Shorter Post:
Bush's plan to leave 50,000 troops permanently in Iraq sucked
Obama's plan to leave 50,000 troops permanently in Iraq sucked
Hail Ceaser!
Posted by S Brennan at March 17, 2009 08:32 AM
Yes, when one is very busy, it is certainly acceptable to be a hypocrite.
H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E
Posted by redsneakers at March 17, 2009 09:14 AMjudge Obama by his actions, not his words
Posted by Gay Veteran at March 17, 2009 11:50 AMThe difference is Bush went to Iraq carelessly. Obama is withdrawing from Iraq carefuly.
Posted by suresh at March 17, 2009 12:15 PMparadox: ....A fierce critic of the war all these years leaves me with an obligation to explain my obeisance to Executive here....Occam's razor would suggest that hypocrisy is your most likely motive. Obama's lengthy ‛timetable' for withdrawing troops from Iraq despite campaign talk, his willingness to sustain the unwinnable Afghan conflict, his hard line pronouncements on Iran, and his acquiescence on Israeli terrorism proves how phony he and you have been on this issue.
You may think that I have nothing but pure contempt for fauxgressives and pseudo-liberal conservatives like you. That would not be wrong.
Again with the false statements, sbrennan---all troops must be withdrawn from Iraq by Dec 2011, that's what the final Status of Forces Agreement says. Iraq isn't going to renegotiate it, and Iraqis seem to have acquiesced to the deal their gub'mint demanded.
So that leaves the 50,000 soldiers staying longer than promised during the campaign. They'll cost money, and who knows how "quiet" Iraq will be and how much damage they'll cause---the story is that they won't be used for "combat".
If that's the case, why don't all of you arguing the Horror of Hypocrisy explain exactly what you fear from the 50,000 staying longer than promised? Remember, you can't bleat "indefinite" or "permanent" occupation as the problem, because all our Imperial Sturmtruppen must be gone by the end of 2011--that's the SOFA.
As for the points mike makes, Obama is doing exactly what he said he would do in Afghanistan, he never said he would stand up to the Israel Lobby (no president can), and his policy towards Iran is already substantially different than the neocons--and the Iranians are aware that's the case. So while there's cause for complaint, there's no basis for a "hypocrisy" charge....
Posted by euzoius at March 17, 2009 03:42 PMMike:
You need math lessons. Nineteen months instead of 16 months is not considered 'lenthy" time table. It shows Obama is listening to the generals and has accessed the situation in Iraq and is confident that we can have this time table. This approach is better than having an ideolgical agenda and sticking to it like Bush did inspite of the facts or situation at the time.
To be against Obama for anything he does is one thing being a Republican but doing that without thinking is plain stupid.
Posted by suresh at March 17, 2009 03:45 PMSOFA's are always up for future considerations Euz. Did you catch ABC news tonight. What a image they cast of today's Baghdad? A nightlife, fast cars, museums, girls buying western casual ware, Italian restaurants, even Ferrari's. What a change has happened in that once lost country? Maybe things will continue along the paths President Bush layed out. 19 months may just be the right time to draw down to some 50,000 troops. And next year after reducing that to about 15,000 based there. President Obama will make sure to make that agreement.
Posted by peter at March 17, 2009 04:37 PMIf you think women in Iraq have a better situation now than under Saddam, you're ignorant, peter.
But you aren't a relevant participant in this debate, this is a debate in the progressive camp. We know YOU think the Lying Invasion and Occupation was a huge success (only 1 million excess deaths, 3 million refugees, millions of widows, orphans and destroyed lives--that's "victory!", you betcha!)
And the only likely modification to this SOFA is an Iraqi-requested shortening of our imperial stormtroops "stay", not an extension.
Posted by euzoius at March 17, 2009 04:53 PMPeter,
Baghdad may not be the place you want to go for a thriving nightlife. Let's hope it soon can be.
19 months sounds comfortable to me. In order to leave, the U.S. has to remove a good bit of the war materiel that has been placed there. Removing the troops and the hardware should not be made unduly hazardous. Given that the nearest staging area is Kuwait, if everything was convoyed back that could not be airlifted out, a column running from N Central Iraq would extend to Kuwait in a long traffic jam that could easily be harassed from its long flanks and could be difficult to defend. Why subject the troops to possible mayhem?
Leaving our ordinance behind is probably not a good idea. A measured redeployment is what is called for. The sooner it happens the better, but we can't trick the enemy on when we are leaving if we are to leave. It should be made clearly evident that the withdrawal of forces and their armament is underway. An Iraqi republic with the security to remain so will then have to do thereafter.
Posted by obelus at March 17, 2009 07:21 PMHey Euz, Dresden never looked this good this fast, neither did Berlin. Baghdad, what a success, Iraq, what a victory. President Obama declared it so last month. Our soldiers will be coming home with honor for doing their job, or if you will accomplishing their mission. The Iraqi's will not hasten anything and will probably find a way to extend the stay of some of our forces. President Obama will assure a peaceful Iraq.
Posted by peter at March 17, 2009 07:27 PMmore from shit for brains petey...since you're so impressed with Baghdad you need to be there...you can drop us a line...if you last 5 minutes..
Posted by headxray at March 17, 2009 07:35 PMHey Euz, Dresden never looked this good this fast, neither did Berlin.
You bet. That's why the Iranians are offering to rebuild it. It is such a garden of fucking Eden there. Shit, they get 13 hours of electricity a day...up from the 24 hours per day they got before Ameri...never mind...
About the only worthwhile thing Buschco did was to convince the the Iraqis to get rid of those fucking X-tians. "Jesus loves bombs!" Who the hell wants a bunch of the Zombies who can believe this sentiment in their country after seeing the havoc the jesus-zombies can wreak? Interesting, huh?
Posted by phidipides at March 17, 2009 09:16 PMLike St Patrick's day, Iraq should have a St George day. The crowds will shout, "He drove the christians out of Iraq!"
Posted by TIKI AL at March 18, 2009 10:15 AM"But you aren't a relevant participant in this
debate"
Ya sure.."lack of relevance"and then a silly childish response from the Euzie guy?
Pathetic