Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: okie01
However, it's a fairly safe assumption that Obama would be looking to throw a monkey wrench in the works and seeking an opportunity for an early exit from Iraq.

Actually, I saw his election as an opportunity for the U.S. to do the exact opposite. Nobody in the leftist media in this country would ever hold him accountable for escalating the conflict over there (or anywhere else) ... which is why a jug-eared exchange student from Kenya was able to preside over thousands of drone strikes that would have drawn a sh!t-load of criticism if they were carried out by a Republican president.

There are plenty of other reasons to blame Bush. But the status of forces agreement with Iraq probably isn't one of them.

Agreed. I'm just pointing out that the terms of that agreement were established before Obama was even in office. Anyone who complains about the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq in 2011 should take it up with Bush, not Obama.

130 posted on 04/27/2015 9:07:35 PM PDT by Alberta's Child ("It doesn't work for me. I gotta have more cowbell!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child

I don’t know, you can find numerous articles where General Lloyd Austin did want more troops to remain and was in dispute with the agreement.

“”There is almost no room for security operations in that number; it will be almost purely a training mission,” this official said. The official added that a very small number of troops within that 3,000 will be dedicated to counter-terrorism efforts, but that’s not nearly what Gen. Lloyd Austin, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, wanted.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/06/sources-obama-administration-to-drop-troop-levels-in-iraq-to-3000/


134 posted on 04/27/2015 9:16:52 PM PDT by BeadCounter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies ]

To: Alberta's Child
"Anyone who complains about the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq in 2011 should take it up with Bush, not Obama."

As I stated above it may well be both their faults in varying degrees. However, Obama was CIC since 2009. He could have insisted on changes to the withdrawal if he had listened to his military advisors. I believe Bush, like most, thought after seeing the "purple fingers" that democracy would actually take hold.

I think we were all naive and some still believe Muslims actually want true liberty. I now believe like Rand Paul, many need to be ruled by authoritarianism, within reason. Hell, we're sorta allies with Saudi Arabia, one of the most intolerant and misogynistic cultures on the planet.

The leader of the free world of a country that kicked Iraq's butt would certainly have the power to re-negotiate. The problem with Obama's promise to follow Bush's withdrawal year was to specifically and publically state how many were leaving on a given date and from what region. Bush may have originally agreed to 2011, but Obama gave the radicals a future battle plan. No wonder ISIS popped up so quickly. They had common knowledge intel to formulate their strategy and recruitment.

144 posted on 04/27/2015 9:39:35 PM PDT by A Navy Vet (An Oath is Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies ]

To: Alberta's Child
I'm just pointing out that the terms of that agreement were established before Obama was even in office. Anyone who complains about the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq in 2011 should take it up with Bush, not Obama.

The terms of the agreement weren't the problem. 0bama didn't get the agreement because it was too much work to bother pursuing it.

149 posted on 04/27/2015 9:47:52 PM PDT by TigersEye (STONE COLD ZOMBIE SCOURGE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson