All Forces to be Withdrawn from Iraq

#26
#26
regardless of the timing, this has nothing at all to do with election year politics. This is about strategic thinking and leadership.
 
#28
#28
VolsNSkinsFan said:
So this is over? On 1/1/12 there will be Zero troops in Iraq? What about the green zone? The embassy? No special forces? No base out in the desert somewhere?
Click to expand...

CNN is reporting there will be a few stationed there to protect the US Embassy.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#30
#30
Judging by the recent posts on Facebook, my liberal friends appear to have been closet war hawks (touting Obama's record in the Middle East and counting the number of scalps he's brought back).

General takeaways:
1) Obama accomplished what Bush couldn't.
2) Obama has cleaned up the mess that Bush created
3) Bush sucks
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#31
#31
dreVol said:
Judging by the recent posts on Facebook, my liberal friends appear to have been closet war hawks (touting Obama's record in the Middle East and counting the number of scalps he's brought back).

General takeaways:
1) Obama accomplished what Bush couldn't.
2) Obama has cleaned up the mess that Bush created
3) Bush sucks
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

do they happen to be attending a rally right now?
 
#33
#33
dreVol said:
I believe theyre posting and Tweeting from the rallies on their Apple products.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

makes sense, but how do they square their Apple fixation with Jobs' comments to the Obama, who is clearly now to replace Jobs as some sort of liberal gateway to heaven?
 
#34
#34
BigPapaVol said:
makes sense, but how do they square their Apple fixation with Jobs' comments to the Obama, who is clearly now to replace Jobs as some sort of liberal gateway to heaven?
Click to expand...

That wasn't Steve, that was his illness.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#35
#35
volinbham said:
So far the only "accomplishment" being touted is "I did what I said I'd do". No mention that Iraq is stable or that this was done because the job was completed or reached some milestone other than a date.
Click to expand...


My criticism of that particular criticism is that it would always be true. American troops cannot "make Iraq stable." That's up to them. Unless you are willing to have us there in some sort of perpetuity, you could always say that us leaving creates the opportunity for mischief.

As far as Iran, again, that would always be true, or at least would be for the foreseeable future. We can't spot up trip wires in the form of our troops in all the countries of the Middle East, waiting on Iran to get in a skirmish with them.

If Iran attacks Iraq, we'd take action to drive them out. Our troops don;t have to be there to justify that.
 
#36
#36
Good news. I'll believe a "full" withdrawal when I see it, but this is a good sign, IMO. Respect to all the troops.
 
#37
#37
lawgator1 said:
My criticism of that particular criticism is that it would always be true. American troops cannot "make Iraq stable." That's up to them. Unless you are willing to have us there in some sort of perpetuity, you could always say that us leaving creates the opportunity for mischief.

As far as Iran, again, that would always be true, or at least would be for the foreseeable future. We can't spot up trip wires in the form of our troops in all the countries of the Middle East, waiting on Iran to get in a skirmish with them.

If Iran attacks Iraq, we'd take action to drive them out. Our troops don;t have to be there to justify that.
Click to expand...

I think you know what I mean - there was no mention that some military and/or stability objectives, milestones, changes in facts on the ground, etc. were met. It was presented as a campaign promise.

Also, I don't think the concern is Iran attacking Iraq as much as it is Iran will control Iraq via (more) direct involvement
 
#38
#38
volinbham said:
I think you know what I mean - there was no mention that some military and/or stability objectives, milestones, changes in facts on the ground, etc. were met. It was presented as a campaign promise.

Also, I don't think the concern is Iran attacking Iraq as much as it is Iran will control Iraq via (more) direct involvement
Click to expand...

Is there any doubt that this is checking the block for the campaign?
 
#42
#42
bamawriter said:
When has this president ever done something solely for the political brownie points?
Click to expand...

What about when he ended vouchers in DC sending thousands of minorities back to failing public schools? That was purely to appease the teachers union.
 
#44
#44
Hayezb said:
It's a joke we are pulling out and not finishing the job (no homo). I still support the initial decision to go over there, and too just ditch all the innocent people in Iraq we have affected just shows how low of a person Obama is. He is trying to do everything he can to help his ratings.

Iran is next, whether the American public likes it or not. I just hope we act instead of react this time.
Click to expand...

