• 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

Again, GWB chose not to speak for his successor. There was no rancor in the Iraqi negotiations with the GWB administration. They expected the next POTUS to make his own deal, and were surprised when BHO kept preemptively lowering the projected number of troops to be left behind.

So that your story and you are gong to stick with it. The fact that it is untrue makes no difference to you.

Some critics assert that the administration was unwilling to offer enough forces to make it worth the Iraqis’ while. But it is not clear Maliki wanted that many troops. Indeed, he was conscious of the extreme unpopularity of a continued U.S. presence among his Shia base, and he had no interest in a sizable U.S. contingent along the Arab-Kurd divide, which is what all of our military’s troop options above the 10,000-man threshold assumed. These disputed boundary areas include Kirkuk as well as parts of Nineveh province north of Mosul and portions of Diyala province—precisely where jihadists are making inroads today.
Others claim the administration spent more time negotiating with itself than it did trying to get a deal from the Iraqis. Perhaps. But, in the end, the immunities issue would likely not have been resolved even if the administration had started negotiations earlier and offered more. There was little the administration could have offered or threatened to change their calculations. It was simply too toxic, politically, for Iraqi politicians to accept.

Read more: No, Obama Didn?t Lose Iraq - Colin H. Kahl - POLITICO Magazine
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership


Yes on the first link. Your second link is misleading. BHO's persistent lowering of projected US residual strength made it not worth the trouble for Maliki to propose keeping US forces.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

So that your story and you are gong to stick with it. The fact that it is untrue makes no difference to you.



Read more: No, Obama Didn?t Lose Iraq - Colin H. Kahl - POLITICO Magazine

Thank you for making my point. From your link: ". . . . Ultimately, at great political risk, President Obama approved negotiations with the Iraqi government to allow a force of around 5,000 American troops to stay in Iraq to provide counterterrorism support and air cover and to train the Iraqi army. . . . "

5,000 troops was about one-fourth of what Maliki expected and what would have been worth his political effort.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Thank you for making my point. From your link: ". . . . Ultimately, at great political risk, President Obama approved negotiations with the Iraqi government to allow a force of around 5,000 American troops to stay in Iraq to provide counterterrorism support and air cover and to train the Iraqi army. . . . "

5,000 troops was about one-fourth of what Maliki expected and what would have been worth his political effort.

What links do you have that confirm that Maliki wanted more US troops? That is nothing but your lame excuse for Bush's failure to achieve a long term agreement. The more troops teh harder it would have been to pass the measure in the Iraqi parliment.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

What links do you have that confirm that Maliki wanted more US troops? That is nothing but your lame excuse for Bush's failure to achieve a long term agreement. The more troops teh harder it would have been to pass the measure in the Iraqi parliment.

Actually, the more troops the easier.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Nobody in this thread has any idea what is in the agreement yet want to undermine and attack it because....well Obama.

What about 47% of the Senate? Do they know whats in the agreement being negotiated?
 
Your probably right. The US wasted no time after assembly of its first nuke to try it out, on civilian targets even!


First, those bombs had yields that were a fraction of what bombs have today

Second, the incendiary devices dropped on German and Japanese cities killed more people than the two atomic bombs that the US dropped o Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

You are aware of that right ?

And thankfully those twk devices ended the war and saved American lives.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Yes on the first link. Your second link is misleading. BHO's persistent lowering of projected US residual strength made it not worth the trouble for Maliki to propose keeping US forces.

On your second point, you act like Iraqi's aren't human beings that can think for themselves or that Iraq isn't a sovereign nation that can make it's own decisions. That's what the second article was about and then bam...you go and prove them right. lol


"....At the time, the US expected a subsequent agreement would be reached to allow some troops to stay beyond that deadline. But first Bush, then Obama, failed to convince Maliki. The major stumbling block for these leaders was the standard US demand that its forces be immune from local prosecution. Maliki wouldn't budge on the issue, and probably couldn't have gotten parliament to go along anyway. So the US was forced to depart, as agreed.

The reason this remains important is because it highlights the fact that Iraqis are actual people, with their own interests, not clay dolls ready to have US interests and demands imprinted upon them.
...."

Obama isn't the problem in Iraq. It's Maliki


Did it ever occur to you that Maliki had his own agenda and didn't need or want US troops in Iraq enough to give them immunity from crimes against Iraqis? Perhaps not because you didn't really read the article...but even if you had, you'd still deny it's validity because it simply doesn't fit your right wing revisionist narrative that the Iraq war was a success and all of it's failures are Obama's fault.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

On your second point, you act like Iraqi's aren't human beings that can think for themselves or that Iraq isn't a sovereign nation that can make it's own decisions. That's what the second article was about and then bam...you go and prove them right. lol


"....At the time, the US expected a subsequent agreement would be reached to allow some troops to stay beyond that deadline. But first Bush, then Obama, failed to convince Maliki. The major stumbling block for these leaders was the standard US demand that its forces be immune from local prosecution. Maliki wouldn't budge on the issue, and probably couldn't have gotten parliament to go along anyway. So the US was forced to depart, as agreed.

The reason this remains important is because it highlights the fact that Iraqis are actual people, with their own interests, not clay dolls ready to have US interests and demands imprinted upon them....."

Obama isn't the problem in Iraq. It's Maliki



Did it ever occur to you that Maliki had his own agenda and didn't need or want US troops in Iraq enough to give them immunity from crimes against Iraqis? Perhaps not because you didn't really read the article...but even if you had, you'd still deny it's validity because it simply doesn't fit your right wing revisionist narrative that the Iraq war was a success and all of it's failures are Obama's fault.


I'm not the one who said the Iraq war was a success. Both BHO and VP Biden called it a victory. If you want to argue against them then be my guest. Immunity for US troops was going to be a heavy lift for Maliki; he wasn't going to do it without a big payoff. BHO reduced the projected force below the level that was worth Maliki's effort.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

I'm not the one who said the Iraq war was a success. Both BHO and VP Biden called it a victory. If you want to argue against them then be my guest.
Link?


Immunity for US troops was going to be a heavy lift for Maliki; he wasn't going to do it without a big payoff. BHO reduced the projected force below the level that was worth Maliki's effort.
Really, what level was that?

But once again, you seem to assume that Iraqi's aren't intelligent enough to make their own decisions. So what part of "no immunity for US troops that commit crimes against Iraq civilians" don't you understand?
 
First, those bombs had yields that were a fraction of what bombs have today

Second, the incendiary devices dropped on German and Japanese cities killed more people than the two atomic bombs that the US dropped o Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

You are aware of that right ?

And thankfully those twk devices ended the war and saved American lives.

Tell your bull**** about yields to those innocents that died that day, and the following days, and weeks and months, and to all those that lived but suffered their entire lives because of low yield American nuclear weapons.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Link?


Really, what level was that?

But once again, you seem to assume that Iraqi's aren't intelligent enough to make their own decisions. So what part of "no immunity for US troops that commit crimes against Iraq civilians" don't you understand?

[h=1]Barack Obama declares Iraq war a success[/h] President told an audience of soldiers at Fort Bragg that the final pullout after nearly nine years of conflict is a 'historic' moment




Chris McGreal in Washington

713






0:00

/

1:22




Barack Obama marked an end to a war he once described as "dumb" by declaring the conflict in Iraq a success and saying the last US troops will leave in the coming days with their "heads held high".
The president told an audience of soldiers at Fort Bragg that the final pullout from Iraq after nearly nine years of war is a "historic" moment and that the country they leave behind is "an extraordinary achievement".
"Dozens of bases with American names that housed thousands of American troops have been closed down or turned over to the Iraqis. Thousands of tons of equipment have been packed up and shipped out. Tomorrow, the colours of United States Forces Iraq, the colours you fought under, will be formally cased in a ceremony in Baghdad," he said. "One of the most extraordinary chapters in the history of the American military will come to an end. Iraq's future will be in the hands of its people. America's war in Iraq will be over."
Advertisement

The president said the last US troops will leave in the coming days, travelling south across the desert by much the same route that American, British and coalition forces attacked Iraq in 2003.
Obama hinted at the military and diplomatic quagmire he inherited from a Bush administration that had promised Americans a quick and easy war that would see Iraqis scattering flowers at the feet of US soldiers. Instead, the American invasion unleashed a conflict - part civil war, part anti-occupation - that dragged on for years.
But the president, who came to power promising to end the war, said that for all the suffering, the result was success.
"We knew this day would come. We've known it for some time. But still there is something profound about the end of a war that has lasted so long," said Obama. "It's harder to end a war than begin one. Everything that American troops have done in Iraq - all the fighting, all the dying, the bleeding and the building and the training and the partnering, all of it has landed to this moment of success."
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Actually, the more troops the easier.

Given the anti-american sentiment in Iraq, I think you are fooling yourself. But you are no stranger to that.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Given the anti-american sentiment in Iraq, I think you are fooling yourself. But you are no stranger to that.

"Sentiment" in the Arab world can change in fifteen minutes, and it is for sale.
 
Tell your bull**** about yields to those innocents that died that day, and the following days, and weeks and months, and to all those that lived but suffered their entire lives because of low yield American nuclear weapons.

LOL !!! Nonsense...

What about the innocents that died in Japanese POW camps ? Or all of the innocent Chinese that were tortured and killed by the Japanese ?

Japanese war crimes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Were the " innocents " that died in Tokyo, Berlin, Hamburg and Dresden less "innocents " than the " innocents " that died in Nagasaki ?

Your butt hurt over the existence of America is compromising your rationality....and its funny.
 
LOL !!! Nonsense...

What about the innocents that died in Japanese POW camps ? Or all of the innocent Chinese that were tortured and killed by the Japanese ?

Japanese war crimes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Were the " innocents " that died in Tokyo, Berlin, Hamburg and Dresden less "innocents " than the " innocents " that died in Nagasaki ?

Your butt hurt over the existence of America is compromising your rationality....and its funny.

All countries commit war crimes during war, stop acting like your **** doesn't stink. It's the hypocrisy.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

LOL Bush tried and failed to get any long term agreements to stay in Iraq. Stop covering for him he is not worth it. And stop with the DoD planners, they had nothing to do with the Iraqi Govt. and their desire for us to leave.
All SOFA's have expiry dates on them and this one went well into Obama's term. This blaming everything on Bush is adolescent and wrong. Obama has screwed up everywhere and you must be mature enough to just accept that. Obama promised to leave, he did, and now we have what we have, with many thousands of people dead and a great war on the way..

FLASHBACK
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Thank you for making my point. From your link: ". . . . Ultimately, at great political risk, President Obama approved negotiations with the Iraqi government to allow a force of around 5,000 American troops to stay in Iraq to provide counterterrorism support and air cover and to train the Iraqi army. . . . "

5,000 troops was about one-fourth of what Maliki expected and what would have been worth his political effort.

Yes, and it was significantly less than anyone recommended at the time and would have been very risky for those 5,000 left behind. Thirty -50,000 was the general recommendation.

Maliki knew, as most of us know now, that Obama was not serious.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

Given the anti-american sentiment in Iraq, I think you are fooling yourself. But you are no stranger to that.
There has always been anti American and pro American sentiment, often encouraged by the local media and ambitious politicians and should not effect US Foreign Policy. The truth should be understood by those who want to live in America.

Among the most anti American people in the world are the mis-educated American leftists.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

But the president, who came to power promising to end the war, said that for all the suffering, the result was success.

"We knew this day would come. We've known it for some time. But still there is something profound about the end of a war that has lasted so long," said Obama. "It's harder to end a war than begin one. Everything that American troops have done in Iraq - all the fighting, all the dying, the bleeding and the building and the training and the partnering, all of it has landed to this moment of success."
This narcissistic didn't even stop to think that it takes a minimum of two sides to end a war. It was one of the most stunning screw-ups in world history, and certainly American history.
 
Re: Obama Blasts Republicans Over Letter to Iranian Leadership

All SOFA's have expiry dates on them and this one went well into Obama's term. This blaming everything on Bush is adolescent and wrong. Obama has screwed up everywhere and you must be mature enough to just accept that. Obama promised to leave, he did, and now we have what we have, with many thousands of people dead and a great war on the way..

FLASHBACK

Again you repeat that same fairytale, Bush wanted a long term agreement like we have with South Korea but the Iraqi's would have none of it and would not agree to any open ended occupation. He struggled to get even the 3 year agreement before his U.N. sanctioned occupation time was up. As far as dead we need to count the Sunnis that Maliki's Shia militias murdered as well. The choice of supporting a sectarian terrorist while he commits genocide or following through with the agreement that Bush signed was probably not that difficult given that the Iraqi's wanted us out badly anyway.
 
Back
Top Bottom