Survivalist Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I cannot believe that no news has spelled it out that President Obama is basically just following the "Status of Forces Agreement" signed by President Bush in 2008. (remember the shoe throwing incident)

CBS comes close saying in is on schedule and in paragraph 2 that there is an agreement from 2008. No one in mentioning that THIS CURRENT PRESIDENT has made no decision.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.–Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement
 

·
RIP America 1776-2012
Joined
·
1,953 Posts
And all those braindead, libtard, idiots wanted change.... :rolleyes:

I guess the last laugh will be by those of us who knew what the illegal alien, muslum, communist was about................IF there's anything left to laugh over. :( :mad: :taped:


________________________

III ~ Peaceful, but prepared.

"Obama, the skid-mark in the underwear of American history."
- J.R.L. -
 

·
aka Mental Avenger
Joined
·
5,455 Posts
I cannot believe that no news has spelled it out that President Obama is basically just following the "Status of Forces Agreement" signed by President Bush in 2008. (remember the shoe throwing incident)
I noticed that. Didn’t O’bama say he was fulfilling a campaign promise he made?
 

·
aka Mental Avenger
Joined
·
5,455 Posts
Dear Iraq.

Sorry we broke your country. Here is some glue.
Actually, Iraq is in better condition than when we first went there, in spite of the fact that most of the damage was done by terrorists and insurgents. We have spent billions of dollars rebuilding damaged infrastructure, and building infrastructure that never was there. The news was great at reporting combat incidents and bombings, but rarely reported the great works projects we did there.
 

·
Unreconstructed
Joined
·
30 Posts
What irritates me is them saying "we are pulling out all 'combat' troops" All they have done is change the name of some of the Brigate Combat teams to Advise and Assist Brigades. It is the same troops with the same gear running the same COMBAT missions. The names have been changed so people who don't know any better will go "hey they are doing something different" WTF??!!??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,808 Posts
I cannot believe that no news has spelled it out that President Obama is basically just following the "Status of Forces Agreement" signed by President Bush in 2008. (remember the shoe throwing incident)

CBS comes close saying in is on schedule and in paragraph 2 that there is an agreement from 2008. No one in mentioning that THIS CURRENT PRESIDENT has made no decision
Of course no one from the drive by media has mentioned this little minor factoid, telling the truth would screw up the story line and all of the fawning that goes with it not to mention political posturing for the left.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackkitty
Dear Iraq.

Sorry we broke your country. Here is some glue.

Actually, Iraq is in better condition than when we first went there, in spite of the fact that most of the damage was done by terrorists and insurgents. We have spent billions of dollars rebuilding damaged infrastructure, and building infrastructure that never was there. The news was great at reporting combat incidents and bombings, but rarely reported the great works projects we did there
Like the bumper sticker reads..."if ignorance is bliss you must be one happy liberal". Libs could have been there and seen it with their own eyes,before and after the war, and they would still continue to live in denial of the facts. Its not perfect, there is still sectarian violence as well as some insurgent activity still but its a lot better than the way we found it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,150 Posts
I cannot believe that no news has spelled it out that President Obama is basically just following the "Status of Forces Agreement" signed by President Bush in 2008. (remember the shoe throwing incident)

CBS comes close saying in is on schedule and in paragraph 2 that there is an agreement from 2008. No one in mentioning that THIS CURRENT PRESIDENT has made no decision.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.–Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement

likely you will not either... the hard leaners to the lefy and some dems still want the toad to get some credit... and you will not get very many of the MSM doing or saying a word against this pile of poop... he has to have something to make him look good.... because right now, if he were on fire I would let him burn...
 

·
Left the building
Joined
·
9,363 Posts
likely you will not either... the hard leaners to the lefy and some dems still want the toad to get some credit... and you will not get very many of the MSM doing or saying a word against this pile of poop... he has to have something to make him look good.... because right now, if he were on fire I would let him burn...
If he were on fire, I wouldn't pee on him with your...............oh never mind.....I guess just saying I don't care for the guy will have to suffice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
What irritates me is them saying "we are pulling out all 'combat' troops" All they have done is change the name of some of the Brigate Combat teams to Advise and Assist Brigades. It is the same troops with the same gear running the same COMBAT missions. The names have been changed so people who don't know any better will go "hey they are doing something different" WTF??!!??

In one article I read it came very close to saying this, except that from now on "no troops will be going on combat missions without having Iraqi troops in tow." So the "non combat troops" will still be going on combat missions, but now they will have to be watching out for the Iraqi troops that are with them to make sure they don't get hurt. Just a whole bunch of double talk that the majority in our country can't seem to grasp or see through.
 

·
Unreconstructed
Joined
·
30 Posts
In one article I read it came very close to saying this, except that from now on "no troops will be going on combat missions without having Iraqi troops in tow." So the "non combat troops" will still be going on combat missions, but now they will have to be watching out for the Iraqi troops that are with them to make sure they don't get hurt. Just a whole bunch of double talk that the majority in our country can't seem to grasp or see through.
These "non combat troops" are the same infantry and other combat mos troops that were there a week ago, just under a different title. We have had Iraqi troops going on missions with our troops for the last couple years. Nothing has changed they just want us to think it has. The only thing that has the possibility of happening is sending troops that are not trained for "combat" missions into bad situations and getting them killed. Fact is some troops are trained to stay in the rear. Not saying anything bad about them they just aren't trained for the same things others are.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top