Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Iraqi Pm Backs Sen. Obama's Plan For Withdrawl  
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1997 times:

And, as I've said before, if the nation we occupy asks us to leave, we should do so with grace and honor.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/19/almaliki.obama/index.html

Your comments are welcome.

42 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJCS17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 39
Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1988 times:

Whatever. Obama certainly didn't back the surge, nor did the Democrats. If it were up to them, Iraq would've been left in shambles and in the beginning of a civil war. Obama is simply taking advantage of a continuously improving situation on the ground in Iraq thanks to the Bush administrations efforts, a leader in Maliki who sometimes isn't known for his good judgment, and a press that creams themselves with any sort of Obama strategic "victory."


America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
User currently offline4holer From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2999 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1985 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
Your comments are welcome.

One should attempt to use correct spelling in the title when starting a thread.

As for the point of the thread, JCS took one word to pretty much sum it up.
Yes, the topic of Iraq is relevent, but threads based on spin serve no point.



Ghosts appear and fade away.....................
User currently offlineMisbeehavin From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 914 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1983 times:

Quoting JCS17 (Reply 1):
continuously improving situation on the ground in Iraq thanks to the Bush administrations efforts

Ha! Of course it's improving. But that's because the Bush administration was responsible for it getting so bad in the first place, that there was no where to go but up!

[Edited 2008-07-19 15:27:04]

User currently offlinePlatypus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1966 times:

More of the usual from our buddy Falcon84.

As already mentioned above, the only way our troops can leave Iraq, is by way of a safe and secure Iraq, which is the case now, because of our military, GW's determination and McCain's push for the Surge, which Obama was dead set against!!! If Obama had his way, would we have left Iraq with our tales between our legs, all the while he, the media and political hacks wink  blaming Bush for the failure!

From the article:

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said al-Maliki had made it clear that such decisions will be based on continuing positive developments.

Sorry buddy, but your attempt to give credit to Obama, while denying our Military and GW, is nothing but smarmy spin! Face it Falcon84, the surge worked, Iraq is secure, and Obama had absolutely NOTHING to do with it!!!

Cheerio


User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1953 times:



Quoting JCS17 (Reply 1):
Obama is simply taking advantage of a continuously improving situation on the ground in Iraq thanks to the Bush administrations efforts, a leader in Maliki who sometimes isn't known for his good judgment, and a press that creams themselves with any sort of Obama strategic "victory."

 checkmark 

Couldn't have said it better.


User currently offlinePlatypus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1949 times:



Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5):
Quoting JCS17 (Reply 1):
Obama is simply taking advantage of a continuously improving situation on the ground in Iraq thanks to the Bush administrations efforts, a leader in Maliki who sometimes isn't known for his good judgment, and a press that creams themselves with any sort of Obama strategic "victory."



Couldn't have said it better.

Same here!


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1946 times:



Quoting Platypus (Reply 4):
White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said al-Maliki had made it clear that such decisions will be based on continuing positive developments.

Which is what the administration has said all along as well. From the story...

"But a spokesman for al-Maliki said his remarks "were misunderstood, mistranslated and not conveyed accurately."

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said the possibility of troop withdrawal was based on the continuance of security improvements, echoing statements that the White House made Friday after a meeting between al-Maliki and U.S. President Bush.
"

So if it can be done in 16 months so be it. The ground work has certainly been laid. I still think Sen. Obama will be singing a different tune when he gets back here. One that liberal democrats will not like to hear.


User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1944 times:



Quoting JCS17 (Reply 1):
Whatever.

Typical from you Jcs. Had McCain said the same thing, you'd be slobbering all over him with praise.

Again, if the leader of Iraq says he wants our troops out, we should leave. No formal request has been made from Iraq, and certianly won't be till after the Inaguration, but, at that point, if al-Maliki says he wants out troops out in 18 months, it is incumbent on us to leave. If they request we stay, then I think we have to stay till Iraq is satisfied.

It is up to Iraq-not us-to decide the timing.

Quoting Platypus (Reply 4):
White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said al-Maliki had made it clear that such decisions will be based on continuing positive developments.

And I agree with that, but our take on what is positive and what their's is might be different, and in that case, we need to bow to their wishes, not ours.

And, Platypus, why do you type everything out in praise of Mr. Bush as if you're putting out an election press release?  Smile

I didn't expect a different response from you or Jcs, as you're like lemmings going out to sea to drown.  Yeah sure


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1924 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 8):
If they request we stay, then I think we have to stay till Iraq is satisfied.

Oh how the winds change.


User currently offlineJCS17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 39
Reply 10, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1918 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 8):
If they request we stay, then I think we have to stay till Iraq is satisfied.

I think these are yours...



America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1918 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 9):
Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 8):
If they request we stay, then I think we have to stay till Iraq is satisfied.

Oh how the winds change.

I've said that all along. It is up to Baghdad, not Washington, on when we leave, RJ. I came out in favor of the surge, and it has worked to a great extent. That has been undeniable, and it's been a good thing for us, and for the Iraqi's.

But, again, it is not up to Washington when we pull out. That's just arrogance to dictate to the nation we invaded to turn down any request they make to leave.


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1914 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 11):
I've said that all along

I guess it's time to go qoute digging again.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 11):
I came out in favor of the surge,

With a HUGE qualifer attached which basically disclaimed any support whatsoever. That's been your modis operendi all along. As I've stated before, you hedge your bets so much that there is no way you can win or lose. You are the perfect fair weather fan when it comes to support. Oh well, time to start mining.


User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1911 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 12):
Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 11):
I came out in favor of the surge,

With a HUGE qualifer attached which basically disclaimed any support whatsoever.

Your opinion. I stated we needed to do it to salvage the situation in Iraq. That we owed a debt of honor to our troops and the Iraqi people to make the best of a bad situation. And, to the credit of General Peatrus and President Bush, it did have positive effects.

Can I make that any more clear for you?


User currently offlineAirStairs From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 487 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1892 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 8):
Again, if the leader of Iraq says he wants our troops out, we should leave.

Since when is Iraq's PM the commander of our military?



AirStairs


User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1887 times:



Quoting AirStairs (Reply 14):
Since when is Iraq's PM the commander of our military?

Since when is the President of the Untied States the head of the Iraqi goverment! If their goverment tells us to leave, we damn well better leave, unless you REALLY want to get out soldiers killed.

What kind of arrogant presumtion tells you we have the right to dictate to a soverign nation? It's THEIR NATION, not ours, and if we truly think they're soverign, we don't tell them "no" when we are asked to pack our bags.

That kind of imperialistic thinking is going to get more American soldiers killed. What absolute arrogance on your part.


User currently offlineAirStairs From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 487 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1880 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 15):
What kind of arrogant presumtion tells you we have the right to dictate to a soverign nation? It's THEIR NATION, not ours, and if we truly think they're soverign, we don't tell them "no" when we are asked to pack our bags.

Not dictate; but, carry out a mission to completion: yes. The United States plays no part in their legislative or parliamentary system and is not and could not "dictate" anything to Iraqis. They are sovereign, yes, and their government acts as such, but I would not go so far as to say independent yet.



AirStairs


User currently offlineEELonghorn From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 42 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1854 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
And, as I've said before, if the nation we occupy asks us to leave, we should do so with grace and honor.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/19/almaliki.obama/index.html

Your comments are welcome.

No surpirise to me, you should have waited for the dust to settle. Now, like Obama, CNN has had to flip flop. Does the link posted read as orginaly posted? Of course not. CNN CYA.


User currently offlinePlatypus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1833 times:



Quoting EELonghorn (Reply 17):
No surpirise to me, you should have waited for the dust to settle. Now, like Obama, CNN has had to flip flop. Does the link posted read as orginaly posted? Of course not. CNN CYA.

 laughing 

The Falconator, was not only drinking the KoolAid, but making it too!!!

 rotfl   rotfl   rotfl 

Cheerio


User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1828 times:



Quoting AirStairs (Reply 16):
Not dictate; but, carry out a mission to completion: yes.

If the leader of Iraq tells us the mission is over, IT'S OVER. End of story.

Now, again, you want to realy make us an enemy in Iraq? Then we should do what you suggest when that happens and tell him "Sorry, Charlie, but our mission isn't over. We're staying". That'll go over like a lead balloon.

When Iraq says it's over, we leave.


User currently offlinePlatypus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1826 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 19):
Quoting AirStairs (Reply 16):
Not dictate; but, carry out a mission to completion: yes.

If the leader of Iraq tells us the mission is over, IT'S OVER. End of story.

Now, again, you want to realy make us an enemy in Iraq? Then we should do what you suggest when that happens and tell him "Sorry, Charlie, but our mission isn't over. We're staying". That'll go over like a lead balloon.

When Iraq says it's over, we leave.

You're spinning it here buddy! And, ignoring what al-Maliki stated in the article you posted. No one is saying we will stay in Iraq against al-Maliki wishes. The consensus between Bush and al-Maliki is:

Conditions in Iraq would dictate the pace of the negotiations and not "an arbitrary date for withdrawal."

The reason why talks of withdrawing from Iraq can be discussed at this time, is because of the continued security on the ground, warrant such discussions, not because of Obama.Obama has no bearing on this matter. He's irrelevant! Despite what CNN, the Obama camp and you say!!! It's total BS!!! But, nice try buddy.  wink 

Cheerio


edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/19/almaliki.obama/index.html - 59k - 15 hours ago -

Iraqi PM disputes report on withdrawal plan

But a spokesman for al-Maliki said his remarks "were misunderstood, mistranslated and not conveyed accurately."

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said the possibility of troop withdrawal was based on the continuance of security improvements, echoing statements that the White House made Friday after a meeting between al-Maliki and U.S. President Bush.


User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1817 times:

Just a question; if the surge was such a success, why does the United States still have 20,000 more troops in Iraq, than prior to the surge?

User currently offlinePlatypus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1804 times:



Quoting AirCop (Reply 21):
Just a question; if the surge was such a success, why does the United States still have 20,000 more troops in Iraq, than prior to the surge?

To maintain the level of security, the surge garnered! The US will stand down, when the Iraqis stand up! Which has been the plan from day one, and that day is not too far off because of the surge. If we did as many democrats, Iraq would be in chaos, and all US efforts would have been for nothing! The US's goal for a secure Iraq has happened! Sorry such news is so difficult for you celebrate.


Way to go US military!
What they have accomplisihed in the most unstable and complicated part of the world is extraordinary!

You guys Rock!  bigthumbsup 

Cheerio


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1797 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 13):
Can I make that any more clear for you?

I think you already have. Just a small sampling of your flip flopping and qualifying statements over the past year and a half. I'd go back and get your statements before the invasion started but I believe you were operating under another screen name then and changed it after you so badly predicted the outcome of the 2004 elections? Regardless, it's clear you write to be able to distance yourself from your own comments.

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...ums/non_aviation/read.main/1594146

I'm Begining To Change My Mind About Iraq

Reply 56

Liberate them? We've enslaved them in a near Civil War! They're not liberated. They live in just as much fear now than many did under Saddam. We've helped replace one evil with another.

We took down a dicatior, and replaced him with chaos, death and destruction.

Democracy? We haven't left "democracy" there. Elections held under the watchful eye of an occupying force isn't democracy. You cannot plant democracy somewhere where they never had it, and really don't want it. There is no democracy in Iraq. There is chaos. There is warfare. There is a nation on the verge of Civil War. That isn't democracy. That's the furthest thing from it.

Again, the point of this thread is to blame others, once again, for the shortcomings of President Bush, and the military and civilian leaders working for him, who have failed our troops, and failed our nation.




At least you remembered to call him President Bush.





http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...id=1491670&searchid=1492078&s=iraq

Here's The First Cut In The Iraq War
Reply 18

We're not talking about withhoding funds from troops already in the field, but troops who's presence may be dubious, at best, in improving the situation at hand in the field. It may be too little, too late, to send more troops. That should have been done on March 19, 2003.



I cannot recall a more stirring endorsement of a policy that I've read in a long long time.



http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...id=1492330&searchid=1493529&s=iraq

Throwing Tepid Support To Mr. Bush's Iraq Strategy


OP
I do not know if it will work-I am skeptical, that, at this late date, almost 4 years after we invaded Iraq, that it may be "too little, too late", but, for the sake of the Iraqi people, the region-and for our nation, I see no other choice but to go forward


That is called a "qualifier" and it's a huge one. After hearing that your support is the last thing I would count on as a leader in any field. If we were in battle I'd be keeping an extra eye on you because I would expect you to turn tail and run.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 21):
Just a question; if the surge was such a success, why does the United States still have 20,000 more troops in Iraq, than prior to the surge?

This story should answer that question. Half way down.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...pentagon-troops-iraaq_N.htm?csp=34

BTW the JCOS chairmen agreed with the President and Iraqi Prime Minister on not setting any hard time table for withdrawl. If Sen. Obama is elected expect him to be fired shortly after for having the audacity to think of anything other than an immediate phased withdrawl with a hard date set for the last of the troops to leave Iraq.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/mullen_two_wars


User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1791 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 23):
BTW the JCOS chairmen agreed with the President and Iraqi Prime Minister on not setting any hard time table for withdrawl. If Sen. Obama is elected expect him to be fired shortly after for having the audacity to think of anything other than an immediate phased withdrawl with a hard date set for the last of the troops to leave Iraq.

Didn't every General/Admiral that voiced concerns about the handling of the conflicts in the middle east get fired by the current administration? So what would the difference be?


25 AirStairs : I understand that what you are saying is the ideal, but it is simply not the case. I am 110% for the President and PM to come to a consensus, and I t
26 FXramper : Al-Maliki said his remarks did not indicate that he was endorsing Obama over presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain. Here is the
27 Falcon84 : Again, that's simply American arrogance to think we have any right to tell a soverign nation, who WE INVADED, that when they tell us to leave, that w
28 Platypus : -Falconator It is total arrogance, more the point ignorance, for one to believe that Al-Maliki would want the US to leave prematurely, because if we d
29 Confuscius : Dick Cheney must have been pointing his hunting rifle at Maliki's head. He's a good shot you know...not at ducks but at people.[Edited 2008-07-20 14:
30 Post contains links STT757 : http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25769311/ It's obvious that the Iraqi's see the Bush Administration as desperate to solidify some kind of agreement that
31 AirStairs : They haven't told us to leave. It makes no sense that they would at this point or any time in the near future and there is no indication that the mom
32 Falcon84 : That might be an interesting idea, but it won't happen. And reading the rest of what you put in is intriguing, and it could be the reality of the sit
33 RJdxer : But I thought Sen. Obama was about change?
34 Aaron747 : Yet the Japanese foot most of the bill. You're wrong on this point sir - although it's a difficult process that an inept political organization like
35 AirStairs : A binding treaty would relinquish their right to do so as a matter of contractual obligation for that given period of time, or shoulder the penalty f
36 Confuscius : Maliki Spokesman Looks Forward to Withdrawal by 2010. Hmmm...
37 Aaron747 : Haha, that's a matter of considerable debate. Japanese right-wingers invariably are of the position that Japan already spends a lot on defense and se
38 Mir : He's the head of state of Iraq, and our UN mandate to be in Iraq is about to expire. Without that or another agreement between the US and Iraq in pla
39 TUNisia : I'm glad someone is just as confused about the puppet show as I am.
40 JM017 : Exactly. But they have done a good job of spinning it as a success. God help anyone who disagrees with that belief.
41 Aaron747 : I'm not at all confused - this nonsense is plain as day. Notice how quiet the State Department has been about Maliki's numerous buddy-chats with Iran
42 Seb146 : I heard somewhere a deal was struck just as the "surge" was taking effect, that the United States made deals with the insurgent groups to have the in
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Whats The Plan For The Holidays? posted Thu Dec 6 2007 18:58:41 by Mbj-11
Sen. Craig Pleas For Disorderly Conduct posted Tue Aug 28 2007 01:42:37 by Dtwclipper
Chavez To Unveil Plan For Indefinite Presidency posted Thu Aug 16 2007 04:29:06 by MaverickM11
My Plan For Southern U.S Rail Travel posted Mon Aug 6 2007 20:21:42 by MSYtristar
Sen. Thompson -- Mole For Nixon White House posted Sat Jul 7 2007 02:45:50 by AeroWesty
Sen. Schumer Calls For Gonzales To Step Down posted Mon Mar 12 2007 00:23:30 by EWRCabincrew
What Is Your Plan For Valentine's Day? posted Mon Feb 12 2007 15:18:18 by Texan
Article Posits Sen. Obama "Secrets" In Background posted Mon Jan 29 2007 12:17:30 by AerospaceFan
NYT Confirms: Dems Have No Plan For Iraq posted Mon Nov 13 2006 16:22:44 by Cfalk
Yes, The Dems Plan For Moving Forward..not! posted Wed Nov 8 2006 18:58:58 by RJdxer