Total Defeat for U.S. in Iraq !!! Must read!

Your kidding me right? Higly speculative? There is no evidence what so ever that he had anything to do with it. The reason being he didnt. No one is accusing him of it.

Lets be honest, Obama is under a microscope right now. If he had anything to do with it that would have been revealed by now. especially considering the governor was recorded on a wire tap.

The FACT is that suggesting that he did have anything to do with it is higly speculative, not the other way around.

There is nothing that even suggests that he had anything to do with the Governors scandal. Besides, The Governor would gain nothing from framing Obama. The goveronor would still have to do his own time.

You keep saying that it is pure speculation that he had nothing to do with it. Well its not. Suggesting that he is in on the scandal IS speculation.

There is no evidence that suggests he is. Obama has condemned the actions of the Governor.

The fact that it is Obama's seat means NOTHING. Thats right NOTHING. It is not up to Obama to decide who takes his place. It is up to the GOVERNOR and no one else.

I dont know if there has been scandals or not during transition periods. But this scandal has do with the Governor selling Obamas old seat. Thats it. That is the most that Obama has to do with this scandal. It was his seat, but thats it!

You say that "everyone knows he was in on it and that Michelle is in on it, and you have the nerve to call what I say Higly speculative? give me a break! What you are saying is beyond speculative. There is no evidence to suggest that Obama or his wife is involved in any way shape or form.

There is no pickle for him to slide out of. he hasnt been accused of anything. He is not in any trouble for the governors actions. He wont be either. So he wont have any trouble washing his hands, seeng how they are clean as far as this is concerned.

You say that "everyone knows he was in on it and that Michelle is in on it, and you have the nerve to call what I say Higly speculative? give me a break! What you are saying is beyond speculative. There is no evidence to suggest that Obama or his wife is involved in any way shape or form.

Although in all fairness I would love to see what type of evidence you have that suggests Barrack or Michelle were involved in the Governor choosing to attept to sell Obamas seat. I have even looked myself. I saw none.

All I saw was Obama condemning the actions of the Governor and calling for him to resign.

please, show me this evidence and show me how everyone knows obama and his wife were in on it. Because I sure havent seen any evidence to match your speculation No one I have talked to or that I know personally "knows" that he is in on it.

As I have said, all evidence I have seen suggests that he has had nothing to do with the Governors scandal. Just because it his his old seat doesnt mean he is in on the attempt to sell it. you might as well blame john lennon for Charles mansons crimes because manson wanted to be a musician. There is no real connection between either scenario.

But hey, If you know something that no one else does id love to be let in on the secret.



That said Go ahead and say your last piece. Our conversation doesnt really fit into the thread. It doesnt really have to do with the illinois governor trying to sell Obamas seat. I shouldnt have replied to your post because it had too much potential to lead the thread off track. That said, go ahead and say your part because I dont want to derail the thread anymore than we already have.

peace buddy

[edit on 13-12-2008 by gimme_some_truth]

its a defeat ,as iraq war has near bankrupted the USA and now USA is forced to withdraw , and yes iraqi insurgency prevented the USA from stealing iraqi oil , by blowing up pipelines controlled by imperilaist american oil companies consistently

Just out of curiosity, what would it take for all of you to declare a victory? Just wondering since you seem to think that Iraq deciding they can handle it themselves and setting a time table for us to finally be able to leave is defeat.

Seems to me that them feeling confidant enough to take care of their own business and our troops finally coming home is a good thing. Seems to me that them having a working government and military of their own is a good thing. Seems to me that their government deciding, and ours agreeing, that they can handle anything else that happens on their own is a good thing. I just don't see any of that as being defeat. Maybe that's just me though...

The bill you are posting about will come into effect well after we have won the war. I have spoken to many people who served in Iraq who have had nothing to say but good things, regarding our near victory there and how much those people cherish our presence. You say about time? 2011 is not 'about time.' That will be almost ten years since the start of this whole crazy thing. This war is coming to an end fast, gas prices are going down, and we have a new president to try to make things for the better (holding my breath). I just am worried about my family and friends as we are now constant and easily targeted for terrorist acts now that Obama has become president. gnite

reply to post by Jenna

---

A 'victory' would consist of the U.S. leaving Iraq entirely and creating a democracy among them, ridding them of any terrorist presence or influence.

The government is starting out and they feel that they will be able to take over in 2011, so victory acheived. Very few soldiers will stay behind to help with training, not fighting, so victory acheived.

As far as the terroists. The sneaky thing about them is that they never go away. Heck, we even have domestic terroists here in the US. THEY NEVER GO AWAY. All you can do is beat them down to a manageable entity. Which we have done in Iraq, so victory acheived.

To call the situation a "Total defeat" or "absolute victory" is impossible to do without knowing the true role under which the US invaded Iraq. Only the powers that be truly know why they went in and if their aims and objectives were accomplished. Dont imagine for a second that you know, unless you want to write the reasons on paper, put them in a hat and draw one out. Personally I dont believe there is any true intention to exit Iraq, ever, that is untill the ME is totally controlled for its oil.


Respects

And you are racist because you dislike his point of view.

Wait that does not make any sense, oh neither does yours "just another thread by an American who hates America".

I want us out of Iraq and I feel that it was criminal to invade to begin with. I am ASHAMED of these actions and guess what, I LOVE the USA. I am proud to be from this country. And it is feelings like this that make it so difficult to take when your country does such pathetically corrupt things such as invade a country for really no good reason what so ever.

