• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Is Sending 275 US Troops To Iraq

My only problem with is that they only sent 275. Send in 27,500 with the sole mission to protect the embassy and immediate vicinity...AGGRESSIVELY...and with drone and CAS.

Umm... I dunno if our "embassy" there would house 27,500 soldiers.
 
My only problem with is that they only sent 275. Send in 27,500 with the sole mission to protect the embassy and immediate vicinity...AGGRESSIVELY...and with drone and CAS.

Yea, lets put many more in harms way for nothing. Sorry, cant agree. Show me a purpose that is needed for the US and I may agree with you.
 
No need for troops. They should be sending in airplanes to evacuate all Americans from anywhere they might be in the country. Time to close the embassy and put Iraq in the rear view mirror.
 
I am all for America being for non-interventionism, but if you went in to do a job in Iraq, end the job. Don't leave it half-assed. Don't just pack your **** and leave. You went in, you overthrew a dictator which for better or worse kept the peace in that territory.
Islamic rebels wouldn't have happened under Saddam because he was a brutal dictator.

So don't make it sound like the USA can just pack **** up and leave. No, you ****ed up. Take responsibility and clean up the mess or accept that yet again, you went in, put your dick in the pond, stirred the fishes and left.


I have to agree as much as I hate war and was against the war in Iraq from the start, we owe it to the people to stand by what we promised them - freedom from a dictatorship and to be able to create a representative self government. We totally ****ed up there and have to stand up and admit it. I don't have any answers to how we can fix it but I don't feel that it's right to do nothing.
 
'WASHINGTON – The United State is deploying up to 275 military troops to Iraq to protect the U.S. Embassy and other American interests and is considering sending a contingent of special forces soldiers as Iraq struggles to repel a rampant insurgency, officials said Monday. The White House insisted anew the U.S. would not be sending combat troops and thrusting America into a new Iraq war.

President Obama, in a formal report to Congress, said the troops in in the deployment he was announcing would be equipped for combat and would remain in Iraq until the security situation improved. About 160 troops are already in Iraq, including 50 Marines and more than 100 Army soldiers. Some of those soldiers have only recently arrived.'


US sending 275 troops to Iraq | Fox News



So, it's official...he went from 'no troops' to '275 troops'.

Is this how Vietnam started (after the Gulf of Tonkin incident)?

isis will make a goal at attacking US interest(consulates/embassy) to draw us back in.
 
My only problem with is that they only sent 275. Send in 27,500 with the sole mission to protect the embassy and immediate vicinity...AGGRESSIVELY...and with drone and CAS.

You don't need 27,000 troops to launch drones for surveillance and/or strategic bombing. Besides, have the Iraqis asked for American troops on the ground? Again, I go back to Ukraine and Putin/Russia. The US gave up control of Iraq - Russia gave up control of the Ukraine. You cannot condemn Russian aggression in Ukraine, in support of those who want them to intervene and then support US aggression in Iraq. In both cases, internal divisions are leading to civil unrest and "revolution". It's not America's place to choose sides in a civil war. But protecting American interests, nationals and property in Iraq is perfectly reasonable and expected.
 
My only problem with is that they only sent 275. Send in 27,500 with the sole mission to protect the embassy and immediate vicinity...AGGRESSIVELY...and with drone and CAS.

We are in a catch 22 at this point. We can't allow Iraq to fall to ISIS. The future for the world and for the US is bleak with a psychotic group like ISIS in charge of Iraq and Syria (and Jordan).

On the other hand, the ME is so insane in its culture that Iraq is resistant to allowing US troops on the ground for political reasons.

On the bright side, if the US can manage to get through this crisis with ISIS destroyed and Iraq intact it will go a long way to returning US to prominence in the ME.
 
I would not bitch about him not sending troops. You are wrong there, like most times.
And his is a failure.

Sure you wouldn't! :roll::lamo:roll:
 
Sure you wouldn't! :roll::lamo:roll:

I have posted against these wars many times. So don't try to come here with some revisionist bull crap. I agree with almost nothing about Obama's policies.
Staying out of Iraq is what we should do.
 
We are in a catch 22 at this point. We can't allow Iraq to fall to ISIS. The future for the world and for the US is bleak with a psychotic group like ISIS in charge of Iraq and Syria (and Jordan).

On the other hand, the ME is so insane in its culture that Iraq is resistant to allowing US troops on the ground for political reasons.

On the bright side, if the US can manage to get through this crisis with ISIS destroyed and Iraq intact it will go a long way to returning US to prominence in the ME.
If Obama showed even a hint of testicular fortitude, this would have never happened. They are open and brazen precisely because Obama has repeatedly shown himself to be a little bitch in the foreign affairs arena.

At the same time...the government of Iraq...hell...the PEOPLE of Iraq need to step up. That part of the equation I put on Bush. He should have told them in no uncertain terms...you have us here for 5 years. After that...we will support you but you have to EARN your freedom and that means you have to stand up against ****heads like ISIS. Instead...we piddled around for 8 years following the end of the war against Iraq. Thats horrible post war management and ops.
 
You don't need 27,000 troops to launch drones for surveillance and/or strategic bombing. Besides, have the Iraqis asked for American troops on the ground? Again, I go back to Ukraine and Putin/Russia. The US gave up control of Iraq - Russia gave up control of the Ukraine. You cannot condemn Russian aggression in Ukraine, in support of those who want them to intervene and then support US aggression in Iraq. In both cases, internal divisions are leading to civil unrest and "revolution". It's not America's place to choose sides in a civil war. But protecting American interests, nationals and property in Iraq is perfectly reasonable and expected.
I need 27,000 troops in place with orders to aggressively defend themselves so none of those ****head get it in their domes that attacking my 275 is even a viable consideration.
 
Yea, lets put many more in harms way for nothing. Sorry, cant agree. Show me a purpose that is needed for the US and I may agree with you.
275 troops are troops in harms way. 27,500...thats "hey...**** it...lets go this other way" kinda support. I dont want to see the 275 sacrificed and left hung out to dry.
 
In and out and in and out and in and out and in and out. 1. Why have an embassy there? 2. Why not remove our people all together instead 275 troops vs. 10,000 psychotic terrorists?
Obama is lost. Does anyone believe he did not contemplate something like this happening when nearly 100% of the Washington buttheads knew it would? Impeach Obama.
 
I have posted against these wars many times. So don't try to come here with some revisionist bull crap. I agree with almost nothing about Obama's policies.
Staying out of Iraq is what we should do.

LOL so you just admitted you would gripe about troops being sent which is what I said you would gripe about. Thank you for proving my point. Your comments display Obama Deranged Syndrome because no matter WHAT he does, you will gripe.
 
I have to agree as much as I hate war and was against the war in Iraq from the start, we owe it to the people to stand by what we promised them - freedom from a dictatorship and to be able to create a representative self government. We totally ****ed up there and have to stand up and admit it. I don't have any answers to how we can fix it but I don't feel that it's right to do nothing.

Yeah. Well I may have been a bit harsh with my language but the point I made still stands.

ISIS wants an islamic dictatorship.
Saddam had a secular dictatorship, hell, he had people in his inner circle who were jews and christians.
Iran would, given the chance, throw it's weight around and support a puppet shiite government in iraq.

Which one is worse? Well, at least in Saddams' Iraq you didn't have to worry about islamist training camps for terrorists coz he wouldn't permit them (not because he was a fan of fighting terrorism but because he knew that they'd be islamist and rise against him, like it happened in Libya a few years ago and in syria). And Iran is a rogue state currently. I mean, I share Christophers' Hitchens belief that in the short future, maybe by 2030, Iran will come around as the current generation of people who are now in their 20s grow up and whom despise the current totalitarian regime and who have a tendency to be less religious and less extremist. But that's a long time away. And may never happen, I mean, there is no certainty. Totalitarian regimes have survived on even less public support. Repression doesn't need a 1-1 exchange.
 
I have posted against these wars many times. So don't try to come here with some revisionist bull crap. I agree with almost nothing about Obama's policies.
Staying out of Iraq is what we should do.

If you say so. :roll:
 
If these troops are just to remain around the Embassy and provide protection for American interests in the region, I have no issue with it.

If these troops are supposed to actively engage ISIS in any ways, then this bothers me because we should not be taking Half Measures in this situation.
 
I will never be able to take an organization called ISIS seriously after watching Archer.
 
'WASHINGTON – The United State is deploying up to 275 military troops to Iraq to protect the U.S. Embassy and other American interests and is considering sending a contingent of special forces soldiers as Iraq struggles to repel a rampant insurgency, officials said Monday. The White House insisted anew the U.S. would not be sending combat troops and thrusting America into a new Iraq war.

President Obama, in a formal report to Congress, said the troops in in the deployment he was announcing would be equipped for combat and would remain in Iraq until the security situation improved. About 160 troops are already in Iraq, including 50 Marines and more than 100 Army soldiers. Some of those soldiers have only recently arrived.'


US sending 275 troops to Iraq | Fox News



So, it's official...he went from 'no troops' to '275 troops'.

Is this how Vietnam started (after the Gulf of Tonkin incident)?

So, being outnumbered by the insurgents, that will be 275 dead men. He needs to get American diplomats out of Iraq. This will be another slaughter of Americans which he has engineered. If he can't get us all killed, might as well get a few of us. What a sick bastard we have in the White House.
 
The man is sending 250 troops to prop up an embassy that may come under siege. For all those who think this is a bad idea, I hope you aren't the ones asking for Hilary's head because she screwed up Benghazi. For all those asking answers for how Benghazi can happen, how one of our ambassadors can be killed, you should be cheering this action.

I will say this is the best decision the President and his team made in this crisis.

It IS a bad idea. He should be getting our diplomats back to the US!
 
'WASHINGTON – The United State is deploying up to 275 military troops to Iraq to protect the U.S. Embassy and other American interests and is considering sending a contingent of special forces soldiers as Iraq struggles to repel a rampant insurgency, officials said Monday. The White House insisted anew the U.S. would not be sending combat troops and thrusting America into a new Iraq war.

President Obama, in a formal report to Congress, said the troops in in the deployment he was announcing would be equipped for combat and would remain in Iraq until the security situation improved. About 160 troops are already in Iraq, including 50 Marines and more than 100 Army soldiers. Some of those soldiers have only recently arrived.'


US sending 275 troops to Iraq | Fox News



So, it's official...he went from 'no troops' to '275 troops'.

Is this how Vietnam started (after the Gulf of Tonkin incident)?

Obama will send around 200,000+ troops to Iraq to wage another war there. That's not up for debate--it's a fact, because he has been ordered to do so by his superiors. . .

images
 
'WASHINGTON – The United State is deploying up to 275 military troops to Iraq to protect the U.S. Embassy and other American interests and is considering sending a contingent of special forces soldiers as Iraq struggles to repel a rampant insurgency, officials said Monday. The White House insisted anew the U.S. would not be sending combat troops and thrusting America into a new Iraq war.

President Obama, in a formal report to Congress, said the troops in in the deployment he was announcing would be equipped for combat and would remain in Iraq until the security situation improved. About 160 troops are already in Iraq, including 50 Marines and more than 100 Army soldiers. Some of those soldiers have only recently arrived.'


US sending 275 troops to Iraq | Fox News



So, it's official...he went from 'no troops' to '275 troops'.

Is this how Vietnam started (after the Gulf of Tonkin incident)?


From what I understand, the troops are there to protect our own embassy and to serve as advisers to the Iraqis.

With some people the poor guy can do no good no matter what. If ISIS storms our Embassy, starts executing Americans and posting videos on the Internet, its Benghazi all over again. If he keeps troops there, this is Obama's war. I honestly believe some people could care less about their country and all they care about is what's in the best interest of their political party. There are over a thousand Americans in that Embassy including one of my best friends who need to be protected from homicidal maniacs.
 
Last edited:
If these troops are just to remain around the Embassy and provide protection for American interests in the region, I have no issue with it.

If these troops are supposed to actively engage ISIS in any ways, then this bothers me because we should not be taking Half Measures in this situation.

I think if our embassy is attacked or it looks like ISIS is about to take Baghdad, all heck will break out. ISIS has declared war on America and said something to the effect "see you in New York." These people need to be stopped.
 
Back
Top Bottom