• 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!

Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership [W:251]

Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

But **** his political skill. If he doesn't know that commenting on something he hasn't seen makes him look stupid, then his perceived skills are moot.

He was discussing BHO's lack of political skill and contrasting BHO unfavorably with WJC.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Just more lefty Bush-bashing without foundation. I suspect I'm the only participant here who has actually been to Iraq, so I hope you'll excuse my preference for my own judgment. Even the author of the linked tripe can't deny violence dropped; he just tries to quibble about why. IMHO it was BHO's failure to retain American forces in Iraq after 2011 that gave free rein to Maliki's sectarian tendencies.

Ahh, did you run out of rational, credible evidence? I must say, that didn't take long...is that a new record for you?
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Just more lefty Bush-bashing without foundation. I suspect I'm the only participant here who has actually been to Iraq, so I hope you'll excuse my preference for my own judgment. Even the author of the linked tripe can't deny violence dropped; he just tries to quibble about why. IMHO it was BHO's failure to retain American forces in Iraq after 2011 that gave free rein to Maliki's sectarian tendencies.

It was Bush's agreement that expired and left Obama with little choice but to follow the Iraqi's wishes. If Bush had been able to get what he wanted we would still be there. Bush was the failure as usual.

Bush’s finest moment on Iraq: SOFA, not the surge | Foreign Policy
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Repeating that lie is not going to help. Iraq would never have had a Shia government while Hussein was there. You have always supported a loosing republican agenda, and your freaky civil war era avatar diminishes your stature.

There is nothing inherently wrong with a Shia led government in a Shia-majority country, so I don't understand your affection for Saddam's tyranny. I'm sure the Iraqi people are glad he's gone.

As for John Coffee Hays, what bothers you? His stature as "the greatest of the early Texas Rangers?" His role as a founder of the city of Oakland, CA? Or his leadership of Union forces to victory over Confederates?
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Exactly.

Do you want the same thing to happen when Iran builds one?

My position remains clear. I prefer global eradication to the awful weapons. But since some few countries insist on retention, it's only logical that others would seek them. People have the wrong focus.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Exactly.

Do you want the same thing to happen when Iran builds one?

Now that, that is a mean question to ask.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

There is nothing inherently wrong with a Shia led government in a Shia-majority country, so I don't understand your affection for Saddam's tyranny. I'm sure the Iraqi people are glad he's gone.

As for John Coffee Hays, what bothers you? His stature as "the greatest of the early Texas Rangers?" His role as a founder of the city of Oakland, CA? Or his leadership of Union forces to victory over Confederates?

Theocracies are inherently problematic. And there will be those pleased with Saddam's removal, such as those that readily fed the Bush administration false information that was gleefully received, and then there would be those who would have preferred the devil they knew. Though many of them are no longer talking.

Hays is all those things you said, but promoters of peace make better role models than purveyors of violence.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Now that, that is a mean question to ask.

Whys that? Seems a very rational question.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Ahh, did you run out of rational, credible evidence? I must say, that didn't take long...is that a new record for you?

The evidence is all on my side. You're the one citing sources counting light bulbs from thousands of miles away, and agenda-driven lefty columnists. Fact is the Surge suppressed violence, and BHO's withdrawal gave up in 2011 the victory that was in place by 2009.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

My position remains clear. I prefer global eradication to the wakeful weapons. But since some few countries insist on retention, it's only logical that others would seek them. People have the wrong focus.

That does not mean proliferation should be allowed. You do know that the probability of nuclear winter grows much more quickly than the number of nuclear weapons owning nations? It will approach certainty in any event, you might remind me. But it will come faster with proliferation.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

My position remains clear. I prefer global eradication to the awful weapons. But since some few countries insist on retention, it's only logical that others would seek them. People have the wrong focus.

Oh, I agree that global eradication would be a good thing, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't resist OTHERS from seeking them out. It's bad enough that we have them without not making an effort to prevent others from getting them.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Whys that? Seems a very rational question.

Because it brings the discussion to the point.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Now that, that is a mean question to ask.

Mean? Why?

Never mind...I saw your answer and understand why you said it.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

That does not mean proliferation should be allowed. You do know that the probability of nuclear winter grows much more quickly than the number of nuclear weapons owning nations? It will approach certainty in any event, you might remind me. But it will come faster with proliferation.

But in my proposition, it wouldn't come at all.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

It was Bush's agreement that expired and left Obama with little choice but to follow the Iraqi's wishes. If Bush had been able to get what he wanted we would still be there. Bush was the failure as usual.

Bush’s finest moment on Iraq: SOFA, not the surge | Foreign Policy

GWB left office with renegotiation of the SOFA pushed back until 2011 in order to give his successor (BHO) the opportunity to negotiate his own agreement. Every US military planner, without exception, assumed in 2009 there would be a substantial residual US military presence in Iraq after 2011. BHO's failure to keep that residual force in place was the most important failure in creating space in Iraq for ISIS.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Because it brings the discussion to the point.

And again, why is that mean?
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Oh, I agree that global eradication would be a good thing, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't resist OTHERS from seeking them out. It's bad enough that we have them without not making an effort to prevent others from getting them.

We still agree. It's just that I must first rid myself of the awful thing I'm trying to prevent you from acquiring.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Maliki gave us the "bums rush" out the door as soon as he could and had an agreement signed by GW Bush saying that he could. Why couldn't Bush negotiate the long term agreement he wanted? Because the Iraqi's were having none of it that's why.

Bush’s finest moment on Iraq: SOFA, not the surge | Foreign Policy


Funny, because foreignpolicy.com had this to say about Obama's performance in the SOFA negotiations:

How the Obama administration bungled the Iraq withdrawal negotiations | Foreign Policy

Administration sources and Hill staffers also tell The Cable that the demand that the troop immunity go through the Council of Representatives was a decision made by the State Department lawyers and there were other options available to the administration, such as putting the remaining troops on the embassy’s diplomatic rolls, which would automatically give them immunity.

"An obvious fix for troop immunity is to put them all on the diplomatic list; that’s done by notification to the Iraqi foreign ministry," said one former senior Hill staffer. "If State says that this requires a treaty or a specific agreement by the Iraqi parliament as opposed to a statement by the Iraqi foreign ministry, it has its head up its ass."
~snip
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

GWB left office with renegotiation of the SOFA pushed back until 2011 in order to give his successor (BHO) the opportunity to negotiate his own agreement. Every US military planner, without exception, assumed in 2009 there would be a substantial residual US military presence in Iraq after 2011. BHO's failure to keep that residual force in place was the most important failure in creating space in Iraq for ISIS.

Lol! Tell al malaki.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Lol! Tell al malaki.

Al Maliki wanted US troops to remain in Iraq. Obama pushed idiotic demands that made the agreement impossible all while continually lowering the offer of troops that would remain.

Obama and Hilary's State Department killed the SOFA.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Well, foreignpolicy.com also said that the US was the cause of the Ukrainian crisis. But who's listening to them.

When you signal to the world that your treaties with your allies aren't worth the paper they are printed on the bad actors in the world start to push around your allies.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

The evidence is all on my side.
Except for all the evidence that's not.


You're the one citing sources counting light bulbs from thousands of miles away, and agenda-driven lefty columnists. Fact is the Surge suppressed violence, and BHO's withdrawal gave up in 2011 the victory that was in place by 2009.
Fact is....the ethnic cleansing of entire Sunni neighborhoods and the Shiite cease fire had more to do with the reduced violence during the surge than sending thousands of troops to guard empty neighborhoods in Baghdad.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

When you signal to the world that your treaties with your allies aren't worth the paper they are printed on the bad actors in the world start to push around your allies.

Yes, bad treaties that need to be dissolved. Apparently you missed the piece at foreignpolicy.com or you wouldn't think the US is failing to honor anything.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

We still agree. It's just that I must first rid myself of the awful thing I'm trying to prevent you from acquiring.

If we don't do anything about Iran and other countries until we get rid of ours, then by the time we've done that Iran...and maybe 10 other countries (just guessing on that number)...will have them.
 
Back
Top Bottom