handyman2
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 23:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,087
|
Post by handyman2 on Jul 7, 2011 20:05:41 GMT -5
Most likely they are leaving them there to deter Iran from over running the place which Iran knows Iraq is no longer in a position to defend it's self.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,513
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 7, 2011 22:22:14 GMT -5
Most likely they are leaving them there to deter Iran from over running the place which Iran knows Iraq is no longer in a position to defend it's self. On November 17, 2008, after months of negotiations, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker and Iraq Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari signed two documents: (1) the Strategic Framework Agreement for a Relationship of Friendship and Cooperation between the United States and the Republic of Iraq, and (2) the Agreement Between the United States of America and Republic of Iraq On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq. ... the agreement requires the removal of all U.S. forces no later than December 31, 2011, ... www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R40011.pdf Maybe the Iraqi people should have been doing something these past three years to be ready for the day they would have to defend themselves. After all, it is their country to defend or lose.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 8, 2011 16:22:13 GMT -5
...
I question those here who are wanting this to happen , all troops out, why you would want what the Iranians would want..they are not our friends,all sides, libs and cons, know and agree on this..and if they want something this badly, it can't be good for our interests.
Personally, if we aren't wanted and not asked to stay, I would wonder if we shouldn't be talking to the Kurds in the north, ... It would be "good for our interests" to have troops in Iran as well as Iraq. It would be "good for our interests" to have troops in North Korea. It would be "good for our interests" to have troops in many more places around the world than we already have them. It would great to never have the sun set on the "American Empire". Is that the direction we should be going in 2011 and beyond? As far as the Kurd issue raised: How would we feel about a foreign country negotiating with one state to allow for something that our federal government had said no to? Sounds like a dangerous game to me. It would never happen, of course, billis..just something I threw in as a thought, but no it would not be a possibility... and as far as all those other options you threw out..I am talking about possibe scenario that might be in our interests..a staying a bit longer if invited, it would , IMHO, if invited, be good for all parties , the Iraqui's, Malicki, his position , and our own and for the region.. we are there now, bases are there..a reason to be there..for mutual interests..because iran wants us gone, to me, that is a reason to not go..if INVITED to stay..only way to be able to keep a presence there.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 8, 2011 16:36:46 GMT -5
"and a member of congress from San Diego CA wants to hold hearing to learn why Iraq with all of their billions in Oil revenue has not repaid our country for the billions we gave them since 2003 to rebuild their country...
--------------------------------------------
Is the same member of Congress who was in Iraq and was asked to leave, the whole group of them, because they brought this up " not why they were there by the way.
The consensus of many Iraqi's is that we, the USA, owe them billions for destroying their infrastructure in the wars, and after the wars, the putting up of the walls surrounding neighborhoods , because of all the sectarian violence for one, they want us to pay for removing those barricades and so much more.
I am getting the feeling of many here they are looking at the Iraqi's as our sworn enemies, belonging to the other side already, what ever the other side is and have to ask why? Do we have that many friends in this part of the world that we can afford to piss off another one? The Saud's are not so favorable to us right now, and along with them I take it they are influencing the smaller States in the area..here in Iraq we have the only other , next to Israel, democratically elected, as wishy, washy as it is, but there is a Parliament, political parties, country in the middle east and so many here seem to want to throw them under the bus and I don't understand the reasoning.
That they, people, have a non love for us..while we may feel we are their saviors, many of them feel anything but..wem invaded them, the reason supposedly for was never there, we meddled in their politics, we allowed their treasures to be vandalized, their infrastructure was destroyed, their children did die because of our embargo, yes there were reasons for but in their minds all this was caused by us and our decisions, and many of those decisions admitted by us were wrong.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 8, 2011 16:51:30 GMT -5
"Maybe the Iraqi people should have been doing something these past three years to be ready for the day they would have to defend themselves. After all, it is their country to defend or lose." -------------------------------------------
It seems they have, it took a while and it is still a work in progress..they first had to try and get their political house in order, they did in a way, yet it is not perfect.
