Iraq war

[cadet]

I wasn't sure where to put this, but i figured the historians on here would have fun with it.

So i had this debate with my friend, he claimed that Obama finished the war in Iraq. And I could've sworn that in 2007 Bush said we were helping them get their gov't back up and running, and not actually at war with them. Just fighting a few stragglers.

But this kid was dead set that obama said the war was over, and it was all because of him that we're pulling out of there.

I found a few things on wikipedia, about "The New Way Forward" but nothing else. (Just want to verify this before i look like a raving idiot on facebook)

Now, still at war with the Taliban, but wasn't the actual war in Iraq done earlier?

[Anton Chigurh]

Obama didn't do anything that wasn't already underway under Bush. He merely followed the already established timelines and schedules.

[Gaffer]

The war with iraq was over in a few weeks. Securing the country was what took a lot longer. We were fighting shea nuts supported by iran and sunni nuts affiliated with AQ. The last few years was fighting proxy iranian troops. You know, that country that hasn't invaded any of its neighbors.

Barely the president had nothing to do with the successes of iraq. All he did was take credit for what someone else had done. Sound familiar?

Afghan is being run like Vietnam. Unless they beef up the number of troops, go on the offensive and take an hold positions it's doomed to fail. There will be no successes there while he's in office.

[Anton Chigurh]

Barely the president had nothing to do with the successes of iraq. All he did was take credit for what someone else had done. Sound familiar?In fact he was on record as a state senator opposing it, then voted against the surge and "no" on every funding bill for it, and so on.
Afghan is being run like Vietnam. Unless they beef up the number of troops, go on the offensive and take an hold positions it's doomed to fail. There will be no successes there while he's in office.Obama "acted stupidly" going back in there after we had kicked their collective asses and essentially already gotten out. Calling it Vietnam right now is a hell of alot more apt than when the Dems were calling Iraq Vietnam.

[Indofred]

The war with iraq was over in a few weeks. Securing the country was what took a lot longer. We were fighting shea nuts supported by iran and sunni nuts affiliated with AQ. The last few years was fighting proxy iranian troops. You know, that country that hasn't invaded any of its neighbors.

Barely the president had nothing to do with the successes of iraq. All he did was take credit for what someone else had done. Sound familiar?

Afghan is being run like Vietnam. Unless they beef up the number of troops, go on the offensive and take an hold positions it's doomed to fail. There will be no successes there while he's in office.

The US had to fight "terrorists" trying to get rid of the invading force (The US) because the US invasion was so badly thought out.

Provide proof there were proxy Iranian troops there.

Afghanistan is being run exactly like Vietnam.
The US invaded to force illegal change in government and got it's arse kicked.

News for the daft.
US troop numbers in Vietnam increased from 243,000 invaders in 1959 to 1,110,000 by 1973.

A bunch of ill trained fighters kicked the mighty US out of the jungle back then and the brave Afghan freedom fighters - sorry, terrorists - shagged the Russians.
(They were freedom fighters when they kicked out the Russian invaders but terrorists when they kill US invaders)

Now, those "terrorist" are shagging the US invading forces.

Don't invade countries if you don't want your troops in body bags.

[Nukeman]

The US had to fight "terrorists" trying to get rid of the invading force (The US) because the US invasion was so badly thought out.

Provide proof there were proxy Iranian troops there.

Afghanistan is being run exactly like Vietnam.
The US invaded to force illegal change in government and got it's arse kicked.

News for the daft.
US troop numbers in Vietnam increased from 243,000 invaders in 1959 to 1,110,000 by 1973.

A bunch of ill trained fighters kicked the mighty US out of the jungle back then and the brave Afghan freedom fighters - sorry, terrorists - shagged the Russians.
(They were freedom fighters when they kicked out the Russian invaders but terrorists when they kill US invaders)

Now, those "terrorist" are shagging the US invading forces.

Don't invade countries if you don't want your troops in body bags.Here's the fallacy of YOUR argument. IF and I say IF the US was ever let off the leash of national scrutiny/opinion and sideline/Saturday night quarter backs NO country in the world could stand against our military if the shackels were removed and WE didn't give a crap about collateral damage. See unlike the terrorist we fight we look to only distroy them not their neighbors or friends JUST THEM, that my friend makes it VERY difficult on our side but easy for the terrorist. Do you really think we couldnt level every city in Afghanastan in a matter of a few weeks?? The whole country could be reduced to ruble in a few weeks and totaly distroyed but WE don't want to hurt innocent people unlike those that you are propping up in your little hissy fit... MORON!!!!!!!!!!!!

[jimnyc]

Provide proof there were proxy Iranian troops there.

