section eight

Has the Iraqi government passed and singed into law a bill calling for a timetable? The have a Constitutional system of governance with separate branches of government, Maliki is not the dictator of Iraq, you know that whole Democracy thing?

section eight

Have they passed a bill and singed it into law requesting the U.S. to leave? Was Maliki appointed dictator while I was in the shower or something?

DivineComedy

"Agreed" does not sound like "ignored" or "disregard" to me, but I do not have a "liberal" dictionary.

__________________
“[59.14] They will not fight against you in a body save in fortified towns or from behind walls; their fighting between them is severe, you may think them as one body, and their hearts are disunited; that is because they are a people who have no sense.”

Yeah, a wall and a border patrol will protect us. {sound of laughter}

Summerwind

My point was that a whole new term had to be devised in order for an agreement to be had. However based on the OP, it seems that Maliki would nonetheless prefer Obama's intended timetable over Bush's "time horizon," however if you need to change the topic to appear to be right, well, that says a lot.

DivineComedy

A term that means less than Tuesday's timetable, but around next week, is more in line with Obama's recent flip flop on this very issue.

The topic is:
"but what say ye?"


I say it is great, I hope the surge did work and Iraq is now stable enough to keep their democracy, regardless of the political bull of changing terms to reflect the fluid situation that may develop. I wanted our troops out before I ever came on this board, and somewhere in an archive at the White House there may be proof. Attempts to support the inhuman creatures who would never have given Iraq a chance to this kind of democratic agreement will not distract me from the real topic.

Unlike the Democratic Party monsters, I have always supported Operation Iraqi Freedom, as far back as 1992 when I protested the lukewarm "liberal" arts of war when Gorby said, "that is far enough," when I did not believe it was far enough.

Summerwind

I can agree with the idea that Bush1 should've finished what he started, perhaps we wouldn't have been in this problem now if he had.

DivineComedy

Bush Sr. did not start it, Saddam did, but Bush did start our obligations under H32 of United Nations (of tyrants too) resolution 687, which prompts me always to say cold or hot but never the lukewarm "liberal" arts of war.

And Bush could not finish what Saddam started for the exact same reason the Arab League stopped United Nations (of tyrants too) action until there were no more villages to burn in Darfur. Now the lame excuse of the ICC, the court without any real bailiff, is mad at the Sudan's president; The world does not know how to read Article One of the UN Charter with regard to removing threats to the peace, and the only answer is for treasonous democrats to support treason against the Declaration of Independence's "Consent of the Governed" where we would only have some protection from politically motivated prosecutions. I suppose if ICC did not like the benefits of Oil for Food, and the appearance of justice meant anything the ICC would have indicted Saddam, and used spit balls there too.

cherokee

Sand? No its been inside an MRI. Anymore retarded questions?

I guess you didn't see the part that said....

But why would you...........

__________________
We must never forget.
On October 23, 1983 at 6:22 a.m., a large delivery truck drove to the Beirut International Airport where the Marine Barracks was located.
The driver detonated explosives with the power equal to more than 12,000 pounds of TNT. The explosion crumbled the four-story building, crushing service members to death while they were sleeping.
The terrorist attack killed 220 Marines and 21 other U.S. service members who were stationed there to help keep the peace.

Summerwind

How does that change the fact that a sovereign Iraq shouldn't have to negotiate the withdrawal of our occupation? The whole idea that a deal has to be reached is completely the point. I suppose it would be a bit different if it were Iraq wanting us to stay, and we had to work out a reasonable situation; but to leave. . . it's called "okay, bye, you're a sovereign nation, we respect your request." No negotiation should be required at all. Why Maliki didn't just sent a timetable proposal to the Iraqi congress and whomever needs to vote on it, and then demand that we honor it is beyond me; oh, that's right they tried to do that with the immunity for military contractors are were basically ignored. Now I remember.

jallman

Uh, Bush didn't create a term. Time Horizon is also known as a planning horizon and is used in financing, risk management, forestry projects, etc.

So why is it that rather than educate yourself on the term, you defaulted to the "Bush lied" caterwauling that you people do? How does foot taste?

__________________
McCain / Palin 08

Obama's idea of "change" is a 40 year Washington insider who has been recycled on the presidential ticket twice now. Lawwwd Change, yes laaaawd change.