Romney Predicted The Failures of Today

[PoliticalChic]

But Romney also wanted to arm the people who are overrunning Iraq:

2012

Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership'


"...Romney called for the United States and partner nations to “arm the opposition so they can defend themselves” against the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad, but White House press secretary Jay Carney warned that would lead to more “chaos and carnage” and was “not the right course.” "


Read more: Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership' | TheHill
Follow us: [MENTION=27326]The[/MENTION]hill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

So I guess Romney wanted American troops to stay in Iraq so he, as president, could arm the people who would eventually head south and try to kill them.

After we dispense with the Liberal hypotheticals, the reality remains: this President is the cause of the slaughter, and misery that he was warned about by Romney.

The worse villains in the scenario are the dopes who put this failure in office.

 

[jillian]

But Romney also wanted to arm the people who are overrunning Iraq:

2012

Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership'


"...Romney called for the United States and partner nations to “arm the opposition so they can defend themselves” against the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad, but White House press secretary Jay Carney warned that would lead to more “chaos and carnage” and was “not the right course.” "


Read more: Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership' | TheHill
Follow us: [MENTION=27326]The[/MENTION]hill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

So I guess Romney wanted American troops to stay in Iraq so he, as president, could arm the people who would eventually head south and try to kill them.

After we dispense with the Liberal hypotheticals, the reality remains: this President is the cause of the slaughter, and misery that he was warned about by Romney.

The worse villains in the scenario are the dopes who put this failure in office.

the CAUSE OF THE SLAUGHTER is the destabilization of Iraq which occurred when the idiot in the white house from 2000 to 2008 started an unnecessary war that lasted for 10 years.

we told you THEN that removing saddam would leave the region in turmoil.

or are we supposed to let our kids die there for another decade to appease neocon loons?

 

[PoliticalChic]

But Romney also wanted to arm the people who are overrunning Iraq:

2012

Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership'


"...Romney called for the United States and partner nations to “arm the opposition so they can defend themselves” against the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad, but White House press secretary Jay Carney warned that would lead to more “chaos and carnage” and was “not the right course.” "


Read more: Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership' | TheHill
Follow us: [MENTION=27326]The[/MENTION]hill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

So I guess Romney wanted American troops to stay in Iraq so he, as president, could arm the people who would eventually head south and try to kill them.

After we dispense with the Liberal hypotheticals, the reality remains: this President is the cause of the slaughter, and misery that he was warned about by Romney.

The worse villains in the scenario are the dopes who put this failure in office.

the CAUSE OF THE SLAUGHTER is the destabilization of Iraq which occurred when the idiot in the white house from 2000 to 2008 started an unnecessary war that lasted for 10 years.

we told you THEN that removing saddam would leave the region in turmoil.

or are we supposed to let our kids die there for another decade to appease neocon loons?

The term 'loons' can only be, correctly, applied to any who voted for the abysmal failure in the White House....

...and for those who did so twice....'certifiable.'

 

[Jarhead]

But Romney also wanted to arm the people who are overrunning Iraq:

2012

Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership'


"...Romney called for the United States and partner nations to “arm the opposition so they can defend themselves” against the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad, but White House press secretary Jay Carney warned that would lead to more “chaos and carnage” and was “not the right course.” "


Read more: Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership' | TheHill
Follow us: [MENTION=27326]The[/MENTION]hill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

So I guess Romney wanted American troops to stay in Iraq so he, as president, could arm the people who would eventually head south and try to kill them.

After we dispense with the Liberal hypotheticals, the reality remains: this President is the cause of the slaughter, and misery that he was warned about by Romney.

The worse villains in the scenario are the dopes who put this failure in office.

the CAUSE OF THE SLAUGHTER is the destabilization of Iraq which occurred when the idiot in the white house from 2000 to 2008 started an unnecessary war that lasted for 10 years.

we told you THEN that removing saddam would leave the region in turmoil.

or are we supposed to let our kids die there for another decade to appease neocon loons?

listen up Ms. Notary Public.....

Obama accepted the responsibility of the Iraq conflict when he took the oath.

He opted to end the war as he promised, but as opposed to looking at possible negative ramifications of a full pull out, he simply acted and washed his hands of it.

But only a mental midget would not realize that it would create a vacuum and to create a vacuum in that region is a very dangerous thing.

He didn't care. He wanted to popular.

