US WITHDRAWS FROM IRAQ BY END OF YEAR
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama announced on Friday that all U.S. troops will leave Iraq by the end of the year.The president made the announcement at a White House briefing following a private video conference with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
“As promised the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year. After nearly nine years, the war in Iraq will be over,” Obama said.
More than 4,400 American military members have been killed, and another 2,000 wounded since the U.S. invaded Iraq in March 2003.
Nothing like military decisions being made to prop up a falling approval rating.
Please God, don't let this clown win a second term.
Are you fucking retarded? It is in OUR interest to be in Iraq, far too much blood and money has been spent to leave like this but the Iraqis will not grant our soldier's immunity from persecution something which has been given to us by ALL host countries.
Stupid comments like this is why I hate posting.
From Reuters: President Barack Obama said on Friday he would pull U.S. troops from Iraq this year, almost nine years after the U.S. invasion, after he failed to convince Iraq that several thousand troops should remain in part as a balance against neighboring Iran.
right on Anthony....if i recall correctly, wasnt part of his platform in 08 to bring the troops home in 09? but in the meantime, thousands of troops were added to afghanistan, illegal war in libya and so on. This man is evil....
Evil is a pretty strong adjective. I agree with most of the points above in that the US needs to stop trying to be the police of the world. Re-focus our efforts on internal problems and let the UN handle the policing.
Are you an idiot? What is there to gain by wasting billions of dollars in Iraq? Don't believe in the supremacy of the free market, and by extension, the free market of ideas? Our presence is acting as a price floor on the value of our moronic exercise in nation building.
Ant, agreed. He promised this in his first campaign, and it's just now coming to fruition.
Also, we need to get out of Afghanistan then we'll be on the right track.
I am trying to find more details about this. We were trying to negotiate an agreement to train Iraqi soldiers.
Obama is strictly doing this because he is tanking hardcore in the polls. Makes me sick.
THAT'S what makes you sick????
So you're okay with the whole illegal invasion/occupation and wholesale slaughter of Iraqi civilians and the deaths and maiming of US troops in some bullshit war, right?
1) Invasion was completely legal. By what standards was it illegal?
2) Iraqi's maimed and killed Iraqi's. It is regretful that some people were neutralized because of US engagements, but it happens. Just like Kurds being gassed or other ethnic minorities being killed.
3) US soldiers being killed is unfortunate, but the easiest way to ensure that you don't get killed or harmed is by not voluntarily joining the military.
to be fair to O, he did promise this in the campaign. if you want to blame someone blame the people who voted for him.
Or blame the administration that sent 4500 Americans to their deaths?
that too.
I have no issue with him fulfilling his promise, nor do I want US troops in Iraq forever. The expediency of this is my issue, also the timing. We have shifted into mainly a training and advising role. We also offer symbolic stability. Iraq is training and building its military and police apparatus and violence has declined significantly.
There is no need to rush this and he could still campaign on the fact that he has essentially withdrawn the majority of troops. This is a slap dash attempt to boost his numbers.
These troops aren't going home either. They are going to Afghanistan.
that's an interesting take, i had the opposite interpretation. i thought O was making typical political false promises during the early campaign and would pussy out on the withdrawal after getting leaned on by the MICC (on the long odds that he would be elected). i won a bet that the troops would still be there 18 months after his inauguration. still there. if anything i think he stiffed the anti-war crowd by dragging this thing on.
and escalating in afghanistan? attack on libya not authorized by congress? way to go, nobel peace prize winner.
I am going to keep quoting cause I don't know how to do the multi quote bullshit. Did you ever wonder maybe because of the sensitivity of this topic it wouldn't make it to the front pages of the teabag daily? The deadline was a self imposed one, we didn't get our immunity clause for our trainers and so we aren't gonna stay. Very simple amigo.
It won't happen. How many times has this asshole promised this in the past four years?
Nefarious, you are quickly becoming one of my favorite posters hahah
Haha, you're already my favorite because you save me from even replying half the time.
SHORT DINARS!!! AHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
Please tell me why I should rephrase anything? We have an all voluntary military. Guess what, you sign up, you might go to a war zone. That is the whole point. All this bullshit about college tuition and seeing the world masks the fact that the military is about going to war.
Doesn't mean I wish ill on soldiers or think their death is meaningless, but it is their job to fight for this nation.
I can honestly say that if you join the military and don't weigh the chances of catching a bullet with your face then you are an idiot.
Let me just say that many of my friends are active duty and most have done multiple tours of duty in Iraqistan. I don't want to be flippant about the risks or what happens when one of them gets injured or worse.
It amazing me how nearly 8 years later, many "Republicans" still have no conception of the lies, deception, and propaganda used to engineer the Iraq war.
I'm still skeptical that all US military personnel will be exiting Iraq. They built a military base nearly the size of the Vatican.
This seems more like "Mission Accomplished III."
The real question: how many military contractors paid by the tax payer will remain in Iraq?
Agreed. People like ANT are willfully ignorant of all the lies that lead us to the Iraq war. Last week, I had jury duty in a case that involved petty theft. The suspect was a 19 year old who broke into an electrician's van to steal some fairly pricey equipment. Deliberation was damn near instantaneous and ended with a conviction. This young adult will be sentenced for a longer period of time than people who are responsible for the deaths of more than one million people.
An insane world.
And who would try the people responsible for these deaths?
Bush and Cheney are the only people responsible.
You didn't answer my question.
OK, shit for brains, if you're looking for volunteers I'd clear my fucking schedule to see a little justice done to those fuckers.
I don't think I'd have any trouble rounding up 11 of my pals who've actually experienced war firsthand to join me, either.
Rummy's another one who wouldn't fare too well in my courtroom.
Every decision I see Obama making right now I believe is because of his approval rating. I mean why the FUCK ARE WE IN UGANDA hunting some random Africans no one in America has heard of? This reminds me of how we bombed Iraq when the Lewinsky deposition was taking place. Coincidence?
The whole "illegal war" is BS. Few wars since Vietnam has been approved by Congress, Iraq though was one of them. It "ended" in 2010. Why was it illegal? I don't think the U.N. is legitimate in any form, we fund our enemies to stay on our shores while we get next to no benfits.
That said, I am for withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan ASAP. No matter what, I don't think we should be in the process of nation building. No one likes an exogenous force imposing themselves on them, democracy- to succeed- need to be an endogenous offshoot. We failed nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan- we should have just gone in, killed the important people and their support structures and GTFO. In Iraq that would have been Saddam and the Ba'ath Party, in Afghanistan that was the Taliban structure (not everyone) and Al Qaida. Needless to say this line of though justifies little to no occupation in Iraq and a pretty long one in Afghanistan.
We should be looking out for America first and foremost, not trying to spread democracy to people who generally do not want it. Before the Arab spring, what were the "democracies" in the Arab world? Egypt (yeah right) and Tunisia (yeah right). I'm not gonna say democracy isn't where Arabian state would end up, but has an exogenous implementation of government ever worked in the long term anywhere? Not really.
If they want a dictator, they should be able to have one. If they want a President, more power to them.
I am not going to bother reading the rest of your post, I disagree with you from the beginning. We hunt fighters of the Lord's army for the same reason we went to Iraq, for the same reason we bombed Bosnia, Grenada, Panama, and etc etc. The list goes on and on, we are the world's policeman because we have global interests.
So you want us to be the world's policeman? Ton's of countries are globalized like...pretty much every first world country today. Why are we the retards running around, guns blazing, making enemies left and right? If Milosevic or this dude posed any threat to the U.S. we should take them out. But we are sending 100 people into the jungles of Africa to kill a bunch of guerrillas in the hope that the corrupt Ugandan government will be grateful enough to let Exxon take all their untapped oil. Yeah....
-
Nation building, in one of the last untapped oil rich ME states, is very strategic for the US. We have massive hooks in that country and as oil becomes more scarce we will ensure that we have a lock on that commodity. This country depends on oil and that will take a long time to change. Until that happens, it is prudent planning to have control over one of the worlds most important resource.
How is Afghanistan the ball? Iraq can and hopefully will be a great country one day. Afghanistan is haggard.
To compare Libya to Iraq is completely unfair. Obama should get jack shit credit for that.
You can thank Bush for Osama and the drone attacks. Obama was just continuing his policies. Furthermore, Bush was always a hawk. Kind of funny how someone running on withdrawing troops and no more wars is asking for credit for anything militarily.
My criticism is that "nation building" will never work. If we want the oil, we should impose a military junta controlled by the U.S. This BS stuff where Iraqis don;t like the government, don't like what has gone on because of the war, etc. isn't gonna help us get oil. Saddam, while evil as hell, probably would have alled with us over Iran.
-
ANT, do you understand foreign policy, or even rudimentary economics? Why would we need to invade a country to get access to their oil supplies? Did we invade and occupy Venezuela, Russia or Canada? Are we preparing a force to invade Nigeria tog et access to their oil supplies? Also, the proven supply of oil has increased greatly over the last decade, a time when oil demand was decreasing by nearly 1.2 million barrels a day? Gasoline will most surely be supplanted by Natural gas since the natural gas reserves in Pennsylvania and New York are greater than their equivalents in Saudia Arabia.
Also, I love how you don't know anything about proven oil reserves. Do you know where the world's largest proven oil reserves are? They are the oil sands/ tar sands in Canada. Not Saudia Arabia, not Iraq or any other ME country.
Try to read something besides tea leaves.
Oil is traded on a global market.
Copia, before calling anyone a retard, have you served and deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan?
What if I said yes? What difference would that make? To answer your question nope I haven't served.
I will call you an idiot if you don't know what you are talking about.
Ask most servicemen and they will tell you the same thing, if we leave Afghanistan now it is giving it back to the Taliban and Pakistan to take back the country 10 years to what it used to be.
ANT:
Bill Kristol...is that you? You're such a fucking neocon drone, it's pathetic.
Obama escalated the drone attacks, particularly into Pakistan, and gave the CIA more authority when it comes to authorizing strikes. It was HIS push that has helped to decimate Al Qaeda.
No, we can't "thank Bush for Osama," are you serious? Bush, just six months after 9/11, said he "wasn't concerned with Bin Laden," and that he didn't think about him a lot:
But, yeah, let's thank Bush for getting Bin Laden. Holy shit. Imagine if the raid was a bust and we didn't get him AND someone died. Would we thank Bush for that? Get the fuck out of here.
Afghanistan is / was the ball because it harbored Al Qaeda. Iraq didn't. End of story. But, yeah, really good idea to go nation building because of oil.
Libya: Why shouldn't he get credit? He could've pushed to put troops on the ground and all sorts of non-sense. Instead, we took a more passive role, supporting the rebels with air strikes. Maybe Bush should get credit!
Your entire view that nation building in Iraq is good because of oil is absurd. Are you shitting me with this crap?
Obama has pissed me off in a shit-ton of ways, I have disagreed with him strongly on some fronts (i.e. his entire economic team), but this is one area where the bullshit from the far right neocon bunch is just laughable.
No point arguing with ANT. Any person who says we should invade/occupy a country so we can have ready access to something that they would be more than willing sell to us is dumber than mildly-retarded small animal that eats lead paint chips. ANT can't think past his infantile jingoism. Our intervention there caused oil production in Iraq to crater. Even now, investment in Iraqis oil fields, for American companies, is non-existent. The world's largest oil fields are in Canada, not the middle east.
But whatever, ANT can't understand that.
Republicans tend to be more hawkish than Democrats.
Everyone should want to be a neocon. It is latin for correct, someone who knows his shit.
Correct wing power in da house.
TheKing, after reading your post, I'm confused. You are condemning neocons (rightfully so) yet fail to understand Obama is a neocon himself.
MNT:
I'm actually pretty hawkish when it comes to terror, but I am absolutely 100000% against what we did in Iraq. It accomplished nothing of note and was clearly more trouble than it was worth.
That said, I think fundamentalism is a real issue and that Obama has the right strategy for fighting it (intel-driven UAV strikes, not full fledged invasions.)
I don't think Obama's policies on terror come anywhere close to the idiocy that was the invasion of Iraq. We need to be aggressive in the war on terror to crush our enemies completely. What we don't need to do is invade countries, kill 1,000,000 citizens, and prop up some bullshit "democracy" that no one asked for at the cost of a trillion dollars and thousands of American lives.
Stopped reading your drivel after this. I find it odd and somewhat humorous that overthrowing a malicious dictator similar to Hitler doesn't fall into the category of "noteworthy."
Don't be mean to my fanboi!
http://www.randomhouse.com/crown/features/decision-points-by-george-w-b…
For all your educational and reading pleasure.
Nefarious:
I suppose you also want us to go to Darfur, then, right?
But, wait...I thought neocons argue in favor of Iraq because of oil. Which is it...strategic oil resources or overthrowing dictators (and subsequently supporting a puppet leader and imposing democracy.)
I really haven't said one thing either way on this debate aside from Obama's promise won't go through.
That aside, your comment about nothing noteworthy coming out of Iraq is absurd, thus my comment.
I guess I don't consider neocon wet dream nation building exercises worth the loss of American lives. Nothing absurd there.
Copia, so you've asked "most servicemen" that question? That's really laughable. The one's I've talked to want to stay home and not go overseas. Guess I should have done a large "sample" like you.
I retract my disgust. I knew that there were negotiations going on and that immunity was a contentious issue. When this announcement was made I couldn't find any information regarding it. It was played up as Obama pulling troops out, finally making good on his promise. Now that news articles are reporting that this is a reaction to not being able to get immunity for the troops, this was a smart move.
Credit to you for being able to revise your view in light of new facts. If only people in government learned to do that.
Serious question: Do these troops get re-deployed, work from the U.S., or are they simply relieved of duty and forced to find employment elsewhere? Basically, are we about to unleash tens of thousands of soldiers into the economy to look for jobs?
I would imagine they would cycle back for a year or less and then get deployed to Afghanistan unless their enlistment is up and they get out of the military.
i predict bonus army part deux in 5 years time.
^
agreed.
pay the soldiers first. the rest don't matter.
The troops aren't coming home becasue Obama wants them home, they are returning because Iraq kicked us out. There is no fullfillment of any promise here.
eokpar on a fucking tear, shredding people to pieces. Good stuff.
JK WHY DO U H8 THA TROOPS BRUH?
Jesus, I am about to hit the gym and my #1 fanboi is sweating EOK now?
1) Saddam was very much like Hitler. He gassed and systematically killed ethnic minorities. He invaded neighboring countries, he allowed his people to starve and die as he siphoned off oil for medicine funds. Sorry that Saddam didn't get to kill as many people as Hitler did. You can thank the USA, once again, for protecting innocent people.
2) Yes, Iraq would happily sell to the USA and everyone else. Problem is, once something becomes scarce and there becomes less and less of something, the price will simply skyrocket, UNLESS you can lock it down for yourself.
The USA having a strong presence in the ME ensures that oil will flow and make it to US consumers above all else. Why do you think China is getting so close to African nations that other countries shun? It is to guarantee their own supply lines while avoiding a direct confrontation with the USA.
3) Bush didn't have to fucking lie. Also, lest you forget, Saddam was in repeated violations and refused to allow weapons inspectors into the country. We were also continually at war with him by policing the no fly zone which Saddam kept entering or shooting at our planes.
I'll be back later.
Saddam was one of a legion of brutal dictators. The US did nothing to stop the Pol Pot regimen, does virtually nothing in Africa, and has yet to invade China to 'liberate' them. The Iraq war wasn't even about oil.
Also, the 1MM death figure is the highest possible composite estimate, it's likely far lower. Note that these deaths were not primarily inflicted by the US: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
There's a lot of reasons we went into Iraq, the bottom line is international power politics, pure and simple. All of the rationalizing and politicking fails to publicly address this.
After the first gulf war, Iraq's military was decimated. Sadaam was never going to become some super powerful Hitler type figure. Give me a break.
here's the difference between ANT and nefarous. i like that ANT openly states that might makes right and leaves it at that. all this other bullshit about saddam being the next hitler is risible to anyone with more than a few working neurons. saddam's crime was that he tried to sell his oil in euros, just as gaddafi's was trying to sell his oil in gold. this is also why hugo is shaking in his boots and dares not go off the worthless paper/oil oops i mean USD/oil trade. we did not give a flying fuck when saddam was gassing "his own people" (i suppose the iraqi kurds were the people of a sunni arab in the same way the blacks of the south were bull connor's people, but i digress). we even supplied him his gas arsenal in the '80s and normalized diplomacy with him not more than a month after he murdered a bunch of mothers and their kids.
if you were/are for this war, step up and own your position. be proud that you have the worldview of a genghis khan or a joe stalin. also, it's "alluded," not "eluded."
I find it hilarious you resort to correcting misinterpretations of homophones while supplying everyone with a grammatical mess of a run on sentence.
I don't know where the comparison of myself and Anthony came into play or why it is even a topic. It sounds like you left wing nut jobs are getting a little upset that you can't attempt to gang up on him like you usually attempt to do.
My original comment about Saddam was that he was a malicious dictator similar to Hitler. You all are the ones that have taken that and made it into Saddam = Hitler.
This is what I have never been able to wrap my head around when it comes to the logic of you tree hugging hippies that have cried for so many years about our invasion of Iraq: Would have it been OK with you if we never went there and Saddam was still in power? I don't really care if Bush went over there to finish off what his Daddy started. People like Saddam deserve to die.
Saying that people that are currently for the war or were at some point for the war have the same "world view of genghis khan or joe stalin" is just amazing. I am truly sorry we don't live in a world of puppy dogs and rainbows.
Making a Hitler comparison = grasping at straws
Being against sending troops to die when the reasons are all as nebulous as what you've put forth does not make one a "tree hugging liberal," it makes them a reasonable person who wants our armed forces and resources used intelligently.
Question: How do you feel about Libya and the killing of Ghadaffi? We played a role without a single US soldier dying. What are your thoughts on that compared to Iraq?
I can't believe you are calling libertarians like myself and Theking tree huggers. Opposing military intervention is the traditionally conservative position. Yes, it would have been OK if Hussein was still in power and in fact, it would have been much better if he still was. Prior to our invasion there was no terrorism in Iraq. Al Qaeda was a sworn enemy of the Baath party and Hussein. That isn't the case now since Iraq has transformed from a semi-secular state to rabidly religious country where clerics like Al-Sadr wield the power. Iraq will be a haven for international terrorist groups. Also, our war in Iraq has destroyed America's position in the world. How can the US prosecute any type of conflict without doubt from the world?
You are irrational. The costs of removing Hussein ( 3 trillions dollars already and trillions more in the oncoming decades do the brutalization of our soldiers) greatly exceeds the negative benefits of the action.
Read something like Fiasco.
I will always stand by might makes right. That being said, there was plenty of moral and international authority for what we did. We never need a reason to engage militarily, but if we did, there was plenty.
i would certainly not say that we don't all benefit from the system. our dollar goes pretty far because our military is going around the world kicking ass. why the fuck do people think we have a military? that's moral justification enough for me. i would like to have an american leader step up and talk to us like we're adults. "we can stop kicking ass, but that would mean you would be paying $200 a tank for gas, $50 a t-shirt and your general standard of living would go down. now, make a choice: do you want to kick ass and live large, or come home and have to square our balance of trade every year? because the only reason we get to run a 70BB pa USD external deficit into infinity is that we got our boots on the necks of the oil producers and everyone who wants that oil needs to pay up in USD and thus sell us their stuff in exchange for paper that we can print up at will."
like another programmer on here i am pretty frugal and can accept a lower standard of living if it means i don't get groped by the TSA in this perpetual war state. but i know i am in the minority and i know ron paul will lose the next election by 49 points. i have accepted it.
Nef -
If we didn't go into Iraq the liberals would cry that we don't care about crimes against humanity. They would cry that the USA only uses Iraq for oil while we allow Saddam to siphon off aid money for his palaces. They would cry that minority ethnic groups in Iraq are being persecuted.
When we DO invade and kill Saddam and allow these people to self determine their future, we are imperialist invaders. We give them billions of dollars and try and build a Democracy and we are murders. The liberals cry about American soldier deaths, yet continually try and cut the budget of the DoD and call soldiers baby killers.
You cannot win so it makes no sense to even listen to them.
Liberals hated Bush for his American-centric views and unilateral action. Obama was supposed to unite the world. Yet we are still condemned around the world. Relations with China and Russia have deteriorated. Our allies don't know what to do.
Why the USA even considers what Europe thinks is beyond me. Other than the UK, no other nation does jack balls to aid the USA.
To think we wasted American blood to help them. And then rebuilt them. Sickening.
^ as a conservative, let me give another perspective. i oppose the GWOT on the grounds that living in a state of perpetual war destroys our republican liberties. a state at war must needs be secretive and suspend democratic practices. wiretapping, torture, infliction of collateral damage, domestic propaganda, physical invasions of privacy, outright lying. lincoln had to do it for the survival of the union and it's just fucking reality. now, obama/bush have given themselves the right to kill US citizens at will. this guy in yemen was not a sympathetic character. but, the TSA was originally designed to stop "terrorists" whatever that means. what are they doing now? they are harassing guys like michael yon and ron paul's campaign staff for carrying cash boxes. or any ordinary guy with silver/gold coins. one woman had to give up her internet passwords so they can read her emails. look all of that up. this is exactly why you cannot give up your liberties so easily, and going to war is the fastest and most expedient road to generating popular assent to rolling back basic constitutional rights -- when people are scared they do short-sighted and stupid things.
i argue that being anti-war is the true conservative position. the neo-cons are the deranged liberals who dreamt up this fantasy of democratizing the world with military force. like most liberal ideas it is based on laughable fallacies that make sense only to foolish professors in a university debating society.
chief, if you don't know the difference between elude and allude, you sound like the kind of guy who does more writing than reading. you should fix that before spouting off.
one of us is indeed living in the world of puppy dogs and safety scissors and it's not me. you seem to be saying that since saddam was a bad man we had to get in there and you're pissed because you think liberals would have been whining either way. well, maybe they might have. not being a liberal, i couldn't get into their heads.
but if your worldview is about knocking over bad men, why do we install bad men on a regular basis? why did we install the shah of iran after knocking over their democratically elected PM in 1953? why did we install suharto in indonesia who went on to massacre the east timorese on a holocaust-scale? why did we prop up pinochet whose use of torture, rape and mass murder as instruments of domestic control are well known? why did we prop up saddam in his war against iran, knowing full well what kind of thug this baathist ex-assassin is? i am just getting warmed up here. i can go on much longer with the list of fascist murderers in the mold of saddam that we have propped up. i know i sound like a broken record here but it's history, it's fact, it's there for anyone without his head up his ass to see it.
if you have acquired any reading comprehension abilities in your education you might be able to deduce that i can respect a "my country right or wrong/do what's good for us and fuck everyone else" position like ant's. at the very least, it is honest, logically consistent and not hypocritical. you on the other hand typify the ideal consumer for the ridiculous propaganda that saddam is anywhere in the neighborhood of hitler in terms of capabilities or intentions.
Stopped reading after this.
you couldn't have made my point any better. thank you.
BTW, are you Obama dick riders even aware that the withdrawal of our troops by 12/31/11 was the deal that was originally agreed upon under Bush?
UFO, the million plus estimate is an actual scientific estimate. All others were counting dead people. Obviously asking people if they had a family member who died (1 out of every 4 said they did) is a better metric than tallying the dead.
Nefarious:
If you don't know the difference between elude and allude, you sound like the kind of guy who does more writing than reading. you should fix that before spouting off.
one of us is indeed living in the world of puppy dogs and safety scissors and it's not me. you seem to be saying that since saddam was a bad man we had to get in there and you're pissed because you think liberals would have been whining either way. well, maybe they might have. not being a liberal, i couldn't get into their heads.
but if your worldview is about knocking over bad men, why do we install bad men on a regular basis? why did we install the shah of iran after knocking over their democratically elected PM in 1953? why did we install suharto in indonesia who went on to massacre the east timorese on a holocaust-scale? why did we prop up pinochet whose use of torture, rape and mass murder as instruments of domestic control are well known? why did we prop up saddam in his war against iran, knowing full well what kind of thug this baathist ex-assassin is? i am just getting warmed up here. i can go on much longer with the list of fascist murderers in the mold of saddam that we have propped up. i know i sound like a broken record here but it's history, it's fact, it's there for anyone without his head up his ass to see it.
if you have acquired any reading comprehension abilities in your education you might be able to deduce that i can respect a "my country right or wrong/do what's good for us and fuck everyone else" position like ant's. at the very least, it is honest, logically consistent and not hypocritical. you on the other hand typify the ideal consumer for the ridiculous propaganda that saddam is anywhere in the neighborhood of hitler in terms of capabilities or intentions.
lol
thank you for contributing to the education of our nation's middle-schoolers.
We can reduce our deficit and shrink our balance of trade without being isolationist. Not saying that we have to be rocking and rolling around the world all the time, but in my opinion, having a strong presence in the ME is beneficial to America.
China is doing the same thing were are, but in unpopular African countries. Why? Because oil is a diminishing and extremely important natural resource and they don't want to cross paths with the USA (at this point).
All I care about is that the US military guarantees that the last oil tanker of oil will sail to US ports and not somewhere else. You can't buy that kind of power.
Europeans should be a lot more respectful and gracious of the US. We don't have an underclass of radical Islamist's in America that cannot wear religious garb. Europe is going to be the flash point of extremism in the future, not the USA.
Libertarian from a global perspective or an American centric view?
Just as people who claim to be about the working class can push for taking jobs from the Chinese working class and bringing them home, so can American libertarians support unilateral military action.
From a globally libertarian viewpoint, Iraq was wrong. From a US centric view point it has no bearing.
Nefarious, a US attorney anywhere in America would do.
I am by no means an expert of the law.
But are you saying that any US attorney could begin a trial on Bush or Cheney for war crimes at any time?
i stopped reading here
^^You won't find more of a critic of the Iraq war than Ron Paul. Not sure why he hasn't touched on that yet. Eh, he has my vote either way.
All right, so I guess the question now becomes will anyone? I believe that no one will.
Vero dolorem quis eum debitis consectetur nihil et. Nihil architecto quam sequi adipisci suscipit maxime. Enim sapiente nulla voluptate ullam.
Omnis recusandae beatae optio quisquam voluptate reprehenderit placeat. Tempore maxime placeat maxime sequi tempora enim qui. Dolor hic blanditiis earum voluptatem aut odit.
Quia et non perferendis ut corrupti nemo. Quaerat laudantium quo minus voluptatem est soluta blanditiis numquam. Nam ab nihil maiores et consequatur velit. Veritatis ut et qui molestias a rerum eum et.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Ad ducimus eos nobis eos. Mollitia totam esse quis assumenda ab asperiores atque sint. Voluptas et ullam maiores. Enim laudantium esse consequatur veritatis velit. Officiis quasi explicabo impedit voluptas numquam est.
Aspernatur ea ipsa velit provident rem delectus. Quisquam aspernatur quis optio deserunt blanditiis dolor. Exercitationem quae placeat voluptas id atque. Laboriosam odit ullam libero sed dolorem velit.
Sequi velit odit ratione tempore odio. Delectus veritatis nostrum quaerat modi repudiandae expedita. Sit neque cum reiciendis.
Nostrum doloremque occaecati aut eaque iusto est earum aut. Voluptatem veritatis aut deleniti sed ut nam quae omnis. Et illo quae commodi. Ut nisi possimus similique quod explicabo culpa. Quibusdam nostrum cupiditate debitis id.
Quisquam harum laborum cum et architecto nesciunt facere. Non repellendus veniam minus ea eos eius voluptatibus. Repellendus iste aut assumenda consequatur et sequi dolorem.
Accusamus ipsa et placeat quia vel. Et enim nulla et neque voluptatem. Unde voluptatem odio dolorum inventore cum. Quis aut ea deserunt unde eaque doloremque. Eum reiciendis perspiciatis est ratione aliquid sunt veniam. Sit placeat ea rerum sit omnis dolorem.
Expedita ipsam aut omnis eligendi. Veritatis omnis qui praesentium dicta debitis. Consequatur ut illum minima sunt architecto. Velit nemo qui amet fugit autem sequi.
Delectus est alias sit sint. Non impedit unde temporibus. Non ducimus a temporibus eos ea eaque repellendus. Suscipit repellendus ullam sunt. Unde veritatis placeat nisi ipsa. Dolorem officiis quae repudiandae. Id perferendis suscipit tempore suscipit deserunt officia voluptatem.