Coming from the person saying we should have left military in Iraq without an immunity agreement reveals you don't really know what stupid is, otherwise, you never would have made such an absurd proposal. At any rate, Iraq wouldn't agree to one no matter what you think people were predicting back then. You crying about it now isn't going to change that nor are moronic suggestions that we leave military in countries where they risk being the target of the host country, as if being a target of the enemy isn't bad enough.
There's a reason why presidents (not just Obama) don't leave troops behind like that without an immunity agreement, even though that evades you. Not to mention, I have no doubt after reading your posts, you would be blasting Obama for increasing the risk our troops face had he idiotically done so.
Yes, wildly unhinged. You claim he was hypocritical for sending advisors over there now yet I've yet to see you coherently explain how. And it's also amusing to read how you claim Obama was handed a stable Iraq while in the same post, claim this was waiting to happen; meanwhile, it was Bush who negotiated the deal to bring home all of the troops.
How thick can someone be. How many times do I have to explain this. He could have gotten the ******* immunity if he really wanted it.
Just like he did 14 days ago.
I can't keep explaining the same thing over and over to you libs. It's like trying to explain the ocean tides to a 5 year old over and over.
Seems you missed a key word in my post ...
"coherently."
Your explanation could be described as
"mind-boggling," since it ignores the fact that the circumstances were different then as they are now. It could be described as
"desperate," since it rests on Monday morning hindsight. It could even be described as "unhinged," since it rests on some fantasy that Obama had the ability to scare Iraq into agreeing into signing an immunity deal in an environment you described as,
"stable." What it cannot be called, however, is
"coherent," as it offer absolutely zero evidence that Obama could have convinced the Iraqi government into signing an immunity agreement back then when even Bush's best efforts failed to do so.
But coming from the person who says the best strategy would have been to screw our troops anyway and leave them exposed in a host country which refused to provide them immunity really does nothing other than to reveal how deeply dedicated you are in your hatred of Obama. So I take it with a grain of salt, as it so aptly deserves.