Racist? WTH? Try learning the meaning of the words you type before you throw them around as insults. Better yet, try getting an education before you type anything at all. In the future, it will help you have a discussion or a debate without resorting to insults and name calling the first time someone disagrees with your now more educated positions.

A very early lesson given in Education that goes beyond 6th grade, and possibly before, is the concept of CONTEXT.

Now when we look at your last post your attack upon me makes sense HOWEVER when you read my post, which quite entertainingly is directly above your last post, you will see the IMPORTANT piece of what I said that was which was left out.

Here let me show it to you to help you wade through all those words mate:



See the difference context makes?

And now to quote you:



You really could take your own advice. Seeing as how a part of my first post was dedicated to calling out your insulting the OP for being 'unAmerican" or "not a true American" because he/she sees the invasion of Iraq as a failure..

How about you cool your jets a bit and back off. I don't need insults from the likes of you because you disagree with what me and my cohort believe.

I am sorry you don't like it but the USA dropped the ball big time in Iraq and telling us we are unAmerican for seeing it is illogical and rather childish.

FYI I am currently a graduate student and IMHO I could run circles around you and your rather weak regurgitations of right wing talking points.





[edit on 14-12-2008 by Animal]

obama's war? that like the captian of the titanic getting in a lifeboat and saying to his commander, "the ship's your problem now"

scandal in chicago for obama? that's why the governor called obama a "f--ker, and his transition team "mother-f--kers....yeah...right...too much FOX NEWS for you. oh... and maybe...for a real far-fetched conspirecy...maybe the governor had alot of money deposited into a swiss bank account by right wingers. i mean he wanted to make money on the senate seat, why wouldn't he concoct this for money.

Let me remind you who actually threw the insults (racism) - you.



We have 2 exposes here: A student, with little or no real-life experience. Someday you will learn that life experience trumps grad school experience every time. BTW, not a great advertisement for whatever grad school you are attending. And a liberal elitist. The M. O. is there for all to see. Insults before logic, all the while way too proud of themselves.

Back to the thread, as you are entitled to your opinions on this subject - and they are only your opinions - so am I. My point is that threads such as this serve little purpose, other than to give our 5th column America-haters yet another venue. There is nothing new being said here. Do a search, and you will see the same issues stated here ad nauseum.

So, if you have anything to be discussed without insults and name calling, please bring it on.

We were in debt before the war, and we were always going to be in debt after the war, but it wasn't the war that is pushing the US economy over the edge, that was done right here on US soil.

Thank Wall Street for that!

The war wouldn't have bankrupted the US.

Corporate greed and bailouts did though!

[edit on 12/14/2008 by Keyhole]

Now, how do you figure that?

The Iraqi government wants the US to leave, The Saddam regime has been replaced, and the NEW government would like US to leave!

Are there any more goals militarily that we should finish?

Different sects of the country are fighting, this is a hatred of each other that a US presence in Iraq won't ever change, they need to work that out themselves!

The US isn't leaving Iraq the way we left Vietnam, the US left Vietnam while two sovereign countries were still fighting, and also, left knowing full well that South Vietnam was going to lose and become a communist country once the US military left.

Is the Iraqi government going to be overthrown once US troops are withdrawn?

I don't see ANY signs that that will happen.

I do believe all the goals set for the US military have all been met now. Now are troops are, more or less, just policing the country, that is not what our military was sent there to do!



The Saddam regime is gone and another system of government set up in its place. The new government thinks that they can handle things now and would like to see the US military start withdrawing.

What other goals were set for the US military?

We've already won in Iraq, what is there left for the US military to do there?

We didn't send our troops there to police the streets and keep the occasional fighting/bickering between the different sects in Iraq from fighting. IF that was the US military's mission, then this WOULD probably end up like Vietnam and we WOULD lose, but that wasn't the US military's mission!

In my eyes it's "Mission Accomplished Troops", come on home, even the Iraqi government feels like their mission has been accomplished!

Good job troops!

'Endgame' for US mission in Iraq


U.S. Forces on Track to Be out of Iraqi Cities by Summer, General Says


[edit on 12/14/2008 by Keyhole]

The human toll in Iraq, on both sides, has been heartbreaking.

Now the financial cost to the USA... estimates are somewhere from $2 trillion to $4 trillion.

Was it worth it?

Couldn't Saddam's regime have been overthrown by cheaper means?

My theory is that W and his cronies truly believed that a) war is good for the economy by acting as an engine of profits for Halliburton, defense contractors, etc (trickle down economics) and b) asserting control in the region would produce control of more oil resources, and c) having permanent forward military bases in Iraq would mean a stronger strategic military position opposing China & Russia if hostilities were to break out with those major players' interests vis a vis other pawn countries in the region (also, Iraq makes a good forward base if Israel goes to full on war with any Arab country in the hood there).

reply to post by Keyhole

---

the iraq war costed you 3.5 trillion$ and with these deficits , it was the last straw on the camel's back, say good bye , the american empire is collapsing

To put things more precisely the conflict in Iraq is coming to a close, but the "war on terror" still remains. Victory against terror = laughable.
the U.S. cannot win nor lose against a noun.

lmao yea total defeat is called leaving the country. topic maker do you wake up this stupid or are you being trained by gamergal?


total Defeat = Japan and Germany in WWII

Victory= finished with a job and leaving a country/ total annihilation/



this is why we did not lose Vietnam. #1 because war was never declared, and #2 because we just left because of the popularity AGAINST the war.