Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama is making clearer than ever that tens of thousands of troops will be left behind in Iraq

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:33 AM
Original message
Obama is making clearer than ever that tens of thousands of troops will be left behind in Iraq
I said that I would remove our combat troops from Iraq in 16 months, with the understanding that it might be necessary likely to be necessary to maintain a residual force to provide potential training, logistical support, to protect our civilians in Iraq, Mr. Obama said this week as he introduced his national security team.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/04/us/politics/04militar...

That status-of-forces agreement remains subject to change, by mutual agreement, and Army planners acknowledge privately that they are examining projections that could see the number of Americans hovering between 30,000 and 50,000 and some say as high as 70,000 for a substantial time even beyond 2011.

....There always was a tension, if not a bit of a contradiction, in the two parts of Mr. Obamas campaign platform to end the war by withdrawing all combat troops by May 2010. To be sure, Mr. Obama was careful to say that the drawdowns he was promising included only combat troops. But supporters who keyed on the language of ending the war might be forgiven if they thought that would mean bringing home all of the troops.

Pentagon planners say that it is possible that Mr. Obamas goal could be accomplished at least in part by relabeling some units, so that those currently counted as combat troops could be re-missioned, their efforts redefined as training and support for the Iraqis.


In Iraq today, there are 15 brigades defined as combat forces in this debate, with one on its way home. But the overall number of troops on the ground is more than 50 brigade equivalents, for a total of 146,000 troops, including service and support personnel. Even now, after the departure of the five surge brigades that President Bush sent to Iraq in January 2006, the overall number of troops in Iraq remains higher than when Mr. Bush ordered the troop increase, owing to the number of support and service personnel remaining.....Mr. Gates, speaking at the Pentagon on Tuesday, a day after he appeared with Mr. Obama to announce the new national security team, made clear that the direction of troop levels now had been decided, with the only decisions remaining on how fast and how low.

And so the question is, How do we do this in a responsible way? Mr. Gates said. And nobody wants to put at risk the gains that have been achieved, with so much sacrifice, on the part of our soldiers and the Iraqis, at this point.




Great. 70,000 troops staying in Iraq past 2011, and a surge of 30,000 into Afghanistan right when India and Pakistan are increasing tensions in the region.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
1. This is NOT what Obama says. It is what "Army planners"say
whoever this is.

Obviously, I'd like to hear Obama or Gates say something that clarifies what has ALWAYS been the real issue in ALL Democratic proposals, but what you are outlining is NOT what Obama said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. I said that I would remove our combat troops from Iraq in 16 months, with the understanding that it
might be necessary likely to be necessary to maintain a residual force to provide potential training, logistical support, to protect our civilians in Iraq, Mr. Obama said this week as he introduced his national security team.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thewiseguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. You are misleading people.
The source of the article are military planners and not Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. He did not say how many. I think that there is a legitimate question to ask, but not
a wild claim like yours. He does not say what your OP says.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. I didn't make the claim.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thewiseguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. and who did? Anonymous military planners or Obama?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #12
17. Is the thread title yours or not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. It's a quotation from the article. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thewiseguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. No Shit!
Are not you smart!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. Too much coffee this morning? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #19
28. So he chose that title purposely. It isn't the title of the article, but it is
the title of the OP.

Thanks for letting me know. I'm so tired this morning that I didn't really feel like clicking and searching. Right now my biggest decision is whether to take an Ultram or a Vicodin for my headache. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #28
32. If Obama pulls 16 brigades home in the next 16 days, there will still be
tens of thousands of troops occupying the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #32
111. And how long does it take to train and provide support for Iraqi troops?
Answer: Not very long at all.

So you've now pulled numbers from anonymous sources, attacked Obama for things he never said, and made assumptions when you have no answers.

And you think this is fooling us?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. Thread title is from the 2nd paragraph.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #9
18. There are 50 brigade equivalants in Iraq, Obama has stated that he wants to pull
16 brigades out in 16 months. The math is the math.

I want them all out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kashka-Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
2. you really thought they'd give up those 14 PERMANENT military bases? "Ending the war" doesn't mean
they'd not still be there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherokeeprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #2
90. Who's "they"? Is Obama NOT the Commander in Chief?
"They". That word always gets me when used in this context.

Obama could have EVERY boot off of the ground in Iraq if he wanted. IN 16 months. The power is his to wield.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kashka-Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #90
178. they = Obama, armed forces, majority of congress
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 02:40 PM by Kashka-Kat
The bases will probably remain even if & when the occupation of the rest of Iraq ends - sorta like Guantanamo base on Cuban soil. Only a few like Dennis K. mention specifically what should happen to the bases, the rest define "ending the war" a bit differently and are intentionally ambiguous about the bases. I don't like it, but that's reality.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DutchLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #90
194. No, he's not. The military industrial complex acts as 'Commander in chief'.
There hasn't been a president yet who could or wanted to beat them, since Eisenhower warned about them in his farewell speech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
3. gogoplata is making it clearer that is he working hard to defeat
President Elect Obama in 2012.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #3
11. Yep. Why are people doing this here? I thought we liked democrats.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #3
29. Yep, the OP's posts have been very.........consistent in their.....focus n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #29
34. 3 purity patrols, who choose not to engage the issue, just attack a DU member.
The article is from the NY Times, what do you dispute that is written, if anything?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #34
44. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. Refuse to engage with the topic? Just want to question loyalty?
Sidney, you are angry at the troops left in Iraq, just like I am. I choose to do something about it, you may feel that appearances of 100% love from the party is more important than opposing the continuation of an illegal occupation, we will have to disagree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #46
51. Refuse to have a discussion? Just want to attack Obama?
Yep, that's your agenda.

Who do you think you're fooling?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #51
56. I am engaged in this discussion, I am opposed to occupying Iraq. I am opposed
to an imperial presence of 70,000 military troops in the sovereign Iraqi nation. Are you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thewiseguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #56
60. WTF are you rambling about? Where did Obama say 70,000?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #60
66. He didn't. This concern troll is just pulling stuff out of his ass.
The OP joined a week ago and every post has been tearing down Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #56
62. I knew when I voted for Obama that he would keep some troops there past 16 months.
If you didn't know that, your own ignorance is the problem.

Obama made this perfectly clear during the campaign.

Of course, someone with your "concerns" probably never supported him anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thewiseguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #62
65. The OP is spreading bogus claims about 70000 troops remaining in Iraq
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 12:38 PM by thewiseguy
Obama has never said such a thing. The article does not quote Obama saying such a thing. The OP is spreading bs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #65
69. I know that. But Obama made it clear that "conditions on the ground" was the key.
The OP is either an ignorant fool or a concern troll disruptor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DutchLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #44
197. Paranoid, are you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #34
59. I don't dispute the article, I do, however, question your OP's 'slant' on it...
but, then again, I have found the vast majority of your OPs and posts to be similarly slanted so no surprise, imo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #59
63. The OP is the article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #63
82. No, your OP is the compilation of your "opinion"...
and 'interpretation' of the article. Were it to be "the article" you would have simply cut and past 4 paragraphs from it and let it stand on it's own.

Your OP is misleading and deliberately so, imo, but, as I said before, no surprise there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DutchLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #34
196. Don't you know? You can't question any politician with a D next to his name...
Unless it's Pleosi or Reid, then all of a sudden bashing is mandatory. But when it comes to others, it's 'party over country' at DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DutchLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #3
195. That's a filthy attack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thewiseguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
4. Your thread title is false. Are you trying to stir up shit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. 2nd paragraph at the link
But as he moves closer to the White House, President-elect Obama is making clearer than ever that tens of thousands of American troops will be left behind in Iraq, even if he can make good on his campaign promise to pull all combat forces out within 16 months.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #4
14. That would be my best guess. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
6. What a fool I've been!
Why didn't I vote for McCain?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. pretty sure that the op did....every thread is designed to start some
anti Obama bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kennetha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
13. Obama is a master of tacit ambiguity
He will end the war "responsibly." But what does "responsibly" mean and entail? It's clearly meant to rule out a precipitous withdrawal that undoes what are claimed to be our gains in Iraq. But too much responsibility of this kind, and you've got a policy barely distinguishable from Bush's. Of course, the main point was to draw distinctions from Bush's policies. But the sense that there would be a radical shift was conveyed more by the tone of OBama's remarks -- the constant stress on ending the war -- rather than the details -- spelling out what ending it responsibly actually amounts to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. That's a good point. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #13
23. Good point
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #13
26. I think it's time that he let us know what the plans are, especially since Gates,
who supported the surge and SOFA, is running the show over there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #13
47. Bingo. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
21. If this is going to be the case, Obama can kiss the anti-war vote goodbye in 2012
We need to get all of our troops out ASAP, and if Obama doesn't do that, then we need to find somebody who will.

Just more confirmation that Obama is also working under the rubric of the two party/same corporate master system of government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #21
25. It would be helpful if Obama made a statement about how he's going to deal
with the obscene mess Bush is leaving there -- including our imperial embassies. Our economy gives him a very good cover for significant downsizing. I hope he uses it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. Not just the economy, but public opinion
Hell, he could load the troops up on Jan 21st and bring them home with the entire country cheering him on. Leaving any sort of residual force in the country is just another euphemism for low level, long simmering military action.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #27
30. Right. There's a matrix of good reasons: responding to public opinion,
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 11:10 AM by sfexpat2000
the economy, signaling a new course in foreign policy, making good on the commitment to develop renewables. Iraq is a very powerful symbol, too, of the massive Bush failures. Obama could continue to use that symbol to advance his politics easily by downsizing and drawing down.

/oops
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WonderGrunion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #21
68. From a practical standpoint
If Obama rescues the economy, he won't need the anti-war vote in 2012.

My momma always said you catch more flies with molasses than vinegar. Perhaps a less aggressive approach towards Obama and the war might yield results closer to what you want. Otherwise, who will listen to you in 2012?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #68
184. Mmm-hmmm, you just keep thinking that
How nice of you to write off seventy five percent of the electorate as irrelevant.

Oh, and it's nice to see just where your priorities are, money over lives :eyes: Nice set of morals you've got there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DutchLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #21
198. The anti-war voters had only one choice for an anti-war candidate...
Kucinich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellacott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
31. I'm convinced that many of you never read his positions
or paid any attention to his speeches or the debates. Many things you all are calling broken promises are not broken promises.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. End the war, bring our troops home. ASAP.
That's what he emphasized.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellacott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #33
35. Just as I thought
Case closed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #35
36. So, this is old news and anyone who was paying attention would know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellacott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #36
41. It's not worth it
amazing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadBadger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #33
43. He has emphasized bringing our troops home 1-2 brigades per month for 16 months.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WonderGrunion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:41 PM
Original message
Obama never stated that
You can go way back to when he first announced nearly two years ago that he was running for president. He never called for immediate withdrawal. Even if he did, he couldn't start that until he takes office. Even if he wanted immediate withdrawal, it's logistically impossible to do that with 180,000 troops and all the hardware and resources we have over there. He never emphasized what you're claiming. All informed voters knew that. I'll leave it to you to conclude what that makes you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
37. What would you suggest we do if the Shiites begin slaughtering the Sunnis in a genocide?
Perhaps what happens if Turkey invades the Kurdish regions and methodically kills off the Kurds?

What about how we utterly destroyed the Iraqi infrastructure, its water resources, its transmission lines and power grid?

I know. We should just leave. Let them kill each other off while we just look away.

It's more complicated than just having the troops leave (as they will eventually) overnight...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #37
38. "There's no doubt there are risks of increased bloodshed in Iraq without a continuing U.S. presence
presence there."

The greater risk is staying in Iraq, Obama said.

"It is my assessment that those risks are even greater if we continue to occupy Iraq and serve as a magnet for not only terrorist activity but also irresponsible behavior by Iraqi factions," he said.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8QGF5700&show_...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #37
39. The international community needs to deal with these issues, not us.
If we do it, there's too much room for the same abuses we've seen since the invasion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #39
99. I agree. We are part of the international community that has to face down these issues
Yes, the UN... which we are probably three quarters of troop-wise...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #99
141. Very true, and the UN is not infallible or somehow magical but
I doubt that outfits like KBR would be getting away with their horrible cr@p -- poisoning the troops, allowing their subs to engage in slavery, murdering civilians without consequences -- if more eyes were on their behavior.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mvd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #141
175. Right. Taking things into our own hands is..
what got us into this mess. I'd rather we made a phased but regular withdrawal starting now, but Obama should ask for international oversight - since some concerns about the aftermath are valid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #175
176. I hope he does. Thank goodness, I trust his team to frame it very well.
They're past masters at it and their skill will serve Obama and us very well in the next awful year or two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
40. Why do you hate America? Why?? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
42. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #42
105. I like the giraffe one you had yesterday. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
45. That's a lot of concern for someone who joined a week ago.
I wonder how you voted on November 4th.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. Another one who wants a loyalty oath and won't discuss facts.
There are people commenting here that this (tens of thousands of troops staying in Iraq) was so obvious that for anyone to be bothered by it was being naive. Then there are others, like you, who attack the messenger. The numbers are not mine, they come from Obama.

We need to stop the surge in Afghanistan and end our occupation in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #48
50. You're tearing down Obama every chance you get. There's nothing to discuss.
You are here to spread your "concern" and get people to attack Obama before he even takes office.

I myself will wait until Obama is president, since he can't even start the withdraw until then.

Your agenda is obvious. Enjoy your stay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. so few posts, all attacking obama....
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hawkeye-X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #48
188. Are you sure you're not jacksom_dem?
Because you sure sound like him
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DutchLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #45
200. I wonder why you engage in personal attacks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
49. He's never said anything different. He always said we'd have a residual force
for a period of time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #49
53. Thank you. Unfortunately the truth won't stop concern trolls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. There are people on this thread, very angry at this story. They, like me, didn't
count on 70,000 troops hanging out in Iraq for an indefinite time period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #54
57. Yes, and there are people at DU, like you, who are spreading "concern".
Most of us who voted for Obama already knew this.

