Comments on: Bush, Iraq PM Discuss Troop Pullout Plan

2011 Eyed As Target Date For U.S. Troops To Leave But No Deal Or Timeline Finalized

[shoebox119]

Once upon a time, the United States refused to recognize any government that was elected while under foreign occupation (see Lebanon). I guess the exception to that policy is when America''s the occupier.

How can anyone not see that the current Iraqi government is nothing more than a puppet of America?

[promaclaura]

alohaone1 and notblue - I think your on target comments fall on deaf ears because these posters have one hate, President Bush. All else falls to the wayside, his elections have caused such sour grape losers that they can''t see past it. How else could one explain their blind, inaccurate statements. I think the jist of their statements conclude they would have been happy to leave the Iraqi''s in Saddams hands. For some reason they are justifying Saddams evil, they''re saying let''s all forget that he invaded other countries, never stopped pursuing WMD, paid suicide bomber families 25,000 (totals in the millions), gassed his own people, contrived fake elections to keep in power for decades, left numerous mass graves (firing squads like the Nazi''s), numerous torture methods (wood chippers, rape houses), palaces galore for himself, a disaster for infrastructure (minimul water or electricity), his people lived in squalor while he sat on gold toilets...... Wow, those Iraqi''s had it great huh? To me that is living hell, so keep on hating Bush and defending Saddam because that is in essence what you are doing. If I had a choice for a ruler I would pick George Bush over Saddam Hussein any day.

[mr2258]

Obama is only trying to take credit for the things that Bush was already doing.What a piece of slim.

[alohaone1]

you know , come to think of if , it is not so bad after all TO BE INVADED BY THE US ... the US is not a colonial or imperial or communist power who invaded for its own benefits while disregard the sufferings of the people there . The US went to wars to secure its interests and its allies'' interests , but after the war , they went by the law , establishd democracies and played by the same rules agreed by both sides , and NOT by force like the Roman,or Mongolians , or the Dutch or French or German or Russian Empires...That is why , Japan , after having their OWN constitution written by the US was able to rebuild and compete and even beat the US in fair competitions , look at the Japanese today and their auto industry . Also , France, Germany , South KOrea , the Phillipines , SAudi Arabia , and even Iraq ....all the countries that were invaded by the US are getting stronger and freer everyday , and if they work hard enough , they surely can compete with the US in any way they want . Too bad for others who DID NOT HAVE THE PLEASURE TO BE INVADED like Georgia or soon Ukraine ,or even Vietnam ...who will eventually be "BROTHERLY PROTECTED " BY THEIR LOVING BIGGER BROTHERS THE RUSSIANS AND THE CHINESE ...No wonder the Polish are just too happy to have recently become our Cronies , ungrateful Western Europeans and Betraying Libs in the US are forgetting the price of Freedom that were paid with the US invading Armies'' blood not too long ago ...sad sad sad ..

[alohaone1]

the crooks you are bashing America are just tooo Dumb to see the reality . We invade Irag for no reason? I thought 90% of the world DID NOT KNOW FOR SURE WHETHER SADDAM REALLY POSSESSED WMD OR NOT and that include not just our CIA BUT also the French , the British , the Russians , the Israelis ... and the Mad Man , himself, went out of his way to even FOOLED his own generals that the next units have WMD (this is backed up by Iraqi Generals commanding units around Baghdad ) . Also , Saddam agreed and violated resolutions after resolutions and treated the world with contempts and deceptions times and again . So , did we actually have pictures of stockpiles of WMD with the Iraqi President standing smiling beside them , NO , but all the intelligent and circumstantial evidences from a intelligent agencies around the world at that time justfied going in to take out a dictator who not only killed scores of his own people but has through invasions killed scores of his neighbors and threaten the whole region and the world oil supply for the last 40 years ...and if any of you is telling me that stability in an OIL Supply region is not an important enough reason , ask yourselves whether or not you or your relatives use cars or electricity today . If you guys walk to work and live in the wilderness , you have the right to criticize decisions regarding oil , if not SHUT UP !

[notblue]

INNNSG, your move.on talking points are tiresome and false, you people mirror the words of the enemy, listen to one of Al KAWHRI''s speaches sometime. How do explain the countless attacks against the US and other countries throughout the world prior to the Iraq conflict? Why do you ignore the history over tha last thirty years, And the point you attempt to make in regards to actually fighting back is tiresome and incorrect. Leavinig the nemy alone didn''t work and if ACTUALLY FIGHTING MEANS the recruitment of more terrorist then that will make them easier to destroy. If you think the US media is somehow a puupet of the Bush administration then you obviously do not watch the news. The leftwing media has been relentless in it''s critisism of Bush and Americas policies, in fact I would characterize the modern media as a mouthpiece forthe leftwing in this country. Osama and the rst of the Extremists caused the chaos in the modern world, 12 million Iraqis voted for freedom, tried the Butcher of baghdad and executed him, get a friggin clue and get on the side of right. Who are you defending with your blather? Ever ask yourself that?

[kissamaarse]

Obama said he would strike within Pakistand after Al Qaeda. He was criticized by Bush & McCain, but then Bush did. Obama said to redeploy troops to Afghanistan. He was criticized by Bush & McCain, but now Bush is. Obama many months ago stated a timeline to withdraw from Iraq. He was criticized by Bush & McCain, but now Bush is.

Now who is the clear choice here? Who knows how to make the right decisions? Seems like Bush keeps following Obama''s lead, and then McCain comes sniffing along after.