LOL...finish what job? We should have been out of Iraq already. In fact, we should have never gone in there, as W and Cheney were advised by virtually everyone with a uniform on and respected ex-cabinet members.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#46
#46
volinbham said:
I think you know what I mean - there was no mention that some military and/or stability objectives, milestones, changes in facts on the ground, etc. were met. It was presented as a campaign promise.

Also, I don't think the concern is Iran attacking Iraq as much as it is Iran will control Iraq via (more) direct involvement
Click to expand...


Well, in the sense that he ran in part on a promise of getting us out of Iraq, if his military are telling him they don;t really have any significant and well-articulated objectives left, then why not bring them home?

Seriously, other than the occasional IED attack, what was the last major skirmish in Iraq? If all we have left is basically turning into a police force -- and that sure seems what it has been for the last 18 months to 2 years, then I'm sorry but its just not a military issue anymore. And I'd be saying that if McCain had won.

There is nothing wrong with fulfilling a campaign promise if its the right policy decision. And all I'm reading here is people saying he did it only as a political option because he promised, but not one word explaining why we in fact should not go ahead and get out at this point in time.

I don't hear any reasons from the peanut gallery here as to why we need to hang around. I've not heard any criticism from the generals on it. Even the far right is expressing mixed emotions. That ought to tell you everything you need to know if they can't present a unified front.

In terms of impact on 2012, reality is that Obama has done a far better job managing the issues loosely thought of as foreign affairs. Iraq is winding down. Afghanistan is where we should have been focused all along and we surged there. Bin Laden is dead. The Arab Spring has been reasonably well managed.

The GOP would do well to remember that its the economy stupid, and just not make foreign policy a major part of their campaign.
 
#47
#47
I work with sustaining these bases, dealing with force protection on a daily basis for my job.

We still have troops in Germany, Japan, Korea, etc...there is absolutely no way we are pulling every single troop out. While it may be a lot more limited, there will still be contingency basing there. I understand what Obama is saying publicly, however, behind closed doors there will still be a small force, be it military, Department of State, or otherwise.
 
#48
#48
Will a company like Dyncorp go in there and manage the operations now?

(Question for BPV or military personnel)
 
#49
#49
lawgator1 said:
Well, in the sense that he ran in part on a promise of getting us out of Iraq, if his military are telling him they don;t really have any significant and well-articulated objectives left, then why not bring them home?

Where on earth did you get the info that the military told him this? If anything, they've indicated the opposite through their reaction to the announcement we'd be down to a few thousand boots on the ground a month or so back

Seriously, other than the occasional IED attack, what was the last major skirmish in Iraq? If all we have left is basically turning into a police force -- and that sure seems what it has been for the last 18 months to 2 years, then I'm sorry but its just not a military issue anymore. And I'd be saying that if McCain had won.

Why then not present that as rationale for ending our involvement? I doubt the scenario you present matches the facts on the ground

There is nothing wrong with fulfilling a campaign promise if its the right policy decision. And all I'm reading here is people saying he did it only as a political option because he promised, but not one word explaining why we in fact should not go ahead and get out at this point in time.

I'll only speak for myself but I see (and none was presented) any indication that it was the right thing to do from policy perspective. That's the big ??????. All that was stated was "I promised I'd do this and see I've done it".

I don't hear any reasons from the peanut gallery here as to why we need to hang around. I've not heard any criticism from the generals on it. Even the far right is expressing mixed emotions. That ought to tell you everything you need to know if they can't present a unified front.

What do you expect generals to say? A month or so when we announced withdrawing to a few thousand there was criticism and concern that we were leaving too soon. Further public disagreement just gets you canned.

In terms of impact on 2012, reality is that Obama has done a far better job managing the issues loosely thought of as foreign affairs. Iraq is winding down. Afghanistan is where we should have been focused all along and we surged there. Bin Laden is dead. The Arab Spring has been reasonably well managed.

How about Iran? How about relations with Israel? The Arab Spring? It took months of NATO airstrikes to oust Col. Q. To say Obama has managed foreign affairs better than Bush is a low bar and a stretch.

The GOP would do well to remember that its the economy stupid, and just not make foreign policy a major part of their campaign.
Click to expand...

.
 
#50
#50
2ironVol said:
Will a company like Dyncorp go in there and manage the operations now?

(Question for BPV or military personnel)
Click to expand...

There will be a lot more contracting to pick up the slack, at least with the non-military work. Is supect there may be some spec ops there under the radar as well.

While the military may be pulling out, the US isn't.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top