If you didn't know this, that's your problem, not his.

Assuming you actually voted for him, which I seriously doubt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #57
61. Ok , then if this is the "truth" about Obama and his plans.
What's the issue with talking about it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #61
72. The 70k figure is out of your ass. Most of us knew there would be a small residual force.
If you didn't know that, that is your problem, not ours, and not Obama's.

The 70,000 figure, you just pulled out of your ass.

And when I see concern trolls stirring shit about someone who didn't even take office yet, I call them out on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #72
75. Well, you started out intelligently, the 70k number is from the NY Times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #75
79. No, "some say" it "could" be 70k - didn't you read your own OP?
Christ, it's like I'm arguing with a toddler.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #79
81. That's where the 70k comes from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thewiseguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #81
86. It does not come from Obama. The source are military planners!
Go back and read your own article again then revisit the thread title.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #86
89. Not even that, anonymous people who say it "could" happen.
The OP must need someone to help him tie his shoes in the morning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #81
88. Yeah, we can always trust "some" who "say" it "could" happen.
For the love of God, are you really this stupid?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #88
93. Stop changing your frame of attack, you accused me of making the number up.
Can't you debate with some honor?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thewiseguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #93
94. We have told you again and again that your number does not come out of Obama's mouth
Your thread title suggests falsely that it does. You can not run away from this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #94
97. The OP is interested in attacking Obama, not facts. It's obvious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #94
100. You dispute the tens of thousands number? Based on what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thewiseguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #100
103. So some anonymous source pulls a number out of their ass, you contribute it to Obama and then..
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 12:55 PM by thewiseguy
You ask me to dispute that number? :rofl:

This is not freerepublic..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #103
149. I'll type slower- Obama says pull 16 brigades in 16 months
that still leaves tens of thousands of troops.

That number doesn't include the contractors he is planning on leaving there either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #149
152. No matter how slow you type, you're still a complete fucking idiot.
Training troops has never taken years, ever.

If you think it will take years to train the Iraqi military, you obviously have no understanding of the armed forces.

Thanks for playing. For your consolation prize, you get a pizza.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #152
156. "Training has never taken years, ever" You need to catch up on the news from Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #156
158. They aren't training the same troops for years. You need to learn to read.
The troops they were training years ago are already on duty.

I know it must be hard going through life brain-dead, but not everyone is like you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #158
162. There ya go, "troop training" can go on for some time.
Easier to learn when you can figure it out on your own, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #162
165. Not for years. Boot camp doesn't take years.
I can see why it would for you, though.

You probably think kindergarten is a 5-year program, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #165
168. I guess you got it in your head we're going to only train one wave of grunts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #168
172. Never said that, but thanks for playing. You fail yet again.
The troops we trained in 2005 and 2006 are already on duty.

The troops we are training now will be on duty within a year.

Once again, you're putting words in the mouths of others.

You don't want discussion. You're a troll with a martyr complex, and you're just here gainsaying anything anyone says, when you're not pulling things out of your ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #94
107. There is no claim, zero, that Obama has stated a number.
The math is the math. 146,000 troops=approx 50 brigades. Reduce that number by 16 brigades, what's left?

What's left is an occupation army terrorizing the population.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #107
118. Except your OP says "Obama makes it clear...tens of thousands"
So once again, you're contradicting yourself in another failed attempt to attack our President-elect.

"The math is the math. 146,000 troops=approx 50 brigades. Reduce that number by 16 brigades, what's left?"

If Hillary Clinton or John McCain had won, there wouldn't even be 16 brigades to subtract.

Before, I thought you were either incredibly stupid or a concern troll.

I apologize.

You're obviously an incredibly stupid concern troll.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #118
157. Now you're just messing around. It does not say that Obama states anything
about the tens of thousands. It is easily figured out though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #157
160. I quoted you. You made that asinine assumption.
Based on anonymous sources and the idea that a single soldier must go through years of training.

Your IQ is roughly equivalent to that of mustard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #93
96. You're attacking Obama for the words of an ANONYMOUS SOURCE.
Not only that, an anonymous source who says it "could" happen.

Can't you debate with some intelligence?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #96
104. We have 146,000 troops in Iraq, Obama says bring home 16 brigades
how many does that leave?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #104
106. He didn't say he'd only bring home 16 and leave the rest there forever.
Not even your own article says that.

Maybe when you learn to read, you can argue with the grown-ups. Okay?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #106
109. Where is "forever" used by anyone in this debate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thewiseguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #109
114. Left behind in Iraq for how long?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #114
117. You tell me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thewiseguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #117
119. Its in your thread title and you want me to tell you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #119
121. The OP must think we're as brain-dead as he is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gogoplata Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #119
133. Yes, I do. You obviously think that there is some timetable given.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top