Obama: US troops out of Iraq by 2010

Status
Not open for further replies.
but what about the 50 thousand troops staying

what are they going to be doing and arnt they going to be just sitting ducks?

don't let anyone fool you Pandora...those are real troops. The troops in Vietnam were called "military advisors" too.

There will still be flare ups...which means more killing. I guess Obama is throwing the Republicans a bone.
 
Werbung:
Every time there's a little saber rattling, particularly from countries that are no real threat such as Iran, you and the other hawks go into armchair war mode...in which you immediately start speculating about what to do about this terrible "threat", ideas that almost always involve death and destruction.

Care to point when I ever advocated for invasion, or air raids for that matter, against Iran?

All of this said, if you think a nuclear Iran is not a proliferation threat or a threat to regional security, then you are delusional.
 
don't let anyone fool you Pandora...those are real troops. The troops in Vietnam were called "military advisors" too.

There will still be flare ups...which means more killing. I guess Obama is throwing the Republicans a bone.

The President is "throwing us a bone" by keeping soldiers in combat areas? This is ridiculous. What Obama is doing to attempting to ensure stability, which is vital if Iraq has any chance being a functioning state, and also vital to regional, as well as economic, security.
 
don't let anyone fool you Pandora...those are real troops. The troops in Vietnam were called "military advisors" too.

There will still be flare ups...which means more killing. I guess Obama is throwing the Republicans a bone.

I am not sure what to make of it.

A couple of days ago Obama changed the rules that reporters can take pictures of the dead soldiers caskets. I am against using dead troops for political purposes, its a private matter. When my brother died I would have been really upset had Anderson Cooper used his casket for some political agenda.

Obama, it seems would not want a bunch of dead soldiers for the media to take pictures of becaus it would make him look bad.....so he must not think they will die?


or.... here is an interesting twist,

he wants as much death and violence as possible and his minions in the media to document it so the American public will swear off war forever and put up with any submission needed to keep from blood shed and violence.

we might even beg the UN to rule us for our safe keeping?

ok ok so the second one is probably just silly
 
The President is "throwing us a bone" by keeping soldiers in combat areas? This is ridiculous. What Obama is doing to attempting to ensure stability, which is vital if Iraq has any chance being a functioning state, and also vital to regional, as well as economic, security.

I've got a novel idea...why don't we remove ALL troops from Iraq and let the chips fall where they may?... we have no business trying to nation build.

"Ensuring stability" is a code term for force..if Iraq can't become a functioning democracy on their own, maybe they're not destined to become one at this time in their history.

Those who make their living off military conflicts have got their hooks into Obama too.
 
It sounds like you think they will be safe. I trust your judgement on this so I wont worry to much about it.

By chance now that Obama is starting a new combat plan for Afganastan, did he mention an exit strategy?

Well they will be able to defend themselves, this does not mean there will be no further deaths or fighting.

As for an exit in Afghanistan, I have not heard of one put forth by the White House.
 
Well they will be able to defend themselves, this does not mean there will be no further deaths or fighting.

As for an exit in Afghanistan, I have not heard of one put forth by the White House.

Umm,

I thought Obama said we need one, Hillary too

Its no longer important to have an exit strategy?

odd!
 
I've got a novel idea...why don't we remove ALL troops from Iraq and let the chips fall where they may?... we have no business trying to nation build.

"Ensuring stability" is a code term for force..if Iraq can't become a functioning democracy on their own, maybe they're not destined to become one at this time in their history.

Those who make their living off military conflicts have got their hooks into Obama too.

What about Afganastan?

dont you think we should exit there too?
 
I am not sure what to make of it.

A couple of days ago Obama changed the rules that reporters can take pictures of the dead soldiers caskets. I am against using dead troops for political purposes, its a private matter. When my brother died I would have been really upset had Anderson Cooper used his casket for some political agenda.

Obama, it seems would not want a bunch of dead soldiers for the media to take pictures of becaus it would make him look bad.....so he must not think they will die?


or.... here is an interesting twist,

he wants as much death and violence as possible and his minions in the media to document it so the American public will swear off war forever and put up with any submission needed to keep from blood shed and violence.

we might even beg the UN to rule us for our safe keeping?

ok ok so the second one is probably just silly

I agree with the lifting of the ban on photographing dead soldiers,,remember that was put in place by the first Bush to keep up support for the original Iraq invasion. Then it was vigorously defended by his son, so support for the second invasion wouldn't wane too soon. America doesn't like seeing their own dead, Vietnam proved that.
 
I agree with the lifting of the ban on photographing dead soldiers,,remember that was put in place by the first Bush to keep up support for the original Iraq invasion. Then it was vigorously defended by his son, so support for the second invasion wouldn't wane too soon. America doesn't like seeing their own dead, Vietnam proved that.

I dont like seeing our troops die but more so I dont like to see them in harms way or die because of a bunch of morons in congress playing games with their lives, like they did in Vietnam. That is what makes me so mad.

I would personally be happy if I knew when I died it was fighting for my country or my ideals.

better than dying of cancer or aids or TB or something
 
I've got a novel idea...why don't we remove ALL troops from Iraq and let the chips fall where they may?... we have no business trying to nation build.

Because the political, economic, and potential proliferation outcomes of this action would be devastating.

Further, our security assurances would become all but meaningless to our allies. This will increase the speed of states pursuing nuclear weapons in an attempt to ensure their own security.

If China feels we have no resolve to respond to a crisis over Taiwan, what exactly is it that keeps them from simply invading? United States security credibility is a must to ensure peace in many areas of the world.

"Ensuring stability" is a code term for force..if Iraq can't become a functioning democracy on their own, maybe they're not destined to become one at this time in their history.

We need to stabilize Iraq, perhaps not as much for the sake of Iraq, but for the sake of United States credibility in foreign affairs. As pointed out above, it is the credibility of our security assurances that often prevent major conflicts for erupting.
 
I agree with the lifting of the ban on photographing dead soldiers,,remember that was put in place by the first Bush to keep up support for the original Iraq invasion. Then it was vigorously defended by his son, so support for the second invasion wouldn't wane too soon. America doesn't like seeing their own dead, Vietnam proved that.

The ban is not really "lifted" persay. It is now up to the families of the soldiers as I understand it.
 
You know what is so funny about this.

back during the primarys when Obama said he would start to pull troops out within the first 30 days blah blah blah

Rush said that if he won he would not be pulling anyone out before 2010 and even then he will leave 60 to 70 thousand troops there.

He was off by a few thousand with the troops to stay but other than that he nailed obama dead on with what he would do

My response to your post, this post , is not on the "subject" . Instead I need to ask you if in very recent days, last two-three weeks(Im writing this post on 11-14-09) or so , Have YOU NOTICED EXTREME CENSORSHIP on this POLITICAL FORM- HOUSE of POLITICS? I ,and others as well, have many post deleted when they are critical of Obama , his policies or those of his cronies?
I find the Conservative voices and some Moderates are being silenced by radical extremist from the left. Do you know of a political forum that allows FREE SPEECH for ALL, not just LEFTIST? Please let me know!
 
Werbung:
My response to your post, this post , is not on the "subject" . Instead I need to ask you if in very recent days, last two-three weeks(Im writing this post on 11-14-09) or so , Have YOU NOTICED EXTREME CENSORSHIP on this POLITICAL FORM- HOUSE of POLITICS? I ,and others as well, have many post deleted when they are critical of Obama , his policies or those of his cronies?
I find the Conservative voices and some Moderates are being silenced by radical extremist from the left. Do you know of a political forum that allows FREE SPEECH for ALL, not just LEFTIST? Please let me know!

Yes, but its not new or recent, its just the way this forum has been for almost as long as I have posted here. You are not going to win this one, the mods will let the others tease, taunt and make fun of you till you blow up and say something back then they will ban you or you will get sick of being the brunt of all their jokes and leave.

You should try a conservative political forum, Their only downfall is not many libs post in those so you dont get a good mix of ideas, but I dont think they would censor you.

No one else wants to read this and the posts will probably be deleted anyway so just pm me, ok
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top