• 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!

CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

Yea, its all Obama's fault. 2 years left then you will have to come up with something else.
 
Grant said:
How do you know that? Why would that have mattered?
Click to expand...

You can't go back in the past and play "what would have happened if..." with any level of absolute certainty. However, the number of US troops occupying Iraq because we didn't like the government they had before would tell me that it's unlikely anyone would be put in power by any means without at least the tacit approval of the United States.
 
US Conservative said:
He lost the peace. And he did it for votes.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he did what he said he would do when campaigning. He got elected. So I'd say that a pretty good portion of Americans that voted for him wanted out of Iraq.

Government of the people by the people isn't only when Repubs win.
 
US Conservative said:
We pacified Iraq, Obama gave that up for votes.
Click to expand...

So stay in Iraq, forget the wishes of the American people, and forget the sovereignty of Iraq. You're just proving that Conservatives had no intention of ever having a sovereign Iraq.
 
rocket88 said:
So stay in Iraq, forget the wishes of the American people, and forget the sovereignty of Iraq. You're just proving that Conservatives had no intention of ever having a sovereign Iraq.
Click to expand...

Now, I don't think I am very happy about the way American presence is developing there, but there is no question of broken sovereignty here. Iraq practically pleaded for help.
 
joG said:
Now, I don't think I am very happy about the way American presence is developing there, but there is no question of broken sovereignty here. Iraq practically pleaded for help.
Click to expand...

Now they're asking for help, but when we pulled out they were asking for that. Staying at that point would have violated their sovereignty, and been against the wishes of the American people.
 
rocket88 said:
Now they're asking for help, but when we pulled out they were asking for that. Staying at that point would have violated their sovereignty, and been against the wishes of the American people.
Click to expand...

Yes. The Iraqis were quite silly. But that was fine by me. But we absolutely should not make this an American problem. It is the neighborhood's and we can help.
 
rocket88 said:
Yeah, he did what he said he would do when campaigning. He got elected. So I'd say that a pretty good portion of Americans that voted for him wanted out of Iraq.

Government of the people by the people isn't only when Repubs win.
Click to expand...

So do these same people somehow want to go back into Iraq now? :cool:
 
US Conservative said:
How so?
Click to expand...

To have stayed without any agreement, or any request from Iraq would have violated their sovereignty. The goal of the war was not to create a sovereign Iraq, it was to create a subservient Iraq. All you need to see for that is the posts of you and other conservatives stating that Obama should have kept troops there against their wishes.
 
joG said:
Yes. The Iraqis were quite silly. But that was fine by me. But we absolutely should not make this an American problem. It is the neighborhood's and we can help.
Click to expand...

I'd like to agree, but the problem is that the real power broker in that neighborhood is Iran. Personally, I say so what, but....
 
rocket88 said:
Now they're asking for help, but when we pulled out they were asking for that. Staying at that point would have violated their sovereignty, and been against the wishes of the American people.
Click to expand...
Violated their sovereignty? What sovereignty? You don't recall the conditions applied after Desert Storm?

Many American people were poorly informed about conditions in Iraq, it seems, but their leaders should have known better.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Its not "dancing". Just because it doesnt fall within your narrative of "its ALL OBAMAS FAULT!", does not mean its "dancing". Reality proves otherwise. If numerous large AQ offenses/attacks, and over 4,000 people killed in one year is "pacified" then more power to you I guess.
Click to expand...
Oh, poor Obama!

Iraq was 'stable', the generals told him he should leave at least 24,000 troops behind, and he refused to listen.

Now women are being sold, raped and murdered, men and boys being beheaded, families left dead and homeless and a murderous caliphate has taken root.

Who do you think deserves responsibility for this disaster?

Obama vs. the generals - The Washington Post
 
Grant said:
Oh, poor Obama!

Iraq was 'stable', the generals told him he should leave at least 24,000 troops behind, and he refused to listen.

Now women are being sold, raped and murdered, men and boys being beheaded, families left dead and homeless and a murderous caliphate has taken root.

Who do you think deserves responsibility for this disaster?

Obama vs. the generals - The Washington Post
Click to expand...

So you are still upholding this view that "Iraq was stable" even tho it was clearly not?
 
rocket88 said:
You can't go back in the past and play "what would have happened if..." with any level of absolute certainty. However, the number of US troops occupying Iraq because we didn't like the government they had before would tell me that it's unlikely anyone would be put in power by any means without at least the tacit approval of the United States.
Click to expand...
There is no evidence that would have happened at all. There are US troops based all over the world and they seldom get involved in local politics. Who really cares if Germany elects members of the Green Party, or Peru elects Conservatives The troops were all about protecting the hard won security and stability, not domestic politics.

U.S. military bases around the world: graphic | National Post
 
Grant said:
Obama said it was stable. If you want a debate, take it up with him, or write a letter to your Congressman.

Flashback: Obama Says
Click to expand...

Again for the third time (also interesting how "US Conservative" liked your comment but wont respond to mine): "Again I posted this earlier in response to US Conservative's quote: "The problem with this is you and many people here are thinking I am analyzing this as a Obama and Republican issue. I am not. I am saying this (ISIS being created, and the extreme destabilization in the region) is the result of a combination of factors, not just one man..."
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Again for the third time (also interesting how "US Conservative" liked your comment but wont respond to mine): "Again I posted this earlier in response to US Conservative's quote: "The problem with this is you and many people here are thinking I am analyzing this as a Obama and Republican issue. I am not. I am saying this (ISIS being created, and the extreme destabilization in the region) is the result of a combination of factors, not just one man..."
Click to expand...
Whose idea was it to remove the troops? Who claimed credit and who went against the generals and the CIA's advice?

There is only one person responsible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom