RE: Iraq

RE: Iraq (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

thompsonx -> RE: Iraq (6/13/2014 11:38:02 AM)
ORIGINAL: truckinslave We Americans see ourselves as Americans first, What sort of moron actually believes that they speak for more than 300 million people? then as Christians or Jews or Dimocrats or firemen or whatever. We tend to think first of our nationality. That is not, generally, how Muslims see themselves. That would be your ignorant unsubstantiated peurile opinion. Their primary self-identification is as Muslim. I use "them" as do they. Which is to say you got caught lying and now are trying to get your feet out of your mouth.

thompsonx -> RE: Iraq (6/13/2014 11:40:18 AM)
ORIGINAL: truckinslave "Thank you, Lord; I am not the worst!!! I am not. I am not! I am not! NOT!!! NOT!!!! You can say that till there is 40 feet of snow in furnace creek but the fact remains that you are.

truckinslave -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 2:09:40 PM)
quote: we're gonna be in Iraq and Afghanistan for decades. I don't think our military presence there will increase ay time soon. 0bama0 will watch Iraq (and Libya and/or Egypt, however the chips may fall) go to the terrorists. The Dimmest will blame Bush, and the world will slide that much closer to The Final Crusade. 0bama0 never has had a knee-jerk reaction that saw him fail to buckle in the direction of Mecca.

truckinslave -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 2:17:26 PM)
quote: we're gonna be in Iraq and Afghanistan for decades. I think we'll give them time to come back over here before we do anything else. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (no, I did not make that shiite up) is the leader of ISIS. As he was released (by 0bama0, shades of Bergdahl) from an American detention center in... 2009?..., guess what his last words were to the American CO? "See you in New York" Which is the only bright spot in this whole fucking scenario. When they come back, they'll target cities, which means Dim strongholds, which means they'll be killing those who have apologized for them for more than a decade. Irony is a motherfucker. We'll have to clean it up- butwe have the means and the training to do so. "Country boy can survive" is more than just a (great classic American) song

Musicmystery -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 3:24:47 PM)
You misunderstand. We are there intentionally. We aren't leaving. The powers that be don't actually want to leave--the neo-cons got that one right, knowing if they forced it, it would continue. Appearance of gradually leaving, yes. But we're camped out there indefinitely. Regardless of administration.

truckinslave -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 3:31:35 PM)
quote: Appearance of gradually leaving, yes. But we're camped out there indefinitely. Well, we have the appearance of a military presence in (at least practically; maybe actually) every nation on earth- US Embassies are guarded by US Marines. But- how many combat troops did we leave in Iraq?

Musicmystery -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 3:42:41 PM)
Dance, you silly man, dance. Clearly, I'm not talking about embassies here. On his disastrous 2008 Presidential bid, amid all the ridiculous and desperate shoot-from-the-hip crap "straight-talk express" McCain said, two things were spot on: 1) the jobs in Detroit are not coming back 2) we'll be in Iraq/Afghanistan for decades If he'd had the balls to continue to tell the truth (vs. the clown act of bringing on Palin), that McCain might have been elected. In the meantime, we're playing the game of removing troops, but hiring private armies in their stead. http://www.npr.org/2011/12/27/144198497/no-u-s-troops-but-an-army-of-contractors-in-iraq

truckinslave -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 3:49:51 PM)
You're the one dancing. And around a simple question, too. The article cited is from 2011. So the simple question remains. How many combat troops do we have in Iran? (0bama0 wanted them out, the liberal ship of fools upon which he sails wanted them out......)

Musicmystery -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 4:02:46 PM)
You can keep trying to play the liberal Obama card, but if you take a few moments to stop dancing, you'll see you are in permanent knee jerk reaction. If you bother to read, you'll note I'm clearly not buying the Obama talking points on this. Or the Republican ones either, for that matter. I already linked to your answer. And expanded on it. It hasn't shrunk. Any ideas why the 38th largest country needs the biggest US embassy in the world? Guess what -- it's not because we have a surplus of troops. And guess what . . . we're still fighting this war. IF you bother to read, you'll see we're talking 2014 here. http://www.talkingproud.us/IraqWithdrawal/IraqWithdrawal.html

truckinslave -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 4:23:10 PM)
Nice move, but: no. I am not going to read a 10 or 20 thousand word blog I never heard of, from a source I know not, only to find out that it doesn't answer the simple question either. How many fucking combat troops do we have in Iraq?

Musicmystery -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 8:54:51 PM)
[sm=dunno.gif] "Thanks for the info, but I refuse to read it, only maintain my position by pretending the evidence to the contrary doesn't exist if I close my eyes." http://lmgtfy.com/

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 9:31:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Any ideas why the 38th largest country needs the biggest US embassy in the world? Because at the time we started the process, the plan was to have an emerging, stable, democratic(ish) Iraq as a strong strategic ally in the region. Just because the strategic plan is dropped, doesn't automatically cancel the building contracts. It's one those inherent inefficiency of government things that conservatives bitch about.

DomKen -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 9:43:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Any ideas why the 38th largest country needs the biggest US embassy in the world? Because at the time we started the process, the plan was to have an emerging, stable, democratic(ish) Iraq as a strong strategic ally in the region. Just because the strategic plan is dropped, doesn't automatically cancel the building contracts. It's one those inherent inefficiency of government things that conservatives bitch about. I do not think we'd need a gigantic fortress as an embassy if we thought Iraq was ever going to be stable.

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 9:48:02 PM)
That's a foolish comment, Ken. Try and figure out for yourself what is wrong with it.

Musicmystery -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 9:53:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Any ideas why the 38th largest country needs the biggest US embassy in the world? Because at the time we started the process, the plan was to have an emerging, stable, democratic(ish) Iraq as a strong strategic ally in the region. Just because the strategic plan is dropped, doesn't automatically cancel the building contracts. It's one those inherent inefficiency of government things that conservatives bitch about. Opening in January 2009, at 440,000 square meters, it is the largest and most expensive embassy in the world and is nearly as large as Vatican City. It employs 15,000 people and cost $750 million to build. That's just a tad more than outdated construction plans. Or strategy changes.

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraq (6/14/2014 10:12:51 PM)
Employs, or employed? It was built inside a war zone. That tends to run up the costs. I think the off chance of suicide bombings must really jack up the workman's comp rates.

DomKen -> RE: Iraq (6/15/2014 6:05:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Any ideas why the 38th largest country needs the biggest US embassy in the world? Because at the time we started the process, the plan was to have an emerging, stable, democratic(ish) Iraq as a strong strategic ally in the region. Just because the strategic plan is dropped, doesn't automatically cancel the building contracts. It's one those inherent inefficiency of government things that conservatives bitch about. Opening in January 2009, at 440,000 square meters, it is the largest and most expensive embassy in the world and is nearly as large as Vatican City. It employs 15,000 people and cost $750 million to build. That's just a tad more than outdated construction plans. Or strategy changes. God ole W. WTF was the point in wasting 3/4 a billion dollars on an embassy?

DomKen -> RE: Iraq (6/15/2014 6:07:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Employs, or employed? It was built inside a war zone. That tends to run up the costs. I think the off chance of suicide bombings must really jack up the workman's comp rates. Employed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Embassy_in_Iraq#Staff_drawdown

Musicmystery -> RE: Iraq (6/15/2014 7:48:53 AM)
It's certainly not one of those conservative cost-savers, nor was designed to be so when it was started in 2005.

Sanity -> RE: Iraq (6/17/2014 5:32:44 PM)
Dick Cheney's view: Rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875