U.S. troops fight on despite end to combat in Iraq

[ConHog]

I'm not convinced it contradicts anything.


Why do you think I wouldn't admit if I thought it was true???

so the fighting was not "combat" and those troops are not "combat" troops, rather they are fighting troops....

is that really your stance?

Yes, my stance is it's not about me or MY stance.


partnered and targeted counter-terrorism operations; and protect ongoing U.S. civilian and military efforts.

Well, you're wrong. Ollie has posted actual COMBAT brigades that in Iraq, so its obvious that there are combat troops in Iraq. If the word means nothing then why did Obama choose to use it?

 

[Yurt]

I'm not convinced it contradicts anything.


Why do you think I wouldn't admit if I thought it was true???

so the fighting was not "combat" and those troops are not "combat" troops, rather they are fighting troops....

is that really your stance?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with Valerie here, but it seems like we get to the point where we call things "police actions" or "conflicts" instead of war or "fighting" instead of "combat" all so we can politically dress up people getting shot.

i agree with what you are saying, obama, IMO, is merely playing semantics, changing the wording so he can fulfill his promise

its shallow and not at all true

 

[Valerie]

so the fighting was not "combat" and those troops are not "combat" troops, rather they are fighting troops....

is that really your stance?

Yes, my stance is it's not about me or MY stance.


partnered and targeted counter-terrorism operations; and protect ongoing U.S. civilian and military efforts.

Well, you're wrong. Ollie has posted actual COMBAT brigades that in Iraq, so its obvious that there are combat troops in Iraq. If the word means nothing then why did Obama choose to use it?

Link ?

 

[elvis]

Yes, my stance is it's not about me or MY stance.


partnered and targeted counter-terrorism operations; and protect ongoing U.S. civilian and military efforts.

Well, you're wrong. Ollie has posted actual COMBAT brigades that in Iraq, so its obvious that there are combat troops in Iraq. If the word means nothing then why did Obama choose to use it?

Link ?

Hey. Share that damned popcorn.

 

[Valerie]

Well, you're wrong. Ollie has posted actual COMBAT brigades that in Iraq, so its obvious that there are combat troops in Iraq. If the word means nothing then why did Obama choose to use it?

Link ?

Hey. Share that damned popcorn.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I did post a short list of Units I know of that are in Iraq. I forget which thread that was in. And I really am not sure i should have posted it. Not that I got it from anything classified. I don't get that stuff anymore.....

 

[Avorysuds]

Sounds like Valerie loves war to me is all... Just has to be a Democrat calling the shots and it's all good.

I like not being a sellout to the GOP or DNC.

 

[Charles_Main]

It's not about Obama.

In January 2009 there were like 150k troops and now there are 50k troops with an official agreement and plan for withdrawal. Shit happens when you're a soldier in Iraq which is why they still carry guns even though the official role is "non combat".

obama said there are no combat troops in iraq and that combat ops have ended....

do you agree with this? especially in light of this article....

Combat is a word...A term they use for legal purposes to define the current mission.

I mean, are you going to start a thread every time a bullet is fired in 2011...?

U.S. Forces – Iraq (USF-I) Drawdown

When President Obama took office in January 2009, there were 144,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. At his Camp Lejeune speech on February 27, 2009, President Obama announced that the United States would end its combat mission on August 31, 2010, and retain a transitional force of up to 50,000 U.S. troops to train and advise Iraqi Security Forces; conduct partnered and targeted counter-terrorism operations; and protect ongoing U.S. civilian and military efforts.

Review “Facts and Figures on Drawdown in Iraq” (HTML | PDF) for information on troops, equipment, bases, and the “big picture” in both

For more information on U.S. military engagement in Iraq: The Official Web Site | United States Forces - Iraq

U.S. Mission Facts & Figures

Yeah and when Bush said Mission Accomplished he was referring to removing Saddam from Power. Yet the left hammered him for it.


he said Major combat operations were over, and was once again technically correct. Yet the Libs smashed him for it.

But now were suppose to give Obama a pass because why? He is a liberal?

 

[Dante]

"...the missions here will hardly change. Instead the military will call them stability operations. And they will inevitably involve – in addition to advising and training Iraqi forces and providing security for Provincial Reconstruction Teams – fighting insurgents, and probably more American troop deaths."

Fighting, but Not Calling It Combat - NYTimes.com

why do you people hate the military?

 

[Dante]

real troops, not faux combat specialists on USMB

“That’s where the fight is,” said Staff Sgt. Kelly E. Young, who is hoping to join a unit headed for Afghanistan after his deployment to Iraq is finished in November. “It’s what I do. All I want to do is fight, and make a difference.” Fighting, but Not Calling It Combat - NYTimes.com

------------

Why do people here get all hysterical about what the real military is doing and saying? Why is it that blowhards with a political agenda always seem to hide behind the fighting men and women while dissing their mission and dedication?

 

[Dante]

Yeah and when Bush said Mission Accomplished he was referring to removing Saddam from Power. Yet the left hammered him for it.


he said Major combat operations were over, and was once again technically correct. Yet the Libs smashed him for it.

But now were suppose to give Obama a pass because why? He is a liberal?

So if you and I agreed with Bush, we gave him a pass?



you can't attack Obama based on how others you disrespect treated Bush without putting yourself in a worse light

 

[Epsilon Delta]

Hahahahaha, "Operation New Dawn." Yeah, right.

I don't understand how he doesn't get it. Just take 'em all out Barak. What are you trying to accomplish? I mean, if there was a clear, popular will in the United States, or if the appropriate measures had been taken back in the "good years" before the economic crisis, then maybe there'd be a chance. But it's a lost cause now. He should've just made some weak "victory" speech and pulled out immediately, washing his hands like Pilate from it. It's been what now, 6 months after elections with still no functioning government there? There's no goals and no point.

Same goes for Afghanistan. If there's no "do-or-die" will to literally rebuild the country, spending a trillion dollars on it, sending 200,000 more troops, then what's the point? It's not going to work.

There's more pressing problems in this neighborhood anyway.

Do you think Obama is different from Bush on these issues? Did you think that before?

Well, I thought, at the beginning, that Obama might've been different from Bush, considering all the crap he was saying before during and after the campaign. He's proven to be in total agreement and a continuation of the slightly more moderate post-2004 Bush II administration policies, however. And according to some reports, he might be even worse.

EDIT: And even then, there's just a whole difference in context here - I mean, at least Bus started the wars. I can understand why Bush would've not pulled out of either place, also considering that during the majority of conflicts we were having a global, booming, (and artificial) economic fiesta. Most people then also seemed to support both of the wars. Obama, on the other hand, had little to do with the wars, never even supported Iraq, got elected in the middle of a massive recession, AND got elected with a pretty unequivocal popular mandate to end both conflicts (ie, because Americans just aren't into it anymore, they're done with it, compounding the inevitability of failure in these long, open-ended wars with no goals). So you'd think he might've been different, obviously it was not the case.

 

[islam4ever]

USA troop lost war of Iraq. Now get out !!!

 

[SFC Ollie]

USA troop lost war of Iraq. Now get out !!!

No dumbass, the real losers in Iraq are the Iraqi people. We gave them freedom and a country of their own and they allowed assholes to stop them from taking full advantage of it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yes, my stance is it's not about me or MY stance.


partnered and targeted counter-terrorism operations; and protect ongoing U.S. civilian and military efforts.

Well, you're wrong. Ollie has posted actual COMBAT brigades that in Iraq, so its obvious that there are combat troops in Iraq. If the word means nothing then why did Obama choose to use it?

Link ?

Why are you asking for a link? You and I have been through this before. you left the thread after I produced a link showing combat troops in Iraq. The key word is COMBAT The same troops that were combat troops are still there.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnqZu27YgbQ[/ame]

 

[SFC Ollie]

2nd Battalion, 114th Field Artillery Regiment

1st Battalion, 98th Cavalry Regiment

2nd Battalion, 162nd Infantry Regiment

1st Battalion, 186th Infantry Regiment

st Battalion, 63rd Armor Regiment

A small sample of Units deployed currently in Iraq. Sure seems like combat troops to me.

Of course then there's also 10th SF and elements of 5th SF...........

 

[Kalam]

USA troop lost war of Iraq. Now get out !!!

No dumbass, the real losers in Iraq are the Iraqi people. We gave them freedom and a country of their own and they allowed assholes to stop them from taking full advantage of it.

We don't want you to impose your interpretation of "freedom" onto us. One would think that the US would have learned that lesson by now.

 

[SFC Ollie]

USA troop lost war of Iraq. Now get out !!!

No dumbass, the real losers in Iraq are the Iraqi people. We gave them freedom and a country of their own and they allowed assholes to stop them from taking full advantage of it.

We don't want you to impose your interpretation of "freedom" onto us. One would think that the US would have learned that lesson by now.

Excuse the fuck out of me, once again we gave the Iraqi people the freedom to set up their own government the way THEY wanted it, not us and not based upon the USA. And what happened? A minority is pressing their views on the majority.

I say let them have it. We tried, and they (as a people) are either too weak or too stupid to take this opportunity. So yes I say we get out and watch them fall back into barbarism.

 

[Kalam]

Excuse the fuck out of me, once again we gave the Iraqi people the freedom to set up their own government the way THEY wanted it,

In what universe did that occur? A government established under the auspices of the CPA is not a result of self-determination.

not us and not based upon the USA. And what happened? A minority is pressing their views on the majority.

If "the majority" supported their puppet government, it wouldn't be being attacked from all sides by various Sunni and Shi'ite militias, secular Arab socialists, Kurdish socialists, etc.

I say let them have it. We tried, and they (as a people) are either too weak or too stupid to take this opportunity. So yes I say we get out and watch them fall back into barbarism.

Right. Any national group that doesn't implement a Western-style government is obviously an inferior ethnicity. What a lovely sentiment.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Watch