How Much You Wanna Bet We Put The Amount Of Troops Back In Iraq We Should've Left There?

EconChick

Gold Member
Feb 15, 2014
4,678
828
190
Obama has already put the 1400 he publicly announced over the past few weeks. After the election he will certainly pour more in. By December 31, I predict at LEAST a Brigade will be sent. By next year there will be more.
 
Obama has already put the 1400 he publicly announced over the past few weeks. After the election he will certainly pour more in. By December 31, I predict at LEAST a Brigade will be sent. By next year there will be more.
Obama refused to keep troops in Iraq because Iraq insisted they be able to charge them with local crimes and Courts. That was Iraq's choice and it was a no go.
 
Obama has already put the 1400 he publicly announced over the past few weeks. After the election he will certainly pour more in. By December 31, I predict at LEAST a Brigade will be sent. By next year there will be more.
Obama refused to keep troops in Iraq because Iraq insisted they be able to charge them with local crimes and Courts. That was Iraq's choice and it was a no go.

Roger, Gunny. I spent much time over there. I've also spent weeks here educating dumb ass libs on this board about the SOFA. Their small brains still can't comprehend what people like you and I are saying.
 
Oh wait Gunny, I just reread your post. Are you saying it had nothing to do with Obama's poor negotiating skills?
 
LOL, I kept wondering why Loner Loser's post wouldn't let me respond. Laugh my ass off, it's because she had to delete making a dumb ass fool of herself.

To stay on topic let me start that LL attempted to discredit my OP by saying my grammar was wrong in a later post. When I tried to reply to lower the hammer on her incorrect post, she deleted it before I could get to it.

Score: Conservatives 26,653
LIberals 228

LMAO.

Sorry darlin, you were caught yet AGAIN.
 
We should never have gone in there in the first place.

And, once there, we should never have stayed as long as we did.

We have not done well with nation-building in recent times, and we should not have even tried in their case.

It would have been much better to just walk away in 2003 or 2004 and let 'em rot.

But, given the way that Reality unfolded...

We should probably have left 10,000 to 25,000 troops in-place for another decade or more.

But, given that the Iraqis did not want to sign-off on a 'Status of Forces Agreement', allowing us to try our own people who are accused of criminal activity, we didn't have much choice, but to either (a) override the new government and stay anyway or (b) leave.

Given how war-weary the nation has been, it's understandable that we chose to leave.

And now we're stuck having to go back into that shithole again, to sort things out.
 
Last edited:
Lone Laugher is a he, dumb ass.

The same thing happened to me yesterday on one of your posts. What a coincidence!

Really? I've asked you to clarify several times. I was told you're a chick. Do you even know what you are?

Why do you talk about yourself in third person?

And why are you even on this thread? It requires a minimal IQ you don't have to discuss complexities of what went on in Iraq.
 
Look it's Forest Gump.........

nobel%20price.jpg
 
Lone Laugher is a he, dumb ass.

The same thing happened to me yesterday on one of your posts. What a coincidence!

Really? I've asked you to clarify several times. I was told you're a chick. Do you even know what you are?

Why do you talk about yourself in third person?

And why are you even on this thread? It requires a minimal IQ you don't have to discuss complexities of what went on in Iraq.

I have actually told you before that I'm a man. You're just really stupid. You don't learn from other people when they speak. Therefore you didn't learn that I was a man, even after I told you.
 
Lone Laugher is a he, dumb ass.

The same thing happened to me yesterday on one of your posts. What a coincidence!

Really? I've asked you to clarify several times. I was told you're a chick. Do you even know what you are?

Why do you talk about yourself in third person?

And why are you even on this thread? It requires a minimal IQ you don't have to discuss complexities of what went on in Iraq.

I have actually told you before that I'm a man. You're just really stupid. You don't learn from other people when they speak. Therefore you didn't learn that I was a man, even after I told you.

I usually don't read your posts because you're so stupid. Before I stopped reading them I asked you several times and you never answered but someone else told me you were a chick. A number of ppl think you're a chick.

I can't help you don't answer specific questions. If it takes you days to get back, I'm not going to be waiting that long.
 

Yes.

And either Gunny misspoke or he's woefully misinformed. I'm trying to give him an opportunity to clarify before I respond. I suspect he was just not clear.

But yes, one minute Obama has no power over Iraqi leaders and the next minute he's claiming credit for having pressured Maliki out.

These double speaking libs keep backing themselves into a corner.
 
Obama has already put the 1400 he publicly announced over the past few weeks. After the election he will certainly pour more in. By December 31, I predict at LEAST a Brigade will be sent. By next year there will be more.
Obama refused to keep troops in Iraq because Iraq insisted they be able to charge them with local crimes and Courts. That was Iraq's choice and it was a no go.

Roger, Gunny. I spent much time over there. I've also spent weeks here educating dumb ass libs on this board about the SOFA. Their small brains still can't comprehend what people like you and I are saying.
No you havent, you havent done anything you sock.

Anyways a few beheadings and we play right into ISIL's hands.....The american public are rubes
 
Obama has already put the 1400 he publicly announced over the past few weeks. After the election he will certainly pour more in. By December 31, I predict at LEAST a Brigade will be sent. By next year there will be more.
Obama refused to keep troops in Iraq because Iraq insisted they be able to charge them with local crimes and Courts. That was Iraq's choice and it was a no go.

Roger, Gunny. I spent much time over there. I've also spent weeks here educating dumb ass libs on this board about the SOFA. Their small brains still can't comprehend what people like you and I are saying.
No you havent, you havent done anything you sock.

Anyways a few beheadings and we play right into ISIL's hands.....The american public are rubes


LMAO, shit- for- brains....you said you had me on ignore.

This flows right into the point of my thread though.....liberals are lilly- livered pussies who never mean what they say.

Then they have to eat their words later. See how that applies to both you AND Obama, moron?
 
Oh wait Gunny, I just reread your post. Are you saying it had nothing to do with Obama's poor negotiating skills?


Obama wanted no troops in Iraq. Iran wanted no U.S. troops in Iraq...Win win.. Obama never wanted any agreement, and he sat back and let Iran gain influence in Iraq.. That was fine with him.
 

Forum List

Back
Top