Wasn't it Dubya's Policy to get Troops out of Iraq?...

[Article 15]

Which...wait for it...makes it Bush's deal.



Take another bong hit. Life will morph to what you want it to be, eventually.

Sure ... if you are in a vacuum and ignore the current state of American politics at the time and everything leading up to it, it was BOOOOOOOOOSHHHH's plan. Here's your token point

Sooooo, Obama ISN'T executing Bush's plan.

You know, I bet your mind would get a lot more clear if you just abstained from drugs and alcohol, Article 15.

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. Yes, "technically" Obama is executing Bush's plan which (coincidentally, of course) is the same exact plan Obama put forth a month before. I very clearly demonstrated this earlier in the thread. So yes, while technically, you are correct in reality you are being obtuse and unwilling to admit that the Bush plan mirrored Obama's and not vice versa.

 

[Article 15]

lol! Sounds like more deranged Leftist ramblings to me.

Every post you make is a deranged rambling.

Loser.

 

[Douger]

zzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Yes, you are misremembering history.

Up until mid 2008 the Bush Admin refused to make "timetables" for getting out of Iraq. When it became perfectly clear anyone with a half a brain that even the Dems couldn't manage to lose the White House in November, Bush allowed the "time horizon" plan to go through. They used the term "time horizon" because they and their media attack dogs had painted themselves into a corner viciously attacking support for a timetable as "support for the terrorist" but they also knew the war was going to be "ended" by the next admin and they wanted to beat them to the political punch so people like you could claim that this was actually Bush's plan along ...

Bingo!!!!!​

July 19, 2008​

"Mr. Bush, who has long derided timetables for troop withdrawals as dangerous, agreed to at least a notional one as part of the administration’s efforts to negotiate the terms for an American military presence in Iraq after a United Nations mandate expires at the end of the year.

The White House offered no specifics about how far off any “time horizon” would be, with officials saying details remained to be negotiated. Any dates cited in an agreement would be cast as goals for handing responsibility to Iraqis, and not specifically for reducing American troops, said a White House spokesman, Gordon D. Johndroe."

 

[Si modo]

Sure ... if you are in a vacuum and ignore the current state of American politics at the time and everything leading up to it, it was BOOOOOOOOOSHHHH's plan. Here's your token point

Sooooo, Obama ISN'T executing Bush's plan.

You know, I bet your mind would get a lot more clear if you just abstained from drugs and alcohol, Article 15.

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. Yes, "technically" Obama is executing Bush's plan which (coincidentally, of course) is the same exact plan Obama put for forth a month before. I very clearly demonstrated this earlier in the thread. So yes, while technically, you are correct in reality you are being obtuse and unwilling to admit that the Bush plan mirrored Obama's and not vice versa.

Obama wanted troops out of Iraq. Bush signed an agreement to get combat troops out of Iraq. I don't think the 'present' junior Senator from Illinois' 2008 plan was quite what Bush gave us.

And, the funniest thing is the amount of Iraqi combat troops who have been redeployed as support staff.

Sleight of hand, but you seem to enjoy the show.

 

[Article 15]

Sooooo, Obama ISN'T executing Bush's plan.

You know, I bet your mind would get a lot more clear if you just abstained from drugs and alcohol, Article 15.

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. Yes, "technically" Obama is executing Bush's plan which (coincidentally, of course) is the same exact plan Obama put for forth a month before. I very clearly demonstrated this earlier in the thread. So yes, while technically, you are correct in reality you are being obtuse and unwilling to admit that the Bush plan mirrored Obama's and not vice versa.

Obama wanted troops out of Iraq. Bush signed an agreement to get combat troops out of Iraq. I don't think the 'present' junior Senator from Illinois' 2008 plan was quite what Bush gave us.

And, the funniest thing is the amount of Iraqi combat troops who have been redeployed as support staff.

Sleight of hand, but you seem to enjoy the show.

Oh, really?

Poster earlier in the thread ... Obama, one month before the "time horizon" deal:

As I’ve said many times, we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 — two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began. After this redeployment, a residual force in Iraq would perform limited missions: going after any remnants of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, protecting American service members and, so long as the Iraqis make political progress, training Iraqi security forces. That would not be a precipitous withdrawal.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Sure ... if you are in a vacuum and ignore the current state of American politics at the time and everything leading up to it, it was BOOOOOOOOOSHHHH's plan. Here's your token point

Sooooo, Obama ISN'T executing Bush's plan.

You know, I bet your mind would get a lot more clear if you just abstained from drugs and alcohol, Article 15.

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. Yes, "technically" Obama is executing Bush's plan which (coincidentally, of course) is the same exact plan Obama put for forth a month before. I very clearly demonstrated this earlier in the thread. So yes, while technically, you are correct in reality you are being obtuse and unwilling to admit that the Bush plan mirrored Obama's and not vice versa.

Message #10: Well,see,thanks for the clue,moron."

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. See,now along with you being a deranged Leftist,you're also a dishonest hypocrite. Do you even read your posts before hitting the submit button? Yikes!

 

[Article 15]

It's okay to admit that it is the same plan Obama put forward. I swear I wont tell your friends.

 

[Article 15]

Sooooo, Obama ISN'T executing Bush's plan.

You know, I bet your mind would get a lot more clear if you just abstained from drugs and alcohol, Article 15.

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. Yes, "technically" Obama is executing Bush's plan which (coincidentally, of course) is the same exact plan Obama put for forth a month before. I very clearly demonstrated this earlier in the thread. So yes, while technically, you are correct in reality you are being obtuse and unwilling to admit that the Bush plan mirrored Obama's and not vice versa.

Message #10: Well,see,thanks for the clue,moron."

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. See,now along with you being a deranged Leftist,you're also a dishonest hypocrite. Do you even read your posts before hitting the submit button? Yikes!

You, see, Lib, Si Modo is actually a reasonable poster who on most days deserves a level of respect and civility when talking to her. You, on the other hand, are nothing but an unoriginal troll who repeats the same dozen or so posts over and over and over again therefor you don't deserve any kind of civility from me.

Got it?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

This is a Bush signed agreement. Hopefully some in our MSM will point this out. I'm not holding my breath though.

 

[Si modo]

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. Yes, "technically" Obama is executing Bush's plan which (coincidentally, of course) is the same exact plan Obama put for forth a month before. I very clearly demonstrated this earlier in the thread. So yes, while technically, you are correct in reality you are being obtuse and unwilling to admit that the Bush plan mirrored Obama's and not vice versa.

Obama wanted troops out of Iraq. Bush signed an agreement to get combat troops out of Iraq. I don't think the 'present' junior Senator from Illinois' 2008 plan was quite what Bush gave us.

And, the funniest thing is the amount of Iraqi combat troops who have been redeployed as support staff.

Sleight of hand, but you seem to enjoy the show.

Oh, really?

Poster earlier in the thread ... Obama, one month before the "time horizon" deal:

As I’ve said many times, we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 — two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began. After this redeployment, a residual force in Iraq would perform limited missions: going after any remnants of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, protecting American service members and, so long as the Iraqis make political progress, training Iraqi security forces. That would not be a precipitous withdrawal.

LMAO! Shall we redefine 'remove'?

 

[Jarhead]

Sooooo, Obama ISN'T executing Bush's plan.

You know, I bet your mind would get a lot more clear if you just abstained from drugs and alcohol, Article 15.

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. Yes, "technically" Obama is executing Bush's plan which (coincidentally, of course) is the same exact plan Obama put for forth a month before. I very clearly demonstrated this earlier in the thread. So yes, while technically, you are correct in reality you are being obtuse and unwilling to admit that the Bush plan mirrored Obama's and not vice versa.

Obama wanted troops out of Iraq. Bush signed an agreement to get combat troops out of Iraq. I don't think the 'present' junior Senator from Illinois' 2008 plan was quite what Bush gave us.

And, the funniest thing is the amount of Iraqi combat troops who have been redeployed as support staff.
Sleight of hand, but you seem to enjoy the show.

yep.
People just dont get it. The battle of the party's has resulted in the people who empoloy them as the victims of their trickery.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. Yes, "technically" Obama is executing Bush's plan which (coincidentally, of course) is the same exact plan Obama put for forth a month before. I very clearly demonstrated this earlier in the thread. So yes, while technically, you are correct in reality you are being obtuse and unwilling to admit that the Bush plan mirrored Obama's and not vice versa.

Message #10: Well,see,thanks for the clue,moron."

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. See,now along with you being a deranged Leftist,you're also a dishonest hypocrite. Do you even read your posts before hitting the submit button? Yikes!

You, see, Lib, Si Modo is actually a reasonable poster who on most days deserves a level of respect and civility when talking to her. You, on the other hand, are nothing but an unoriginal troll who repeats the same dozen or so posts over and over and over again therefor you don't deserve any kind of civility from me.

