52,000

Onceler said:
I need a little more than "oh, c'mon" to accept an allegation that a CIC whose focus is 100% economy has some sort of hidden Iraq agenda that he needs to hide from the public to try to boost his poll #'s. It doesn't really add up.
Click to expand...
LOL Considering your absolutely blind partisan nature, it would take Obama personally shooting you in the face for you to question him.

I'm sure it doesn't make sense. After all, Obama is the paragon of absolute virtue in your little deluded universe. A president taking a major hit on the economy wouldn't give a shit about breaking his promise about Iraq as a complicating factor would he? He couldn't POSSIBLY be motivated to hide the fact that things aren't as peaceable as needed for s genuine withdrawal. There is no way he could be motivated to gloss over the high probability that combat operations are still needed to keep the whole thing from blowing up again like Afghanistan did when we relaxed there. Nothing at ALL to hide, because he is 100% focused on the economy.

All I can say is you're lucky Obama isn't selling bridges and swamp land.
 
Cypress said:
I'm positive his campaign pledge explicitly was to remove american troops from day to day combat roles, but to leave substantial numbers of troops there on bases in some sort of support role. Is this supposed to be a shock?

I'm more outraged that it took 19 months, or whatever, to remove them instead of the 16 months he promised.

Clearly, The Barack Hussein Obama lied.
Click to expand...
The shock is in the numbers. Number of troops, and types of units. It does not take 52,000 troops with Striker combat teams to form a "support" force. The numbers and types of units remaining in place clearly indicate that independent (ie: no Iraqi units around to "advise") combat operations will continue to be a regular part of our continued presence there. Obama knows it, the Iraqi government knows it, the military analysts of other countries know it and are undoubtedly advising their governments. The only ones who don't know it are the blind brain dead Obama worshipers.
 
Last edited:
Onceler said:
Good Luck also indicated that he has no proof until events prove him right. You're pretty quick to make a broad accusation of a clandestine war, during the media age, that somehow Obama needs to wage.

That is now "reality" to you. It's amazing the lengths you can go to in order to convince yourself of something.

But no - we're all delusional, and "hacks"....
Click to expand...
This is the second time you've referred to a "clandestine" war. No one has said or implied such. What we said is things will go on as before, but under a different name so as to please the partisan twits.
 
Good Luck said:
The shock is in the numbers. Number of troops, and types of units. It does not take 52,000 troops with Striker combat teams to form a "support" force. .....
Click to expand...

wow, you're "shocked" and angry about something the Obama did? Will wonders never cease!

Here's a tip: anyone following the 2008 Democratic primaries - in particular democratic voters - are bound to be more familiar with what the candidates promised, than are the faithful readers of MattDrudge, Ron Paul, or the CATO insitute.

January 2008: Obama's Iraq Plan Would Leave Tens of Thousands of American Troops in Iraq

One day before the Iowa caucuses, John Edwards has become the first major presidential candidate to favor withdrawing all American troops, including advisers, from Iraq, doing so in response to queries from a leading military correspondent, the New York Times' Michael Gordon.

The positions taken by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, while favoring de-escalation, would leave tens of thousands of American advisers, special forces and substantial back-up troops in Iraq for five years, at least until 2013.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-hayden/edwards-first-major-candi_b_79202.html
Click to expand...


There you have it folks.

This is what Obama campaigned on. No one is "shocked" who actually was informed about the Democratic primaries, and Democratic campaign promises.

I can only surmise that your "shock" is due to lack of knowledge about what Democratic candidates promised, or its because you read something on Drudge and accepted it at face value.

Personally, I'm totally unshocked. Because I knew this is exactly what Obama was planning. And, at that time during the primaries I was supporting Edwards - before I knew what a dick he was - , in part, because he wanted to withdraw ALL american troops. I didn't like Obama's or H. Clinton's plan to leave troops in the country.


But carry on with the manufactured, faux-shock if you must. No worries, mate!
 
Last edited:
Onceler said:
Good Luck also indicated that he has no proof until events prove him right. You're pretty quick to make a broad accusation of a clandestine war, during the media age, that somehow Obama needs to wage.

That is now "reality" to you. It's amazing the lengths you can go to in order to convince yourself of something.

But no - we're all delusional, and "hacks"....
Click to expand...

and you bitch about me distorting your words? good lord, its nothing but projection. i never said that, you're outright lying, link up or admit you lied......you can leave combat brigades in place and not have a clandestine war....

my ONLY issue is the claim that the "last" combat brigades are home....that is false, obama's admin claimed that and i showed that two combat aviation brigades are staying and that others have simply be renamed "advisors"

i can't believe how dense you are, no wonder you spin madly when wrong, you probably don't even see how you're wrong
 
Good Luck said:
LOL Considering your absolutely blind partisan nature, it would take Obama personally shooting you in the face for you to question him.

I'm sure it doesn't make sense. After all, Obama is the paragon of absolute virtue in your little deluded universe. A president taking a major hit on the economy wouldn't give a shit about breaking his promise about Iraq as a complicating factor would he? He couldn't POSSIBLY be motivated to hide the fact that things aren't as peaceable as needed for s genuine withdrawal. There is no way he could be motivated to gloss over the high probability that combat operations are still needed to keep the whole thing from blowing up again like Afghanistan did when we relaxed there. Nothing at ALL to hide, because he is 100% focused on the economy.

