The Newest Big Lie

[Kosh]

Do you dipshits realize we still have troops in Germany, Italy, and Japan...and we actually won that war in 1945.....and we have troops in South Korea as well......

And you guys think just pulling out troops when the fighting isn't over...just ends things...you guys are real geniuses.....

The European Occupation army were not fighting an insurgency in the host countries like we fought in Iraq for years(the highest death toll was in 2007, 4 years after the toppling of Saddam's regime), they were there initially to protect those countries from the Red Army.

Doesn't alter the fact 150,000 troops still in Europe/Asia TODAY!
But our military tried to get Obama to negotiate the Status of Forces Agreement and he wouldn't because to do so would be counter to his promise..withdraw all troops!
Consequently whatever gains our military had in Iraq would as they are doing now be for naught!

The same thing that happened during the Bush negotiations in 2008 happened during the 2011 ones. The Iraqis wanted us out. They want the war with the Sunnis.

FACTS... Why not do some research rather then spout an unsupported OPINION????
NO it didn't! The Bush negotiations went on even after Bush was out of office.
President Obama’s announcement on Friday that all American troops would leave Iraq by the end of the year was an occasion for celebration for many, but some top American military officials were dismayed by the announcement, seeing it as the president’s putting the best face on a breakdown in tortured negotiations with the Iraqis.

And for the negotiators who labored all year to avoid that outcome, it represented the triumph of politics over the reality of Iraq’s fragile security’s requiring some troops to stay, a fact everyone had assumed would prevail.
But officials also held out hope that after the withdrawal, the two countries could restart negotiations more productively, as two sovereign nations.

This year, American military officials had said they wanted a “residual” force of as many as tens of thousands of American troops to remain in Iraq past 2011 as an insurance policy against any violence. Those numbers were scaled back, but the expectation was that at least about 3,000 to 5,000 American troops would remain.

At the end of the Bush administration, when the Status of Forces Agreement, or SOFA, was negotiated,
setting 2011 as the end of the United States’ military role, officials had said the deadline was set for political reasons, to put a symbolic end to the occupation and establish Iraq’s sovereignty.
But there was an understanding, a senior official here said, that a sizable American force would stay in Iraq beyond that date.

Over the last year, in late-night meetings at the fortified compound of the Iraqi president, Jalal Talabani, and in videoconferences between Baghdad and Washington, American and Iraqi negotiators had struggled to reach an agreement.
All the while, both Mr. Obama and the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, gave the world a wink and nod, always saying that Iraq was ready to stand on its own but never fully closing the door on the possibility of American troops’ staying on.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/w...expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0

And the reasons why President Bush was not able to secure a long term deal for US Troops was........the same reason President Obama wasn't able to keep troop there any longer than the final SOFA. The Iraqis didn't want us there.

And always the afr left drones are wrong, but they will do all they can to protect their messiah!

 

[BlindBoo]

We told Obama, in December 2011, not to telegraph our withdrawal to enemy forces so that they can know when they can move in and take over.
Well they HAVE moved in and took over.

Since it was President Bush who made the agreement in Nov. 2008, the telegraph had already been sent. It was the Central Government in Iraq that shit all over the Sunnis in Anbar Provence that caused them to align with their former partners al Qaeda in Iraq (re-branded as ISIS). It is a civil war facilitated by the failed US/UK led occupation and it now threatens the entire region.

Yes Obama has more time logged dealing with Iran to bow to them, yet would not give any time to negotiating Iraq. His goal was to appease the drones like you, instead of actually leading..

Drone-Master-Kosh and the Far Right lies and talking points

 

[Kosh]

We told Obama, in December 2011, not to telegraph our withdrawal to enemy forces so that they can know when they can move in and take over.
Well they HAVE moved in and took over.

Since it was President Bush who made the agreement in Nov. 2008, the telegraph had already been sent. It was the Central Government in Iraq that shit all over the Sunnis in Anbar Provence that caused them to align with their former partners al Qaeda in Iraq (re-branded as ISIS). It is a civil war facilitated by the failed US/UK led occupation and it now threatens the entire region.

Yes Obama has more time logged dealing with Iran to bow to them, yet would not give any time to negotiating Iraq. His goal was to appease the drones like you, instead of actually leading..

Drone-Master-Kosh and the Far Right lies and talking points

Says the far left drone spouting far left religious talking points not based in reality..

 

[BlindBoo]

We told Obama, in December 2011, not to telegraph our withdrawal to enemy forces so that they can know when they can move in and take over.
Well they HAVE moved in and took over.

Since it was President Bush who made the agreement in Nov. 2008, the telegraph had already been sent. It was the Central Government in Iraq that shit all over the Sunnis in Anbar Provence that caused them to align with their former partners al Qaeda in Iraq (re-branded as ISIS). It is a civil war facilitated by the failed US/UK led occupation and it now threatens the entire region.

Yes Obama has more time logged dealing with Iran to bow to them, yet would not give any time to negotiating Iraq. His goal was to appease the drones like you, instead of actually leading..

Drone-Master-Kosh and the Far Right lies and talking points

Says the far left drone spouting far left religious talking points not based in reality..

Thank you Drone-Master-Kosh

 

[Kosh]

We told Obama, in December 2011, not to telegraph our withdrawal to enemy forces so that they can know when they can move in and take over.
Well they HAVE moved in and took over.

Since it was President Bush who made the agreement in Nov. 2008, the telegraph had already been sent. It was the Central Government in Iraq that shit all over the Sunnis in Anbar Provence that caused them to align with their former partners al Qaeda in Iraq (re-branded as ISIS). It is a civil war facilitated by the failed US/UK led occupation and it now threatens the entire region.

Yes Obama has more time logged dealing with Iran to bow to them, yet would not give any time to negotiating Iraq. His goal was to appease the drones like you, instead of actually leading..

Drone-Master-Kosh and the Far Right lies and talking points

Says the far left drone spouting far left religious talking points not based in reality..

Thank you Drone-Master-Kosh

Says the far left drone!

 

[M14 Shooter]

replace 1967 and insert 1997, above

There's a topic waiting for your response.
George Zimmerman back in the news: another shooting incident

 

[The Rabbi]

Do you dipshits realize we still have troops in Germany, Italy, and Japan...and we actually won that war in 1945.....and we have troops in South Korea as well......

And you guys think just pulling out troops when the fighting isn't over...just ends things...you guys are real geniuses.....

The European Occupation army were not fighting an insurgency in the host countries like we fought in Iraq for years(the highest death toll was in 2007, 4 years after the toppling of Saddam's regime), they were there initially to protect those countries from the Red Army.

Doesn't alter the fact 150,000 troops still in Europe/Asia TODAY!
But our military tried to get Obama to negotiate the Status of Forces Agreement and he wouldn't because to do so would be counter to his promise..withdraw all troops!
Consequently whatever gains our military had in Iraq would as they are doing now be for naught!

The same thing that happened during the Bush negotiations in 2008 happened during the 2011 ones. The Iraqis wanted us out. They want the war with the Sunnis.

FACTS... Why not do some research rather then spout an unsupported OPINION????
NO it didn't! The Bush negotiations went on even after Bush was out of office.
President Obama’s announcement on Friday that all American troops would leave Iraq by the end of the year was an occasion for celebration for many, but some top American military officials were dismayed by the announcement, seeing it as the president’s putting the best face on a breakdown in tortured negotiations with the Iraqis.

And for the negotiators who labored all year to avoid that outcome, it represented the triumph of politics over the reality of Iraq’s fragile security’s requiring some troops to stay, a fact everyone had assumed would prevail.
But officials also held out hope that after the withdrawal, the two countries could restart negotiations more productively, as two sovereign nations.

This year, American military officials had said they wanted a “residual” force of as many as tens of thousands of American troops to remain in Iraq past 2011 as an insurance policy against any violence. Those numbers were scaled back, but the expectation was that at least about 3,000 to 5,000 American troops would remain.

At the end of the Bush administration, when the Status of Forces Agreement, or SOFA, was negotiated,
setting 2011 as the end of the United States’ military role, officials had said the deadline was set for political reasons, to put a symbolic end to the occupation and establish Iraq’s sovereignty.
But there was an understanding, a senior official here said, that a sizable American force would stay in Iraq beyond that date.

Over the last year, in late-night meetings at the fortified compound of the Iraqi president, Jalal Talabani, and in videoconferences between Baghdad and Washington, American and Iraqi negotiators had struggled to reach an agreement.
All the while, both Mr. Obama and the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, gave the world a wink and nod, always saying that Iraq was ready to stand on its own but never fully closing the door on the possibility of American troops’ staying on.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/w...expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0

And the reasons why President Bush was not able to secure a long term deal for US Troops was........the same reason President Obama wasn't able to keep troop there any longer than the final SOFA. The Iraqis didn't want us there.

BUllshit.
That isnt my opinion either. That is the written statement of two former SecDefs.

