It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FACT CHECK: Is Iraq combat really over for U.S.?

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 10:01 PM
link   

FACT CHECK: Is Iraq combat really over for U.S.?


www.google.com

WASHINGTON — Despite President Barack Obama's declaration Tuesday of an end to the combat mission in Iraq, combat almost certainly lies ahead.
And in asserting the U.S. has met its responsibilities in Iraq, the president opened the door wide to a debate about the meaning of success in the muddle that most — but not all — American troops are leaving behind.
A look at some of the statements Obama made in his Oval Office speech and how they compare with the facts:
OBAMA: "Tonight, I am announcing
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Combat is not really over for the U.S. forces in Iraq. Not just over, it's rearrangement of the chessmen for a new target. Starts with an I, ends with an N.

Obama's globalist elite handlers are revealing their agenda, their agenda the corporate media would bother covering up.

PNAC is not deviating from its intended goal one bit...just rearranging the chessmen.

Withdrawing from Iraq would pave the way for more sectarian conflict (Sunni vs. Shiite) and remote-controlled Iranian influence.



www.google.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 10:20 PM
link   
Since there are 50,000 of the most dangerous troops on Earth still in Iraq, I think the wars demise is a little premature.

Sadly I think this is truly about the mid-term elections and has little to do with the reality in Iraq. It's OK if we pull out now while they don't have a stable government, causing extra death and suffering, as long as a couple of more people vote for his Party. Whats a few bombing victims to him after all.

We made this mess, now we need to stay until the place is stable.

Near as I can tell everything he does is just campaigning. He certainly is not leading anything or anyone. A Commander and Chief must be able to make split second decisions. It took him how many months to decide about Afghanistan while the death count kept climbing?

Bush / Obama - same thing. If I remember right this was also the date Bush had planned on starting the pull out. War on a schedule, imagine that. Imagine a person who thinks that makes sense being elected President?



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


Spot on, this news flash was for the sheeple that rely on the 6 o'clock news for there daily feeding. This is far from over, but as has been said its a move of pieces from one target to another, and since there in the neighborhood .......

Anyway, when he opens his mouth, its a LIE. Bush(s) were no different, hell all of them were lairs and crooks.



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Ron Paul:

“It is deceitful to imply we will avoid hostilities with this new policy. We still have to contend with:

* the 50,000 troops carrying weapons remain in Iraq
* the 100,000 contractors that remain with more expected to go to Iraq
* the 9,000 special ops personnel trained in assassinations that remain in Iraq
* a huge embassy, bigger than the Vatican, that will remain
* Dozens of military bases that will stay
* Al Qaeda organizations that did not exist before the war
* Muqtada al Sadr, a strong nationalist who has gained much political power
* The fact that Iran benefits tremendously with the Shiites now in power in Iraq and is a close ally of al Sadr



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Combat is over, so why are troops getting combat pay? (lol)

C'mon obamao, if combat is over and the US is broke: cut the troops pay and do it now!! (loool) ..oh, one way to "wake up" (more) troops they're pawns in a needless elitist chess game.. would be cutting their pay, ok.. bad idea.

...so combat troops in a combat zone receiving combat pay are not combat troops.. lol.. war is peace, ignorance is wit.. yet in DC dumb is getting dumber... but at least it "dumb you can believe in".

Congress should wear clown suits & this calliope tune should be the new national anthem... we need to stop pretending the US isn't an ass-clown circus.. republican & democrat voters should embrace it! own it!! it's all you AND a glass of GMO milk!!

www.youtube.com...

www.stripes.com...

“Iraq (land and airspace) is included in the list of designated hostile fire or imminent danger pay areas (effective since Sep 17, 1990),” said Defense Department spokeswoman Eileen Lainez in an e-mail. “These pays are based upon a location's designation as a combat zone or direct support area. Therefore, the pays won't change Sept. 1.”



new topics

top topics
 
4

log in

join