Good for him.

Bad for us.

 

[BlindBoo]

By the way......nice clean OP there, queen dummy. No outline. Just a few words and a video. Well done.

You can still have this genius as POTUS. Just get enough people to urge him to run again. He's a lock.

...overlooking the fact that some other idiot did the exact same thread with the exact same video earlier today.

lol, if Obama had left troops in Iraq the GOP and the RWnuts would be crowing about how he failed to keep his promise to end the war in Iraq and how he was now putting more US soldiers needlessly in harm's way.

Are there troops in Germany? South Korea?

The reason is that we were once led by leaders who understood what would happen if we left with the possibility that all the gains could be lost.


Along came a community organizer, given power by the slow-witted, like you, who didn't have the requisite ability to get a status of forces agreement with Iraq.

And Romney told all exactly would happen.

And Palin did the same vis-a-vis Putin.

Only Obama, the Oblivious, didn't.



Now, if you require a theory that endows Obama with more ability.....then the chaos in the Middle East must be his plan.
And he has misled you on his plan for the world.....


...note: neither theory endows Obama voters with insight or intelligence.

So how long did the insurgency's last in Germany after WWII? How many Americans were blown up by IED's. Where was the Soviet Unions troops at this time? You get an A+ in false comparisons.

When the occupation failed to keep order in Iraq it was predicted that a three way civil war would be the end result.

Neither Bush nor Obama could get the Iraqis to agree to give our troop immunity to Iraq laws. Neither one would have left our troops there under those terms. Nor would Romney had we been unfortunate enough to have elected him.

Palin? Hahahahaha

 

[Jarhead]

...overlooking the fact that some other idiot did the exact same thread with the exact same video earlier today.

lol, if Obama had left troops in Iraq the GOP and the RWnuts would be crowing about how he failed to keep his promise to end the war in Iraq and how he was now putting more US soldiers needlessly in harm's way.

Are there troops in Germany? South Korea?

The reason is that we were once led by leaders who understood what would happen if we left with the possibility that all the gains could be lost.


Along came a community organizer, given power by the slow-witted, like you, who didn't have the requisite ability to get a status of forces agreement with Iraq.

And Romney told all exactly would happen.

And Palin did the same vis-a-vis Putin.

Only Obama, the Oblivious, didn't.



Now, if you require a theory that endows Obama with more ability.....then the chaos in the Middle East must be his plan.
And he has misled you on his plan for the world.....


...note: neither theory endows Obama voters with insight or intelligence.

So how long did the insurgency's last in Germany after WWII? How many Americans were blown up by IED's. Where was the Soviet Unions troops at this time? You get an A+ in false comparisons.

When the occupation failed to keep order in Iraq it was predicted that a three way civil war would be the end result.

Neither Bush nor Obama could get the Iraqis to agree to give our troop immunity to Iraq laws. Neither one would have left our troops there under those terms. Nor would Romney had we been unfortunate enough to have elected him.
Palin? Hahahahaha

I am glad to hear you are happy with the way things are going with the one we were "fortunate enough" to have elected.

Pathetic.

 

[NYcarbineer]

But Romney also wanted to arm the people who are overrunning Iraq:

2012

Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership'


"...Romney called for the United States and partner nations to “arm the opposition so they can defend themselves” against the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad, but White House press secretary Jay Carney warned that would lead to more “chaos and carnage” and was “not the right course.” "


Read more: Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership' | TheHill
Follow us: [MENTION=27326]The[/MENTION]hill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

So I guess Romney wanted American troops to stay in Iraq so he, as president, could arm the people who would eventually head south and try to kill them.

After we dispense with the Liberal hypotheticals, the reality remains: this President is the cause of the slaughter, and misery that he was warned about by Romney.

The worse villains in the scenario are the dopes who put this failure in office.

Romney quoted as wanting to arm the people who are now in the forefront of the war against Iraq is not a hypothetical.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Such is the hypocrisy of the partisan right.

As for the OP, she'll repeat a lie often enough in the hope it's perceived to be true.

"...repeat a lie often enough..."

I never lie....

That's a lie!

You must have mistaken me for a Liberal.

 

[PoliticalChic]

...overlooking the fact that some other idiot did the exact same thread with the exact same video earlier today.

lol, if Obama had left troops in Iraq the GOP and the RWnuts would be crowing about how he failed to keep his promise to end the war in Iraq and how he was now putting more US soldiers needlessly in harm's way.

Are there troops in Germany? South Korea?

The reason is that we were once led by leaders who understood what would happen if we left with the possibility that all the gains could be lost.


Along came a community organizer, given power by the slow-witted, like you, who didn't have the requisite ability to get a status of forces agreement with Iraq.

And Romney told all exactly would happen.

And Palin did the same vis-a-vis Putin.

Only Obama, the Oblivious, didn't.



Now, if you require a theory that endows Obama with more ability.....then the chaos in the Middle East must be his plan.
And he has misled you on his plan for the world.....


...note: neither theory endows Obama voters with insight or intelligence.

So how long did the insurgency's last in Germany after WWII? How many Americans were blown up by IED's. Where was the Soviet Unions troops at this time? You get an A+ in false comparisons.

When the occupation failed to keep order in Iraq it was predicted that a three way civil war would be the end result.

Neither Bush nor Obama could get the Iraqis to agree to give our troop immunity to Iraq laws. Neither one would have left our troops there under those terms. Nor would Romney had we been unfortunate enough to have elected him.

Palin? Hahahahaha

"So how long did the insurgency's last in Germany after WWII? How many Americans were blown up by IED's. Where was the Soviet Unions troops at this time? You get an A+ in false comparisons."

Once again....my function is to be teacher to the Leftists....




"The Werewolves were originally organised by the SS and the Hitler Youth as a diversionary operation on the fringes of the Third Reich, which were occupied by the Western Allies and the Soviets in the autumn of 1944. Some 5,000 -- 6,000 recruits were raised by the winter of 1944-45, but numbers rose considerably in the following spring when the Nazi Party and the Propaganda Ministry launched a popular call to arms, beseeching everybody in the occupied areas -- even women and children -- to launch themselves upon the enemy. In typical Nazi fashion, this expansion was not co-ordinated by the relevant bodies, which were instead involved in a bureaucratic war among themselves over control of the project. The result was that the movement functioned on two largely unrelated levels: the first as a real force of specially trained SS, Hitler Youth and Nazi Party guerrillas; the second as an outlet for casual violence by fanatics.

The Werewolves specialised in ambushes and sniping, and took the lives of many Allied and Soviet soldiers and officers --.... "
Minutemen of the Third Reich ("Werewolf" guerilla movement - postwar sabotage & terror not new)



Imagine....if you actually had an education, you wouldn't be a Leftist.




"You get an A+ in false comparisons."

I'm never wrong. I once thought I was wrong, turns out, I was mistaken.

 

[Plasmaball]

After we dispense with the Liberal hypotheticals, the reality remains: this President is the cause of the slaughter, and misery that he was warned about by Romney.

The worse villains in the scenario are the dopes who put this failure in office.

the CAUSE OF THE SLAUGHTER is the destabilization of Iraq which occurred when the idiot in the white house from 2000 to 2008 started an unnecessary war that lasted for 10 years.

we told you THEN that removing saddam would leave the region in turmoil.

or are we supposed to let our kids die there for another decade to appease neocon loons?

listen up Ms. Notary Public.....

Obama accepted the responsibility of the Iraq conflict when he took the oath.

He opted to end the war as he promised, but as opposed to looking at possible negative ramifications of a full pull out, he simply acted and washed his hands of it.

But only a mental midget would not realize that it would create a vacuum and to create a vacuum in that region is a very dangerous thing.

He didn't care. He wanted to popular.

Good for him.

Bad for us.

Wrong. Obama ended nothing. Bush ended it when he was forced to sign sofa via the Iraqi government.

Iraqi wanted us gone. Period.

 

[BlindBoo]

But Romney also wanted to arm the people who are overrunning Iraq:

2012

Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership'


"...Romney called for the United States and partner nations to “arm the opposition so they can defend themselves” against the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad, but White House press secretary Jay Carney warned that would lead to more “chaos and carnage” and was “not the right course.” "


Read more: Obama will not arm Syrian rebels; Romney sees a 'lack of leadership' | TheHill
Follow us: [MENTION=27326]The[/MENTION]hill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

So I guess Romney wanted American troops to stay in Iraq so he, as president, could arm the people who would eventually head south and try to kill them.

After we dispense with the Liberal hypotheticals, the reality remains: this President is the cause of the slaughter, and misery that he was warned about by Romney.

