Coalition of the Willing...

[Skjellyfetti]

I'm fine with it if we are there for 8 years. We were enforcing a no fly zone in Iraq for around 10 years before the 2003 invasion. That wasn't a huge deal.

I won't be fine with our mission in Libya if we send 150,000+ troops there and 4,000+ troops die. I'll want Obama castrated if he ends up sending in a full invasion force.

Boy the stance on Iraq sure is softening, huh?

How is my stance on Iraq softening?

We were enforcing a UN mandated no-fly zone and ensuring Saddam didn't reconstitute a WMD arsenal for 10 years before we invaded Iraq. I supported that mission. Most of the US supported that mission. What I didn't support is the full scale invasion and nation building from 2003 to now.

Why is that so hard to understand?

Were you against our mission in Iraq 1992-2003?

[houndawg]

Is Obomber back from spring break yet?
Seems like the coalition is having some trouble.


• Tensions with Britain as Gates rebukes UK government over suggestion Gaddafi could be assassinated
• Germany pulls equipment out of NATO coalition over disagreement over campaign's direction
• Italians accuse French of backing NATO in exchange for oil contracts
• U.K. ministers say war could last '30 years'
• Italy to 'take back control' of bases used by allies unless NATO leadership put in charge of the mission
• Russians tell U.S. to stop bombing in order to protect civilians - calls bombing a 'crusade'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1HNvrqWrK" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Something tells me that we ain't gonna be real happy if France winds up with Libya's oil.

[CID1990]

Boy the stance on Iraq sure is softening, huh?

How is my stance on Iraq softening?

We were enforcing a UN mandated no-fly zone and ensuring Saddam didn't reconstitute a WMD arsenal for 10 years before we invaded Iraq. I supported that mission. Most of the US supported that mission. What I didn't support is the full scale invasion and nation building from 2003 to now.

Why is that so hard to understand?

Were you against our mission in Iraq 1992-2003?

You need to read more carefully before you reply, then. You have been told this before.

Griz said to give him a call once we have had forces there 8 years and counting. (This was not a reference to the no fly zone but the presence of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan)

Then you replied that you were fine with those 8 years (leading a reasonable person to believe you were referring to our PRESENCE in those countries for 8 years... presence not meaning aircraft overhead but boots on the ground).

Now you have misread a post, followed by a misleading reply, thereby sucking me into your fantasy world. I can hear the Frankie Goes to Hollywood tunes in my head already.

[YoUDeeMan]

Boy the stance on Iraq sure is softening, huh?

How is my stance on Iraq softening?

We were enforcing a UN mandated no-fly zone and ensuring Saddam didn't reconstitute a WMD arsenal for 10 years before we invaded Iraq. I supported that mission. Most of the US supported that mission. What I didn't support is the full scale invasion and nation building from 2003 to now.

Why is that so hard to understand?

Were you against our mission in Iraq 1992-2003?

But you are FOR Obama's war in Afghanistan...the war with lots of troops invading, and more sent by Obama, and the whole nation building thing going on there. And I don't see you, or the liberal press, with a daily body count of our dead soldiers in Iraq or Affy...you know, since Obama has decided not to pull us out.

[kalm]

How is my stance on Iraq softening?

We were enforcing a UN mandated no-fly zone and ensuring Saddam didn't reconstitute a WMD arsenal for 10 years before we invaded Iraq. I supported that mission. Most of the US supported that mission. What I didn't support is the full scale invasion and nation building from 2003 to now.

Why is that so hard to understand?

Were you against our mission in Iraq 1992-2003?

But you are FOR Obama's war in Afghanistan...the war with lots of troops invading, and more sent by Obama, and the whole nation building thing going on there. And I don't see you, or the liberal press, with a daily body count of our dead soldiers in Iraq or Affy...you know, since Obama has decided not to pull us out.

This is absolutely true. I spoke last night with the father of a kid who worked for me years ago and who has been re-deployed to Afghanistan for what seems like the umpteenth time. He's an Apache pilot, flying recon missions for predator drone strikes along the border and also providing support for ground troops and convoys. They're sometimes flying up to eight hour missions with no breaks having to piss in water bottles. And no break when you're on the ground either - he had a mortar shell land right next to him a few days ago. The region is hot right now, and nary a peep about it.

He's a great kid fighting what increasingly looks like useless war that we can't afford. So lets start another.

Can't thank guys like this and their families enough.

[89Hen]

And I don't see you, or the liberal press, with a daily body count of our dead soldiers in Iraq or Affy...you know, since Obama has decided not to pull us out.

The silence is deafening.

[Grizalltheway]

And I don't see you, or the liberal press, with a daily body count of our dead soldiers in Iraq or Affy...you know, since Obama has decided not to pull us out.

The silence is deafening.

For starters, he's dead wrong about Obama deciding not to pull us out of Iraq.

[YoUDeeMan]

The silence is deafening.

For starters, he's dead wrong about Obama deciding not to pull us out of Iraq.

Wait...Grizhalfazz has inside information that Obama is pulling ALL of our trops out of Iraq...uh...soon. No more dead US soldier bodies from our attempts at nation building, right? No more U.S. presence to help....uhhhh...stabilize Iraq?

"Let me say this as plainly as I can," Obama told the Marines. "By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end."http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-28/n ... ary-deaths

Ooops! But we're still taking casualties. Mission accomplished!

But wait...there's more:

"Despite a security agreement requiring a full U.S. military withdrawal by the year's end, hundreds if not thousands of American soldiers will continue to be in Iraq beyond 2011.

There are about 47,000 American troops in Iraq now, down from an October 2007 peak of 166,000. As of this week, 4,439 U.S. forces have been killed and the war has cost taxpayers more than $750 billion.

U.S. military officials and Western diplomats in Baghdad say the number of troops now being considered to stay ranges from a few hundred, who would work under the U.S. Embassy, to the tens of thousands, likely clustered in bases far off the beaten path where they will have little interaction with Iraqi civilians.

A senior adviser to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said the U.S. is quietly suggesting to Iraqi officials that up to 20,000 troops stay. The adviser spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions, and American officials repeatedly have refused to discuss how many troops might remain if Iraq asks for a continued large force."

http://www.sify.com/news/iraq-weighs-if ... ahjdg.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Hey, Grizthroat...when did you meet with Obama and when did he tell you all of our troops will be out of Iraq? You might want to meet with the major news organizations...you've got some breaking stuff there. The quote from above was from 2 hours ago. And you might want to tell Corporal Brandon S. Hocking that he died a couple days ago...but we don't have any troops in harm's way in Iraq.


Now that we're done with that little attempt at distraction and misinformation, true to his screen name, I'm sure Grizalltheway will answer the questions...all the way. Where are the body counts and calls to withdrawl from Affy?

And when will we be out of Iraq?

[Grizalltheway]

For starters, he's dead wrong about Obama deciding not to pull us out of Iraq.

Wait...Grizhalfazz has inside information that Obama is pulling ALL of our trops out of Iraq...uh...soon. No more dead US soldier bodies from our attempts at nation building, right? No more U.S. presence to help....uhhhh...stabilize Iraq?

"Let me say this as plainly as I can," Obama told the Marines. "By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end."http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-28/n ... ary-deaths

Ooops! But we're still taking casualties. Mission accomplished!

But wait...there's more:

"Despite a security agreement requiring a full U.S. military withdrawal by the year's end, hundreds if not thousands of American soldiers will continue to be in Iraq beyond 2011.

There are about 47,000 American troops in Iraq now, down from an October 2007 peak of 166,000. As of this week, 4,439 U.S. forces have been killed and the war has cost taxpayers more than $750 billion.

U.S. military officials and Western diplomats in Baghdad say the number of troops now being considered to stay ranges from a few hundred, who would work under the U.S. Embassy, to the tens of thousands, likely clustered in bases far off the beaten path where they will have little interaction with Iraqi civilians.

A senior adviser to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said the U.S. is quietly suggesting to Iraqi officials that up to 20,000 troops stay. The adviser spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions, and American officials repeatedly have refused to discuss how many troops might remain if Iraq asks for a continued large force."

http://www.sify.com/news/iraq-weighs-if ... ahjdg.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Hey, Grizthroat...when did you meet with Obama and when did he tell you all of our troops will be out of Iraq? You might want to meet with the major news organizations...you've got some breaking stuff there. The quote from above was from 2 hours ago. And you might want to tell Corporal Brandon S. Hocking that he died a couple days ago...but we don't have any troops in harm's way in Iraq.


Now that we're done with that little attempt at distraction and misinformation, true to his screen name, I'm sure Grizalltheway will answer the questions...all the way. Where are the body counts and calls to withdrawl from Affy?

And when will we be out of Iraq?

Are you saying we didn't withdraw combat troops by the date he promised (was a day early IIRC)? I never said we had everyone out, or that there aren't people still in harm's way. Pretty hilarious that you're trying squarely pin the blame for being stuck in a quagmire (gigity) on a guy who didn't even vote to send us there.

[YoUDeeMan]

Are you saying we didn't withdraw combat troops by the date he promised (was a day early IIRC)? I never said we had everyone out, or that there aren't people still in harm's way. Nice try, though.

Are you saying our military forces aren't killing people, and getting killed, in Iraq?



Call them whatever you want, it is the political thing to do in order to spin lies to the public, but we have troops in Iraq that are killing people.

[Grizalltheway]

Are you saying we didn't withdraw combat troops by the date he promised (was a day early IIRC)? I never said we had everyone out, or that there aren't people still in harm's way. Nice try, though.

Are you saying our military forces aren't killing people, and getting killed, in Iraq?



Call them whatever you want, it is the political thing to do in order to spin lies to the public, but we have troops in Iraq that are killing people.

No shit? I believe I admitted as much in the post you just quoted. I want out of there asap, but giving the finger to the people whose country we voluntarily destabilized is...well, a dick move.

[YoUDeeMan]

And Grizhalfway, like his spineless jellybelly cohort, still refuses to answer that entire question.

Spin Iraq all you want (yup, we still have troops targeting and killing bad guys...and still getting killed), but what about OBAMA's Affy war? And what about the body counts?

Funnny, we had 499 body bags come home from Afghanistan last year...Obama's casualties...377 from 2008....mostly Obama's casualties...64 so far this year (a pace for 293), including one killed in an ambush today, and the Libs are just happily supporting Obama's war. Heck, 940 out of the 1,510 American deaths have come on Obama's watch...in just over 2 years...with no end in sight. But, that's OK with Libs because it is their guy in charge...and the war in Affy is justified.

Still haven't heard that justification...it must be a top secret liberal thing that they can't talk about.

So, acording to Griz and skelly...a projected 1,500 casualties over 4 years is OK , but 4,440 over 8 years is where they draw the limit.

[YoUDeeMan]

Are you saying our military forces aren't killing people, and getting killed, in Iraq?



Call them whatever you want, it is the political thing to do in order to spin lies to the public, but we have troops in Iraq that are killing people.

No shit? I believe I admitted as much in the post you just quoted. I want out of there asap, but giving the finger to the people whose country we voluntarily destabilized is...well, a dick move.

Ahhh...but when we bomb Lybia into civil war and then abondon them, that isn't a dick move? You care SO MUCH it must hurt.

[YoUDeeMan]

And when we furnish Saudi Arabia and Bahrain with enough money to suppress their minorities, that isn't a dick move?

Libs: "we care enough not to care about our dick moves, but we will call out opponent's dick moves".

[AZGrizFan]

Are you saying our military forces aren't killing people, and getting killed, in Iraq?



Call them whatever you want, it is the political thing to do in order to spin lies to the public, but we have troops in Iraq that are killing people.

No shit? I believe I admitted as much in the post you just quoted. I want out of there asap, but giving the finger to the people whose country we voluntarily destabilized is...well, a dick move.

Their government said they wanted us out pronto. I say don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya....

C YA!!!

[Grizalltheway]

And when we furnish Saudi Arabia and Bahrain with enough money to suppress their minorities, that isn't a dick move?

Libs: "we care enough not to care about our dick moves, but we will call out opponent's dick moves".

We both know any decision we make regarding SA or Bahrain comes down to one thing: oil.

[Grizalltheway]

No shit? I believe I admitted as much in the post you just quoted. I want out of there asap, but giving the finger to the people whose country we voluntarily destabilized is...well, a dick move.

Ahhh...but when we bomb Lybia into civil war and then abondon them, that isn't a dick move? You care SO MUCH it must hurt.

Are you suggesting the situation wasn't descending into civil war before we started bombing?

[Bronco]

What has happened to the anti-war protesters?



" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[youtube][/youtube]

[BlueHen86]

If the guy I voted for does it, I'm okay with it.
If the "other" guy does it, it must be wrong.



Seems to me that we had a no fly zone in Iraq and now we have one in Libya. I had no problem with the Iraqi no fly zone but I was against the invasion.

I think we should let the rest of the world handle a Libya no fly zone, and we definitely should not invade. I hope our leaders are being truthful about reducing our involvement in Libya, but I will believe it when I see it.

[CID1990]

The ass beating going on in here is epic.

Ass beating is an understatement. We'll need to come up with a more descriptive word.

Only SK was stupid enough to set foot in here and try to spin things, but that's not surprising.

SK, next time call TTBF and get permission before you come in here and step on your own pee pee.

[YoUDeeMan]

And when we furnish Saudi Arabia and Bahrain with enough money to suppress their minorities, that isn't a dick move?

Libs: "we care enough not to care about our dick moves, but we will call out opponent's dick moves".

We both know any decision we make regarding SA or Bahrain comes down to one thing: oil.

Wait, Iraq wasn't about WMDs...the Libs said it was about Bush and his oil friends.

So, you, a Liberal trumpet, are telling me that Obama's decisions aren't about protecting civilian casualties...Obama's decisions are about oil? And you approve of his decisions...but not Bush's decisions.

Change? Only "change" for chumps.

Hey, Grizhalfway, where's the answer to the other part of the question? You keep avoiding that part.

Obama's war in Afghanistan...lots of dead US soldiers...and the Libs such as skelly and you are supporting Obama's increased invasion force because.....?

[YoUDeeMan]

Ahhh...but when we bomb Lybia into civil war and then abondon them, that isn't a dick move? You care SO MUCH it must hurt.

Are you suggesting the situation wasn't descending into civil war before we started bombing?

Libya will suffer as many casualties with or without our bombs. Q/K/G-boy actually did help keep those folks together...we might not like that, but there is truth in that.

In fact, a case could be made that they will remain fractured for quite some time due to our interference. But hey, we decide what's best for us...oil...and Obama, full of himself with the power of the Presidency, decides to make it personal and tells a leader of a nation that he "must go". Not just a "no-fly" zone to protect civilians. Obama is on record for saying, and repeating two days ago, that a leader of another country must be removed...by any means. Cripes, he is even telling his generals and National Security advisers to shut up when they say Kwadoofus might stay.

This isn't about civilians...Bahrain proves that...this is about cowboy Obama's ego. And you and skelly support that.

[Grizalltheway]

Are you suggesting the situation wasn't descending into civil war before we started bombing?

Libya will suffer as many casualties with or without our bombs. Q/K/G-boy actually did help keep those folks together...we might not like that, but there is truth in that.

In fact, a case could be made that they will remain fractured for quite some time due to our interference. But hey, we decide what's best for us...oil...and Obama, full of himself with the power of the Presidency, decides to make it personal and tells a leader of a nation that he "must go". Not just a "no-fly" zone to protect civilians. Obama is on record for saying, and repeating two days ago, that a leader of another country must be removed...by any means. Cripes, he is even telling his generals and National Security advisers to shut up when they say Kwadoofus might stay.

This isn't about civilians...Bahrain proves that...this is about cowboy Obama's ego. And you and skelly support that.

Link?

[Grizalltheway]

We both know any decision we make regarding SA or Bahrain comes down to one thing: oil.

Wait, Iraq wasn't about WMDs...the Libs said it was about Bush and his oil friends.

So, you, a Liberal trumpet, are telling me that Obama's decisions aren't about protecting civilian casualties...Obama's decisions are about oil? And you approve of his decisions...but not Bush's decisions.

Change? Only "change" for chumps.

Hey, Grizhalfway, where's the answer to the other part of the question? You keep avoiding that part.

Obama's war in Afghanistan...lots of dead US soldiers...and the Libs such as skelly and you are supporting Obama's increased invasion force because.....?

You keep bringing up Afghanistan...there was a HUGE consensus, on both sides of the spectrum, that we were justified in taking action there. No one, expect for uber-pacifist liberals, was screaming at Bush to not do so.

[YoUDeeMan]

You keep bringing up Afghanistan...there was a HUGE consensus, on both sides of the spectrum, that we were justified in taking action there. No one, expect for uber-pacifist liberals, was screaming at Bush to not do so.

And there was a consensus, except for a few uber-pacifist liberals, to go into Iraq...or didn't you check out the voting record of our most honored Democrats? Biden? Check. Pelosi? Check. Shall I continue?

But hey, things changed. No WMDs. So, we gotta' get out of Iraq. Things changed in Affy, too. No Osama...but we gotta' stay in Affy. In fact, Obama decides we have to increase our troops..and casualties...to do what?

What are we doing having our soldiers die, in increased numbers - thanks only to Obama, in Afghanistan? Answer that.