Goobieman

So, you agree that Obama thinks:

-The war in Iraq does not need to be won
-It is OK for us to lose the war in Iraq.

Thank you.

__________________
Haven't you noticed? We've been sharing our culture with you all morning.
-- King Leonidas

cascadian

I could name quite a few democrats that have indistinguishable positions on Iraq from Republicans. This is ridiculous over-generalized tripe.

Obama is popular because he's saying what the majority of Americans feel.

It has been a quagmire, and we're sick of it.

So how are things going in Afghanistan in the mean time? Can you predict the lasting effects of the surge? What the hell does "better" mean? Does it mean that Iraq is out of the woods?

What is failure exactly? The mere fact that we left on a timetable?

If our economy continues to go down the tubes and we continue to destabilize it by going further into debt, don't you think that Al Qaeda would count that as a victory?

Well if it isn't a quagmire than what is wrong with leaving after 7(!) years?

__________________
"Fear is the mind killer."
~Bene Gesserit

cascadian

Erm... whatever. I don't why you come to a debate message board to stick you fingers in your ears, and repeat yourself but I can't stop you.

Goobieman

Just trying to be clear.
My interpretation of your post is in error?

Goobieman

Never mind that "over-generalized tripe" is more than OK, when liberals do it.

Yes... and little else.

Funny...all indicators point to us winning...

-Violence has bottomed out
-US casualties at an all-war low
-AQ and other terrorist groups have been ousted
-The Iraq government feels it is ready to take over security duties

People are sick of that?

Yes, lets change the goal posts -- can't legitimately complain about Iraq, so we move to Afghanistan...

jallman

Cascadian...I enjoy our back and forths so I am going to share a little secret. Goobieman is the only person on this forum to ever stay on my ignore list for longer than a couple weeks. It makes the place much more pleasant.

__________________
http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/d...amaSigcopy.jpg

Truth Detector

Quote:Originally Posted by Truth Detector
How amusing, we voted to go into Iraq; the Democrats then spent every waking moment denigrating the mission, the troops and the Commander and Chief for purely partisan political gamesmanship.
Would you like me to compare my list of denigrators starting with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the ranting loon Howard Dean who is Chairman of the DNC to yours? The last time I looked, these were the leaders of the party.

It is only ridiculous and over-generalized if you are wearing Liberal blinders.

Obama is only popular with the rabid supporters who swoon over his every statement. The notion that he represents what a MAJORITY of the American people feel is a ridiculous over-generalization wouldn’t you say?

You have a distorted definition of “quagmire” to keep making such absurd assertions.

Quote:Originally Posted by Truth Detector
Yet here we are, the surge has worked and as a result, things are starting to get better for the Iraqi people.
Are you suggesting that we need a “surge” strategy in Afghanistan now? I mean, your messiah Obama claimed that “surges” cannot possibly work. Now you are suggesting that they will work? So does this mean you are validating McCain’s strategy?

The situation in Afghanistan is nothing more than a desperate enemy trying to disrupt the march to self rule and Democracy in that country. NATO forces are there to ensure this will happen and if more troops are necessary, they can make a case for a larger troop commitment, which I am sure the USA will once again do all the HEAVY lifting.

Can you predict the effects of not having done a surge? I can predict the lasting effects of doing nothing and pulling the troops out……a decline into chaos and death.

Why would you support a political philosophy that might lead to a worse situation than we have now? Because it fits your narrow myopic view of the world?

I am hardly surprised you would have to ask this based on your weak arguments to the contrary. Better:

Main Entry: 1bet•ter
Function: adjective comparative of GOOD
Pronunciation: 'be-t&r
Etymology: Middle English bettre, from Old English betera; akin to Old English bOt remedy, Sanskrit bhadra fortunate
1 : greater than half
2 : improved in health or mental attitude
3 : more attractive, favorable, or commendable
4 : more advantageous or effective
5 : improved in accuracy or performance


What it means is that there is now greater security, most of the security is being handled by the Iraqi Government itself, that the efforts by the terrorists and former Bathist insurgents have not succeeded and that contrary to the efforts of an entire political party in the USA, and the Iraqi people, thanks to the efforts and will of George Bush and this administration, are working towards a successful Unified Government which answers to the people and not the whim of a despotic dictator.

You Liberals should be thrilled by this.

Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
The REALITY is that once the decision was made to go in, the cost of failure will always be too great.
I am hardly surprised you would have to ask this based on your weak arguments to the contrary. Failure:
Main Entry: fail•ure
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'fA(&)l-y&r
Etymology: alteration of earlier failer, from Anglo-French, from Old French faillir to fail
1 a : omission of occurrence or performance ; specifically : a failing to perform a duty or expected action b : a state of inability to perform a normal function <kidney failure> -- compare HEART FAILURE c : a fracturing or giving way under stress <structural failure>
2 a : lack of success b : a failing in business : BANKRUPTCY
3 a : a falling short : DEFICIENCY <a crop failure> b : DETERIORATION , DECAY
4 : one that has failed


The notion that this economy is going to go down the tubes under your simplistic notions about spending for a war is absurd in the extreme.

It is equally absurd to suggest that this economy is so much worse than previous economies. If you compare THIS economy with those of many other administrations and our European allies, you would understand this FACT.

I assure you that the issues with this economy will not get better by taking the billions we are spending there and spending it on Social Welfare programs. That’s just naïve nonsense.

Your argument, as appears to be the case with all your positions, is specious at best.

Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
remember how desperately they argued we were in a quagmire.
You can’t get the most basic facts correct. No wonder you are wallowing in denial. We have been in Iraq since March of 2003. That would make it slightly more than FIVE years not SEVEN.

But that small FACT aside, what does the time we are there have to do with the term “quagmire?” Do you even comprehend what a “quagmire” is?

Main Entry: quag•mire
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'kwag-"mīr, 'kwäg-
1 : soft miry land that shakes or yields under the foot
2 : a difficult, precarious, or entrapping position : PREDICAMENT

What part of the current situation in Iraq is a difficult, precarious or entrapping position.

Obama’s statements:
“Obama, who has argued the success of the Bush administration strategy in Iraq should be judged on long-term political reconciliation, conceded signs of progress in that direction. He cited the Maliki government's offensives in Basr and Sadr City against militias from his own Shiite sect. He called those offensives "a confidence-building measure." Some Shiite militia groups have targeted Sunnis in sectarian killings.”
The Swamp

I look forward to more desperate and specious arguments that suggest that America is in decline and we need to lose the war in Iraq so that we can win in Afghanistan and spend the savings on creating a dependent class of Americans here at home.

__________________
Nothing can frighten a Socialist more than the TRUTH; and nothing can frighten Obama more than REALITY

cascadian

As long as you acknowledge there is a list and that it is in fact quite long, my point stands

Nope.

I would like to see a quote of Obama saying surges cannot possibly work in any context.

My position is not necessarily Obama's either when it comes to Afghanistan. Calling him my "messiah" is pretty ridiculous and not an honest way to engage someone in a debate.
So where are these US troops coming from?

And yet it's somehow not a quagmire....
Wait didn't you just say it was on the verge of chaos and death? Make up your mind.

That's not what I said. It is a significant contributing factor however.
that' s an entirely separate debate. But for now, just not spending it in the first place would suffice.

Obama is talking about pulling out in 2010. That would be 7 years.
How about the part where there is no foreseeable end (at least not one that you're happy with).
I'm sure you'll have fun making up what I'm saying because it suits your prejudices and it's conveniently easier to argue with.

CaptainCourtesy

And you can keep pretending that your question was an honest attempt at debate, and not a baiting attempt to present an agenda. A good suggestion is that if you do not want to be called out on your dishonest questions, stop posting them. I will wait to see if you do this.

Obviously, I'll need to keep waiting.

__________________
"Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

====||:-D

Goobieman

How was it not?

This is political debate board. Presenting an agenda is the point... and how that agenda is presented is up to the person presenting it.

A good suggestion is that if you do not like it, you can go away.

Oh... and you're still avoiding the question.