Page 12 of 22 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 220

Thread: Obama, With Reluctance, Returns to Action in Iraq

  1. #111
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Obama, With Reluctance, Returns to Action in Iraq

    Absolutely horrible. Obama better get in there and fix the mess he left. Americans wont stand for this.

  2. #112
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Obama, With Reluctance, Returns to Action in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by shrubnose View Post
    I predict that there will be no good result to any foreign involvement in Iraq.
    You must be joking. Everyone involved stands to benefit from being there-THATS WHY WE/THEY ARE.

    Isis gets a base to wage war there and elsewhere. Its a handy location to behead Christian children and destroy the last of obscure kurdish sects, etc.
    Iran gets to expand its sphere of influence and possibly link up to Syria...meaning road access vs sea/air routes, all while suppressing sunnis.
    The US gets some semblance of security, increases stability, and maintains peace, and also defends southern oil producing regions.
    The Kurds who are now on the defensive would have more bargaining room towards the establishment of a Kurdish state.

    Though it has not happened, I could even see Russia getting involved with proxy support to Syria and Iran. This allows them to appear to be champions of peace, restore stability, perhaps gain oil access, and diminish US influence all in one shot.

    As for your hawk fallacy, its discrediting-I wouldn't use that argument.

  3. #113
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Obama, With Reluctance, Returns to Action in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post

    You're being deliberately dishonest. ISI, the precursor to ISIS, did exist in 2006. It didn't expand into Syria because well... there was no Syrian civil war to begin with. However, if ISI had been stopped in 2006, it wouldn't have become ISIS. Stop being deliberately dishonest. It will save you some embarrassment.
    Its remarkable that you somehow know the telos of someone you have never met, and by what they type, no less.

    ISIS DID NOT EXIST, THAT IS A FACTUALLY CORRECT STATEMENT. They are an incestuous group of radicals and if you want to trace out the family tree thats super-but it does not change the FACT. Much like its a FACT that these groups have expanded greatly under B. Hussein Obama.

    ISIS, was forced out of much of the fighting in Syria by Al Qaida-because they were too extreme. And they have flourished under Obama. Im sure they'd like to thank him, actually.

  4. #114
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Obama, With Reluctance, Returns to Action in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by shrubnose View Post
    I predict that there will be no good result to any foreign involvement in Iraq.
    That was an easy prediction. Child Beheadings, Forced Conversion: A ‘Christian Holocaust’ Is Happening Right Before Our Eyes

  5. #115
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,057

    Re: Obama, With Reluctance, Returns to Action in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    Its remarkable that you somehow know the telos of someone you have never met, and by what they type, no less.
    I tend to call lies out for what they are. You are being deliberately dishonest by trying to blame this on Obama when it's clear and evident that the organization existed as far back as 2006, Republicans failed to destroy it and it expanded into Syria. In short, Republicans created the clauster**** which is Iraq, ISI came to be as a result and when Republicans began the withdrawal process and Democrats continued it, they expanded into Syria. Want to prove me wrong or just debate more of your deliberately dishonest nonsense?

    ISIS DID NOT EXIST, THAT IS A FACTUALLY CORRECT STATEMENT.
    ISIS is a renaming of an organization that simply expanded into a new country. The leaders and group did in fact exist and so did the organization. If it had been stopped in 2006, it wouldn't have expanded into Syria. It existed in Iraq and the Republican administration in place failed to destroy it. Those are facts and the facts show you're being deliberately dishonest. Just like when you completely failed to rebut your erroneous and uneducated claims about Nazis being left wingers. You're making a pattern out of being deliberately dishonest by omitting information which goes against your ridiculously flawed narratives. Why?
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  6. #116
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Obama, With Reluctance, Returns to Action in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    I tend to call lies out for what they are. You are being deliberately dishonest by trying to blame this on Obama when it's clear and evident that the organization existed as far back as 2006, Republicans failed to destroy it and it expanded into Syria. In short, Republicans created the clauster**** which is Iraq, ISI came to be as a result and when Republicans began the withdrawal process and Democrats continued it, they expanded into Syria. Want to prove me wrong or just debate more of your deliberately dishonest nonsense?



