Wow... if this is true... not good for The One
- Thread starter Cancel 2016.2
- Start date
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
actually, he did.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
then do enlighten me... try explaining why you think I am wrong rather than spitting out one liners. You are smarter than that.
status of Forces Agreement as of June 16, 2008
www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL34531.pdf
Can you tell us the precise paragraph you are referring to that states an exit or withdrawal of troops?
Otherwise, I think we have a second ownage coming in one thread!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Another story broken by the NY Post:
they just wanted to get the man love photo on the front page. Who can blame them?
Sad, yet entertaining.
Basically, Obama wanted to stop a bad deal that was bad for the troops, the US and the Iraqis. As it turns out everyone came around to his ideas on moving forward. The Iraqis did. The Bush campaign grudgingly did. Everyone did. Everyone but John McCain, who is the last dead-ender on the perpetual occupation train.
But somehow this is all bad news for Obama.
But somehow this is all bad news for Obama.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
what a load of crap... Obama is currently asking to delay negotiations for withdrawal of troops because that is in the best interest of the troops?
You are also full of shit with regards to McCain. The premise has always been that after the sustained surge, troop withdrawals would begin when the Iraqis and US military commanders felt it attainable. McCain was opposed to mandatory timelines for withdrawals, as was the Iraqi government and the commanders on the ground. ESPECIALLY back in early 2006 when Obama thought it was a better idea than the surge.
Now that the situation is viable for withdrawal... Obama says ....'wait until I am elected'. Great friggin leader. Wrong then. Wrong now.
When did you become such a liar? And defiant at that. Provide a link to something non editorialized that corroborates this blatant lie or shut the fck up.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
page 24 of your status of forces link...
or ....
"Although each SOFA is unique, all SOFAs normally deal with issues necessary for day-to-day business, such as entry and exit of forces, entry and exit of personal belongings (i.e. automobiles), labor, claims and contractors, and susceptibility to income and sales taxes. In situations where U.S. forces will be present for a lengthy period, SOFAs may also deal with ancillary activities such as postal offices, and recreation and banking facilities. "
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/sofa.htm\
The Status of Forces Agreement covers what the forces are allowed to do and not do. Whose jurisdiction they fall under. It also covers entry and exit of forces.
Obama was asking to delay negotiations in July when the 58 permanent bases were being discusses. Then Maliki essentially agreed with the Obama plan and the Bush Administration rushed on board. You're adding your own lies to the lies of Taheri.
By the way, your description of McCain's plan is fucking priceless. It start off with:
First of all, the idea of a "sustained surge" is a joke. It's an oxymoron. Secondly, McCain won't even bother to articulate when the "sustained surge" will end. So, to start off with "after" something that is perpetual in duration is kind of a difficult thing to do. So, let's just start there. When does McCain suggest to end the "sustained surge?" After that, when can troops begin to "start withdrawing?"
He may not be saying explicitly that he's for perpetual war, but what you have outlined up there is the same fucking thing.
By the way, where is the evidence that the status of forces agreement that Obama wanted to put of included troop withdrawals?
Translation:
I was owned once again. I have no proof that Obama wanted to delay troop withdrawal, but I can pretend he did.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
What a load of crap.... the whole friggin point of stating that it would be a sustained surge is that it is idiotic to put an arbitrary timetable on such an event. You DO NOT KNOW going in how long it will have to last. Which is where the Iraqi government and the military commanders on the ground have to use their judgement.
Second, now that the Iraqi government is agreeing that the time for withdrawals is at hand, we are seeing it being done (planned at this point). But they are still not agreeing to Obamas perpetual 'lets withdraw with a timeline' bullshit.
Again, as for the exact wording of what was being DISCUSSED at the time, I do not have a copy and NEITHER do you apparently or you would have put it forth.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
LMAO....
translation:
"I am ashamed that I didn't even read my own link which stated that the SOFA's contain provisions for troop levels etc... and now I will go back to my childish claims of 'you were owned'"
Superfreak, I think I should explain something to you: this thread ended about 20 posts ago for you, when you were thoroughly humiliated, much more so than anyone I can remember in recent history on JPP.
For you to persist in the argument that you "know what Obama was really thinking" without any proof at all is laughable, particularly since, if he WAS thinking what you seem to think he was thinking, it would be praiseworthy for you; something hilarious, and a way he could really "put one over" on Bush.
I mean, honestly; if there is one thread you shouldn't keep plugging for the "last word" on, it's this one.
For you to persist in the argument that you "know what Obama was really thinking" without any proof at all is laughable, particularly since, if he WAS thinking what you seem to think he was thinking, it would be praiseworthy for you; something hilarious, and a way he could really "put one over" on Bush.
I mean, honestly; if there is one thread you shouldn't keep plugging for the "last word" on, it's this one.