 

[blackhawk]

It's true and false the true part is no one lied to you about Iraq an honest decision was made based on the intelligence at the time. Now for the false part not everything happening in Iraq is Obamas fault he does share some of the blame for the decisions he made but so does Bush as well as the Iraqi government for their decisions and the Iraqi military that has broken and run in pretty much every battle they have had with ISIS.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's true and false the true part is no one lied to you about Iraq an honest decision was made based on the intelligence at the time. Now for the false part not everything happening in Iraq is not Obamas fault he does share some of the blame for the decisions he made but so does Bush as well as the Iraqi government for their decisions and the Iraqi military that has broken and run in pretty much every battle they have had with ISIS.

Frankly I blame WInston Churchill.

It is Obama's fault. He has been in office 7 years. He had opportunities to deal with the situation he inherited. Instead of doing that he fumbled, ignored it, and allowed events to get out of hand. This is because he regularly skips his intelligence briefings and doesnt pay much attention to what's going on. And he probably has the attention span of a gnat.

 

[2aguy]

It's true and false the true part is no one lied to you about Iraq an honest decision was made based on the intelligence at the time. Now for the false part not everything happening in Iraq is not Obamas fault he does share some of the blame for the decisions he made but so does Bush as well as the Iraqi government for their decisions and the Iraqi military that has broken and run in pretty much every battle they have had with ISIS.

Frankly I blame WInston Churchill.

It is Obama's fault. He has been in office 7 years. He had opportunities to deal with the situation he inherited. Instead of doing that he fumbled, ignored it, and allowed events to get out of hand. This is because he regularly skips his intelligence briefings and doesnt pay much attention to what's going on. And he probably has the attention span of a gnat.

I think it is more problematic than that....he wants to return control of the area to the people he thinks it was stolen from....that is why he is so hands off with the rise of these monsters....he thinks the situation in Iraq, from before sadaam, was created by western imperialism, dittos Afghanistan, and letting it go back into their control is the way he wants it.....

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Dems were duped !!!! Lol

 

[whitehall]

The Iraq war was an honest mistake, nobody lied to the public, and anything bad that's happening now is Barack Obama's fault.

True or False?

About 35% of democrats (including Hillary) voted for boots on the ground. The President gave Saddam almost a year to comply with U.N. resolutions but he refused. Congress authorized the mission and democrat traitors undermined it. The US went further, faster and took more real estate with less casualties than any other military mission of it's kind but democrats hate it, not because of the casualties but because of the success. Democrat senate majority leader Harry Reid should have been arrested for treason when he tried to impact the morale of the Troops when he told America "the war is lost" just before the Troop Surge. The FBI should have investigated democrat activists who purchased a $10,000 full page ad in the NY Times calling the commander of U.S. forces, "betray-us". Cindy Sheehan's little band of anti-war activists turned out to be political activists when they disappeared right after Barry Hussein was elected. Bill Clinton's little war in Europe to cover up for his serial abuse of women was a mistake but we still have Troops in Bosnia while Barry Hussein withdrew Troops from the liberated country of Iraq.

 

[there4eyeM]

An illegal invasion that all participants in its approval knew to be so. There were definitely traitors involved, in both parties. Everyone who supported the war betrayed law and and US Constitution.
The closest thing to patriots were the painfully few who vocally opposed the crime.

 

[Kosh]

It's true and false the true part is no one lied to you about Iraq an honest decision was made based on the intelligence at the time. Now for the false part not everything happening in Iraq is Obamas fault he does share some of the blame for the decisions he made but so does Bush as well as the Iraqi government for their decisions and the Iraqi military that has broken and run in pretty much every battle they have had with ISIS.

The current ISIS problem belongs to Obama, after all they are just a JV team why should he worry about them right?

 

[healthmyths]

It's true and false the true part is no one lied to you about Iraq an honest decision was made based on the intelligence at the time. Now for the false part not everything happening in Iraq is Obamas fault he does share some of the blame for the decisions he made but so does Bush as well as the Iraqi government for their decisions and the Iraqi military that has broken and run in pretty much every battle they have had with ISIS.

The current ISIS problem belongs to Obama, after all they are just a JV team why should he worry about them right?

President Obama’s announcement on Friday that all American troops would leave Iraq by the end of the year was an occasion for celebration for many, but some top American military officials were dismayed by the announcement, seeing it as the president’s putting the best face on a breakdown in tortured negotiations with the Iraqis.