The worse villains in the scenario are the dopes who put this failure in office.

I'm still pretty sure it was started when the Iraqi army was disbanded in the very early stage of the occupation, and the civil war began. President Bush wasn't able to get the Iraqi Government to agree to give US troops immunity from Iraqi laws past 2011. So he signed the agreement to have all our troops out by the end of 2011. Ultimately the onus fall on the Iraqis themselves for not agreeing to the Presidents terms. They had ample opportunity to do so too.

 

[1776]

It's common sense all this bullshit would happen because Obama is more interested in "changing America" than "protecting America."

Islamic terrorism has grown under Bill Clinton (pre 9-11) and Obama (post GWOT).....and that is not by mistake.

 

[Plasmaball]

At the time of this speech bush had not signed sofa, thus cool he wanted us to stay forever. Typical neocon.

After bush signed sofa there would be nothing Romney could have done. He would of done the same thing is Obama in the end.

 

[jillian]

After we dispense with the Liberal hypotheticals, the reality remains: this President is the cause of the slaughter, and misery that he was warned about by Romney.

The worse villains in the scenario are the dopes who put this failure in office.

the CAUSE OF THE SLAUGHTER is the destabilization of Iraq which occurred when the idiot in the white house from 2000 to 2008 started an unnecessary war that lasted for 10 years.

we told you THEN that removing saddam would leave the region in turmoil.

or are we supposed to let our kids die there for another decade to appease neocon loons?

listen up Ms. Notary Public.....

Obama accepted the responsibility of the Iraq conflict when he took the oath.

He opted to end the war as he promised, but as opposed to looking at possible negative ramifications of a full pull out, he simply acted and washed his hands of it.

But only a mental midget would not realize that it would create a vacuum and to create a vacuum in that region is a very dangerous thing.

He didn't care. He wanted to popular.

Good for him.

Bad for us.

well, lying loser.... the middle east was destabilized by neocon idiots who lied about why they were going there. Obama deranged wingers like you want a state of perpetual war for no reason.

then when you break your toys you blame everyone else.

now YOU listen up, WE CAN'T KEEP FIGHTING YOUR WAR OF CHOICE FOREVER WHILE YOU CUT TAXES FOR RICH PEOPLE AND SAY THERE'S NO MONEY FOR DOMESTIC PROGRAMS;.

p.s. baby bush was the only president in history to cut taxes during war time.

congrats!

 

[Jarhead]

the CAUSE OF THE SLAUGHTER is the destabilization of Iraq which occurred when the idiot in the white house from 2000 to 2008 started an unnecessary war that lasted for 10 years.

we told you THEN that removing saddam would leave the region in turmoil.

or are we supposed to let our kids die there for another decade to appease neocon loons?

listen up Ms. Notary Public.....

Obama accepted the responsibility of the Iraq conflict when he took the oath.

He opted to end the war as he promised, but as opposed to looking at possible negative ramifications of a full pull out, he simply acted and washed his hands of it.

But only a mental midget would not realize that it would create a vacuum and to create a vacuum in that region is a very dangerous thing.

He didn't care. He wanted to popular.

Good for him.

Bad for us.

Wrong. Obama ended nothing. Bush ended it when he was forced to sign sofa via the Iraqi government.

Iraqi wanted us gone. Period.

Jeez. Gimme a break.

If Obama wanted to keep 10,000 troops ion there to keep it stable, as he should have, all he had to do was say....'sign this now giving our troops immunity or we will take everyone home today along with all of our arms and equipment.'

Dam...pathetic how you guys simply take liars for their word.

 

[jillian]

And for the record, we told you loons that saddam was a creep but he was our keep and kept the fundies at bay.

he also stood between us and iran.

but why would neocon idiots understand that?

 

[jillian]

listen up Ms. Notary Public.....

Obama accepted the responsibility of the Iraq conflict when he took the oath.

He opted to end the war as he promised, but as opposed to looking at possible negative ramifications of a full pull out, he simply acted and washed his hands of it.

But only a mental midget would not realize that it would create a vacuum and to create a vacuum in that region is a very dangerous thing.

He didn't care. He wanted to popular.

Good for him.

Bad for us.

Wrong. Obama ended nothing. Bush ended it when he was forced to sign sofa via the Iraqi government.

Iraqi wanted us gone. Period.

