• 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

cpwill said:
:shrug: those who had visibility on the negotiations say different. Two separate SECDEFs and the Ambassador to Iraq under Obama have all come out and pretty much confirmed that it was the Administration that wanted us out, and were warned what that meant.



:shrug: that's not what I saw from the ground level, and it's not what is described by those who were at the higher level.

We made sure to burn all the bridges as we left, and are now surprised that they reacted accordingly.
Click to expand...

The fact Obama has been totally exposed on this is irrelevant to the lying slobs who support him. They will, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, continue to insist anything BUT what really happened.

They will ignore Obama's vacuous bull**** claims all was well, what he said on tape is denied; they even deny he made speeches about the "lasting peace" his administration had created and the great news that all of Islam were his buddies now.

Look, the prick lied though his pearly whites for the sole purpose of getting his sorry, incompetent ass re-elected, just as he lied about Obamacare and everything else. Most of the country has now seen through the smoke and mirrors, and given up on this charlatan, but to some, those who BELIEVED this community organizer was a god sent redeemer who was harboring in a new utopia are now left with the pitiful rebuttal of "wait till 2016!"

It's over, but the minimal thinkers, those with single digit IQ's cannot accept they bought a handful of mist from a snake oil salesman and will continue to invent their own form of reality/history to suit that image, a anything else means they really are nobodies.

The Democrats have lost control of the House, the Senate, most of the Gubernatorial offices, state legislatures and the hearts and minds of most sane Americans, they simply cannot accept that.
 
pbrauer said:
It was President George W. Bush who signed the SOFA that all troops would be out of Iraq Dec 31, 2011. President Obama tried to extend it but al Maliki said if troops stayed they could possibly be prosecuted under Sharia Law. So we left.
Click to expand...

Obama ignoring the IS problem and not addressing it has allowed it to get beyond his level of competence in managing it.

Poor management, poor leadership on _________ issue = lost elections. Iraq is just one of those fill-in-the-blank issues.
 
Last edited:
TheDemSocialist said:
And it could be that the government cut off 37% of the population from any political representation.
Click to expand...

Saddam cut off 66% for 20 years and used genocide to keep them quiet.
 
ecofarm said:
Saddam cut off 66% for 20 years and used genocide to keep them quiet.
Click to expand...

Ok. Does that excuse any actions by the government who upheld itself as democratic? Do you ignore the rest of my analysis?
 
Kobie said:
ISIS couldn't flourish until the dictator who kept his bootheel on the sectarian violence was gone.

And while ISIS didn't particularly flourish under Bush (largely because it didn't ****ing exist before the invasion), its ideological predecessor, Al-Qaeda in Iraq, most certainly did. Facts, US Conservative, are stubborn things.
Click to expand...

ISIS didn't exist before Obama did the premature withdrawal.

That and the arms shipments out of Libya though Benghazi is what created ISIS.

Besides, if AL-Qaeda was so strong in Iraq that they were just waiting for Obama to leave why did he say everything is cool and leave? Shouldn't a responsible commander in chief have KNOWN things were unstable?

Clearly you want it both ways and while Republicans may indeed be stubborn, you and the rest of the Obama-supporting hordes are simply dishonest as demonstrated with the above post.

When the American left can learn to stop lying, you may get some respect but this whole debate is simply a lie.

Obama said there was stability and peace, there wasn't just like you couldn't keep your plan....
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Ok. Does that excuse any actions by the government who upheld itself as democratic? Do you ignore the rest of my analysis?
Click to expand...

I didn't say it excuses anything. I just think one might consider 20 years of genocide, institutionalized rape, mass slaughters and 66% of the population having no representation to be the largest factor in the rise of ISI. Saddam set a stage that no one could change. All we can do is get through it while Iraq regrows social capital.
 
Fearandloathing said:
ISIS didn't exist before Obama did the premature withdrawal.

That and the arms shipments out of Libya though Benghazi is what created ISIS.

Besides, if AL-Qaeda was so strong in Iraq that they were just waiting for Obama to leave why did he say everything is cool and leave? Shouldn't a responsible commander in chief have KNOWN things were unstable?

Clearly you want it both ways and while Republicans may indeed be stubborn, you and the rest of the Obama-supporting hordes are simply dishonest as demonstrated with the above post.

