across the region. The simple truth is foreign policy was never a major concern of President Obama I think the administrations reaction to events across the Middle East and the rest of the world confirms this if the President does not want to be involved in foreign policy issues fine but just come out and say I don't give a shit what is happening in the rest of the world. I would have more respect for him if did that than continue this were deeply concerned and disturbed by this and were watching the situation closely and there will be serious consequences if this behavior continues which everyone knows there won't be.
 
What is happening across the Middle East was predictable and in fact many people did predicate it would happen when we started pulling out across the region. The simple truth is foreign policy was never a major concern of President Obama I think the administrations reaction to events across the Middle East and the rest of the world confirms this if the President does not want to be involved in foreign policy issues fine but just come out and say I don't give a shit what is happening in the rest of the world. I would have more respect for him if did that than continue this were deeply concerned and disturbed by this and were watching the situation closely and there will be serious consequences if this behavior continues which everyone knows there won't be.

Why are you blaming Obama for the "Bushes" clusterfuck?
 
Obama's been President for 6 FUCKING YEARS!

WWII was fought from start to finish in that time!
 
What is happening across the Middle East was predictable and in fact many people did predicate it would happen when we started pulling out across the region. The simple truth is foreign policy was never a major concern of President Obama I think the administrations reaction to events across the Middle East and the rest of the world confirms this if the President does not want to be involved in foreign policy issues fine but just come out and say I don't give a shit what is happening in the rest of the world. I would have more respect for him if did that than continue this were deeply concerned and disturbed by this and were watching the situation closely and there will be serious consequences if this behavior continues which everyone knows there won't be.

Why are you blaming Obama for the "Bushes" clusterfuck?

I'm holding Obama responsible for the decisions he has made not Bush's something you clearly can't do.
 
What is happening across the Middle East was predictable and in fact many people did predicate it would happen when we started pulling out across the region. The simple truth is foreign policy was never a major concern of President Obama I think the administrations reaction to events across the Middle East and the rest of the world confirms this if the President does not want to be involved in foreign policy issues fine but just come out and say I don't give a shit what is happening in the rest of the world. I would have more respect for him if did that than continue this were deeply concerned and disturbed by this and were watching the situation closely and there will be serious consequences if this behavior continues which everyone knows there won't be.
Actually, a lot of us predicted this when the invasion was launched in 2003.
How long would you have had us stay in Iraq and across the region?
 
Bush is long gone. Get back to me George when you can get someone in the WH to give us an explanation on why they let this bastard go in 2009.
I'm not on very good terms with the bastards in the WH, Tiny, but I suspect it has something to do with the fact that when you engage in eternal war for profit, one of the things you can't run out of... is enemies.

What do you suppose would happen if things get so bad in Baghdad that Iran steps into the picture?

You're getting ahead of yourself G.P.. Iraq has given Obie the okay to use 'kinetic' air support against Al-Qaeda.
Bush's war is about to become Obie's war.....
Looks like you're right

"WASHINGTON—Iraq has privately signaled to the Obama administration that it would allow the U.S. to conduct airstrikes with drones or manned aircraft against al Qaeda militant targets on Iraqi territory, senior U.S. officials said Wednesday.

"The Obama administration is considering a number of options, including the possibility of providing 'kinetic support' for the Iraqi military fighting al Qaeda rebels who seized two major cities north of Baghdad this week, according to a senior U.S. official who added that no decisions have been made.

"Officials declined to say whether the U.S. would consider conducting airstrikes with drones or manned aircraft."

Iraq Signals Openness to U.S. Airstrikes Against al Qaeda, U.S. Officials Say - WSJ
 
What is happening across the Middle East was predictable and in fact many people did predicate it would happen when we started pulling out across the region. The simple truth is foreign policy was never a major concern of President Obama I think the administrations reaction to events across the Middle East and the rest of the world confirms this if the President does not want to be involved in foreign policy issues fine but just come out and say I don't give a shit what is happening in the rest of the world. I would have more respect for him if did that than continue this were deeply concerned and disturbed by this and were watching the situation closely and there will be serious consequences if this behavior continues which everyone knows there won't be.

Why are you blaming Obama for the "Bushes" clusterfuck?

The democrats in congress who voted to invade and then resisted any troop surge are responsible for Iraq becoming a temporary clusterfuck. Obama is completely liable for it becoming a loss. You need to get your history straight and stop relying on left wing propagandists for info.
 
Obama's been President for 6 FUCKING YEARS!

WWII was fought from start to finish in that time!
How long did Bush have in Iraq? What was it? 5 years in Iraq? Longer than WWII. 7 years in Afghanistan? Even longer than Iraq? More than twice as long as WWII?

Maybe Bush would have won in Afghanistan in 7 years if he didn't lie to the world to invade Iraq. Oh, wait. He couldn't win in Afghanistan at all because the CIA trained the jihad in guerrilla tactics specifically to fight a long, drawn-out war against a more powerful invading force.
 
Last edited:
Iraq/Afghanistan are now and will forever be George W. Bush’s failed, illegal wars. And he will be forever responsible for the consequences of these failed, illegal wars, regardless future occupants of the WH.

