'The City That Bush Built'

[Siete]

So Bush said he was opposed to nation building,

but not city building?

And he lived up to his word and denied Kurdistan their independence. Perhaps, you missed that in the OP and the follow-up posts.

HE Bullshit ... the Kurds are still searching for independence. At present oil prices are holding them back. .. LOL

 

[Siete]

the city that Bush built ...




Billion $$$$$$ Embassy in Baghdad. Bush built? Horseshit. Taxpayers built.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

the city that Bush built ...




Billion $$$$$$ Embassy in Baghdad. Bush built? Horseshit. Taxpayers built.

That would be Obamie....He's the one that cut and run and left Iraq at the mercy of a mere 30,000 Islamic thugs.

 

[Siete]

the city that Bush built ...




Billion $$$$$$ Embassy in Baghdad. Bush built? Horseshit. Taxpayers built.

That would be Obamie....He's the one that cut and run and left Iraq at the mercy of a mere 30,000 Islamic thugs.

damn, you're really dumb aren't you. That ^^^^^^^^^^^ is the US Embassy in Iraq when it was being built. 43 was POTUS then. Shit like that is why "Obamie" handed the Republicans their ass two general elections in a row.

 

[BlindBoo]

That would be Obamie....He's the one that cut and run

Who signed the SOFA mandating U.S. withdrawal from Iraq by the end of 2011?

That would be President Bush. I understand why the die hard pseudo-cons want to pin it on President Obama but, the history of who did what is quite clear.

 

[Dreadnaught1968]

Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over'

Democrats fill the treasury; Republicans empty the treasury.

The Onion? Really? Hilarious!

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

That would be Obamie....He's the one that cut and run

Who signed the SOFA mandating U.S. withdrawal from Iraq by the end of 2011?

That would be President Bush. I understand why the die hard pseudo-cons want to pin it on President Obama but, the history of who did what is quite clear.

Nice over simplification. The agreement could've been renewed. Obama declined.

 

[BlindBoo]

Nice over simplification. The agreement could've been renewed. Obama declined.

"...it required that all U.S. forces be gone from Iraq by January 1, 2012, unless the Iraqi government was willing to negotiate a new agreement that would extend their mandate. And as Middle East historian Juan Cole has noted, “Bush had to sign what the [Iraqi] parliament gave him or face the prospect that U.S. troops would have to leave by 31 December, 2008, something that would have been interpreted as a defeat… Bush and his generals clearly expected, however, that over time Washington would be able to wriggle out of the treaty and would find a way to keep a division or so in Iraq past that deadline.”

But ending the U.S. troop presence in Iraq was an overwhelmingly popular demand among Iraqis, and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki appears to have been unwilling to take the political risk of extending it. While he was inclined to see a small number of American soldiers stay behind to continue mentoring Iraqi forces, the likes of Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, on whose support Maliki’s ruling coalition depends, were having none of it. Even the Obama Administration’s plan to keep some 3,000 trainers behind failed because the Iraqis were unwilling to grant them the legal immunity from local prosecution that is common to SOF agreements in most countries where U.S. forces are based.

Iraq s Government Not Obama Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence TIME.com

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Nice over simplification. The agreement could've been renewed. Obama declined.

"...it required that all U.S. forces be gone from Iraq by January 1, 2012, unless the Iraqi government was willing to negotiate a new agreement that would extend their mandate. And as Middle East historian Juan Cole has noted, “Bush had to sign what the [Iraqi] parliament gave him or face the prospect that U.S. troops would have to leave by 31 December, 2008, something that would have been interpreted as a defeat… Bush and his generals clearly expected, however, that over time Washington would be able to wriggle out of the treaty and would find a way to keep a division or so in Iraq past that deadline.”

But ending the U.S. troop presence in Iraq was an overwhelmingly popular demand among Iraqis, and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki appears to have been unwilling to take the political risk of extending it. While he was inclined to see a small number of American soldiers stay behind to continue mentoring Iraqi forces, the likes of Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, on whose support Maliki’s ruling coalition depends, were having none of it. Even the Obama Administration’s plan to keep some 3,000 trainers behind failed because the Iraqis were unwilling to grant them the legal immunity from local prosecution that is common to SOF agreements in most countries where U.S. forces are based.

Iraq s Government Not Obama Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence TIME.com

I'm not going to get into your trivial nonsense twisting and fogging of the matter....Everyone and their dog knows that the US had the option to stay in Iraq and Obama pulled them out. You and your liberal cohorts showered him with praise for that, and conservatives criticized. THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED.

 

[BlindBoo]

Everyone and their dog knows that the US had the option to stay in Iraq and Obama pulled them out.

Was that a condition written into the SOFA President Bush agreed to?

But fact is President Obama said on many occasions that he was open to keeping a residual force in Iraq. As the posted article explains, it was the Iraqi political landscape that prevented Maliki from making any kind of agreement with America to keep American troops in their country.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Everyone and their dog knows that the US had the option to stay in Iraq and Obama pulled them out.

Was that a condition written into the SOFA President Bush agreed to?

But fact is President Obama said on many occasions that he was open to keeping a residual force in Iraq. As the posted article explains, it was the Iraqi political landscape that prevented Maliki from making any kind of agreement with America to keep American troops in their country.

