The Shrub doesn't “blame her a bit.”

I already said that Obama is at fault for pulling out too early, what the fuck else do you want? Originally Posted by shanm

Just wondering if you feel that Obama is at fault for pulling out too early in Iraq.. how you liking his plan to pull most troops out by the end of 2015 in Afghanistan after getting over 1700+ troops killed there? You for or against his plans as announced?

Just wondering if you feel that Obama is at fault for pulling out too early in Iraq.. how you liking his plan to pull most troops out by the end of 2015 in Afghanistan after getting over 1700+ troops killed there? You for or against his plans as announced? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Oral aficionado. How many roses for CIM

So, you are faulting him for deaths in afghanistan. He wants to pull the troops out, so no more would die there, and you have a problem with THAT too? You can't have it both ways.

and you still haven't provided a link for your 1700 number. Until then, I'm calling bullshit.

Oral aficionado. How many roses for CIM

So, you are faulting him for deaths in afghanistan. He wants to pull the troops out, so no more would die there, and you have a problem with THAT too? You can't have it both ways.

and you still haven't provided a link for your 1700 number. Until then, I'm calling bullshit. Originally Posted by WombRaider

The actual number is 1727 dipshit. I gave you the link. Too stupid to be able to do the math? So which is it? He is "the Peace President " for pulling them out... AFTER he ordered in TWO troop surges?? Wanting to pull the troops out to reduce deaths would be more beneficial if he hadn't already gotten 1700+ of them killed in response to his ordered surges.

As for CIM... you don't have enough money to pay to come in your mouth, much as you want it.

The actual number is 1727 dipshit. I gave you the link. Too stupid to be able to do the math? So which is it? He is "the Peace President " for pulling them out... AFTER he ordered in TWO troop surges?? Wanting to pull the troops out to reduce deaths would be more beneficial if he hadn't already gotten 1700+ of them killed in response to his ordered surges.

As for CIM... you don't have enough money to pay to come in your mouth, much as you want it. Originally Posted by RedLeg505

I found the numbers on my own. Since the surge, the number is in the 1400s, not 1700 as you claim. What would you have done? Just left Afghanistan in chaos?

What would you have done? Just left Afghanistan in chaos? Originally Posted by WombRaider

You mean just like Obama did in Iraq and is trying to do in Afghanistan???

You mean just like Obama did in Iraq and is trying to do in Afghanistan??? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

We wouldn't have been in either place if not for the war criminal bush.

I wonder if the missing 28 pages of the 911 Commission report would have led us to a different adversary? Maybe the real enemy lies within those pages.

You mean just like Obama did in Iraq and is trying to do in Afghanistan??? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Get your fucking head on straight first.

You're arguing both sides of the coin. Basically, you don't want Obama to reduce American presence in Afghanistan and you want him to reduce American presence in Afghanistan....That is literally the combined argument contained in your last three/four posts.

You mean just like Obama did in Iraq and is trying to do in Afghanistan??? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Well, dum-dum common sense would indicate that the nation was left in chaos because we pulled out too early, didn't get enough time to set up a foreign government and military able to take care of its own.. At the same time you argue this:

So... what did Obama and the US gain in Afghanistan that was worth the deaths of over 1700 American troops? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Again, dum dum, the purpose of those surges was to allow some semblance of order to the chaos in the region that we created in the first place as we decided to leave the country. Should he have increased military troops even further then (as per your suggestion), to "avoid chaos" in the region? Well then, that would mean an almost certain increase in the death of American troops, in the hundreds, maybe even thousands.
One wonders exactly what the fuck are you trying to argue.

It's just typical argumentative drivel. You blather on with whatever you heard in the latest O'Reilly factor without having any actual substance to fall back on.

As it was, Obama prepared a strategy to end our foreign presence in Afghanistan by at first increasing the number of troops so that they could eventually hand control over to the Afghanistani government. He was successful in getting most of our troops out of that hell-hole wasn't he? You can't just declare war on a Wednesday and pull out on Thursday.

You can't just declare war on a Wednesday and pull out on Thursday. Originally Posted by shanm

Funny Obama thinks he can. Or at least he believed he could order troop surges in 2009 and KNOW with enough certainty back then, what he would accomplish to already plan to pull them out in 2015. He's better than the Amazing Kreskin, isn't he.

As for the apparent contradictions you whine about... I haven't taken a position other than to ask if Obama's actions made any sort of sense... or did he order the surge for political theater, and get thousands killed for no reason. Or is it your claim shanm, that "some semblance of order" in Afghanistan was worth the lives of those who died following his orders. Or were the orders wrong??

Ohh, and finally, who declared war in Afghanistan and when was war declared??

As for the apparent contradictions you whine about... I haven't taken a position other than to ask if Obama's actions made any sort of sense... or did he order the surge for political theater, and get thousands killed for no reason. Or is it your claim shanm, that "some semblance of order" in Afghanistan was worth the lives of those who died following his orders. Or were the orders wrong?? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Remember 911? It's still relevant even after the killing of OBL.