Neither is our system, just pick up the paper, just read the daily BS happenings, both parties, yet here it is all of that, the sharing of their revenue who benefits plus over 200 years being ruled by a minority sect were these secterian differences, Shia, Sunni, and throw in the Kurds and any other group, here it means a big deal, so no they don't have it all together yet..understandable, but trying to..so for us, if invited , to stay a while longer, again if invited, it would be a good thing..not just for them , for us too as much as for them.
To think only of the $ involved , if we do that then it is time to get up on the stage and admit to the world, we are giving up our leadership position, we are now a "every one else", with the privilidges and responsibility of a "every one else, " our days of leadership is over, let others take the lead and direct us..we are retreating from the world leadership stage..
Is this what you want for your children , grand children , your country..if so , then say so, but understand there is a price to pay for being a "every one else "' and you just might not like the price...and no, our 1500 Nucs and delivery vehickles will not keep us in that position of leadership..
I personally am not ready to do that..possible you and others here are..
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 9, 2011 9:18:18 GMT -5
Most likely they are leaving them there to deter Iran from over running the place which Iran knows Iraq is no longer in a position to defend it's self. handyman2 FYI....we were debating this same subject on a USMC message board yesterday, and a retired Colonel added his comments which were; " Hey guys I suggest you all quit trying to second guess our Commander in Chief about the drawdown and troop strength in Iraq in 2012 -2014, the military in Iraq will take their orders from him and do what he orders, end of story"...
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,513
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 9, 2011 9:40:22 GMT -5
Most likely they are leaving them there to deter Iran from over running the place which Iran knows Iraq is no longer in a position to defend it's self. handyman2 FYI....we were debating this same subject on a USMC message board yesterday, and a retired Colonel added his comments which were; " Hey guys I suggest you all quit trying to second guess our Commander in Chief about the drawdown and troop strength in Iraq in 2012 -2014, the military in Iraq will take their orders from him and do what he orders, end of story"... The day that the military does not, in their official capacity, accept the orders of the Commander in Chief is the day the United States ceases to exist. The day that Americans, including our military outside of their official capacity, do not debate ad nauseam the actions of the Commander in Chief is also the day the United States ceases to exist. I don't see either happening for a very long time. Our military is much too professional and Americans are too independent for it to happen.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 9, 2011 9:44:17 GMT -5
handyman2 FYI....we were debating this same subject on a USMC message board yesterday, and a retired Colonel added his comments which were; " Hey guys I suggest you all quit trying to second guess our Commander in Chief about the drawdown and troop strength in Iraq in 2012 -2014, the military in Iraq will take their orders from him and do what he orders, end of story"... The day that the military does not, in their official capacity, accept the orders of the Commander in Chief is the day the United States ceases to exist. The day that Americans, including our military outside of their official capacity, do not debate ad nauseam the actions of the Commander in Chief is also the day the United States ceases to exist. I don't see either happening for a very long time. Our military is much too professional and Americans are too independent for it to happen. Or you could also say those outside the miltary debating the Commander in Chief's decisions are for the most part Biased, Clueless or Misinformed..take your pick since you liked to pick and choose, I guess??
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 9, 2011 10:28:30 GMT -5
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,513
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 9, 2011 10:30:04 GMT -5
... Or you could also say those outside the miltary debating the Commander in Chief's decisions are for the most part Biased, Clueless or Misinformed... The Eternal Truths an eschatological laundry list -- a partial register of the 927 (or was it 928?) eternal truths by Sheldon Kopp, author of GURU ... 32. We must live within the ambiguity of partial freedom, partial power and partial knowledge. 33. All important decisions must be made on the basis of insufficient data. ...
"(D)ecisions" and opinions. This would be my choice of "truth". This would be true of both members of the military and civilians (including even the POTUS).