[alohaone1]

So , Obama wants the troop to go to Afganishtan instead ? This is the most stupid things I ever heard ! Afganishtan''s problems is not with troops , it is with Pakistan , when the terrorists were given safe-haven in Pakistan , they are never totally destroyed . And we can not invade Pakistan like Obama mentioned without facing international back-lash , For us to just go and bomb target inside Pakistan , it is not only obsurd , it is barbaric .So , we either have to give Musharaf free-hand to DESTROY the oppositions like how it is in dictatorship ( which is not acceptable for us ) OR , trying to work with the Pakistani Government now that Musharaf is out of the way . Obama is not only naive , he does not know basic in foreign relations , If you have someone as ally , you do not JUST BOMB them as you please , unless you want to fight in both , Afganishtan and fignt the Pakistani at the same time !

[idnnsg]

"Only a politically blinded moron would ignore the progress in Iraq, two years ago when the Dems wanted to cut and run there was no progress, the situation today is much different" - notblue

We invaded Iraq, destroyed their infrastructure, killed millions of people, invited in al Qaeda, set up a puppet government, and stole the Iraqi''s oil for the international corporations. Iraq is in shambles. There is NO CHANCE of any meaningful democratic government. Civil war is inevitable. Iraq has been a complete, MISERABLE FAILURE, just like Bush!

Bush''s backers control the US media, so it''s easy for re.tards like you to fool yourselves into believing the lie that "now things are different". But the ONLY people who will be fooled are the same re.tards who believed Cheney when he said the "insurgency is in its last throes" in May of 2005, MORE THAN 3 YRS AGO! The SAME re.tards who thought it was FUNNY when Bush laughed about not finding WMDs under his desk. The SAME retards who will vote for In.sane McCain.

So what if there''s less violence in Iraq now, compared to some point earlier when WE caused the chaos that created more violence in Iraq. That is NOT success!

Repugs: They "Cut and run", but only when the Chimp in Charge says to!

Has anyone let McCain in on the joke? HE wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years! What will the party faithful do? Vote for Obama who wants to get the hell out of Iraq? Or will they vote for McCain who wants to stay, but CALLS HIMSELF a "republican"?

[FHMullane]

I don''t understand how the timetable is such a campaign issues since it will be negotiated with Iraq before the new President takes office... and no matter who it is he will have to pay attention to what is going on... If we can get them home sooner we should.

To say the SURGE ALONE is responsible for this is nieve to say the least. Part of what got the Iraqis putting it together and stopping the craziness was our elections and the real possibility that a democrat isn''t going to put up with this.

Sadr had his troops stand down and the Sunnis fought along side Americans to run Al Qaeda out. There is no way to be sure if those things would not have happened without the surge... I think they would have because they were in response to our talking about leaving (Sadr) and AlQaeda just going too far with the Sunnis.

The surge, in hindsight, was a good thing but to say it was the sole reason things calmed down really is unrealistic. McCain wants credit for that but that alone would just have put 30,000 more troops in harm''s way. Had the Sunnis continued to work WITH Al Qaeda and had Sadrs Army continued there would be no calm on the ground with our without 30,000 troops...

[tablink]

Despite our strong denials in the past, the Russians were correct about the purpose of NATO.

[notblue]

Only a politically blinded moron would ignore the progress in Iraq, two years ago when the Dems wanted to cut and run there was no progress, the situation today is much different yet the ingrates cling to defeat and sarcasm, that''s the leftwing way!

[alphaa10-2009]

A NEW REVERENCE FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW?

What is most interesting about the Russian invasion of Georgia is how exquisitely reverent Bush and Cheney and Rice and all the other architects of Bush''s war in Iraq have become about the principles of national sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Bush and minions are clearly indignant when Russia does, on a much-smaller scale, exactly what they did in Iraq. And compared with Saddam, Saakashvili was left in power (at least, so far).

Here on display is official Bush Double-Think in its full, Orwellian glory.

Rice is Exhibit A-- From her academic background, even Rice understands principles of international law matter a great deal in drafting a responsible US foreign policy.

As an educator in the California university system, Rice was also the first to insist the Communist bloc honor such principles, as well. Her area of specialty was foreign affairs, and the Soviet bloc, in particular.

But hitching her wagon-- pre-2000 election-- to the rising Bush star, Rice clearly forgot about such principles. So complicit did Rice become in the Bush conspiracy about Iraq, she was content to moan about the threat of a "mushroom cloud" and any other tale handed her for publication.

(see "A New Reverence for International Law?"--2)

[hermitdave]

WELL lets see. The American puppet president is talking to the puppet leader of a country he invaded to make sure his big business oil friends could get back to exploit the country of Iraq. My guess is the plan will go just as Uncle Richerd the real American president wants it to go.

[deacon20081]

WAR CRIMES TRIALS FOR THIS IDIOT ARE SOON TO FOLLOW!
Posted by bluestardad

Pray for Justice.

[alphaa10-2009]

A New Reverence for International Law?--2

On some days, Rice probably wishes she had stayed in academia.-- at least there, she could publish for GOP thinktanks in taxpayer-paid obscurity.

Finally, we are given to understand the Georgians have committed their share of offenses under international law, as well. To the extent these are factual, Georgia must understand international law applies to even the natives of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The two, miniscule territories fear absorption by either Russia or Georgia. They want to be left alone.

All to say, many parties are involved in an affront to international law in Georgia and nearby regions. How startling a tactical move it might be if Russians were actually to honor the principles of international law in Georgia, and remove their military forces.

By respecting international law in Georgia, Russia would dramatize the illegal Bush conduct in Iraq. On his way out of office, Bush could reflect once more on that stark contrast-- if Russia could demonstrate respect for international law, maybe he should have, as well.

[bluestardad]

WAR CRIMES TRIALS FOR THIS IDIOT ARE SOON TO FOLLOW!

[armydog2]

georgie must be ready to go off the wagon now,cut and run.or maybe a line or two will take the edge off.