    ISIS is a renaming of an organization that simply expanded into a new country. The leaders and group did in fact exist and so did the organization. If it had been stopped in 2006, it wouldn't have expanded into Syria. It existed in Iraq and the Republican administration in place failed to destroy it. Those are facts and the facts show you're being deliberately dishonest. Just like when you completely failed to rebut your erroneous and uneducated claims about Nazis being left wingers. You're making a pattern out of being deliberately dishonest by omitting information which goes against your ridiculously flawed narratives. Why?
    You appear to have left Obama out of this tale, as if he just happened upon this. 6 years, and he ignored his generals, the Iraqi govt, and the situation on the ground. In January, ISIS took Ramadi. Nothing.

    Obama is the sitting POTUS and therefore Commander in Chief-this happened on his watch, nobody else's. See how the election goes in november for an idea of what people are buying.

  7. #117
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,057

    Re: Obama, With Reluctance, Returns to Action in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    You appear to have left Obama out of this tale, as if he just happened upon this. 6 years, and he ignored his generals, the Iraqi govt, and the situation on the ground. In January, ISIS took Ramadi. Nothing.

    Obama is the sitting POTUS and therefore Commander in Chief-this happened on his watch, nobody else's. See how the election goes in november for an idea of what people are buying.
    You're being dishonest again. Here was your original statement:

    ISIS DID NOT EXIST, THAT IS A FACTUALLY CORRECT STATEMENT.
    ISI (Future ISIS) did exist, it just hadn't expanded into Syria. The organization, leaders, mission and structure was there. Now, if you want to blame Obama for its expansion, sure. Go wingnuts on the matter. However, it didn't come to exist as a result of Obama's foreign policy. It existed long before that. I'm sure that since you've now been educated, you'll recant on your uneducated statements.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  8. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Obama, With Reluctance, Returns to Action in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    You're being dishonest again. Here was your original statement:



    ISI (Future ISIS) did exist, it just hadn't expanded into Syria. The organization, leaders, mission and structure was there. Now, if you want to blame Obama for its expansion, sure. Go wingnuts on the matter. However, it didn't come to exist as a result of Obama's foreign policy. It existed long before that. I'm sure that since you've now been educated, you'll recant on your uneducated statements.
    Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius. Splinter groups are a common thing in Islamism-you can refer to ISIS as a splinter group if you'd like, but a precursor is not the same thing. Please focus and stop diverting.

  9. #119
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,908

    Re: Obama, With Reluctance, Returns to Action in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    Its remarkable that you somehow know the telos of someone you have never met, and by what they type, no less.

    ISIS DID NOT EXIST, THAT IS A FACTUALLY CORRECT STATEMENT. They are an incestuous group of radicals and if you want to trace out the family tree thats super-but it does not change the FACT. Much like its a FACT that these groups have expanded greatly under B. Hussein Obama.

    ISIS, was forced out of much of the fighting in Syria by Al Qaida-because they were too extreme. And they have flourished under Obama. Im sure they'd like to thank him, actually.
    Gees, I can link a family tree to "Muhammad."

    I read too much....

    I don't even know where to begin....

  10. #120
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,375

    Re: Obama, With Reluctance, Returns to Action in Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    You appear to have left Obama out of this tale, as if he just happened upon this. 6 years, and he ignored his generals, the Iraqi govt, and the situation on the ground. In January, ISIS took Ramadi. Nothing.

    Obama is the sitting POTUS and therefore Commander in Chief-this happened on his watch, nobody else's. See how the election goes in november for an idea of what people are buying.
    What happened on Obama's watch? Has the US been attacked again? No, only a Republican would allow that. You just mad because Obama didn't say "bring it on" like the incompetent Bush did and get 4000 American's killed in a hopelessly useless war. Obama followed Bush's signed agreement to the letter and when Bush's man Maliki said leave he did. If Bush's plan was good we would not be in this mess. But it was FAR from good and in fact was a recipe for disaster. Even the National review and Rand Paul agree. It looks like you are being left out to dry again.

    Don
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-blame-presid/

Page 12 of 22 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •