Reply With Quote
Fine with me. Iran's gonna end up running it after we leave no matter how long we stay anyway. Might as well get out now.
Obama about to speak about Having Troops out of Iraq by the end of the year. What say you?
Let the bashing begin by McCain and others.
Fine with me. Iran's gonna end up running it after we leave no matter how long we stay anyway. Might as well get out now.
bingo
Iraq is gonna blow up, remain corrupted, remain tribally, ethnically, sectarianally divided for centuries. Get out now and not stay for McLiar's "100 years". Like VN, UCA invading Iraq for oil was a total failure for American security, but a huge success for the MIC and US/UK oil company instigators.
Barry says no deal with Iraqis to give US troops immunity from war crimes, so the troops are coming out by 31 Dec.
Obama: U.S. will pull troops out of Iraq by year-end
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...litics+News%29
So, Obama and Co have taken everything they needed I guess
No need for Iraq anymore
Transferred from DoD to State. We're not out of Iraq by a long shot.
It does seem like we have a greatly reduced presence coming though. That's just anecodtal on my end though; most deployments are to a 'Stan now, which is a big change from even a year ago.
dubya's $1B green zone boogdoggle imperial embassy, disfiguring the middle of BadGag, will probably cost State $1B/year forever, with $100Ms going to murderous mercenaries.
I expect the Iraq govt to shakedown the US/UK oilcos more and more over the years, with US taxpayers $$ providing much grease to Iraqi hands to keep the US/UK oilcos in business.
What exactly did Obama and co take from Iraq that they don't need anymore?
It's a big change for sure, it just doesn't mean what people are suggesting it means. We will not be free and clear of Iraq's downstream wreckage for quite some time, and the conceit that we will shortly be out of Iraq, though technically true, is practically misleading. Have you seen the pix of the US embassy there?
"the State Department's plan is absolutely necessary to achieve key goals when it comes to diplomacy, economics, energy, security and rule of law."
so the US embassy mercenaries will be policing and enforcing the rule law outside of the embassy (and esp around the US/UK oil/gas facilities)? Thanks for the clarification.
iow, US taxpayers can't fund butter (teachers and fire/policemen, bridges, roads, education) while spending $100Bs on guns (occupy Iraq-for-oil for decades).
America is ing insane (but sanity reigns for the MIC and UCA).
what about the 3 billion dollar US mini-city green zone? will it become an amusement park?
the embassy is in the green zone, right?
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=baghda...psrc=6&iwloc=A
Yes.
Answered in the linked material...it will become home to 16,000 State Dept personnel and contractors.
Well, I hope he gets them out. If not, he puts the US in violation of the SOFA agreement president Bush signed.
I have seen some of the security reports from Iraq and they have taken over the preponderance of the policing as it is. That we had to go in there and play cop for a decade was ing stupid. Its like one of WC's posts.
Man, you're like an expert on every subject.
Hardly. i just have seent he reports and thats what they claim. There is a guy named Ralph Peters that talks about this subject and the strategic implications of the shift in the role our military has had to take and I am familiar with his takes but that is about the extent of it.
I don't watch TV except for sports so i end up reading constantly. It helps to educate oneself. You should know that as an engineer.
who knew the GOPhers, rodents every one of them, would object, as if programmed message central?
GOPers Hit Obama for Iraq Withdrawal
Nonetheless, the end of US military operations in Iraq—100,000 troops have already left the country, and the final 39,000 will be gone by late December—is already being spun by some Republican critics as an admission of defeat, part of a larger attempt to paint Obama and his party as soft on national security.
Obama had shown "weakness" in making "a political decision and not a military one."
Mitt Romney's campaign sent out an email statement with a near-identical sentiment.
The status of forces agreement between the US and Iraq that requires American troops to leave this year—the deal that Bachmann and Romney are railing against—was negotiated in 2008 by George W. Bush.
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/10/...raq-withdrawal
===
No worries, the "message" will be all over Fox Repug Propaganda network tonight and for months to come.
Republican warmongers do know that the military is run by civilians, right?
Thats a good point. How many get to come home?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