The last time you uttered "provide proof", you outright dismissed said proof because you didn't like 2 of the 3 sources, and then you ignored the 3rd. I would advise Gaffer to not waste his time with a troll, but I think he knows better.

[jimnyc]

The US invaded to force illegal change in government and got it's arse kicked.

Don't invade countries if you don't want your troops in body bags.

How many body bags have been used for dead Afghani's, Iraqi's, Taliban, Al Qaeda & other fighters against our fighters? Estimates start at 100,000 and increase dramatically.

I believe the US troops are in the 5,000-7,000 range depending on the source.

With the goal of war to kill the other side and not be killed yourself, that annihilation word comes to mind again. Sure, neither country is a bowl of cherries, and might even say a lot of fucked up going on inside the countries - but to say the US troops got their asses kicked is a funny joke for me so early in the morning.

If our military wanted to, they could have destroyed both places outright without placing any boots on the ground. And even then, if not held back, the troops on the ground could have had 1/10th of their losses if they simply did what they were trained to do.

The ONLY thing the enemies have been even remotely successful at is using terrorist tactics. And even then, they have been summarily dismissed like the little cockroaches they are.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The last time you uttered "provide proof", you outright dismissed said proof because you didn't like 2 of the 3 sources, and then you ignored the 3rd. I would advise Gaffer to not waste his time with a troll, but I think he knows better.

I am wondering if this cat is just a troll or if a sock for another current or banned member from here? I'm sure Gaffer would smash this cat's blather if it continued on as it is going now.-Tyr

[jafar00]

How many body bags have been used for dead Afghani's, Iraqi's, Taliban, Al Qaeda & other fighters against our fighters? Estimates start at 100,000 and increase dramatically.

I believe the US troops are in the 5,000-7,000 range depending on the source.



Despite the body count the taliban are still in control of much of Afghanistan outside of the Capitol. I it sure looks like you are on the losing side.

[jimnyc]

Despite the body count the taliban are still in control of much of Afghanistan outside of the Capitol. I it sure looks like you are on the losing side.

Do you understand the actual premise of war? Not what politics would like to do with them as pawns, but what military, you know, the people with the weapons, what their jobs are? The Taliban having control in some areas doesn't speak to victory or loss. "IF" the US Military wanted to, their firepower can destroy each and every city in Afghanistan by tomorrow morning and bye bye Taliban.

Politics is losing. The Afghani farmers are losing. But the US soldiers decimated both Iraq and Afghanistan when it came to actual war.

[Gaffer]

Time for another history lesson. Pay attention fred. Vietnam was not lost by the US. The war there ended in 1973. Nixon had bombed hanoi and was threatening to do so again if they did not agree to a cease fire. They agreed and the war ended. The north had lost over a million men fighting the US and South Vietnam. They had their asses kicked and handed to them. In 1975 the north attacked the south again. After the democratic run congress in this country had decided to cut off all aid to South Vietnam. This effort was led by the fat fuck ted kennedy. Without arms and ammunition the south could not defend themselves and quickly fell to the armored columns of northern soldiers. The US had no dog in that fight.

The big rush to get out of the embassy was Vietnamese trying to flee the country. Not Americans running away as the media tries to depict.

You can't even get your numbers right as to how many troops were in Vietnam at what time. In 1959 there were a couple of dozen advisors in Vietnam. At no time was the country invaded. The troops were there because they were asked for. The build up and escalation began in 1965 following the gulf of Tonkin incident which was orchestrated by the democratic administration under Johnson. Are you paying attention fred?

At no time did the number of troops in South Vietnam exceed 500,000. Where did you get those numbers you posted? When you spout bullshit your gonna be called on it. And I can speak from experience because I was there. I lived it.

I'm not about to debate a troll, I will post truthful corrections to your lies and bullshit when you post it.

[aboutime]

Do you understand the actual premise of war? Not what politics would like to do with them as pawns, but what military, you know, the people with the weapons, what their jobs are? The Taliban having control in some areas doesn't speak to victory or loss. "IF" the US Military wanted to, their firepower can destroy each and every city in Afghanistan by tomorrow morning and bye bye Taliban.

Politics is losing. The Afghani farmers are losing. But the US soldiers decimated both Iraq and Afghanistan when it came to actual war.



jimnyc. That has been jafar's intent all along. His only goal in his sad, miserable life is to make everyone else uncomfortable, and to threaten them with his intimidation tactics...learned so well by people like OBL, who gave people like jafar instructions on how to destroy from within.
jafar is nothing but a phony shill for prolonged, perpetual tactics of hatred, hidden behind a facade of preaching Love, and Peace...with a Murderer's Suicide Jacket loaded with explosives.

[jafar00]

jimnyc. That has been jafar's intent all along. His only goal in his sad, miserable life is to make everyone else uncomfortable, and to threaten them with his intimidation tactics...learned so well by people like OBL, who gave people like jafar instructions on how to destroy from within.
jafar is nothing but a phony shill for prolonged, perpetual tactics of hatred, hidden behind a facade of preaching Love, and Peace...with a Murderer's Suicide Jacket loaded with explosives.

Silence! I kill you :p

[fj1200]

Silence! I kill you :p

He's much more useful alive to you. ;)

[jimnyc]

Silence! I kill you :p

Gotta admit I laughed out loud when I read this! Are you a fan of Achmed? I was a little nervous about showing videos of Jeff Dunham to my Muslim buddies, but they LOVE him and think he's hilarious, or should I say they like Achmed.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Gotta admit I laughed out loud when I read this! Are you a fan of Achmed? I was a little nervous about showing videos of Jeff Dunham to my Muslim buddies, but they LOVE him and think he's hilarious, or should I say they like Achmed.

He was just letting his inner thoughts out! Muslim version of letting off steam..-;)

[Kathianne]

On Iraq:

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/08/12/iraq-oil-production-beats-iran-but-many-iraqis-still-fear-the-future/


Iraq: Oil Production Beats Iran, but Many Iraqis Still Fear the Future FT (http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/c3212886-e2c4-11e1-a463-00144feab49a.html#axzz22rCiHrWM):

The International Energy Agency, the western countries’ oil watchdog, said on Friday that last month Iraq produced more than 3m barrels a day, the highest since the US-led invasion nearly a decade ago. At the same time, Iranian oil output fell below the 3m b/d level for the first time in more than 20 years, dropping to 2.9m b/d in July. Saudi Arabia, which pumped 10m b/d in July, remains Opec’s largest oil producer.


It’s not just oil production. GDP growth is also explosive, growing at 9.9 percent in 2011, which beats China and is one of the fastest growth rates in the world.


But violence is also on the rise. There are assassinations, kidnappings, and bombings somewhere in Iraq almost every day. Prime Minister Maliki, ignoring his own promises to share power with other political groups, has instead arrested and intimidated his rivals. “Corruption is rampant,” writes (http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a1961024-dfdf-11e1-b81c-00144feab49a.html#axzz22rYGYntF) Kevin Sullivan in a long analysis in the FT, “and people complain that bribery is the only way to get a job, a building permit or a government contract.”


Has anything changed for the better after the invasion and withdrawal of American troops, and without the hated Saddam? New folks are in the seats of power in Baghdad, and there are many Iraqis who have seized the chance for a new beginning to become financially successful international businessmen and women. But many others feel nothing has changed, or even that things are worse. Electricity is scarce. Jobs are rare. Violence is a constant fear.


Yet many Iraqis think the only way the country can go is up. With the oil flowing freely once again, many hope that money, jobs, electricity, and other services will begin to flow freely too.

<!-- .entry-content -->

[jafar00]

Gotta admit I laughed out loud when I read this! Are you a fan of Achmed? I was a little nervous about showing videos of Jeff Dunham to my Muslim buddies, but they LOVE him and think he's hilarious, or should I say they like Achmed.

I like it too :) It also funny because there is not such name as Achmed. It's Ahmed without the phlegm. I know a few Ahmeds as well.

[Neo]

3855

(pictured above: Liberals gather for "stra-tee-gery" session after rising @ noon, ready to take on the day!)

Jimmy, Gaffer, Tyr, Kathianne, etc...what you obviously have here in Mr. Jafar00 & Indofred, are a pair of America hating, Left-wing maggots, who are not only miserably misinformed (as Mr. Gaffer has already established quite brilliantly), but don't ever seem to care that they are ALWAYS wrong.

I.O.W.'s, further evidence that liberalism is a terminal mental disorder. :cuckoo:

[jafar00]

3855

(pictured above: Liberals gather for "stra-tee-gery" session after rising @ noon, ready to take on the day!)

Jimmy, Gaffer, Tyr, Kathianne, etc...what you obviously have here in Mr. Jafar00 & Indofred, are a pair of America hating, Left-wing maggots, who are not only miserably misinformed (as Mr. Gaffer has already established quite brilliantly), but don't ever seem to care that they are ALWAYS wrong.

I.O.W.'s, further evidence that liberalism is a terminal mental disorder. :cuckoo:

I'm assuming that sitting in a cafe in a straight jacket is less harmful than shooting a bunch of people in the name of racial or religious purity like a few right wingers have been known to do :p

[Voted4Reagan]

TERROR ATTACKS IN THE NAME OF ISLAM = 221

Number killed in the name of Islam = 996

Terror attacks in the name of OTHER religions = 0

Number killed in name of other religions = 0

Attacks by Angry Racists = 1

Number killed by angry racist = 6


http://thereligionofpeace.com/