The conflict in Afghanistan has been going on during the current administration longer than WW2. When is Afghanistan going to become Barry Hussein's war?
Did we invade Afghanistan in 1951? 1964? 1979? 1986? 1995? No.

It was 2001. George W. Bush. Little bitch is now hiding from justice in his mansion, fingerpainting dogs in the shower. Couldn't even show his face at the memorial for the attack that he let happen so his rich friends could make a lot of money.

http://pnac.info/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

What is the little bitch in the White House doing about it? WW2 lasted about 4 years and Barry Hussein has been president for (has it been that long?) five years and he has done nothing about Afghanistan except show the greatest Military in the world that he doesn't give a shit one way or the other. When is Barry Hussein going to be held responsible for anything?
 
Barry Hussein has been fighting Bush's unending, unwinnable, illegal war.

Why didn't Bush win in Afghanistan in 7 years?
 
Holy shit liberals are fucking stupid. All of them are nothing more than American hating piles of utter shit. Ignorant as the day is long.

Bush enforced the Iraq Liberation Act Clinton signed for WMDs which was why democrats voted for the war. They of course spoke out against it for political expediency.

The mission was accomplished. When a captial is captured and a leader is deposed, the mission was accomplished. However, the rebuilding mission has been an utter failure. Which is an entirely different aspect of the war. The reason for the failure of that mission has a lot to do with the fucking morons on the left and flack politicians get from the ignorant.

The fact that Obama withdrew from Iraq on Bush's timeline does not mean Obama gets the credit. Then again, we are talking about liberals like the OP who is...well a liberal. You dumb ignorant fuck.

Plus, Obama tried to stay in Iraq. Another thing the liberals like the OP has no clue about. Why? Cause he is a liberal, which means he is dumb fuck.

10,000 U.S. Troops On Offer For Iraq: Sources

BAGHDAD — The White House is offering to keep up to 10,000 troops in Iraq next year, U.S. officials say, despite opposition from many Iraqis and key Democratic Party allies who demand that President Barack Obama bring home the American military as promised.

Any extension of the military's presence, however, depends on a formal request from Baghdad – which must weigh questions about the readiness of Iraqi security forces against fears of renewed militant attacks and unrest if U.S. soldiers stay beyond the December pullout deadline.

Iraq is not expected to decide until September at the earliest when the 46,000 U.S. forces left in the country had hoped to start heading home.

Already, though, the White House has worked out options to keep between 8,500 and 10,000 active-duty troops to continue training Iraqi security forces during 2012, according to senior Obama administration and U.S. military officials in interviews with The Associated Press. The figures also were noted by foreign diplomats in Baghdad briefed on the issue.

All spoke on condition of anonymity to frankly discuss the sensitive matter during interviews over the past two weeks.

White House spokesman Jay Carney on Tuesday said the Pentagon is still planning for all U.S. troops to withdraw by year's end, noting that time is running out for Iraq's government to ask them to stay.

"We have said for a long time now if the Iraqi government asks us to maintain some level of troops beyond that end of the year deadline, we would consider it," Carney told reporters in Washington.

He appeared to back off that possibility, however, adding: "That doesn't necessarily mean we would do it. We would just consider it. And I really don't have any more information on that possible outcome because, again, we haven't even gotten a request."

Any change in the U.S. military withdrawal timetable in Iraq – after more than eight years and more than 4,450 U.S. military deaths – could open up difficult political confrontations for Obama as pressure builds to close out the Iraq mission and stick to pledges to draw down troops in Afghanistan.

The Senate's top Democrat, Sen. Harry Reid, told the AP that the high cost of keeping U.S. troops in Iraq – given a mounting U.S. debt crisis and Iraq's fledgling security gains – is no longer necessary.

Reid, the Senate majority leader, estimated nearly $1 trillion has been spent in Iraq since the U.S. invaded in 2003, including $50 billion this year alone.




-----------------------------------------------------------------------

There seems to be some serious denial going on. The Obama administration did in fact negotiate to keep troops in Iraq. It was only after Al-Maliki rejected the terms of an extension (for troop prosecution immunity) of the old Bush agreement for US troops staying in Iraq that the US was forced to leave.

Obama did not decide to leave to fulfill a campaign promise, he was convinced to stay but legally can't without that agreement.


http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/21/world/meast/iraq-us-troop...
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/obama-speak-ir...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/pres...
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/22/us-iraq-usa-o...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/a...


-------------------------------------------------------

Liberals are stupid ignorant American hating morons. They claim to be on the side of the poor, down trodden and tortured and they cry that Saddam is gone and not torturing people.

Yes, folks. Liberals are not worthy of ANY respect. They are in fact the enemies within. They rewrite history. They are clueless about logistics.

Along with the utter fucking lies the pieces of shit on the left claim about the costs of the Iraq war.

Federal Budget--Receipts, Outlays, and Debt - The 2012 Statistical Abstract - U.S. Census Bureau

Deficits.gif
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top