Obama Declares Victory And Leaves In Defeat

[Full-Auto]

Yes, his accomplishments. What else would you call his numerous legislative victories, the death of Bin Laden and numerous AQ leaders, the downfall of Ghadaffi and the end to the war in Iraq?

Like this one?

Did you want to go into the stimulus?

Umm...the ACA (what you refer to as 'Obamacare') was a legislative victory, and therefore, an accomplishment. Do you seriously disagree?

You want to talk about the stimulus? The one that kept us from sliding into a depression? The one that, according to the CBO, saved/created 3 million jobs (about the same amount of jobs that Bush 'created' during his 8 years in office)? I'm sure it'll be more fantasy on your part, but hey, knock yourself out.

Such an accomplishment over half of the states filed suit. the legislation was already adjusted due to pressure and now another section placed on hold because the lies are to transparent in relation to cost.

So if lying was the objective..then yes it is an accomplishment.

Then with the Jobs BS I can claim anything when I am not required to show proof. Between 1.3 and 3 Generous margin of error.

 

[paulitician]

Let me know all the wonderful things Afghans,Pakistanis,Palestinians,Saudis,Turks,Libyans,Iraqis,and so on have done for a single American Citizen. I'll await the long list. Foreign Aid/Foreign Interventionism is so outdated. American Citizens have seen no benefits after 70 straight years of it. I think it's time for real change.

 

[alan1]

Partisanship?

On this thread? Hardly

Well, it does move beyond this thread.

Obama got the job done where Bush couldn't. The underestimation of the requirements to complete the Iraq mission are only overshadowed by the blunder of attacking in the first place

No, there was no threat of a Mushroom cloud and no, we were not treated as liberators

I'm pretty sure the job was done by the troops, not the president. Correct me if I am wrong.

Yes, just like the decision to invade was done by the troops.......OOops......that decision was made by Bush. So was the decision to ignore the advice of his commanders and not put sufficient troops on the ground

The result was an unnecessary invasion, eight year occupation and 4000 dead US soldiers not to mention an estimated 100,000 dead Iraqis.

All to satisfy Bushs vendetta against Iraq

Are you seriously trying to pretend that the decision by a president is synonymous with the actions by the troops?
Seriously?
I've got better things to do than argue that fallacious kind of mindset.

 

[alan1]

In 5 years 'the people' (Al Qaeda) will be in charge of the majority of the middle east. Obama is very vocal in his support of 'the people' (Al Qaeda).

What about in his own country?

Which country would that be? There seems to be some disagreement on it even as we speak.

yes, there does.
Sad.

 

[mudwhistle]

This is the real situation in Iraq:

BRIAN KATULIS: Well, look, again, I think the key deadline was last summer. And we have already adopted a posture of training and advising. I think we still have targeted operations against insurgent groups and terrorist groups, and these have been quite effective, even as we are drawing down the force there.

And I think the real challenge in the next year is making sure that the Iraqis stand up. And I think everybody talks about the surge of U.S. forces in 2007. The real surge that mattered was the surge of Iraqi forces. The U.S. surge was about a 15 percent increase. The Iraqi forces during that same period doubled.

And that is what matters the most, is that Iraqis have a strong impetus to take control of their own affairs.

GWEN IFILL: But the president opposed that surge. Did it work in the end?

BRIAN KATULIS: It didn't in terms of -- actually, you look at the political divisions in Iraq, and one of the goals of the surge was actually to reduce the violence, to get Iraqi leaders to bridge their political divide.

I argue that the surge actually froze those divisions in place. And, also, for those who like to talk about a counterinsurgency strategy achieving results on the ground in Iraq, there are millions of Iraqis who don't see the benefit of basic services and increased security.

Counterinsurgency didn't succeed in the way that it's, I think, portrayed here in Washington.

MICHAEL RUBIN: Well, I think counterinsurgency did succeed to some extent in giving the political -- the political elite space to move. There is still a lot to be done.

One of the most interesting and important statistics from the Iraqi elections last March is that only 20 percent of the incumbents returned to office. Some of that is because they chose not to run again. Some of that was because they were thrown out of office, as the younger generation and as the Iraqis basically say, enough of this ethno-sectarian strife. We want results.

GWEN IFILL: But they haven't been able to form a government.

MICHAEL RUBIN: This is the main problem. But so far, until this point, they're combating themselves politically. They are debating. They're arguing.

The question is, if we withdrawal in the midst of that, whether some might decide to try to impose, through force of arms, what they can't win on the floor of the assembly.

GWEN IFILL: Why is this divide so stubborn, so wide? And what difference does it make whether the U.S. is there or not in order to close it?

BRIAN KATULIS: Well, look, I think we should take a step back and look at the Iraq war and its impact on U.S. national security.

And more than seven years later, it is still a net negative when you measure it for U.S. national security interests. What we have is emboldened Iran. Some of Iran's best allies are now in power in Baghdad. We helped create for a while there a live training ground for terrorists, who are now using some of the tactics they tested on the battlefield against us in Iraq at this point.

