Comments on: U.S. Military Mulls Iraq Troop Pullbacks
Chiefs To Discuss Possible Cuts For This Fall; Troops Likely To Be Redeployed to Afghanistan
- But today, on July 6, 2008, the Associated Press reports that
Saddam Hussein had a nuclear program
At the Tuwaitha nuclear complex just south of Baghdad
Which included 550 metric tons (over 1.2 million pounds) of "yellowcake", or concentrated uranium
And multiple devices that could be used in a nuclear weapon.
The AP does not say alleged nuclear program. It does not add "according to military experts." It simply says "Saddam Hussein''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''s nuclear program." - Reply to this comment
- Weird how this is timed for the Election.
Could someone please tell me if it is true we are paying Iraqis NOT to fight US troops - giving them something like 300/month to stand down? - Reply to this comment
- Why not pull out 1000 troops, then put them back in a week later and call it a "surge"? Oh, right. We did that already.
- Reply to this comment
- notblue,,,, Don''t get started calling Americans "Un-American" again ----- All you do is discredit youself & shame our nation.
- Reply to this comment
Re: "Why not just get out there and fight with those MUslim freedom fighters you guys support every day with your anti-American rhetoric and blather."
Posted by notblue
Are you throwing another tantrum?- Reply to this comment
- notblue,,,, I''ve served my 20 years in the military --- How about you signing up for 4 ??
- Reply to this comment
- j-whitman, I must say coming from you I almost have to believe it since there are no bigger experts on ignorance than you. It must make you proud to know the likes of feelfree4u pretty much see eye to eye with you. You two are the biggest idiots that frequent these posts. Everything I stated in regards to what the politicians said before the Iraq inbasion was true, it''s not fault you people have politically blinded, selective memories. What is worse yet, is your message mirrors the enemies we are currently fighting with a volunteer army, that makes you worse than the enemy because you are doing it from the comfort of your living room. Why not just get out there and fight with those MUslim freedom fighters you guys support every day with your anti-American rhetoric and blather.
- Reply to this comment
Whichever shameful, self-defeating misadventure we decide to waste more blood, dignity, and treasure on, we can take solace in knowing that Exxon-Mobil and CBS will profit from it.- Reply to this comment
Re: "notblue,,,, Does ignorance run in your family..."
Posted by j-whitman
More of a low-crawl.- Reply to this comment
- notblue,,,, Does ignorance run in your family, or are you the only one ??
- Reply to this comment
Re: "notblue; why, because you say so?"
Posted by jn122736
It looks like your credibility is being called into question here, "notblue"...- Reply to this comment
- Clestes, less than one percent of provinces originally controlled by the Taliban are now under their control so as usual your completely wrong again.
Posted by notblue at 05:24 PM : Jul 07, 2008
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
notblue; why, because you say so? - Reply to this comment
Re: "STOP LOSS and IRR are code words for backdoor draft."
Posted by Riptide213
Good point.
I would actually like to see an actual draft reinstated. If it were, then I predict that our shameful and self-defeating "wars" would be over in a month or two, due to lack of interest.- Reply to this comment
Re: "Get new troops trained for the Afghan theatre."
Posted by BajaJohn1
Where do you reckon those will come from?- Reply to this comment
- Troop pullback announcements are just meadia feeders for wishful readers.
It is very cruel to announce something is going to be considered without a diplomatic entitity publically declaring stability. - Reply to this comment
- Clestes, less than one percent of provinces originally controlled by the Taliban are now under their control so as usual your completely wrong again.
- Reply to this comment
- Head east young man and prosper
- Reply to this comment
- Impact on STOP LOSS, none!
During a so called town hall meeting, Adm. Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff make clear to soldiers at Fort Stewart, Ga., things would get worse before they would get better. Number of troops held under STOP LOSS policies currently over 12,000. When respectfully confronted on how long Army STOP LOSS policies would continue the answer was. We see a slight growth in the next couple of years based on predictions right now; it could drag on beyond three years.
STOP LOSS, In Lieu of Taskings (ILO), 8 year minimum service obligations for advertised 2,3,4,6, enlistment options, Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) call ups, Army recruiting 17-41 years olds, and felony waivers all contribute to hazy smoke screen sham, a US government shanghai subterfuge to maintain war fighting troop numbers.
Why do citizens allow government manipulation to legally abuse loopholes to press gang those already serving in a supposed All Volunteer Force to serve at perpetual pleasure of Commander in Chief?
Why does American public allow President as Commander in Chief backed by Congress to shamefully get away with a read the fine print, covert war conscription, and unofficial backdoor draft by stealth?
Sign up to serve your country, do your fair share, and get indentured to serve in overseas wars indefinitely until wounded or death which ever comes first.
STOP LOSS and IRR are code words for backdoor draft. - Reply to this comment
- Gee things are going so well in Iraq that we are sending an additional 30,000 troops this fall and any troops whose time is up in Iraq are going to Afghanistan.
I predicted this 9 months ago when the reps were braying about "the surge is working". Working so well we are sending in more troops??
90% of the land given up by the Taliban has been retaken. US forces in Afghanistan are in serious trouble. This is where the real war on terror is being fought. Not in Iraq. Iraq was only a distraction that descended to a disaster. Saddam never had WMD, played no part in 9-11 and kept Iran at bay. Since being invaded, for their oil, Al-queda has regained strength and Iran is now a middle east player.
And Israel wants to make matters worse by attacking their non-existant nuclear weapon program. I really don''t think Israel will attack. There are a few political figures that have a death wish, but they are not in the majority and don''t have the power to attack. I''ll make another prediction. If they do oil will immediately zoom to $200 a barrel and gas will go to over $5.00 a gallon.
If Iran retaliates by closing the Straits of Hormez, oil will go to $300 a barrel and over $7.00 a gallon. But all this talk of war is bluster and pysch warfare.
Sigh..... - Reply to this comment
- The surge did NOT do it! It helped.
It was the change in strategy from
base-located troops to total occupation
of Iraq.
The proof of this will be when, say,
50-thousand troops ARE pulled from
Iraq and violence doesn''t increase
that much.
Bush at the time before the surge
couldn''t say that I''m going to totally
occupy Iraq. Which is what he did.
Which isn''t that hard when you head an
army that can kill anything that moves
on land, sea and air.
It was then that the "surge" was
invented.
So we''d concentrate on "The surge"
instead of our movement into the
cities knocking down doors and
killing ten civilians to get
one "terrorist.
Only when 50-thousand troops ARE
withdrawn can it be proved that
this was or was not just one more
sneaky move by the jerk.
You know where my money is. - Reply to this comment




