Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    06 Jun '11 14:22 / 1 edit
    Obama fans might not have noticed it, but we still have approximately 50,000 troops in Iraq and they "still come under almost daily attack by rockets and mortars in their bases and get shot at and targeted by roadside bombs when they move outside of their bases" two and a half years after the "anti-war" candidate got elected. Unfortunately, a rocket attack killed 5 yesterday: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43291132/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/

    While by agreement with the Iraqis, ALL troops are supposed to be withdrawn by the end of the year, the Obama administration is pressuring the Iraqi government to allow some unspecified number of "trainers and support personnel" to remain. If they are successful, we can expect to see more incidents like this in the future.

    How many who voted for Obama thought that his election would still mean that US troops were getting killed in Iraq in June 2011?
  2. 06 Jun '11 14:42
    It's unclear to me what Obama is still trying to achieve in Iraq. Perhaps he wants to stay there at least until the 2012 elections so the GOP candidate can't accuse him of pulling out before "finishing the job" (whatever that means).
  3. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    06 Jun '11 14:45
    "I will end this war in 2009" Barack Obama (several times on this video from a speech in March 2008): http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bc6_1213724783

    How's that working out?
  4. 06 Jun '11 14:48 / 2 edits
    "How many who voted for Obama thought that his election would still mean that US troops were getting killed in Iraq in June 2011?"

    I did. But then I actually pay attention to what's going on. Obama promised a phased withdrawal from Iraq, specifically saying after the combat troops are out a smaller force would remain behind. The initial withdrawal was ahead of schedule.

    I would love to see your source (a non-editorial and not from an activist site) that the Obama administration is "pressuring" Iraq to let us stay longer. When I get home I'll post multiple sources reporting the Iraqi forces are saying they need more time.
  5. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    06 Jun '11 14:49 / 2 edits
    [/i]Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper[/i]
    [b]"How many who voted for Obama thought that his election would still mean that US troops were getting killed in Iraq in June 2011?"

    I did. But then I actually pay attention to what's going on. Obama promised a [/i]phased[/i] withdrawal from Iraq, specifically saying after the combat troops are out a smaller force would remain behind. The ...[text shortened]... n ll post multiple sources reporting the [/i]Iraqi[i/] forces are saying they need more time.[/b]
    So when he said in his campaign speeches in 2008, he'd "end the war in 2009" he didn't mean it?
  6. 06 Jun '11 14:59
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    So when he said in his campaign speeches in 2008, he'd "end the war in 2009" he didn't mean it?
    Your video won't play on my iPhone. I do know for a fact Obama stated many times it would be a phased withdrawal, and that for a time residual troops would remain behind, a stradegy I actually favor.

    PS: Stop pretending you give a shlt about the five fallen Soldiers.
  7. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    06 Jun '11 15:02
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    [b]"How many who voted for Obama thought that his election would still mean that US troops were getting killed in Iraq in June 2011?"

    I did. But then I actually pay attention to what's going on. Obama promised a phased withdrawal from Iraq, specifically saying after the combat troops are out a smaller force would remain behind. The in ...[text shortened]... ll post multiple sources reporting the Iraqi forces are saying they need more time.[/b]
    Does the Defense Secretary count:

    U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday that the United States should maintain a troop presence in Iraq after the scheduled full withdrawal at the end of this year, in part, to balance Iran's influence in the region.

    http://www.voanews.com/english/news/usa/Gates-Calls-for-Continued-US-Iraq-Role-122529954.html

    There's this article in the DailyKos (among many others): http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/04/09/964367/-Gates-pushes-to-extend-occupation-of-Iraq-and-tens-of-thousands-of-Iraqis-protest
  8. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    06 Jun '11 15:08
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    Your video won't play on my iPhone. I do know for a fact Obama stated many times it would be a phased withdrawal, and that for a time residual troops would remain behind, a stradegy I actually favor.

    PS: Stop pretending you give a shlt about the five fallen Soldiers.
    You should get better technology. Obama says the phrase I gave a couple of times and has a rather dramatic part where he says "I was against the war in 2002, and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and now 2008" to loud cheering from the Democratic crowd. Wonder if they are cheering now?

    You didn't wait long for the personal attack this thread; if I had my druthers these guys wouldn't be dead. Your policy preferences if continued by the wet noodle who is President will certainly mean more dead US soldiers. That will give people like you plenty of opportunities to wave flags and talk about their "sacrifice" in your phony "patriotic" manner.

    I'd prefer to not have our soldiers killed in such worthless enterprises.
  9. 06 Jun '11 15:18
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Does the Defense Secretary count:

    U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday that the United States should maintain a troop presence in Iraq after the scheduled full withdrawal at the end of this year, in part, to balance Iran's influence in the region.

    http://www.voanews.com/english/news/usa/Gates-Calls-for-Continued-US-Iraq-Ro ...[text shortened]... 4/09/964367/-Gates-pushes-to-extend-occupation-of-Iraq-and-tens-of-thousands-of-Iraqis-protest
    Gates saying we "should" doesn't automatically mean we're pressuring them. In fact, his words could have been swayed by Iraqi officials. There are counless reports of Iraqi officials being the ones asking for more time.

    http://m.npr.org/story/136730559?url=/2011/05/29/136730559/iraqi-leader-reconsiders-u-s-troop-withdrawal
  10. 06 Jun '11 15:26
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    You should get better technology. Obama says the phrase I gave a couple of times and has a rather dramatic part where he says "I was against the war in 2002, and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and now 2008" to loud cheering from the Democratic crowd. Wonder if they are cheering now?

    You didn't wait long for the personal attack this thre ...[text shortened]... I'd prefer to not have our soldiers killed in such worthless enterprises.
    Call it a personal attack if you wish, I speak the truth. I notice you didn't deny what I said about not giving a shlt about the troops who were killed.

    It's obvious to anyone who reads this thread the five troopers who were killed meant nothing to you besides an opportunity to score cheap shots over the Internet. The entire tone is, "Ha! In your face Obama supporters!"

    Which is fine, really. I just didn't want you to get away with pretending you actually care.
  11. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    06 Jun '11 15:48
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    Your video won't play on my iPhone. I do know for a fact Obama stated many times it would be a phased withdrawal, and that for a time residual troops would remain behind, a stradegy I actually favor.

    PS: Stop pretending you give a shlt about the five fallen Soldiers.
    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/obama_dont_be_confused_im_seri.php

    This war was unwise which is why I opposed it in 2002 and that is why I will bring this war to an end in 2009. Now just one thing—one note I have to make on this. I haven’t spent too much time talking about my opponent Senator Clinton or Senator McCain for that matter.
    But I do have to say this. She was quoted either this morning or last night in Mississippi because one of my advisors had said that in a interview overseas that well Senator Obama would not… he has given a time frame for withdrawal, but obviously it would be subject to decisions and the situation at the time.

    And so, Senator Clinton used this to try to imply that I wasn’t serious about bringing this war to an end. I just have to mention this because I don’t want anybody here to be confused.

    I was opposed to this war in 2002. If it had been up to me we would have never been in this war. It was because of George Bush with an assist from Hillary Clinton and John McCain that we entered into this war. A war that should have never been authorized, a war that should have never been waged.

    I have been against it in 2002, 2003, 2004, 5, 6, 7, 8 and I will bring this war to an end in 2009.

    So don’t be confused. Don’t be confused.
  12. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    06 Jun '11 15:52
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    Call it a personal attack if you wish, I speak the truth. I notice you didn't deny what I said about not giving a shlt about the troops who were killed.

    It's obvious to anyone who reads this thread the five troopers who were killed meant nothing to you besides an opportunity to score cheap shots over the Internet. The entire tone is, "Ha! In you ...[text shortened]... hich is fine, really. I just didn't want you to get away with pretending you actually care.
    I didn't feel it necessary to dignify such a charge with an explicit denial. We both know it's BS.
  13. 06 Jun '11 15:58 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/obama_dont_be_confused_im_seri.php

    This war was unwise which is why I opposed it in 2002 and that is why I will bring this war to an end in 2009. Now just one thing—one note I have to make on this. I haven’t spent too much time talking about my opponent Senator Clinton or Senator McCain for ...[text shortened]... , 8 and I will bring this war to an end in 2009.

    So don’t be confused. Don’t be confused.
    So what you're saying is you heard that speech but couldn't be bothered with the details he provided in multiple interviews, in the debates and on his website. Got it.

    edit: Sorry Thousand. Thought you were no1. Thanks the the text
  14. 06 Jun '11 15:59
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    Call it a personal attack if you wish, I speak the truth. I notice you didn't deny what I said about not giving a shlt about the troops who were killed.

    It's obvious to anyone who reads this thread the five troopers who were killed meant nothing to you besides an opportunity to score cheap shots over the Internet. The entire tone is, "Ha! In you ...[text shortened]... hich is fine, really. I just didn't want you to get away with pretending you actually care.
    Sheesh, you shouldn't let no1 get under your skin like that.
  15. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    06 Jun '11 16:00 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    So what you're saying is you heard that speech but couldn't be bothered with the details he provided in multiple interviews, in the debates and on his website. Got it.

    edit: Sorry Thousand. Thought you were no1. Thanks the the text
    NP