So, for those who argued seven years ago that we're going to have tsunamis of democracy and that the region will be completely changed, they were proven wrong. And I think what we're now trying to do is take a sad song and make it better.

 

[J.E.D]

Like this one?

Did you want to go into the stimulus?

Umm...the ACA (what you refer to as 'Obamacare') was a legislative victory, and therefore, an accomplishment. Do you seriously disagree?

You want to talk about the stimulus? The one that kept us from sliding into a depression? The one that, according to the CBO, saved/created 3 million jobs (about the same amount of jobs that Bush 'created' during his 8 years in office)? I'm sure it'll be more fantasy on your part, but hey, knock yourself out.

Such an accomplishment over half of the states filed suit. the legislation was already adjusted due to pressure and now another section placed on hold because the lies are to transparent in relation to cost.

So if lying was the objective..then yes it is an accomplishment.

Call it what you wish, but it was a legislative victory. Republicans pulled out all of the stops and they couldn't stop it. It's a victory.

Then with the Jobs BS I can claim anything when I am not required to show proof. Between 1.3 and 3 Generous margin of error.

Hey, talk to the CBO. They said 3 million. Do you have access to data that they didn't?

 

[J.E.D]

What about in his own country?

Which country would that be? There seems to be some disagreement on it even as we speak.

yes, there does.
Sad.

The only people who disagree are a handful of nuts. The rest of the world just laughs at them.

 

[Full-Auto]

Umm...the ACA (what you refer to as 'Obamacare') was a legislative victory, and therefore, an accomplishment. Do you seriously disagree?

You want to talk about the stimulus? The one that kept us from sliding into a ? The one that, according to the CBO, saved/created 3 million jobs (about the same amount of jobs that Bush 'created' during his 8 years in office)? I'm sure it'll be more fantasy on your part, but hey, knock yourself out.

Such an accomplishment over half of the states filed suit. the legislation was already adjusted due to pressure and now another section placed on hold because the lies are to transparent in relation to cost.

So if lying was the objective..then yes it is an accomplishment.

Call it what you wish, but it was a legislative victory. Republicans pulled out all of the stops and they couldn't stop it. It's a victory.

Then with the Jobs BS I can claim anything when I am not required to show proof. Between 1.3 and 3 Generous margin of error.

Hey, talk to the CBO. They said 3 million. Do you have access to data that they didn't?

I understand your reluctance to use national labor stats net jobs. You cant BS those.

If you think sucking up to big insurance and bribing fellow members is right and just I understand why you are a democrat.

 

[The T]

This is the real situation in Iraq:

BRIAN KATULIS: Well, look, again, I think the key deadline was last summer. And we have already adopted a posture of training and advising. I think we still have targeted operations against insurgent groups and terrorist groups, and these have been quite effective, even as we are drawing down the force there.

And I think the real challenge in the next year is making sure that the Iraqis stand up. And I think everybody talks about the surge of U.S. forces in 2007. The real surge that mattered was the surge of Iraqi forces. The U.S. surge was about a 15 percent increase. The Iraqi forces during that same period doubled.

And that is what matters the most, is that Iraqis have a strong impetus to take control of their own affairs.

GWEN IFILL: But the president opposed that surge. Did it work in the end?

BRIAN KATULIS: It didn't in terms of -- actually, you look at the political divisions in Iraq, and one of the goals of the surge was actually to reduce the violence, to get Iraqi leaders to bridge their political divide.

I argue that the surge actually froze those divisions in place. And, also, for those who like to talk about a counterinsurgency strategy achieving results on the ground in Iraq, there are millions of Iraqis who don't see the benefit of basic services and increased security.

Counterinsurgency didn't succeed in the way that it's, I think, portrayed here in Washington.

MICHAEL RUBIN: Well, I think counterinsurgency did succeed to some extent in giving the political -- the political elite space to move. There is still a lot to be done.

One of the most interesting and important statistics from the Iraqi elections last March is that only 20 percent of the incumbents returned to office. Some of that is because they chose not to run again. Some of that was because they were thrown out of office, as the younger generation and as the Iraqis basically say, enough of this ethno-sectarian strife. We want results.

GWEN IFILL: But they haven't been able to form a government.

MICHAEL RUBIN: This is the main problem. But so far, until this point, they're combating themselves politically. They are debating. They're arguing.

The question is, if we withdrawal in the midst of that, whether some might decide to try to impose, through force of arms, what they can't win on the floor of the assembly.

GWEN IFILL: Why is this divide so stubborn, so wide? And what difference does it make whether the U.S. is there or not in order to close it?

BRIAN KATULIS: Well, look, I think we should take a step back and look at the Iraq war and its impact on U.S. national security.

And more than seven years later, it is still a net negative when you measure it for U.S. national security interests. What we have is emboldened Iran. Some of Iran's best allies are now in power in Baghdad. We helped create for a while there a live training ground for terrorists, who are now using some of the tactics they tested on the battlefield against us in Iraq at this point.

So, for those who argued seven years ago that we're going to have tsunamis of democracy and that the region will be completely changed, they were proven wrong. And I think what we're now trying to do is take a sad song and make it better.

