• 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

Fearandloathing said:
So what about Iraq's request for at least 10,000 troops which Obama denied?
Click to expand...

Lol. These ones:

Iraq rejects US request to maintain bases after troop withdrawal | US news | The Guardian

The Pentagon had wanted the bases to help counter growing Iranian influence in the Middle East. Just a few years ago, the US had plans for leaving behind four large bases but, in the face of Iraqi resistance, this plan had to be scaled down this year to a force of 10,000. But even this proved too much for the Iraqis.
Click to expand...

The Iraqis didn't want it. We abided. What exactly is your problem?

These pathetic wormy attempts to re-write what happened under Obama by citing what happened under Bush is still bull**** no matter how you want to cut the fart.

If getting informed is what you propagandists shovel in the name of preserving the myth that Obama actually didn't destroy something he touched then ignorance is bliss.

Go shovel this crap elsewhere
Click to expand...

Spare me the diatribe. You had absolutely no idea that Obama actually followed the previous administration's set strategy and are now complaining because he did. :shrug:
 
US Conservative said:
Again, I dont deny that wars have lasting effects, but Im going to ask you straight up one more time... Can you at least agree that ISIS has flourished under Obama?
Click to expand...

I agree that ISIS has developed and grown during the time that Obama was in office. The same could be said for every other world leader, currently serving, around the globe. To put as "under Obama," like he was their 5 star General or something is dishonest and misleading. It's warped.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
So do I!



simply voicing my opinion.
Click to expand...

An opinion that didn't say anything about Obama's policies when that is who is the current pres ;)

I think we should pulled out a long long time ago. I dont think we should send more troops (i dont think we should send any troops).
Click to expand...

I agree. Just so long as you realize that means innocent people are GOING to die by Isis in horrific ways. I mean they are going to anyway, but we are gonna be killing Isis if we are there.
 
stonewall50 said:
An opinion that didn't say anything about Obama's policies when that is who is the current pres ;)
Click to expand...
Ive stated my opinion about Obama and his policy.

I agree. Just so long as you realize that means innocent people are GOING to die by Isis in horrific ways. I mean they are going to anyway, but we are gonna be killing Isis if we are there.
Click to expand...

Yes I realize this will happen. But are we going to "kill ISIS if we are there"? Arent the troops just there to train?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Ive stated my opinion about Obama and his policy.



Yes I realize this will happen. But are we going to "kill ISIS if we are there"? Arent the troops just there to train?
Click to expand...

Weren't our troops just advisers in Vietnam? They are gonna train them to kill Isis by killing Isis with them.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
So we did give aid. We did increase aid to Iraq in 2013.
Click to expand...

Actually the aid didn't get there until 2014......which they also bought F16's. Delivery wasn't set until Sept of this year. Also from Feb to June Maliki and others in Iraq requested Air Strikes against ISIS. BO denied them.
 
cpwill said:
Just came over "breaking news" on the telly-o-vision.

Huh. Odd how that decision came just after the election, eh?
Click to expand...

Damned if he does damned if he doesn't. You Obama haters are so predictable.
 
MMC said:
Actually the aid didn't get there until 2014......which they also bought F16's. Delivery wasn't set until Sept of this year. Also from Feb to June Maliki and others in Iraq requested Air Strikes against ISIS. BO denied them.
Click to expand...

Seattle Times article. Increased aid (hellfire missiles) was delivered a week before December 25, 2013...
 
Hatuey said:
Lol. These ones:

Iraq rejects US request to maintain bases after troop withdrawal | US news | The Guardian
Click to expand...
So you believe that after winning a war in an Iraq, losing all those people and spending all that money to make Iraq 'stable' and democratic, Maliki could just tell Obama to leave?

Didn't Obama say he was going to pull the troops from Iraq during the election campaign? The fact is that it didn't matter what Maliki said. Maliki also had to play local politics and 'stand up' to the US and coalition. Now Obama is saying Maliki forced him?

It is amazing that some people are still buying that excuse..

