Story Comments
Posted by: ybdogsct 1 year, 3 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
100%
ybdogsct1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Because in an election year a Bush aide has just helped spread the word that Barack Obama is right (again) on Iraq - that we should redeploy in accordance with the wishes of a sovereign Iraq.
This is a plan that Nouri al-Maliki endorses, a plan that Bush has finally agreed to, and a plan that McCain now flip-flops to support despite calling timelines a form of "surrender" not more than a few days ago.
Obama has demonstrated an uncanny ability to be right. Obama was right in 2002 when he said we shouldn't invade Iraq. Obama was right when he said the Troop Escalation alone wouldn't result in diplomatic progress unless the administration applied more pressure on Iraqi politicians, and Obama is right when he called for a timeline for troop redeployment - a plan Bush himself has finally come to accept.
Reply-
Neutral
Aidenag1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Don't forget he has been right about what is needed in Afghanistan as well. Bush is now going to redeploy forces like Obama has called for for years... Something McBush thought was not needed until it became a political issue recently...
And that his calls for diplomacy with Iran were correct(bush is now sending people to talk directly with Iran, which Bush and McBush called Appeasement just last month)
Anything else im forgetting that Barack was right on, that Bush is now bending over and doing?
Reply-
Neutral
mivan41 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Timing folks, when Obama was advocating this the timing was wrong. Now after the SURGE, conditions are different. NOTICE the quassi time table that Bush set up with Maliki is dependent on how things are going on the ground and can be modified as needed. Maliki is in complete agreement with the depending on how things are going statement and Indicated so in his speech!
Reply-
Neutral
tchef1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Timing BS! If they would have not invaded Iraq in the first place we wouldn't even be talking about withdrawal. We should have finished the job in Afghanistan. Osama is still running free, why?
Not to mention if we would have invaded Iraq with enough troops to have properly secured the place it may not have become such a mess. The surge was 4 years too late. How's that for timing.
Reply -
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
MIVAN:
"NOTICE the quassi time table that Bush set up with Maliki"
Bush was ADAMANTLY opposed to timetables just several days ago. He only RELUCTANTLY acquiesced when al-Maliki refused to budge on the issue.
I find it laughable just how much Bush apologists need to contort their position to justify Bush's and McCain's flip-flopping. First, it was flip-flopping on talks with Iran. Now, it's flip-flopping on setting timelines for troop redeployment in Iraq.
What's next?
LOL.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
hyperbola1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Except that re-deploying of troops to Afghanistan is a tremendous error. Sad that Obama has to use that fop to American militaristic imperialism to get elected.
How to Save Afghanistan
Politics â;; Just because Afghanistan has problems that need to be solved does not mean that the West can solve them all. Those pushing for an expansion of our military presence there are wrong. We don't need bold new plans and billions more in aid. Instead, we need less investment - but a greater focus on what we know how to do.
http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/07/18/...
Reply -
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
Teech1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Now, just who in hell does Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki think he is in supporting a proposed 16-month timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. This a$$hole acts like he's Prime Minister of a sovereign nation or something instead of an occupied, conquered country.
Has he discussed this with Bush, Cheney and McCain yet? Have Neocons and Repukes signed off on this? What about the oil companies? The nerve!
Reply-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: Hard Banned18 Replies
-
-
Neutral
svensun1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WRONG, yb, because B. Hussein has ALREADY abandoned his demand for a TIMETABLE for withdrawl!!!
You folks, like B. Hussein, are a day late and a dollar short on this issue!
Didn't you get the talking points? B. Hussein has CHANGED his website: no more 'demand' for a withdrawl in 16 months. No more 'timetable'! The 'timetable' of 16 months he so gleefully trumpeted for months has now VANISHED into the ether, replaced by calls for a "responsible and phased... ...removal", "directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government."
What happened to the 16 month DEMAND???
Now, it has been replaced by this pablum: "Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of 1 to 2 brigades a month that would remove them in 16 months..." (from the current B. Hussein website)
For a look at the original text, see this Politico article:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11517...
Reply-
Neutral
sinophil491 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
svensun - Could you please define more explicitly what type of racism you espouse? Do you hate blacks in general, mulattos, people w/ foreign or funny names, people who look like blacks, people who go to Black churches, or people who associate w/ blacks, or just blacks who have the audacity to run for president?
I can tell by your post that you will vote for J. Sidney.
Reply -
sailrComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
SVENSUN:
"B. Hussein has ALREADY abandoned his demand for a TIMETABLE for withdraw"
Actually, Obama has NOT.
Obama has always been consistent that our troops need to be redeployed as quickly, safely, and responsibly as possible, but he has been flexible in exactly how much time that would take to accomplish. The 16-month timeline was simply a flexible estimate based on the available data at the time.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008...
"So my position has not changed, but keep in mind what that original position was. I've always said that I would listen to commanders on the ground. I've always said the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability. That assessment has not changed. And when I go to Iraq and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies."
Reply
-
-
Neutral
svensun1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh, by the way, B. Hussein's website contains this even more ALARMING REVERSAL:
"Under the Obama plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel."
WHAT?!?
Just how long does he intend this 'residual force' to 'remain' in Iraq?
100 years?
Has he run THAT idea by al Maliki yet?
So, who's talking like an imperialist now?
Reply-
Neutral
Blackacereturn1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Under every plan "a residual force will remain in Iraq." You are not making any points that alarming or express a major shift in policy for Obama. You are nit picking and it makes you look like a 7th grade girl who didn't get pick for the cheer leading team. But Obama did, and Obama said, and he was, shut your freaking pie hole no one is buying it! It's Obamas plans that Bush is implementing NOW!
Reply -
-
Neutral
hamy1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Um...idiot? Bush has planned to be in Iraq forever already. Don't blame Obama for Bush's mistake. Someone is finally going to end this nightmare and clean up his mess. Lord knows Bush isn't doing anything to try and clean it up. He is more than happy to dump that hot mess into someone elses lap.
He doesn't even really talk about it anymore. Fade into obscurity Mr. Bush. Fade away so we can get to the difficult task of rebuilding what you have destroyed.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
raza91 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
For years we heard the administration claim over and over that the Iraqi government wants us there, and is begging us to stay. On the other hand, all they had to do was ask and we would respect their wishes and leave.
Al-Maliki perhaps took his cue from his challenger, al-Sadr, who has been clamoring for us to leave for years. Popular opinion in Iraq now mirrors that in the United States, with about 70 percent of Iraqis wishing us to leave.
At the end of the year, our Status of Forces Agreement expires. Without a 'new agreement' and 'understanding' with the Iraqi government regarding our presence there, we officially become occupiers.
Just getting the troops out of Iraq means nothing. Bringing them HOME means everything, and that is what the people in both countries demand.
Reply
-
loading ...
Ratskii
Eagle_Eye
sinophil49
cushi
Amazing1
Aidenag
tchef
Teech
spkguy
1basque1
BillieMaxer
Beau7890
fsev41
quackpot
ProudBlueTexan
Blackacereturn
GWHayduke
CRYMTYPHON
smithichie
cowboygrandpa
bluetexasvalley
raats6662
AlphaGnosis
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.