And for the negotiators who labored all year to avoid that outcome, it represented the triumph of politics over the reality of Iraq’s fragile security’s requiring some troops to stay, a fact everyone had assumed would prevail.
But officials also held out hope that after the withdrawal, the two countries could restart negotiations more productively, as two sovereign nations.
This year, American military officials had said they wanted a “residual” force of as many as tens of thousands of American troops to remain in Iraq past 2011 as an insurance policy against any violence. Those numbers were scaled back, but the expectation was that at least about 3,000 to 5,000 American troops would remain.
At the end of the Bush administration, when the Status of Forces Agreement, or SOFA, was negotiated, setting 2011 as the end of the United States’ military role, officials had said the deadline was set for political reasons, to put a symbolic end to the occupation and establish Iraq’s sovereignty.
But there was an understanding, a senior official here said, that a sizable American force would stay in Iraq beyond that date.

Over the last year, in late-night meetings at the fortified compound of the Iraqi president, Jalal Talabani, and in videoconferences between Baghdad and Washington, American and Iraqi negotiators had struggled to reach an agreement.
All the while, both Mr. Obama and the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, gave the world a wink and nod, always saying that Iraq was ready to stand on its own but never fully closing the door on the possibility of American troops’ staying on.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/w...expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0

 

[The Rabbi]

It's true and false the true part is no one lied to you about Iraq an honest decision was made based on the intelligence at the time. Now for the false part not everything happening in Iraq is Obamas fault he does share some of the blame for the decisions he made but so does Bush as well as the Iraqi government for their decisions and the Iraqi military that has broken and run in pretty much every battle they have had with ISIS.

The current ISIS problem belongs to Obama, after all they are just a JV team why should he worry about them right?

President Obama’s announcement on Friday that all American troops would leave Iraq by the end of the year was an occasion for celebration for many, but some top American military officials were dismayed by the announcement, seeing it as the president’s putting the best face on a breakdown in tortured negotiations with the Iraqis.

And for the negotiators who labored all year to avoid that outcome, it represented the triumph of politics over the reality of Iraq’s fragile security’s requiring some troops to stay, a fact everyone had assumed would prevail.
But officials also held out hope that after the withdrawal, the two countries could restart negotiations more productively, as two sovereign nations.
This year, American military officials had said they wanted a “residual” force of as many as tens of thousands of American troops to remain in Iraq past 2011 as an insurance policy against any violence. Those numbers were scaled back, but the expectation was that at least about 3,000 to 5,000 American troops would remain.
At the end of the Bush administration, when the Status of Forces Agreement, or SOFA, was negotiated, setting 2011 as the end of the United States’ military role, officials had said the deadline was set for political reasons, to put a symbolic end to the occupation and establish Iraq’s sovereignty.
But there was an understanding, a senior official here said, that a sizable American force would stay in Iraq beyond that date.

Over the last year, in late-night meetings at the fortified compound of the Iraqi president, Jalal Talabani, and in videoconferences between Baghdad and Washington, American and Iraqi negotiators had struggled to reach an agreement.
All the while, both Mr. Obama and the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, gave the world a wink and nod, always saying that Iraq was ready to stand on its own but never fully closing the door on the possibility of American troops’ staying on.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/w...expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0

But withdrawing the troops wasnt his idea!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

When do we talk about Obama's handing Ramadi over to ISIS

 

[TooTall]

The Iraq war was an honest mistake, nobody lied to the public, and anything bad that's happening now is Barack Obama's fault.

True or False?

True!

 

[TooTall]

The Iraq war was an honest mistake, nobody lied to the public, and anything bad that's happening now is Barack Obama's fault.

True or False?

If anyone lied it was ALL the politicians from both parties, that said Saddam had WMD's.

Evidence was missing and no one but Bush & Co. went on the airways to make a case for war without real evidence. Several of the signers of the Statement of Principles (Project for a New American Century, 1997) were members of the Bush Administration, including Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby and Wolfowitz. And let's not forget Jeb Bush, not part of the Bush Administration, but obviously a member of Bush & Co. also signed this infamous document.

Do your homework, war with Iraq was the goal of the Bush Administration from day one of the election of Bush and Cheney, they simply needed an excuse.

So why did dozens of Democrats say the exact same thing as Bush&Co?

Because they were fooled, because they worried they would look weak, because the emotions of 911 clouded their judgment - a question you might ask each of them, not me.

Your post is as usual dishonest, for you fail to mention that 126 D's voted against the Iraq Resolution, and 86 for it; 21 D's senators voted against it, and 26 for it. On the other side, 215 R's voted for it, and only six vote against it; in the Senate 48 R's vote for it and only 1 against it. It was fully owned by the Republican Party. Once again Rabbi(t) lied by omission.

The votes in the House and Senate were bipartisan and they passed the bill.

 

[Katzndogz]

This is no big deal. When isis takes Baghdad obama will ask isis what else they want.