When the American left can learn to stop lying, you may get some respect but this whole debate is simply a lie.

Obama said there was stability and peace, there wasn't just like you couldn't keep your plan....
Click to expand...

Well, for starters, screw off.

I'm not claiming that full withdrawal was the right idea, I'm not claiming anything else of the sort. Maybe if you didn't try and claim I'm saying things I'm not, you could engage in something resembling an actual discussion.
 
Kobie said:
ISIS couldn't flourish until the dictator who kept his bootheel on the sectarian violence was gone.

And while ISIS didn't particularly flourish under Bush (largely because it didn't ****ing exist before the invasion), its ideological predecessor, Al-Qaeda in Iraq, most certainly did. Facts, US Conservative, are stubborn things.
Click to expand...

ISIS isn't AQI. AQI was largely destroyed, Iraq became a lightning rod for terrorists, and we killed them. Now its a lightning rod yet again, and Obama does nothing. Facts are most definitely stubborn, Kobie.
 
ecofarm said:
I didn't say it excuses anything. I just think one might consider 20 years of genocide, institutionalized rape, mass slaughters and 66% of the population having no representation to be the largest factor in the rise of ISI. Saddam set a stage that no one could change. All we can do is get through it while Iraq regrows social capital.
Click to expand...

Sure it does. But now one must look at the beast it created.
 
US Conservative said:
ISIS isn't AQI. AQI was largely destroyed, Iraq became a lightning rod for terrorists, and we killed them. Now its a lightning rod yet again, and Obama does nothing. Facts are most definitely stubborn, Kobie.
Click to expand...

Does nothing, except for, yanno, the thread title. And bombing them for the last few months. And no, it's probably not enough.

AQI was one of the groups that formed ISIS. Facts, US Con. Learn them.
 
Kobie said:
Jesus ****ing Christ. Nobody is claiming that Obama doesn't bear his share of the responsibility for the current morass in Iraq. HOWEVER, certain folks around here are claiming that Obama is solely, 100% to blame for this mess, and he's NOT.

These folks are doing this with the obvious intent of absolving the Republican president for his share of the blame. And, of course, to use Obama as a cudgel to beat up left-leaning posters.
Click to expand...

This wouldn't have happened if Bush was POTUS. Say what you will but the man could make difficult decisions, Obama cant.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Sure it does. But now one must look at the beast it created.
Click to expand...

This beast grew under Saddam and it could not be contained through brutality forever. Only social capital can defeat it, and that will take time.
 
Kobie said:
Does nothing, except for, yanno, the thread title. And bombing them for the last few months. And no, it's probably not enough.

AQI was one of the groups that formed ISIS. Facts, US Con. Learn them.
Click to expand...

ISIS and AQ split (mostly in Syria, in Iraq they were killed) because ISIS was seen as too extreme. These are bad, bad folks, and they need to be exposed to large amounts of kinetic energy. Give it up, defending Obama wont change how things are.
 
ecofarm said:
This beast grew under Saddam and it could not be contained through brutality forever. Only social capital can defeat it, and that will take time.
Click to expand...

I'm not gonna get into an argument if "Saddam suppressed that beast, etc". But one thing we know for 100% sure is that the invasion of Iraq, the debaathification, and the oppression of the Sunnis released the beast
 
US Conservative said:
Again, Whos at the wheel, Obama or Bush?
Click to expand...

Who signed the SOFA, Bush or Obama?
Do you have any proof that ISIS wouldn't have grown if we left 10K troops there?
Would YOU leave troops there if they could be prosecuted under Sharia Law?
 
pbrauer said:
Who signed the SOFA, Bush or Obama?
Do you have any proof that ISIS wouldn't have grown if we left 10K troops there?
Would YOU leave troops there if they could be prosecuted under Sharia Law?
Click to expand...

There was no SOFA which is exactly what the President wanted...
 
US Conservative said:
ISIS and AQ split (mostly in Syria, in Iraq they were killed) because ISIS was seen as too extreme. These are bad, bad folks, and they need to be exposed to large amounts of kinetic energy. Give it up, defending Obama wont change how things are.
Click to expand...

Only the truly delusional can read what I'm posting and claim it's "defending Obama."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom