Page 42 of 66 FirstFirst ... 32404142434452 ... LastLast
Results 411 to 420 of 657

Thread: CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

  1. #411
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    No, it was not 'pretty stable' eitheer. There was genocide, rape rooms, mass graves, invasions of neighboring countries, and so on. Now , of course, it is not stable but it was in 2011 until Obama, againsg all the generals advice, withdrew the troops.
    It wasnt stable? Last time I checked there wasnt a massive threat of terrorism in Iraq in 2002, last time I checked there wasnt a massive forces stating they have created their own state based on Salafi Islam in their state.

    It was stablle in 2011, even Barrack Obama said so, but then he pulled the troops and we have what we see now. Yes, Al Q was still around, which is why the troops should have remained.
    There is no proof that Iraq would be more stable if we left troops behind. Afterall there were troops there and there was a civil war going on, there was succession movements, there was terrorist attacks.
    What period are you referring to here? Iraq was 'stable' in 2011. There were 55 deaths al year and not all of those from terrorists. Hoow does that compare with three years later?
    That is not true. In 2011 AQ alone killed 133 people. Here is the rest: https://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/numbers/2011/ . Looks like to me over 4,000....
    You are not familiar with the history of the area.
    Clearly you are not claiming there was only 55 deaths...


  2. #412
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,115

    Re: CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by EnigmaO01 View Post
    Damned if he does damned if he doesn't. You Obama haters are so predictable.
    I'm fine with this decision. It's more right than not (he needs to do a bit more, imo). I just find the timing entertaining

  3. #413
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    It wasnt stable? Last time I checked there wasnt a massive threat of terrorism in Iraq in 2002, last time I checked there wasnt a massive forces stating they have created their own state based on Salafi Islam in their state.
    Then maybe you should check again.
    There is no proof that Iraq would be more stable if we left troops behind. Afterall there were troops there and there was a civil war going on, there was succession movements, there was terrorist attacks.
    No proof?? All the generals wanted the troops left behind, it was n election issue, and every knowledgeable person predicted what would happen.
    That is not true. In 2011 AQ alone killed 133 people. Here is the rest: https://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/numbers/2011/ . Looks like to me over 4,000....
    I was referring to military deaths.
    Clearly you are not claiming there was only 55 deaths...
    Military deaths! That site you linked to has been suspect since it was initiated, and if you read it you can see its slant, but even you can see that all deaths dropped by 2011.

  4. #414
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Unable to operate? Tell that to the 583 people who were killed by AQ attacks after this article was published. Tell that to over 1,000 people who were injured from AQ terrorist attacks after this article was published.
    I also find it kind of ironic that the article you just posted was posted because all coalition forces were leaving Iraq soon, and they were calling it basically a victory, yet you have been on here saying coalition forces leaving Iraq was not a victory but was terrible and its all "BO"'s fault...

    How did it happen? Regrouping, followed by the Syrian Civil War.


    A great variety of reasons. No Sunni representation in the Iraqi government, radicalization because of the Syrian Civil War, failure of the Iraqi military, long term effects of destabilization in the region, and long term effects of the war in Iraq.


    Malikis, the US, the UK's, the Iranians, the "coalition of the willing".

    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..."

    According to their stats, in late 2006, al Qaeda was responsible for 60 percent of the terrorist attacks, and nearly all the ones that involved killing a lot of civilians. The rest of the violence was carried out by Iraqi Sunni Arab groups, who were trying in vain to scare the Americans out of the country......snip~


    Also how many were done by Shia?

    10% of attacks still took place.....and you just pointed out HOW they were still doing so. Coming in from Syria where they were sending in 30 suicide bombers a week. The same place they ran and set themselves up while going after Assad. So yeah that's how they regrouped after being driven out of operating in Iraq.


    I am not looking at this as any type of Party issue. Foreign policy is on BO and his Team now. Like it was on Junior's. A lot of Executive Orders dictate Foreign policy and a lot of them have been wrong. Thought of and implemented by BO and his team.

  5. #415
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Then maybe you should check again.
    Gonna provide anything? Because clearly you know something I dont...

    No proof?? All the generals wanted the troops left behind, it was n election issue, and every knowledgeable person predicted what would happen.
    Generals wanting something does not mean the historical and present consequences would not exist...

    I was referring to military deaths. Military deaths! That site you linked to has been suspect since it was initiated, and if you read it you can see its slant, but even you can see that all deaths dropped by 2011.
    So just because there were less military deaths mean its stable? Only military deaths matter in stability? There were over 4,000 deaths total that year from attacks, including military, and civilian. How you claim that as stability is beyond me.


  6. #416
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    According to their stats, in late 2006, al Qaeda was responsible for 60 percent of the terrorist attacks, and nearly all the ones that involved killing a lot of civilians. The rest of the violence was carried out by Iraqi Sunni Arab groups, who were trying in vain to scare the Americans out of the country......snip~
    Uhh Ok???

    Also how many were done by Shia?


    10% of attacks still took place.....and you just pointed out HOW they were still doing so. Coming in from Syria where they were sending in 30 suicide bombers a week. The same place they ran and set themselves up while going after Assad. So yeah that's how they regrouped after being driven out of operating in Iraq.
    You to claim that AQ was defeated is ridiculous. Look at the body county, look at the attacks.

    I am not looking at this as any type of Party issue. Foreign policy is on BO and his Team now. Like it was on Junior's. A lot of Executive Orders dictate Foreign policy and a lot of them have been wrong. Thought of and implemented by BO and his team.
    Well you seem to only wanna talk about one thing and one thing only, "ITS BO's fault!" while conventatly ignoring the rest of the major factors that got us here into the first place.

    But quick question: What would you of done differently?


  7. #417
    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: CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by ReverendHellh0und View Post
    seems times have changed, I remember when the left was far more vocal about sending troops to Iraq.
    Isn't that remarkable?

  8. #418
    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: CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    Damn him for listening to the electorate. I mean, what good is democracy if our elected representatives don't tell the people to "go f*ck themselves?"
    He lost the peace. And he did it for votes.

  9. #419
    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: CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by Capster78 View Post
    The thing you people fail to understand is that there are SEVERAL rival groups in Iraq. All of which are fighting each other. They will not stop fighting each other until the other groups are completely gone, or their group is in power and suppressing the other groups. Its a civil war between different sects of Islam. You can get rid of AQ and you still have not solved the problem there.
    Its NOT just sectarian, this week ISIS massacred many Sunni. MANY in ISIS aren't even Iraqi or Syrian. Its the same gang of cousin ****ers that spreads death and destruction wherever they go. They are fighting because of a power vacuum. In Syria because of the civil war, in Iraq because Obama left it wide open-and they TOOK it.

    They need to be exposed to rapidly expanding gasses and shrapnel.

  10. #420
    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: CNN: 1,500 more troops to Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    It wasnt stable? Last time I checked there wasnt a massive threat of terrorism in Iraq in 2002, last time I checked there wasnt a massive forces stating they have created their own state based on Salafi Islam in their state.


    There is no proof that Iraq would be more stable if we left troops behind. Afterall there were troops there and there was a civil war going on, there was succession movements, there was terrorist attacks.

    That is not true. In 2011 AQ alone killed 133 people. Here is the rest: https://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/numbers/2011/ . Looks like to me over 4,000....

    Clearly you are not claiming there was only 55 deaths...
    Stop dancing man. Iraq was largely pacified by Obama's first election. By the second we were withdrawing and now there is a freaking country, chalk full of terrorists too extreme for AQ. Thats on Obama. Own it.

Page 42 of 66 FirstFirst ... 32404142434452 ... 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
  •