So, we're back at war in Iraq/Syria. Still think we should have pulled out of Iraq?

blco02

Banned
3,932
1,281
Joined
Apr 21, 2001
Obama is starting air strikes in Iraq and now Syria as of tonight. It's probably just a matter of time before we send ground troops in.

The overwhelming opinion during the Bush years was to get out of Iraq. After the surge though, we had the war won but Obama pulled us out and ISIS took over. Seems like that pull out strategy was dumb. Thoughts?
 
I knew I'd get that response. What do you think about Obamas pull out strategy-did it work?
 
I was for the war, and still am. I just feel the war should have lasted 6 months. Instead of more than a decade. I never got why people were like 

"Now that we're there, we just can't leave"

I was like why not?
 
Bush agreed to pull troops out of Iraq before Obama was elected...... But lets just ignore that fact

I don't really know how true that is. That's a popular Democrat talking point now but Obama took credit dozens of times on the campaign trail in 2012 saying he ended the war in Iraq. So did Joe Biden. Now he says it was Bush who pulled out. Hypocrites :smh:
 
Last edited:
I was for the war, and still am. I just feel the war should have lasted 6 months. Instead of more than a decade. I never got why people were like 

"Now that we're there, we just can't leave"

I was like why not?

I'm not sure if you've been following the news but the worst case scenario has happened. People like me said we should leave some troops there or else radical Muslims would take over Iraq. That's what has happened. ISIS is taking over the whole region.
 
Bush agreed to pull troops out of Iraq before Obama was elected...... But lets just ignore that fact

I don't really know how true that is. That's a popular Democrat talking point now but Obama took credit dozens of times on the campaign trail in 2012 saying he ended the war in Iraq. So did Joe Biden. Now he says it was Bush who pulled out. Hypoc:smh:rites

The jist of Obama's talking point was "things are better than they were 4 years ago, the troops are home"

And you don't know who true that is :rofl: LINK

Stop it brah, you made this thread to have a Obama trashing party, and you sound like you're not gonna let reality get in the way of that.
 
Last edited:
The jist of Obama's talking point was "things are better than they were 4 years ago, the troops are home"

And you don't know who true that is :rofl: LINK

Stop it brah, you made this thread to have a Obama trashing party, and you sound like you're not gonna let reality get in the way of that.

Obama trashing party? I just wanted to present an opinion that is never shared on NT. And you're trying to ridicule me for it, nice. A typical liberal.

Read this "brah"

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...raq-narrative-now-blames-george-w-b/?page=all
 
I'm not sure if you've been following the news but the worst case scenario has happened. People like me said we should leave some troops there or else radical Muslims would take over Iraq. That's what has happened. ISIS is taking over the whole region.
I have been reading the news, which is exactly my point.

If we would have left right after we Killed Hussein we might have very well have dealt with an ISIS type regime coming in. But we would have trillions more in the bank, and maybe every city not named Chicago NY or SF would have decent public transportation.
 
Last edited:
Obama was in a lose-lose situation over there.  Pull out and all hell breaks loose like it has.  Or stay there and face the wrath of Americans begging for the troops to come home.  

Choosing either of those was going to lead to some negative **** happening, but I'd rather see less U.S. soldiers overall getting murked.  Dude knew eventually we'd be back over there, but all in all, I think at the end of all this (if there is ever an end) some American lives were saved. 

For folks like you though, it'll never be enough.  And you'll continue to conveniently glaze over the impetus of all this, downplaying the effects of the Bush invasion of Iraq and takedown of Saddam.  
 
Obama was in a lose-lose situation over there.  Pull out and all hell breaks loose like it has.  Or stay there and face the wrath of Americans begging for the troops to come home.  

Choosing either of those was going to lead to some negative **** happening, but I'd rather see less U.S. soldiers overall getting murked.  Dude knew eventually we'd be back over there, but all in all, I think at the end of all this (if there is ever an end) some American lives were saved. 

For folks like you though, it'll never be enough.  And you'll continue to conveniently glaze over the impetus of all this, downplaying the effects of the Bush invasion of Iraq and takedown of Saddam.  

No trust me, I get it. If we had it all to do over again we probably shouldn't have invaded.

My point is basically to ask if the Obama voters are happy with how his plan has worked out. He, as well every Democrat was anti war the whole way during both campaigns and advocated pulling out of Iraq. I just wanted to see if you die hard liberals could criticize Obama one little bit when the Middle East is on fire on his watch. The answer is no I guess.
 
Is this just some Democrat/'liberal'/Obama trashing thread? Sure seems like it.
 
I think you're all forgetting how pissed U.S. was after 9/11. Just gonna sit back after  that?
 
Is this just some Democrat/'liberal'/Obama trashing thread? Sure seems like it.

Just trying to have a debate and share an opinion that is never shared on here. There sure were hundreds of Bush trashing threads on here back in the day and I didn't see anyone complaining.
 
Well technically, we're just carrying out airs trikes and bringing SF to train the Iraqis. Also, we will be supplying the Kurds with better weapons and as of now, we're pretty much leaving to the Iraqi militia and Kurdish soldiers.
 
Just trying to have a debate and share an opinion that is never shared on here. There sure were hundreds of Bush trashing threads on here back in the day and I didn't see anyone complaining.
Different boards lean different ways, just the way it is. 4chans /pol/ board is super right leaning, this board not as much.
 
 
Obama was in a lose-lose situation over there.  Pull out and all hell breaks loose like it has.  Or stay there and face the wrath of Americans begging for the troops to come home.  

Choosing either of those was going to lead to some negative **** happening, but I'd rather see less U.S. soldiers overall getting murked.  Dude knew eventually we'd be back over there, but all in all, I think at the end of all this (if there is ever an end) some American lives were saved. 

For folks like you though, it'll never be enough.  And you'll continue to conveniently glaze over the impetus of all this, downplaying the effects of the Bush invasion of Iraq and takedown of Saddam.  
No trust me, I get it. If we had it all to do over again we probably shouldn't have invaded.

My point is basically to ask if the Obama voters are happy with how his plan has worked out. He, as well every Democrat was anti war the whole way during both campaigns and advocated pulling out of Iraq. I just wanted to see if you die hard liberals could criticize Obama one little bit when the Middle East is on fire on his watch. The answer is no I guess.
Does the situation suck?  Yep.  

Does Obama have to take some responsibility for it?  Yep.

Is it entirely his fault that we're in this mess?  Nope.

Provide us with what YOU would've done and I can guarantee that I can take issue with your decision.  Like I said, it was/is a lose-lose situation for dude.  Especially to folks like you.  
 
I think you're all forgetting how pissed U.S. was after 9/11. Just gonna sit back after  that?
So invading Iraq under the guise of searching for WMDs had exactly what to do with Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and 9/11?
 
The two party system in america is so divisive, so confrontational and argumentative that you have conservatives seriously debating to what extent they should blame obama for the situation in iraq/afghanistan.

But tell me how much richer Haliburton and the Carlyle Group are today? After the deaths of thousands and thousands of women and children. Yet the americans inflated egos keep them arguing about whose side is right, whose side is to blame. OP clearly cares more about blaming a singular politician as it proves how smart he is for being on the other side. OP cares nothing of the cluster**** of travesty that WE left in iraq/afghanistan.

People died fool. A lot of them. I'm sure you can find some other talking point to inflate your self worth.
 
Last edited:
Obama ****** up by not paying enough attention to the Syrian revolution. Trying to play both sides of the fence. Secretly supplying the rebels while not taking a firm stance on AL Asad. The rebels lost and what happened...ISIS.
 
No trust me, I get it. If we had it all to do over again we probably shouldn't have invaded.

My point is basically to ask if the Obama voters are happy with how his plan has worked out. He, as well every Democrat was anti war the whole way during both campaigns and advocated pulling out of Iraq. I just wanted to see if you die hard liberals could criticize Obama one little bit when the Middle East is on fire on his watch. The answer is no I guess.
You could try educating people or you can continue to have this pointless pissing contest. 
 
Back
Top Bottom