FLASHBACK: Obama: ‘I Promised To End The War In Iraq, And I Did’ « Pat Dollard
 
Hatuey said:
Lol. These ones:

Iraq rejects US request to maintain bases after troop withdrawal | US news | The Guardian



The Iraqis didn't want it. We abided. What exactly is your problem?



Spare me the diatribe. You had absolutely no idea that Obama actually followed the previous administration's set strategy and are now complaining because he did. :shrug:
Click to expand...

The Iraqi's wanted us to stay, as did Obamas military staff. Obama wanted to political benefits of "ending" the war and now here we are.
 
radcen said:
Serious question for those who say we pulled out too early and/or pulled out irresponsibly: When would be a good time? Or, phrased differently, do you honestly see a point where we would have ever "won" and thus been able to pull out responsibly?

I don't. Maybe you do, and if so, please tell us how and when.
Click to expand...

it wasn't just the pullout -whatever the true story, I've heard different versions (SOFA).
Maliki ran the army as Shia militia -purging Baathists, and Sunni - many of whom joined ISIL.

Iraq was broken the day we went in for....what was that reason again? :roll:

Still there are ways it should have been handled better instead getting out of Dodge city on a expressway.

the advisors are trainers - and supposedly non-combat. We can't fight this war for the region - use airpower get the relevant states in
as much as possible (which isn't much) and "degrade" Daesh (ISIL) in the hopes the sectarian army will decide to fight again.

Not what I want, but what I see as possible
 
Captain America said:
I agree that ISIS has developed and grown during the time that Obama was in office. The same could be said for every other world leader, currently serving, around the globe. To put as "under Obama," like he was their 5 star General or something is dishonest and misleading. It's warped.
Click to expand...

Obama ran on being able to fix these things, and instead his own politics have led to this flare up. Iraq is his baby, he took credit for it when it was going well, so logically he must accept the responsibility now.

And other nations are testing us. This is what happens when we elect weak leaders.
 
President Pinprick comes through again, I see. All this clownish politician is doing by putting men in by dribs and drabs is making it likely more of them will be lost. A substantial force--on the order of the force in South Korea, or somewhat smaller, with the right mix of aircraft, etc.--could finish these people once and for all. A force like that is what the experts say this country should have left in Iraq.

It's exactly because that was not done that this has happened. The longer these curs survive, and appear to be defying the U.S. and getting away with it, the brighter their star shines. The idea should be to whip them so badly, and to appear to do it so easily, that no one like them in the world would ever doubt who the strong horse was.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Seattle Times article. Increased aid (hellfire missiles) was delivered a week before December 25, 2013...
Click to expand...

Which was already ordered and bought, along with the F16s.

There is no mistaking BO knew what was going on. BO sent out Kirby and Kirby stated it was Iraq's problem to deal with.



U.S. Said to Rebuff Iraqi Request to Strike Militants......Uhm, note that date in June of 2014.

As the threat from Sunni militants in western Iraq escalated last month, Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki secretly asked the Obama administration to consider carrying out airstrikes against extremist staging areas, according to Iraqi and American officials. But Iraq’s appeals for a military response have so far been rebuffed by the White House, which has been reluctant to open a new chapter in a conflict that President Obama has insisted was over when the United States withdrew the last of its forces from Iraq in 2011.

“Ultimately, this is for the Iraqi security forces, and the Iraqi government to deal with,” Rear Adm. John F. Kirby, the Pentagon spokesman, said Tuesday......snip~

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/12/w...rstrikes-on-militants-officials-say.html?_r=2
 
MMC said:
Which was already ordered and bought, along with the F16s.
Click to expand...
Nope. From the article: "The move follows an appeal for help in battling the extremist group by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who met with President Obama in Washington last month.

There is no mistaking BO knew what was going on. BO sent out Kirby and Kirby stated it was Iraq's problem to deal with.
Click to expand...
So what?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Nope. From the article: "The move follows an appeal for help in battling the extremist group by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who met with President Obama in Washington last month.


So what?
Click to expand...



So what?..... So who gives a **** if BO sent aid to Iraq and it was late. He still ****ed up and kept ****ing up. You weren't trying to deny that were you?