Not interested in your spinster BS (Time: Left's propaganda rag). The writing was always on the wall that America would cut and run. Maliki undoubtedly played ball and got whatever he could've out of the deal.

BTW, took a brief look at the article; nothing but a ton of conjecture.

And in case you need to remember Obama's stated mission:

Presidential candidate Barack Obama said Wednesday that he and other leading congressional Democrats were seeking ways to “ratchet up the pressure” on President Bush to set a timetable to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq.

“The American people have said ‘enough,’” Obama, the junior senator from Illinois, said in an interview with NBC News’ David Gregory on MSNBC’s “Hardball.” A new Associated Press-Ipsos poll indicates that a majority of Americans believed going to war in Iraq was a mistake.

The House and the Senate have passed different versions of bills to fund the military campaign in Iraq and Afghanistan, both of which seek to limit the U.S. deployment. The Senate version would urge, but not mandate, that most troops be withdrawn by March 31, while the House version would set a hard deadline to pull them out by Sept. 1, 2008.

So, just stop the revisionist history based upon superficial points.

 

[JoeB131]

Damn peace loving prosperous kurds....

Except they aren't "peace-Loving". They've been at war with the governments of IRaq, Syria and Turkey for quite some time. And then they found themselves a Sugar Daddy in George W. Stupid.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm not going to get into your trivial nonsense twisting and fogging of the matter....Everyone and their dog knows that the US had the option to stay in Iraq and Obama pulled them out. You and your liberal cohorts showered him with praise for that, and conservatives criticized. THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED.

Except we didn't have the option. Not unless we wanted American Soldiers tried by Iraqi Courts. The fact is, the Iraqis didn't want us to stay and we didn't want to be there. Everyone got what they wanted.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Damn peace loving prosperous kurds....

Except they aren't "peace-Loving". They've been at war with the governments of IRaq, Syria and Turkey for quite some time. And then they found themselves a Sugar Daddy in George W. Stupid.

<Gasps> They've been at war with brutal dictators and legions of thugs who surround them? The nerve! You're full of shit, Joe Blow! When you find stories of innocents being butchered or women systematically being enslaved, it's not the Kurds! Stop hating, your racist pile of shit! Guy!

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I'm not going to get into your trivial nonsense twisting and fogging of the matter....Everyone and their dog knows that the US had the option to stay in Iraq and Obama pulled them out. You and your liberal cohorts showered him with praise for that, and conservatives criticized. THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED.

Except we didn't have the option. Not unless we wanted American Soldiers tried by Iraqi Courts. The fact is, the Iraqis didn't want us to stay and we didn't want to be there. Everyone got what they wanted.

There was never a precedent for American soldiers being tried. That was just some lame shit that the regime put out there for their lapdog media to justify a total pull-out. I love how libtards only read between the fucking lines when it suits them.

 

[JoeB131]

<Gasps> They've been at war with brutal dictators and legions of thugs who surround them? The nerve! You're full of shit, Joe Blow! When you find stories of innocents being butchered or women systematically being enslaved, it's not the Kurds! Stop hating, your racist pile of shit! Guy!

Seriously fuck the Kurds.

Turkey is a democracy. the Kurdish PKK has been waging a terrorist war against them for decades. Which is why Turkey isn't too keen on saving them from ISIL.

Not sure what the Kurds are going to do now that George W. Stupid isn't their sugar Daddy anymore.

 

[JoeB131]

There was never a precedent for American soldiers being tried. That was just some lame shit that the regime put out there for their lapdog media to justify a total pull-out. I love how libtards only read between the fucking lines when it suits them.

Actually, check out the case of the two marines who raped an 11 year old Japanese girl on Okinawa.

They were tried by the JAPANESE government and are now spending their lives in a JAPANESE prison.

If we stayed, we'd be subject to their laws.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

There was never a precedent for American soldiers being tried. That was just some lame shit that the regime put out there for their lapdog media to justify a total pull-out. I love how libtards only read between the fucking lines when it suits them.

Actually, check out the case of the two marines who raped an 11 year old Japanese girl on Okinawa.

They were tried by the JAPANESE government and are now spending their lives in a JAPANESE prison.

If we stayed, we'd be subject to their laws.

Please.....there's a difference between gross crimes against humanity (I'm guessing committed while not on duty too) and the military not being considered an autonomous organization. Stop throwing out straw man arguments. You're fucking lame.

 

[JoeB131]

Please.....there's a difference between gross crimes against humanity (I'm guessing committed while not on duty too) and the military not being considered an autonomous organization. Stop throwing out straw man arguments. You're fucking lame.

so you think there are some cases where the Iraqis SHOULD be able to arrest our soldiers?

Really?

Are we going to extradite the perpertrators of Abu Grahib to them?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Please.....there's a difference between gross crimes against humanity (I'm guessing committed while not on duty too) and the military not being considered an autonomous organization. Stop throwing out straw man arguments. You're fucking lame.

so you think there are some cases where the Iraqis SHOULD be able to arrest our soldiers?

Really?

Are we going to extradite the perpertrators of Abu Grahib to them?

There would be no reason. We can police ourselves. Obviously, there should judiciary triggers for third party plaintiffs; but no country in their right f'ing mind conducts military options while subjecting their soldiers to a highly politicized third party government.