Did you HEAR? This is quite a change, and a rather abrupt one; I wonder how much THIS has to do with it? Leaving only 160 troops behind is definitely considered "leaving", isn't it.
Thoughts?
z
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
remember
Andrew Breitbart...American Hero
My Blog List
-
-
-
What is FREEDOM OF SPEECH?7 years ago
-
An Epidemic Of Biden3 years ago
-
-
FOR ME - MORE BLOG LESS F B2 years ago
-
-
Kid's Creations3 months ago
-
The Old Breed1 week ago
-
His Name Was Charles4 years ago
-
-
-
Project Reconquista Commences10 years ago
-
Memorial Day 20159 years ago
-
-
-
-
Goodbye, Mom9 years ago
-
-
-
-
I'm on a roll tonight.7 years ago
-
-
No Hard Feelings7 years ago
-
Just Looking for A Better Life2 hours ago
-
VALENTINES DAY! :-)4 years ago
17 comments:
Moqtada al-Sadr's rise to power is only just beginning. Whoever HE should follow (in the form of a "Grand Ayatollah") will determine the future of both the Iraqi AND Iranian regimes. Ali al Sistani will die, soon. When he does, ALL bets regarding an Iraqi return to Shi'a fundamentalism of the Khomeini heresy are off the table. I would NOT be surprised to see Moqtada al Sadr unify Iran and Iraq once al Sistani dies.
As for Malaki, his days as a caretaker president serving the infidels are over.
Note - that Moqtada al Sadr chooses to study in Qom and NOT Najaf does not bode well for Iraqi "secularism". Picture Iran TWICE as powerful as it is today. Now you know what "liberating Iraq" has bought us, as NO contingencies have been made over the past eight years to forestall this seemingly inevitable eventuality.
Like they say, we fought to wars in the East. Iran won both of them.
Only two? What about Bosnia?
Bosnia is right. We're were supposed to be outta there in five years...oh wait that was a Clinton war.
BTW duhkkky hows it feel to have the full weight of the Nazi and Communist Party behind the OWS fleabaggers?
Seig Heil duhkkky
Impertinent - As usual you come across as the raging bull - complete with your own style of bullsh*t.
Right on IMP. You continue to piss off the libs by telling the truth. War is not a game and there are no ties, no second place, only a winner and the winner is the one who kills the most first in order to get those left alive to surrender or die.
Unfortunately the libs don't understand this. They think if we play nice , they'll play nice and so far IT AIN'T WORKED WORTH A DAMN.
Libs are clueless as shown by "clueless n' chief" him self.
As to the leaving. He has to do something to make folks think he is keeping his campaign pledges, a little late but he can brag, I pulled the troops out of Iraq. So OK BOZO when you gonna move em out of Afghanistan and now Africa . Week before the election?
Again IMP your choice of words were eloquent. The more libs you piss off the better. It just shows how right you are.
Oh yeah, Ticker, I'm just one p*s*e* o*f l*b.
**** ** * break
Iraq has always been Obama's to lose. it looks like he is serious about his loser-ship.
He is anti-American.
Imp, you're right about collateral damage; we're fighting with our hands tied because of political correctness and worry about the leftwing media's disdain and our enemy can't get enough collateral damage...that's their goal.
Ticker, it's scary to think this move is all about the election, but it's rather sudden and a little upsetting for the Iraqis who want us to stay and for our soldiers who've lost limbs and so much more.......off we go! Like we left Vietnam when I just heard that many soldiers said we were winning and were stunned and saddened that we pulled out like we did........
I don't know how we survive this kind of mentality.
Bob...it sure seems so. but, when we consider the types of people his folks were and then whatever facts we know about his growing up, there's nothing PRO American in any of it...
There are no leaders there for Obama to "take care of" so it's time to move on. To the Sudan, Syria, Lybia and any other country where there could be a hinderance to him becoming the Caliph.
Just saying!
Or just something for him to throw the fleabaggers before election
We never should have taken out Saddam. The Iraqi's don't appreciate us for it, and it removed the firewall that kept Iran out of the Middle East.
Some people just require a dictator, and we'll see how it plays out in Iraq...
Uganda here we come....
spreadeagle..some good points there :=)
SF..I used to think the one good thing about IRaq, for Iraq's people, was Saddam's ouster until I finally studied enough and understood Mr. Z's admonitions enough, to realize that the world is sometimes better off WITH those awful people in power; You're so right about that firewall and now it's IRAN'S SMORGASBORD, isn't it..the whole Middle East.. ONWARD TO ISRAEL'S DESTRUCTION...what a NIGHTMARE.
Beamish...that's exactly what I said to a friend this morning.
Did you hear that WE won't be firing until WE are fired upon? Nice (sarcasm here) for the families of those Green Berets over there, huh? Good news for our enemies, too.
Imp :-)
Post a Comment