U.S. Formally Ends War In Afghanistan

[Carib Gyal]

Haha. The same people who were criticizing Obama for not getting us out of Afghanistan are now criticizing him for getting us out of Afghanistan.

Classic derangement from the usual suspects.

And the same people who credited Obama with getting out of Iraq until that looked like a bad decision are crediting him with getting out of Afghanistan. Until that looks like a bad decision. Those people incliude Obama, btw.

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

What about going back?

 

[jwoodie]

Haha. The same people who were criticizing Obama for not getting us out of Afghanistan are now criticizing him for getting us out of Afghanistan.

Classic derangement from the usual suspects.

And the same people who credited Obama with getting out of Iraq until that looked like a bad decision are crediting him with getting out of Afghanistan. Until that looks like a bad decision. Those people incliude Obama, btw.

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

Does that mean it was a good decision? Please enlighten us with your analysis.

 

[The Rabbi]

Haha. The same people who were criticizing Obama for not getting us out of Afghanistan are now criticizing him for getting us out of Afghanistan.

Classic derangement from the usual suspects.

And the same people who credited Obama with getting out of Iraq until that looked like a bad decision are crediting him with getting out of Afghanistan. Until that looks like a bad decision. Those people incliude Obama, btw.

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

Apparently Obama thought it was:

 

[The Rabbi]

Haha. The same people who were criticizing Obama for not getting us out of Afghanistan are now criticizing him for getting us out of Afghanistan.

Classic derangement from the usual suspects.

And the same people who credited Obama with getting out of Iraq until that looked like a bad decision are crediting him with getting out of Afghanistan. Until that looks like a bad decision. Those people incliude Obama, btw.

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

What about going back?

That was Bush's fault.

 

[konradv]

There was no pressing reason to go into Iraq when we did. Should have waited to deal with Saddam until after Afghanistan was settled.

A) Not true B) Afghanistan is not settled even now.

A) There were a lot of excuses for going into Iraq, but no "we have to do it now" reasons.
B) That's because too many people fell for the excuses cited in A) and blew what chance there was.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Haha. The same people who were criticizing Obama for not getting us out of Afghanistan are now criticizing him for getting us out of Afghanistan.

Classic derangement from the usual suspects.

And the same people who credited Obama with getting out of Iraq until that looked like a bad decision are crediting him with getting out of Afghanistan. Until that looks like a bad decision. Those people incliude Obama, btw.

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

What about going back?

I opposed it and I'm on record here repeatedly opposing. I said if the Iraqis who were fleeing in the face of ISIS weren't willing to fight for their own country,

why should American soldiers fight and die in their place?

Feel free to answer that question, btw.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Haha. The same people who were criticizing Obama for not getting us out of Afghanistan are now criticizing him for getting us out of Afghanistan.

Classic derangement from the usual suspects.

And the same people who credited Obama with getting out of Iraq until that looked like a bad decision are crediting him with getting out of Afghanistan. Until that looks like a bad decision. Those people incliude Obama, btw.

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

What about going back?

That was Bush's fault.

Bush made the worst blunder since Vietnam. That is that end of that story.

 

[The Rabbi]

There was no pressing reason to go into Iraq when we did. Should have waited to deal with Saddam until after Afghanistan was settled.

A) Not true B) Afghanistan is not settled even now.

A) There were a lot of excuses for going into Iraq, but no "we have to do it now" reasons.
B) That's because too many people fell for the excuses cited in A) and blew what chance there was.

That's a non-sequitur. Rabbi Rules!
You will make any reason an "excuse" so argument with you is pointless. The truth is there was tremendous pressure as Iraq worked to undermine sanctions and return to their WMD program. All this in the aftermath of 9/11. Do you really need to see the list of Democrats howling for Bush to "do something" yet again?

 

[Carib Gyal]

Haha. The same people who were criticizing Obama for not getting us out of Afghanistan are now criticizing him for getting us out of Afghanistan.

Classic derangement from the usual suspects.

And the same people who credited Obama with getting out of Iraq until that looked like a bad decision are crediting him with getting out of Afghanistan. Until that looks like a bad decision. Those people incliude Obama, btw.

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

What about going back?

I opposed it and I'm on record here repeatedly opposing. I said if the Iraqis who were fleeing in the face of ISIS weren't willing to fight for their own country,

why should American soldiers fight and die in their place?

Feel free to answer that question, btw.

Here is your answer:

Because that is their policy and has been since at least WWI.

My thinking is, if that's who you want to be, be it all the way or don't be that at all.

 

[The Rabbi]

Haha. The same people who were criticizing Obama for not getting us out of Afghanistan are now criticizing him for getting us out of Afghanistan.

Classic derangement from the usual suspects.

And the same people who credited Obama with getting out of Iraq until that looked like a bad decision are crediting him with getting out of Afghanistan. Until that looks like a bad decision. Those people incliude Obama, btw.

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

What about going back?

That was Bush's fault.

Bush made the worst blunder since Vietnam. That is that end of that story.

And Obama promptly doubled down on it. End of that story.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And the same people who credited Obama with getting out of Iraq until that looked like a bad decision are crediting him with getting out of Afghanistan. Until that looks like a bad decision. Those people incliude Obama, btw.

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

What about going back?

That was Bush's fault.

Bush made the worst blunder since Vietnam. That is that end of that story.

And Obama promptly doubled down on it. End of that story.

Obama doubled down on Iraq? We have twice as many troops now in Iraq as in 2008?

Link?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Haha. The same people who were criticizing Obama for not getting us out of Afghanistan are now criticizing him for getting us out of Afghanistan.

Classic derangement from the usual suspects.

And the same people who credited Obama with getting out of Iraq until that looked like a bad decision are crediting him with getting out of Afghanistan. Until that looks like a bad decision. Those people incliude Obama, btw.

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

What about going back?

I opposed it and I'm on record here repeatedly opposing. I said if the Iraqis who were fleeing in the face of ISIS weren't willing to fight for their own country,

why should American soldiers fight and die in their place?

Feel free to answer that question, btw.

Here is your answer:

Because that is their policy and has been since at least WWI.

My thinking is, if that's who you want to be, be it all the way or don't be that at all.

If I get enough posters to acknowledge your ability to be incoherent, would you kindly stop trying to repeatedly prove it?

 

[konradv]

A) There were a lot of excuses for going into Iraq, but no "we have to do it now" reasons. B) That's because too many people fell for the excuses cited in A) and blew what chance there was.

That's a non-sequitur. Rabbi Rules!
You will make any reason an "excuse" so argument with you is pointless. The truth is there was tremendous pressure as Iraq worked to undermine sanctions and return to their WMD program. All this in the aftermath of 9/11. Do you really need to see the list of Democrats howling for Bush to "do something" yet again?

There was no "smoking gun". Nothing about Iraq was urgent. I deny any "non sequitur". This all about your inability to distinguish between excuses and reasons. U.N. rulings and technical violations of previous agreements are excuses; direct attack or threat of attack are reasons. The former aren't immediate threats and the latter, theoretical at best and imaginary at worst

 

[Carib Gyal]

And the same people who credited Obama with getting out of Iraq until that looked like a bad decision are crediting him with getting out of Afghanistan. Until that looks like a bad decision. Those people incliude Obama, btw.

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

What about going back?

I opposed it and I'm on record here repeatedly opposing. I said if the Iraqis who were fleeing in the face of ISIS weren't willing to fight for their own country,

why should American soldiers fight and die in their place?

Feel free to answer that question, btw.

Here is your answer:

Because that is their policy and has been since at least WWI.

My thinking is, if that's who you want to be, be it all the way or don't be that at all.

If I get enough posters to acknowledge your ability to be incoherent, would you kindly stop trying to repeatedly prove it?

why should American soldiers fight and die in their place?

Because that has been American policy since WWI. If you don't like it, change it.

Obama certainly didn't.

 

[The Rabbi]

A) There were a lot of excuses for going into Iraq, but no "we have to do it now" reasons. B) That's because too many people fell for the excuses cited in A) and blew what chance there was.

That's a non-sequitur. Rabbi Rules!
You will make any reason an "excuse" so argument with you is pointless. The truth is there was tremendous pressure as Iraq worked to undermine sanctions and return to their WMD program. All this in the aftermath of 9/11. Do you really need to see the list of Democrats howling for Bush to "do something" yet again?

There was no "smoking gun". Nothing about Iraq was urgent. I deny any "non sequitur". This all about your inability to distinguish between excuses and reasons. U.N. rulings and technical violations of previous agreements are excuses; direct attack or threat of attack are reasons. The former aren't immediate threats and the latter, theoretical at best and imaginary at worst

Hindsight is 20/20. Go back and review what was known and what was widely assumed. Further Iraq was underminding sanctions. Your comments are non sequiturs.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It wasn't a bad decision to get out of Iraq.

What about going back?

I opposed it and I'm on record here repeatedly opposing. I said if the Iraqis who were fleeing in the face of ISIS weren't willing to fight for their own country,

why should American soldiers fight and die in their place?

Feel free to answer that question, btw.

Here is your answer:

Because that is their policy and has been since at least WWI.

My thinking is, if that's who you want to be, be it all the way or don't be that at all.

If I get enough posters to acknowledge your ability to be incoherent, would you kindly stop trying to repeatedly prove it?

why should American soldiers fight and die in their place?

Because that has been American policy since WWI. If you don't like it, change it.

Obama certainly didn't.

Obama is an improvement over Bush, and better than either of the warmongering GOP'ers he ran against.

 

[NYcarbineer]

A) There were a lot of excuses for going into Iraq, but no "we have to do it now" reasons. B) That's because too many people fell for the excuses cited in A) and blew what chance there was.

That's a non-sequitur. Rabbi Rules!
You will make any reason an "excuse" so argument with you is pointless. The truth is there was tremendous pressure as Iraq worked to undermine sanctions and return to their WMD program. All this in the aftermath of 9/11. Do you really need to see the list of Democrats howling for Bush to "do something" yet again?

There was no "smoking gun". Nothing about Iraq was urgent. I deny any "non sequitur". This all about your inability to distinguish between excuses and reasons. U.N. rulings and technical violations of previous agreements are excuses; direct attack or threat of attack are reasons. The former aren't immediate threats and the latter, theoretical at best and imaginary at worst

Hindsight is 20/20. Go back and review what was known and what was widely assumed. Further Iraq was underminding sanctions. Your comments are non sequiturs.

Obama knew enough in 2002, without hindsight, to know that invading Iraq was an idiotic idea. So did I.

You didn't. You come in third in that contest lol.

 

[Carib Gyal]

What about going back?

I opposed it and I'm on record here repeatedly opposing. I said if the Iraqis who were fleeing in the face of ISIS weren't willing to fight for their own country,

why should American soldiers fight and die in their place?

Feel free to answer that question, btw.

Here is your answer:

Because that is their policy and has been since at least WWI.

My thinking is, if that's who you want to be, be it all the way or don't be that at all.

If I get enough posters to acknowledge your ability to be incoherent, would you kindly stop trying to repeatedly prove it?

why should American soldiers fight and die in their place?

Because that has been American policy since WWI. If you don't like it, change it.

Obama certainly didn't.

Obama is an improvement over Bush, and better than either of the warmongering GOP'ers he ran against.

"...if the Iraqis who were fleeing in the face of ISIS weren't willing to fight for their own country, why should American soldiers fight and die in their place?"

Some kind of consistency in your argument would make it stronger.

 

[francoHFW]

The war in Afghanistan, fought for 13 bloody years and still raging, came to a formal end Sunday.

U.S. Formally Ends War In Afghanistan

The Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts, taken together, will be the most expensive wars in US history—totaling somewhere between $4 trillion and $6 trillion. Every hour, taxpayers in the United States paid $10.17 million for Cost of War in Afghanistan since 2001. So, what did we accomplish?

Boosh's boy RW bigot Maliki ruined Iraq. Afghan now has schools and respect for women, university, a good chance, especially now that Bush's corrupt meltdown depression is ending. Ditto Pakistan and everywhere Jihad was a good career choice. Great job, Pubbies, as always.

 

[The Rabbi]

A) There were a lot of excuses for going into Iraq, but no "we have to do it now" reasons. B) That's because too many people fell for the excuses cited in A) and blew what chance there was.

That's a non-sequitur. Rabbi Rules!
You will make any reason an "excuse" so argument with you is pointless. The truth is there was tremendous pressure as Iraq worked to undermine sanctions and return to their WMD program. All this in the aftermath of 9/11. Do you really need to see the list of Democrats howling for Bush to "do something" yet again?

There was no "smoking gun". Nothing about Iraq was urgent. I deny any "non sequitur". This all about your inability to distinguish between excuses and reasons. U.N. rulings and technical violations of previous agreements are excuses; direct attack or threat of attack are reasons. The former aren't immediate threats and the latter, theoretical at best and imaginary at worst

Hindsight is 20/20. Go back and review what was known and what was widely assumed. Further Iraq was underminding sanctions. Your comments are non sequiturs.

Obama knew enough in 2002, without hindsight, to know that invading Iraq was an idiotic idea. So did I.

You didn't. You come in third in that contest lol.

No, he opposed it out of knee jerk reaction of pacificism and anti-Bushism. Most Democrats supported it, including Hillary.