Got it?

Another personal attack ay? You know you're unhinged right?

 

[Article 15]

Obama wanted troops out of Iraq. Bush signed an agreement to get combat troops out of Iraq. I don't think the 'present' junior Senator from Illinois' 2008 plan was quite what Bush gave us.

And, the funniest thing is the amount of Iraqi combat troops who have been redeployed as support staff.

Sleight of hand, but you seem to enjoy the show.

Oh, really?

Poster earlier in the thread ... Obama, one month before the "time horizon" deal:

As I’ve said many times, we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 — two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began. After this redeployment, a residual force in Iraq would perform limited missions: going after any remnants of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, protecting American service members and, so long as the Iraqis make political progress, training Iraqi security forces. That would not be a precipitous withdrawal.

LMAO! Shall we redefine 'remove'?

Gee, I dunno ... you seem to want to redefine which months come first in the calender ...

 

[Si modo]

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. Yes, "technically" Obama is executing Bush's plan which (coincidentally, of course) is the same exact plan Obama put for forth a month before. I very clearly demonstrated this earlier in the thread. So yes, while technically, you are correct in reality you are being obtuse and unwilling to admit that the Bush plan mirrored Obama's and not vice versa.

Message #10: Well,see,thanks for the clue,moron."

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. See,now along with you being a deranged Leftist,you're also a dishonest hypocrite. Do you even read your posts before hitting the submit button? Yikes!

You, see, Lib, Si Modo is actually a reasonable poster who on most days deserves a level of respect and civility when talking to her. You, on the other hand, are nothing but an unoriginal troll who repeats the same dozen or so posts over and over and over again therefor you don't deserve any kind of civility from me.

Got it?

Dammit, now I have to apologize to you. You bitch. LOL.

 

[Article 15]

Message #10: Well,see,thanks for the clue,moron."

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. See,now along with you being a deranged Leftist,you're also a dishonest hypocrite. Do you even read your posts before hitting the submit button? Yikes!

You, see, Lib, Si Modo is actually a reasonable poster who on most days deserves a level of respect and civility when talking to her. You, on the other hand, are nothing but an unoriginal troll who repeats the same dozen or so posts over and over and over again therefor you don't deserve any kind of civility from me.

Got it?

Dammit, now I have to apologize to you. You bitch. LOL.

Haha ... s'ok, no harm done.

FTR, I haven't had a drink in three years and am bong hit free so far today.

 

[Si modo]

You, see, Lib, Si Modo is actually a reasonable poster who on most days deserves a level of respect and civility when talking to her. You, on the other hand, are nothing but an unoriginal troll who repeats the same dozen or so posts over and over and over again therefor you don't deserve any kind of civility from me.

Got it?

Dammit, now I have to apologize to you. You bitch. LOL.

Haha ... s'ok, no harm done.

FTR, I haven't had a drink in three years and am bong hit free so far today.

Most excellent!

 

[Article 15]

Message #10: Well,see,thanks for the clue,moron."

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is. See,now along with you being a deranged Leftist,you're also a dishonest hypocrite. Do you even read your posts before hitting the submit button? Yikes!

You, see, Lib, Si Modo is actually a reasonable poster who on most days deserves a level of respect and civility when talking to her. You, on the other hand, are nothing but an unoriginal troll who repeats the same dozen or so posts over and over and over again therefor you don't deserve any kind of civility from me.

Got it?

Another personal attack ay? You know you're unhinged right?

Be gone, troll. You are unoriginal and boring.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

yes it is

no. it's not... bush's position was always... well, we'll see... and even then only after he had to give in and bring in petreus. until then, he had his head up his butt and was flailing wildly in a war we never should have started.

not correct. President Bush signed an agreement with the Iraqi government before he left office agreeing to this troop withdrawal. Obama, on the other hand voted against the surge and said it would fail. He needs to own up to the fact that he did not buy into the surge and the surge is what got us to the point in which we could withdraw troops.

....AFTER Lil' Dumbya's guy, RUMMY, got his ass kicked OUTTA any command-capabilities!!!!!

****

"As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time."

*

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Sure ... if you are in a vacuum and ignore the current state of American politics at the time and everything leading up to it, it was BOOOOOOOOOSHHHH's plan. Here's your token point

Sooooo, Obama ISN'T executing Bush's plan.

You know, I bet your mind would get a lot more clear if you just abstained from drugs and alcohol, Article 15.

You know the need to put a personal attack in with every post shows how weak your argument is.

Even they know that. ​