All I can say is you're lucky Obama isn't selling bridges and swamp land.
Click to expand...

That's not a real answer. I'm not surprised -at all - but that's not a real answer.

All you really have is "c'mon!"

That's a shame.
 
Good Luck said:
This is the second time you've referred to a "clandestine" war. No one has said or implied such. What we said is things will go on as before, but under a different name so as to please the partisan twits.
Click to expand...

Sorry if you don't like the term.

You & Yurt seem to want it both ways. I'll ask you the same thing I asked him...what point are you trying to make exactly? Oh, Obama is lying about an end to combat ops...but we're not saying clandestine war!

You guys need to get your stories straight. Either you think something secretive is going on, or you don't.

You're a fool, Good Luck. I thought I might actually be able to engage you in a somewhat serious chat about this, but you revert to your "blind partisan" BS like it's an old pacifier.
 
Onceler said:
Sorry if you don't like the term.

You & Yurt seem to want it both ways. I'll ask you the same thing I asked him...what point are you trying to make exactly? Oh, Obama is lying about an end to combat ops...but we're not saying clandestine war!

You guys need to get your stories straight. Either you think something secretive is going on, or you don't.

You're a fool, Good Luck. I thought I might actually be able to engage you in a somewhat serious chat about this, but you revert to your "blind partisan" BS like it's an old pacifier.
Click to expand...

translation:

yurt and good luck NEVER said clandestine war, i made it up, but since i am incapable of ever admitting i'm wrong, i'll post this nonsense
 
Yurt said:
translation:

yurt and good luck NEVER said clandestine war, i made it up, but since i am incapable of ever admitting i'm wrong, i'll post this nonsense
Click to expand...

Then answer the question instead of sprinting away.

What exactly are you trying to claim, then? As I said much earlier in this thread, it's pretty dumb to think that the 50,000 left aren't trained soldiers (aka "combat troops"). I'm still amazed you thought these were somehow "untrained" personnel.

What is their mission, Yurt? If you're not trying to claim clandestine war, or clandestine "combat ops" if that works better for you...what exactly are you trying to say?
 
Onceler said:
Then answer the question instead of sprinting away.

What exactly are you trying to claim, then? As I said much earlier in this thread, it's pretty dumb to think that the 50,000 left aren't trained soldiers (aka "combat troops"). I'm still amazed you thought these were somehow "untrained" personnel.

What is their mission, Yurt? If you're not trying to claim clandestine war, or clandestine "combat ops" if that works better for you...what exactly are you trying to say?
Click to expand...

asked and answered....sheesh
 
Yurt said:
are you really this stupid? obama can call them whatever kind of troops he wants....he is the CIC....if you think no true combat troops are there to protect the so called 50,000 non combats troops, you're a moron
Click to expand...

And lookie here - an allegation of a secret # of troops above & beyond the 50,000 reported (to "protect" all of those untrained soldiers we're leaving).

Nope - nothing clandestine there...
 
Onceler said:
And lookie here - an allegation of a secret # of troops above & beyond the 50,000 reported (to "protect" all of those untrained soldiers we're leaving).

Nope - nothing clandestine there...
Click to expand...

you are such a fucking moron

at the time it was said 50,000 troops would remain, was using the GENERAL number, i wasn't aware it was an EXACT number...now its 300 less....it wasn't clandestine at all...seriously, you are in way over your head...i never said they would be secret....ever...and my article in the other thread proves they are NOT secret....

your desperation and weak twisting of my words shows your utter failure in this topic
 
Yurt said:
you are such a fucking moron

at the time it was said 50,000 troops would remain...now its 300 less....it wasn't clandestine at all...seriously, you are in way over your head...i never said they would be secret....ever...and my article in the other thread proves they are NOT secret....

your desperation and weak twisting of my words shows your utter failure in this topic
Click to expand...

Sure.

I see you ignored the other comment I had to dig up.
 
Yurt said:
that is NOT clandestine war you tool....combat troops can engage the enemy without declaring war....

lawd you are stupid
Click to expand...

Like I said, we can change it to "clandestine combat ops" if you'd like.

You're doing your pretzel thing again.
 
Onceler said:
Sure.

I see you ignored the other comment I had to dig up.
Click to expand...

more lies...i just responded to it....sorry, i don't wait hand on foot for you you pissy little boy

and too funny how you have no actual response except to lie i ignored your other stupid post....which clearly shows i never said anything about clandestine war...

fool
 
Yurt said:
so its just words....and the troops still there can and will engage in the same activities
Click to expand...

Did I really have to dig this up again?

You did not respond to this one. The implication - which you're trying to sprint from now - is pretty crystal clear.
 
Yurt said:
now you're changing the goal posts....lmao

when onceler gets proven wrong, he then changes what he earlier claimed
Click to expand...

How am I changing the goal posts?

The idea is that you are trying to imply that Obama is having the troops engage in clandestine activities, one way or another. We never "declared war" in Iraq to begin with, so no use hiding behind that now.

I know you'd like to hide behind something, but that ain't flying...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top