Ohh, and finally, who declared war in Afghanistan and when was war declared?? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Remember how Bush and Congress have responded after 911?

Get your fucking head on straight first.

You're arguing both sides of the coin. Basically, you don't want Obama to reduce American presence in Afghanistan and you want him to reduce American presence in Afghanistan....That is literally the combined argument contained in your last three/four posts.


Well, dum-dum common sense would indicate that the nation was left in chaos because we pulled out too early, didn't get enough time to set up a foreign government and military able to take care of its own.. At the same time you argue this:



Again, dum dum, the purpose of those surges was to allow some semblance of order to the chaos in the region that we created in the first place as we decided to leave the country. Should he have increased military troops even further then (as per your suggestion), to "avoid chaos" in the region? Well then, that would mean an almost certain increase in the death of American troops, in the hundreds, maybe even thousands.
One wonders exactly what the fuck are you trying to argue.

It's just typical argumentative drivel. You blather on with whatever you heard in the latest O'Reilly factor without having any actual substance to fall back on.

As it was, Obama prepared a strategy to end our foreign presence in Afghanistan by at first increasing the number of troops so that they could eventually hand control over to the Afghanistani government. He was successful in getting most of our troops out of that hell-hole wasn't he? You can't just declare war on a Wednesday and pull out on Thursday. Originally Posted by shanm

I'm done with him. He's going around in circles.

You mean just like Obama did in Iraq and is trying to do in Afghanistan??? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Funny Obama thinks he can. Or at least he believed he could order troop surges in 2009 and KNOW with enough certainty back then, what he would accomplish to already plan to pull them out in 2015. He's better than the Amazing Kreskin, isn't he.

As for the apparent contradictions you whine about... I haven't taken a position other than to ask if Obama's actions made any sort of sense... or did he order the surge for political theater, and get thousands killed for no reason. Or is it your claim shanm, that "some semblance of order" in Afghanistan was worth the lives of those who died following his orders. Or were the orders wrong??

Ohh, and finally, who declared war in Afghanistan and when was war declared?? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Again, an argument rife with contradiction.

Funny Obama thinks he can.

He doesn't. He never did. That's what you are arguing he should have done, by (ASSininely) claiming that the death of 1700 soldiers meant nothing. According to you, those 1700 deaths were meaningless and we should have pulled out as early as 2009.

Like I said, you can't declare war on a Wednesday and pull out on a Thursday. Obama DID NOT do that. He pulled out on Saturday where, effectively, we should have actually seen the week out completely. However, that would mean the death of more American soldiers and more American presence on foreign soil. Again, that is also something you seem to advocate by saying that we left the "region in Chaos".

What would you have done? Just left Afghanistan in chaos? Originally Posted by WombRaider

'

You mean just like Obama did in Iraq and is trying to do in Afghanistan??? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

No one has any fucking clue what you're trying to argue.

Afghanistan was worth the lives of those who died following his orders.

That depends. Is any war ever worth it?

We left Afghanistan after the Soviet-Afghan war. We pulled out too quickly. What was the result? The established government was weak and unable to stop the religious thugs (Taliban) from taking over. That is exactly what Obamas administration is trying to prevent in this instance.

You seem to forget that the surges ordered by Obama were actually ordered under Bush. Obama simply increased the number. Understandable, because the timeline was considerably shortened. Here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090221...,2351712.story

The new troops are the first wave of an expected surge of reinforcements this year. The process began to take shape under President George Bush but has been given impetus by President Barack Obama's call for an increased focus on Afghanistan.

You're not simply ignorant. You're also blind with your hatred for Obama. A dangerous combination.

Funny Obama thinks he can. Or at least he believed he could order troop surges in 2009 and KNOW with enough certainty back then, what he would accomplish to already plan to pull them out in 2015. He's better than the Amazing Kreskin, isn't he.

As for the apparent contradictions you whine about... I haven't taken a position other than to ask if Obama's actions made any sort of sense... or did he order the surge for political theater, and get thousands killed for no reason. Or is it your claim shanm, that "some semblance of order" in Afghanistan was worth the lives of those who died following his orders. Or were the orders wrong??

Ohh, and finally, who declared war in Afghanistan and when was war declared?? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

You're the absolute fucking worst. Do you even read or understand what you're writing? 2009 to 2015 is lightning fast? Because that's what you're asserting. You haven't taken a position? I'm not sure you know what that word means. You followed that statement up with at least four questions.

You followed that statement up with at least four questions. Originally Posted by WombRaider

And are those questions too difficult for an Odumbo supporter like you to answer? Yeah, figured so.

So tell us, as a dye-in-the-wool Odumbo supporter, how did he know the troops he ordered in his surges would accomplish the mission he assigned by 2015.. all the way back in 2009? Was he elected with a magic crystal ball to be able to see the future? Because if he did... how come he didn't know his economic plans would be such an amazing failure when he put them into effect in 2009? 6+ years later.. 8 trillion added to the debt.. and 2.2% growth is all he can achieve? Wow.

Lemme guess.. is this where, after defending him all over the political threads.. you say "I'm not for him, I just hate seeing you folks whine about him"?