Obamas Military advisor...100 years in Iraq

Cancel 2016.2

Cancel 2016.2

The Almighty
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/hoping_for_100_years.html

"The desirability of a similar presence in Iraq was obvious as long as five years ago to retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, one of Barack Obama's leading military advisers and his campaign co-chairman. During the first week of the Iraq War, McPeak (a war critic) suggested in an interview that "we'll be there a century, hopefully. If it works right." (Meaning, if we win.) "

So for the serial liars like Cypress... please, do try to spin your way out of this... it would be amusing.

Either Obama's campaign co-chair and leading military advisor is a warmonger like McCain or both are simply suggesting a presence in Iraq for a long time under peaceful circumstances. Which is it?
 
"The Annenberg Political Fact Check, a nonprofit and nonpartisan project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania, says: "It's a rank falsehood for the DNC to accuse McCain of wanting to wage 'endless war' based on his support for a presence in Iraq something like the U.S. role in South Korea."

So it appears Gumby and company support serial liars.... after so many years bitching about Bush's lies and how they cannot stand them. Here we have their party's entire leadership spreading a lie and they are cheering them along. How hypocritical.
 
More proxy horseshit.

McPeak is not Obama. He's free to have his own opinions on things, but it's Obama's opinion that matters, not McPeak's.

Are you really this fucking dense or do you just play the moron on message boards?
 
Superfreak said:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/hoping_for_100_years.html

"The desirability of a similar presence in Iraq was obvious as long as five years ago to retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, one of Barack Obama's leading military advisers and his campaign co-chairman. During the first week of the Iraq War, McPeak (a war critic) suggested in an interview that "we'll be there a century, hopefully. If it works right." (Meaning, if we win.) "

So for the serial liars like Cypress... please, do try to spin your way out of this... it would be amusing.

Either Obama's campaign co-chair and leading military advisor is a warmonger like McCain or both are simply suggesting a presence in Iraq for a long time under peaceful circumstances. Which is it?
Click to expand...
Wow, Barack's advisers suggest that it would be great if it was the 100 Years war!11!!!shiftplusone!

This dude pretty much said the same thing McCain said. That if we are successful and there is a modicum of peace in Iraq, we could station people there like we do in Germany.
 
Dungheap said:
More proxy horseshit.

McPeak is not Obama. He's free to have his own opinions on things, but it's Obama's opinion that matters, not McPeak's.

Are you really this fucking dense or do you just play the moron on message boards?
Click to expand...

So Obama, who has NO military background isn't going to listen to his leading military advisor?

Obama has as his leading military advisor a man who said exactly the same thing as McCain and you do not call McPeak a warmonger like you do McCain?

The ONLY bullshit is your attempt at a strawman... my post was talking about Obama's leading military advisor... not about Obama himself. Either learn to comprehend what you read or if you are already comprehending it.... stop with the idiotic strawmen.
 
Damocles said:
Wow, Barack's advisers suggest that it would be great if it was the 100 Years war!11!!!shiftplusone!
Click to expand...

Adviser"s" ???

An adviser (singular) is there to suggest, not to make policy .. and only an idiot would believe this is something Obama wants.

Can't defeat the man .. use anyone around him in the attempt.
 
Dungheap said:
More proxy horseshit.

McPeak is not Obama. He's free to have his own opinions on things, but it's Obama's opinion that matters, not McPeak's.

Are you really this fucking dense or do you just play the moron on message boards?
Click to expand...

yes well said.
SF is just playing more of the Obama's preacher game.
Just now it is Obama's advisor. A bit more valid but still not Obama.


It IS all about securing oil which the USA is very dependent on. Without it we crash, it is as simple as that.

The issue is should we secure oil from other countries by force of arms.
That is not yet saleable to the public in the USA.
But I feel we are degenerating to the point that it will be saleable in the not too distant future.
 
blackascoal said:
Adviser"s" ???

An adviser (singular) is there to suggest, not to make policy .. and only an idiot would believe this is something Obama wants.

Can't defeat the man .. use anyone around him in the attempt.
Click to expand...

The point was.... will you proclaim McPEAK a warmonger just as you did McCain for the same statement.

Side note... when a politician has no experience in a field (in this case, the military) and he brings on a person to be his leading advisor on the military, I would hope he would actually listen to his advisor given his complete lack of experience in the area.
 
Now figure this one out guys.

He thoguth there were WMDS because he was told that before the war.

Now he knows that we went on lies.

He then switched to the Dems and has been there since.
 
blackascoal said:
Adviser"s" ???

An adviser (singular) is there to suggest, not to make policy .. and only an idiot would believe this is something Obama wants.

Can't defeat the man .. use anyone around him in the attempt.
Click to expand...
:D I'd hope you noticed the !!!shiftplusone!11!! stuff and think. Why is he doing that? Probably because it is sarcasm.

Now that you are back I'll have to point it out again. The first line with that stuff in it was sarcasm. The second, wasn't.
 
uscitizen said:
yes well said.
SF is just playing more of the Obama's preacher game.
Just now it is Obama's advisor. A bit more valid but still not Obama.


It IS all about securing oil which the USA is very dependent on. Without it we crash, it is as simple as that.

The issue is should we secure oil from other countries by force of arms.
That is not yet saleable to the public in the USA.
But I feel we are degenerating to the point that it will be saleable in the not too distant future.
Click to expand...

McCain.... states 100 year presence under the right conditions.... equals.... WARMONGER!!!!

McPeak.... states 100 year presence in Iraq under the right conditions.... equals... SO?
 
Superfreak said:
welcome back.

and you are quite wrong. The moron didn't even comprehend the fact that I was talking about Obamas advisor... not Obama. Thus, very poor response on his part.
Click to expand...

Thank you my brother.

It would be nice to use what Obama himself has said and done as criticism.

Obama has never even remotely suggested anything other than getting us the hell out of Iraq.
 
Desh said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrill_A._McPeak#Post-military_career

This guy used to be a republican. He worked on the Bush 2000 campaign. He left the party because of Iraq.

If he thought McCain would not be a Bush third term he would be working for him I bet.
Click to expand...

That was not the point Desh.... the point is that he stated the exact same thing as McCain and you all continue to call McCain a warmonger for it. So is McPeak also a warmonger or not?
 
blackascoal said:
Thank you my brother.

It would be nice to use what Obama himself has said and done as criticism.

Obama has never even remotely suggested anything other than getting us the hell out of Iraq.
Click to expand...

I agree. IF I were talking about Obama's position. I was talking about McPeak's position. Is McPeak a warmonger by your standards for making such a statement?

Because as memory serves... that is exactly what got McCain labeled as a warmonger by you and many others.
 
blackascoal said:
Thank you my brother.

It would be nice to use what Obama himself has said and done as criticism.

Obama has never even remotely suggested anything other than getting us the hell out of Iraq.
Click to expand...
And...

1. leaving a strong enough force to protect our Embassy. (How strong would it need to be in that place? And those guys would still be in Iraq, in fact stationed there... hmmm....)

2. Staying in and around the area (the reason we were attacked by al-Qaeda according to them is that we are in and around the area) so that we can quickly go back in if extremists make bases there.

(not saying you are wrong, just giving the larger picture that he talks about.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top