Then why is Obama touting 'Arab Spring', and Democracy welling up in the Middle East?

Could it be that the O is talking out of his ass as well?

 

[alan1]

How is Iraq a "victory"?

I suppose that is the million dollar question.

In war, the losers declare the victor at the point they no longer have the will or means to fight and/or resist.
I haven't heard anybody say "I give up", 'cept our president.

 

[J.E.D]

Such an accomplishment over half of the states filed suit. the legislation was already adjusted due to pressure and now another section placed on hold because the lies are to transparent in relation to cost.

So if lying was the objective..then yes it is an accomplishment.

Call it what you wish, but it was a legislative victory. Republicans pulled out all of the stops and they couldn't stop it. It's a victory.

Then with the Jobs BS I can claim anything when I am not required to show proof. Between 1.3 and 3 Generous margin of error.

Hey, talk to the CBO. They said 3 million. Do you have access to data that they didn't?

I understand your reluctance to use national labor stats net jobs. You cant BS those.

If you think sucking up to big insurance and bribing fellow members is right and just I understand why you are a democrat.

Talk to the CBO. And BTW, I'm not a Democrat. I'm Independent.

 

[Full-Auto]

Call it what you wish, but it was a legislative victory. Republicans pulled out all of the stops and they couldn't stop it. It's a victory.



Hey, talk to the CBO. They said 3 million. Do you have access to data that they didn't?

I understand your reluctance to use national labor stats net jobs. You cant BS those.

If you think sucking up to big insurance and bribing fellow members is right and just I understand why you are a democrat.

Talk to the CBO. And BTW, I'm not a Democrat. I'm Independent.

Ok sure. Why dont you post for us the historical accuracy of the CBO. Since you give them the credit as being the final authority.

 

[J.E.D]

I understand your reluctance to use national labor stats net jobs. You cant BS those.

If you think sucking up to big insurance and bribing fellow members is right and just I understand why you are a democrat.

Talk to the CBO. And BTW, I'm not a Democrat. I'm Independent.

Ok sure. Why dont you post for us the historical accuracy of the CBO. Since you give them the credit as being the final authority.

WHy don't you prove them wrong, since you're so sure they're wrong.

 

[paulitician]

I have to agree with the President on this one. Time to get out that shyte-hole. His foreign policy is just more of the same ole same ole but at least he's right on this one. What good is that occupation if you can't even get cheap oil from them? What a massive waste. It's very sad.

 

[Full-Auto]

Talk to the CBO. And BTW, I'm not a Democrat. I'm Independent.

Ok sure. Why dont you post for us the historical accuracy of the CBO. Since you give them the credit as being the final authority.

WHy don't you prove them wrong, since you're so sure they're wrong.

The estimation is inflated for political purposes. If you were independent as you say you shouldnt have an issue with that. Correct?

 

[The T]

How is Iraq a "victory"?

I suppose that is the million dollar question.

In war, the losers declare the victor at the point they no longer have the will or means to fight and/or resist.
I haven't heard anybody say "I give up", 'cept our president.

He promised "he would get us out"...but isn't it a damned shame that the agreement for the event came before the O was ever immacculated?

And note the shameful use of it? (As he send others into harm's way in Uganda)?

 

[J.E.D]

Ok sure. Why dont you post for us the historical accuracy of the CBO. Since you give them the credit as being the final authority.

WHy don't you prove them wrong, since you're so sure they're wrong.

The estimation is inflated for political purposes. If you were independent as you say you shouldnt have an issue with that. Correct?

I shouldn't have an issue with your explanation because I'm independent? Not necessarily.

 

[alan1]

How is Iraq a "victory"?

I suppose that is the million dollar question.

In war, the losers declare the victor at the point they no longer have the will or means to fight and/or resist.
I haven't heard anybody say "I give up", 'cept our president.

He promised "he would get us out"...but isn't it a damned shame that the agreement for the event came before the O was ever immacculated?

And note the shameful use of it? (As he send others into harm's way in Uganda)?

Shameful in that both he and the media pretend it was his plan.

 

[Cuyo]

Cheap oil is all these wars are about. They aint about "The poor children" or "Democracy." We haven't seen the cheap oil deals yet so yes we have been defeated. American Citizens will see no benefits at all from Hussein and Gaddafi being killed. Aggressive Foreign Interventionism is a big fail. Time to change our foreign policy.

Well OBVIOUSLY.

 

[rightwinger]

Well, it does move beyond this thread.


I'm pretty sure the job was done by the troops, not the president. Correct me if I am wrong.

Yes, just like the decision to invade was done by the troops.......OOops......that decision was made by Bush. So was the decision to ignore the advice of his commanders and not put sufficient troops on the ground

The result was an unnecessary invasion, eight year occupation and 4000 dead US soldiers not to mention an estimated 100,000 dead Iraqis.

All to satisfy Bushs vendetta against Iraq

Are you seriously trying to pretend that the decision by a president is synonymous with the actions by the troops?
Seriously?
I've got better things to do than argue that fallacious kind of mindset.

Synonymous?

Do you understand what Commander in Chief is?