Jeez. Gimme a break.

If Obama wanted to keep 10,000 troops ion there to keep it stable, as he should have, all he had to do was say....'sign this now giving our troops immunity or we will take everyone home today along with all of our arms and equipment.'

Dam...pathetic how you guys simply take liars for their word.

does the fact that they wouldn't enter into an agreement with us to keep troops there get into your thick skull at all?

 

[Jarhead]

the CAUSE OF THE SLAUGHTER is the destabilization of Iraq which occurred when the idiot in the white house from 2000 to 2008 started an unnecessary war that lasted for 10 years.

we told you THEN that removing saddam would leave the region in turmoil.

or are we supposed to let our kids die there for another decade to appease neocon loons?

listen up Ms. Notary Public.....

Obama accepted the responsibility of the Iraq conflict when he took the oath.

He opted to end the war as he promised, but as opposed to looking at possible negative ramifications of a full pull out, he simply acted and washed his hands of it.

But only a mental midget would not realize that it would create a vacuum and to create a vacuum in that region is a very dangerous thing.

He didn't care. He wanted to popular.

Good for him.

Bad for us.

well, lying loser.... the middle east was destabilized by neocon idiots who lied about why they were going there. Obama deranged wingers like you want a state of perpetual war for no reason.

then when you break your toys you blame everyone else.

now YOU listen up, WE CAN'T KEEP FIGHTING YOUR WAR OF CHOICE FOREVER WHILE YOU CUT TAXES FOR RICH PEOPLE AND SAY THERE'S NO MONEY FOR DOMESTIC PROGRAMS;.

p.s. baby bush was the only president in history to cut taxes during war time.

congrats!

it blows my mind that the State of NY gives notary licenses to just anyone.

Now...do us all a favor little girl.....do some reading.....use your brain...

Oops...sorry.

That was insensitive of me.

Carry on.

 

[Jarhead]

Wrong. Obama ended nothing. Bush ended it when he was forced to sign sofa via the Iraqi government.

Iraqi wanted us gone. Period.

Jeez. Gimme a break.

If Obama wanted to keep 10,000 troops ion there to keep it stable, as he should have, all he had to do was say....'sign this now giving our troops immunity or we will take everyone home today along with all of our arms and equipment.'

Dam...pathetic how you guys simply take liars for their word.

does the fact that they wouldn't enter into an agreement with us to keep troops there get into your thick skull at all?

learn to read little girl.
If we threatened to take our toys with us and not train them at all...they would beg us to stay.
See now little girl? They are begging us to come back.
Got it little notary public attorney wannabe?

And by the way lawyerwannabe...

The reason they have neg repping is to allow those that cant control their emotions, to feel satisfaction when they read a post they don't like. The positive repping was instituted to rationalize and offset the negative repping.

I suggest you learn to control your emotions.

Your negative reppings are laughable.

 

[PoliticalChic]

the CAUSE OF THE SLAUGHTER is the destabilization of Iraq which occurred when the idiot in the white house from 2000 to 2008 started an unnecessary war that lasted for 10 years.

we told you THEN that removing saddam would leave the region in turmoil.

or are we supposed to let our kids die there for another decade to appease neocon loons?

listen up Ms. Notary Public.....

Obama accepted the responsibility of the Iraq conflict when he took the oath.

He opted to end the war as he promised, but as opposed to looking at possible negative ramifications of a full pull out, he simply acted and washed his hands of it.

But only a mental midget would not realize that it would create a vacuum and to create a vacuum in that region is a very dangerous thing.

He didn't care. He wanted to popular.

Good for him.

Bad for us.

Wrong. Obama ended nothing. Bush ended it when he was forced to sign sofa via the Iraqi government.

Iraqi wanted us gone. Period.

Wrong.


The problem was totally due to the ineptitude of Obama, and folks like you who put him in office.


"In one of his final acts in office, President Bush in December of 2008 had signed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the Iraqi government that set the clock ticking on ending the war he’d launched in March of 2003. The SOFA provided a legal basis for the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq after the United Nations Security Council mandate for the occupation mission expired at the end of 2008. But it required that all U.S. forces be gone from Iraq by January 1, 2012,...."
Iraq?s Government, Not Obama, Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence | TIME.com



Do you understand that?

Bush left Obama with three years.....three years....to work out an agreement.

The dunce could not.