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 9, 2011 11:27:14 GMT -5
[ There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation, the rest of them have to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves.......Will Rogers
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,513
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 9, 2011 11:45:39 GMT -5
[ There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation, the rest of them have to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves.......Will Rogers That had to have been painful. ;D
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 9, 2011 11:52:04 GMT -5
|
|
handyman2
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 23:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,087
|
Post by handyman2 on Jul 9, 2011 12:56:02 GMT -5
P.I. Funny you should bring up the peeing on an electric fence. It brings back childhood memories. My friends and I all country boys had a cousin from the city come visit. We were out in a pasture and he said he had to pee. So being obliging we said go over and pee on that fence post, knowing that the fence was electrified. The howl could be heard a mile away. Needless to say we got some solid licks from the belt but it was worth every lick. ;D
|
|
❤ mollymouser ❤
Senior Associate
Sarcasm is my Superpower
Crazy Cat Lady
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 16:09:58 GMT -5
Posts: 12,858
Today's Mood: Gen X ... so I'm sarcastic and annoyed
Location: Central California
Favorite Drink: Diet Mountain Dew
|
Post by ❤ mollymouser ❤ on Jul 9, 2011 23:14:00 GMT -5
<--- has no childhood peeing stories to share
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 9, 2011 23:20:28 GMT -5
<--- has no intention of sharing my childhood peeing stories...
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 11, 2011 8:01:09 GMT -5
Leon Panetta to press Iraq for decision on pullout Craig Whitlock,Ed O'Keefe, Washington Post Monday, July 11, 2011 Baghdad -- New Pentagon chief Leon Panetta made his first visit to Iraq as defense secretary Sunday to address several flareups in a fading war, including a rash of attacks on U.S. troops and continued indecision about whether the United States will completely withdraw its forces by the end of the year. Unlike some Obama administration officials, who have made clear that they would like the Iraqi government to invite thousands of U.S. troops to stay in the country, Panetta demurred when asked if he favored the idea but said he would press Iraqi leaders to make up their minds. "I'll encourage them to make a decision so that we know where we're going," he told reporters traveling with him on a tour of war zones in Afghanistan and Iraq. "If they do make a request, we ought to seriously consider it." Obama has pledged in an agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw the remaining 46,000 U.S. troops in the country by Dec. 31. sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/11/MNU01K8R0G.DTLThis article appeared on page A - 2 of the San Francisco Chronicle
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 11, 2011 8:06:11 GMT -5
According to our military blogs the Iraqi Army should be about ready to defend their own country. However very few are volunteering to serve. But then again why should they, our troops are doing it for them without much gratitude or thanx from the al Maliki government in Baghdad who is preoccupied with too much in fighting and corruption.
P.I.( I was anti-Iraq way before it was cool)
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,513
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 11, 2011 8:11:51 GMT -5
... P.I.( I was anti-Iraq way before it was cool) I thought I saw you at one of the marches protesting the proposed invasion.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 11, 2011 8:20:26 GMT -5
... P.I.( I was anti-Iraq way before it was cool) I thought I saw you at one of the marches protesting the proposed invasion. No it was after Bush's so called "Major Combat Ops" speech on the USS Abraham Lincoln in 2003... if you recall I reposted on the MSN P&M Message Board what was really going on in Baghdad which was far differenct than the spin by Bush..
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,513
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 11, 2011 8:28:16 GMT -5
I thought I saw you at one of the marches protesting the proposed invasion. No it was after Bush's so called "Major Combat Ops" speech on the USS Abraham Lincoln in 2003... if you recall I reposted on the MSN P&M Message Board what was really going on in Baghdad which was far differenct than the spin by Bush.. If that is true (sorry I don't personally remember), I must inform you of the fact that you only qualify for, "I was anti-Iraq as it was starting to be cool" status. You had to have actively protested against the invasion to qualify for, "I was anti-Iraq way before it was cool" status.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Jul 11, 2011 8:35:04 GMT -5
No it was after Bush's so called "Major Combat Ops" speech on the USS Abraham Lincoln in 2003... if you recall I reposted on the MSN P&M Message Board what was really going on in Baghdad which was far differenct than the spin by Bush.. If that is true (sorry I don't personally remember), I must inform you of the fact that you only qualify for, "I was anti-Iraq as it was starting to be cool" status. You had to have actively protested against the invasion to qualify for, "I was anti-Iraq way before it was cool" status. You are right and must admit I was one of many that believed the Bush Administration that Saddam Hussein had WMD in 2002 and we had to take him out.. But when General Shinseki spoke about about the troops really needed I began to doubt what Rummy was selling in 2003. Btw Rummy eased General Shinseki out the rear door of the Pentagon.
|
|