Moreover now his plan has failed completely. Doesn't say much for BO and his plan made by him and his inner circle. He should try listening to the experts who have been telling him what needs to be done all along.
 
MMC said:
So what?..... So who gives a **** if BO sent aid to Iraq and it was late.
Click to expand...
It was late. The request was made in November and it arrived in December...

He still ****ed up and kept ****ing up. You weren't trying to deny that were you?
Click to expand...
He "****ed up"? No I'm denying your claim that we gave no increased aid in 2013. We did. Maliki asked for it in November and it was received in December...

Moreover now his plan has failed completely. Doesn't say much for BO and his plan made by him and his inner circle. He should try listening to the experts who have been telling him what needs to be done all along.
Click to expand...
I personally think we shouldnt be involved in this conflict, period.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
It was late. The request was made in November and it arrived in December...


He "****ed up"? No I'm denying your claim that we gave no increased aid in 2013. We did. Maliki asked for it in November and it was received in December...


I personally think we shouldnt be involved in this conflict, period.
Click to expand...



Yeah, you would have to go back way before that when BO knew ISIL was a problem.

Oh my claim, did you forget was put out by the media all up until Dec? Also I claimed they didn't get any of it until 2014. Can you show me where they received the shipments in Dec of 2013.

Yeah I know you do personally.....but you seem to have a bit of trouble when Admitting BO was in the wrong and what he knew.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
It was late. The request was made in November and it arrived in December...


He "****ed up"? No I'm denying your claim that we gave no increased aid in 2013. We did. Maliki asked for it in November and it was received in December... I personally think we shouldnt be involved in this conflict, period.
Click to expand...
The fact is that there are problems throughout the world and the US is involved whether they want to be or not, but the less bright elected a ineffective, inexperienced and not very bright leader based on a fictional 'war against women' , or some other 'issue' where they became easily sidetracked..

If anything good comes out of this it might be that the electorate may give some thought to the real issues and choose some real leaders before they cast their votes.
 
MMC said:
Yeah, you would have to go back way before that when BO knew ISIL was a problem.
Click to expand...
Point being?


Oh my claim, did you forget was put out by the media all up until Dec? Also I claimed they didn't get any of it until 2014. Can you show me where they received the shipments in Dec of 2013.
Click to expand...
Yes
From the Seattle Times article that was published on December 25 of 2013: "A shipment of 75 Hellfire missiles was delivered to Iraq last week, reconnaissance drones are to be delivered by March and U.S. intelligence and counterterrorism officials say they have mapped the al-Qaida network in Iraq and are sharing this information with the Iraqis."
They arrived the week before this article was published in 2013.... U.S. sending weapons to Iraq to help curb al-Qaida advances | Nation & World | The Seattle Times

Yeah I know you do personally.....but you seem to have a bit of trouble when Admitting BO was in the wrong and what he knew.
Click to expand...
What "wrong"? My opinion is he is in the wrong and you are in the wrong.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
In the beginning yes.


You dont know that
Click to expand...

Lmao. So Isis know 1500 troops are going to Iraq. Isis knows they are gonna train troops. Isis is likely going to attack them with bombs. But there is a good chance our guys will get into firefights with them. Thinking our troops are going to be contained to and advisory role and not fire at enemy combatants is simply naive.

Our guys shot back as advisors in Vietnam. They will here.
 
stonewall50 said:
Lmao. So Isis know 1500 troops are going to Iraq. Isis knows they are gonna train troops. Isis is likely going to attack them with bombs. But there is a good chance our guys will get into firefights with them. Thinking our troops are going to be contained to and advisory role and not fire at enemy combatants is simply naive.

Our guys shot back as advisors in Vietnam. They will here.
Click to expand...

Really? We have troops there now. Why havent they been attacked yet?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Really? We have troops there now. Why havent they been attacked yet?
Click to expand...

Are you on the ground there? Do you have secret sources? How do you know they haven't been? They won't be publicizing shootouts in Iraq. Most the personnel there is security. Again. Thinking our guys won't be doing any shooting is naive.

Will they be carrying guns?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom