Obama Doesn't Plan to End the Occupation in Iraq

13

Comments

  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    _outlaw wrote:
    It was partly a joke, but the idea is that these sort of terms try to discredit other people. Someone who criticizes something like Israel is labeled "anti-Semitic" and now apparently if you criticize Obama for doing something you disagree with (and rightly so) you're "anti-Obama"? How can you even be anti-Someone? It makes no sense.

    Correct. I don't even know the guy. In fact I don't think anyone here does personally behind closed doors. He's probably extremely cool in many regards, but being cool really doesn't cut it for me, as outlined in my signature, when it's really all about policy, and in my case (being an outsider) foreign policy in particular. This is something that affects everyone (especially at present). I have little to no interest what he does internally. That's something he has to answer for to the people that live in the country he works for.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • Urban Hiker
    Urban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    That's something he has to answer for to the people that live in the country he works for.

    Unfortunately, they won't be asking much of him. Just don't be Bush - that's a pretty low standard.
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • Anon
    Anon Posts: 11,175
    _outlaw wrote:
    It was partly a joke, but the idea is that these sort of terms try to discredit other people. Someone who criticizes something like Israel is labeled "anti-Semitic" and now apparently if you criticize Obama for doing something you disagree with (and rightly so) you're "anti-Obama"? How can you even be anti-Someone? It makes no sense.
    That's a fair comment. Just to clarify, i don't have a problem with anyone having a negative opinion on Obama when they debate their reasons for feeling like that.

    What I do have a problem with, is the people that post here, who think they know what obama supporters think and feel about issues. I'm sorry, but they are not that awesome. They cannot read minds.
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    Pj_Gurl wrote:
    That's a fair comment. Just to clarify, i don't have a problem with anyone having a negative opinion on Obama when they debate their reasons for feeling like that.

    What I do have a problem with, is the people that post here, who think they know what obama supporters think and feel about issues. I'm sorry, but they are not that awesome. They cannot read minds.

    From a status quo perspective it isn't that hard of a mystery to figure out (for a lot it was a lesser of two evils reality...but ultimately they chose the wrong direction to begin with if they supported Obama over all available choices) ....and those that give passes to further the phony (and illegal) war on terror as an acceptable situation are even easier to gauge.

    I'm not pointing fingers, just observing expressed viewpoints I've seen in general here and elsewhere..

    The bottom line is if Obama continues the pre-emptive war on terror doctrine that bush created...he's fucked, and so is the entire country.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • Mutiny! he cried
    Mutiny! he cried Posts: 162
    Pj_Gurl wrote:
    I know there have been a few mentions of 'sore loser's and sour grapes', but i didn't think that i had seen it on more than half a dozen times?

    I can do a search if you like to see how many times those words have been used, and then at the same time i can also search the word 'sheep'. You know, that condascending word that gets dropped around here very often. I don't think that's actual discussion either.

    I guess two wrongs don't make a right though. Have a look at the number of really switched on and great debaters that have stopped posting here recently. I guess eventually they get sick of being told this is how they feel and this is how they see things when time and time again they say that is not the case. It's like hitting your head against a brick wall time and time again. Eventually you can't do it anymore.

    How many people here actually want good debate? Honestly. Or how many just wanna tell you how you feel, what you think, and how stupid you are because you don't think like they do?

    It happens all the time. There is no denying it.


    what did your search find?

    I did a search just in the moving train for 'sour grapes' and it found 92 posts (93 now and 90 when you take away me and you saying it) so........

    so some call Obama supporters sheep....and? that is also trying to prevent discussion or just to put someone down, my point still stands
    'and I can't imagine why you wouldn't welcome any change, my brother'

    'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
    and you swear it's not a trend
    it doesn't matter anyway
    there's no need to talk as friends
    nothing news everyday
    all the kids will eat it up
    if it's packaged properly'
  • catefrances
    catefrances Posts: 29,003
    Urban Hiker wrote:
    Unfortunately, they won't be asking much of him. Just don't be Bush - that's a pretty low standard.

    and very easily attainable.

    i have to wonder though... why is it some people expect such high standards from their politicians anyway?
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • NoK
    NoK Posts: 824
    Mutiny! he cried wrote:
    what did your search find?

    I did a search just in the moving train for 'sour grapes' and it found 92 posts (93 now and 90 when you take away me and you saying it) so........

    so some call Obama supporters sheep....and? that is also trying to prevent discussion or just to put someone down, my point still stands

    Have you tried sour grapes? They're very good with tequila.
  • Anon
    Anon Posts: 11,175
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    but ultimately they chose the wrong direction to begin with if they supported Obama over all available choices)
    That's your opinion.
  • Anon
    Anon Posts: 11,175
    Mutiny! he cried wrote:
    what did your search find?

    I did a search just in the moving train for 'sour grapes' and it found 92 posts (93 now and 90 when you take away me and you saying it) so........

    so some call Obama supporters sheep....and? that is also trying to prevent discussion or just to put someone down, my point still stands
    I said two wrongs don't make a right.
    It's ok. You win. You guys have convinced me. Obama sucks and i'm a fuckhead for trying to fight for what i believe in.
  • Mutiny! he cried
    Mutiny! he cried Posts: 162
    Pj_Gurl wrote:
    I said two wrongs don't make a right.
    It's ok. You win. You guys have convinced me. Obama sucks and i'm a fuckhead for trying to fight for what i believe in.


    :confused:


    it's not about one of us being right and the other wrong. I know you said that, i'm just saying it's a moot point is all. :)
    'and I can't imagine why you wouldn't welcome any change, my brother'

    'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
    and you swear it's not a trend
    it doesn't matter anyway
    there's no need to talk as friends
    nothing news everyday
    all the kids will eat it up
    if it's packaged properly'
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    Pj_Gurl wrote:
    That's your opinion.

    Not really. It depends what the goal is. The lesser "Hollywood" or "mainstream" candidates were less status quo and offered more change at face value than what Obama actually presented, (and has still yet to present). If the goal is war these days, then status quo is your man. Ultimately this action will destroy the country given the global understanding and impressions, and interpretations, of such action (not to mention past history). Chaos will ensue the world around sure as the sun rises.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    Nader's clarification re: uncle tom goes a long way in illuminating the counter mindset towards Obama.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_MmPIHWJlU
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • LikeAnOcean
    LikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    It's too early to criticize Obama.. give him a year and then tear him down. There's no way we are going to instantly leave Iraq. No way. Bush fucked Iraq, and somebody has to pay the child support..

    I am by no means a conservative, but some left wingers live in a fantasy dream world.
  • Urban Hiker
    Urban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    LikeAnOcean wrote:
    It's too early to criticize Obama.. give him a year and then tear him down. There's no way we are going to instantly leave Iraq. No way. Bush fucked Iraq, and somebody has to pay the child support..

    I am by no means a conservative, but some left wingers live in a fantasy dream world.


    I once accepted a job and on the first day I was told I had ONE MONTH to fix the system that was incredibly fucked up or I was FIRED. My methods were questioned the whole time I was there and I was happy to explain my logic. They were happy that I cleaned up their mess and that I continued to raise the bar.

    I don't give people a free pass. Every job I've had has been a "jump straight in the fire" kind of gig. Sink or swim.

    I think just about any working stiff has had to answer for their actions and accept criticism.

    Why should we handle the President-elect with kid gloves?
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • LikeAnOcean
    LikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    Urban Hiker wrote:
    I once accepted a job and on the first day I was told I had ONE MONTH to fix the system that was incredibly fucked up or I was FIRED. My methods were questioned the whole time I was there and I was happy to explain my logic. They were happy that I cleaned up their mess and that I continued to raise the bar.

    I don't give people a free pass. Every job I've had has been a "jump straight in the fire" kind of gig. Sink or swim.

    I think just about any working stiff has had to answer for their actions and accept criticism.

    Why should we handle the President-elect with kid gloves?
    OK then. Give him a month.. He hasn't even started the job yet and he's getting criticized for work he hasn't done..
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    Not really. It depends what the goal is. The lesser "Hollywood" or "mainstream" candidates were less status quo and offered more change at face value than what Obama actually presented, (and has still yet to present). If the goal is war these days, then status quo is your man. Ultimately this action will destroy the country given the global understanding and impressions, and interpretations, of such action (not to mention past history). Chaos will ensue the world around sure as the sun rises.
    What is life like on your high horse? It must be nice to have all the worlds answers. You are clearly the smartest one here and the rest of us (who disagrees with you) are nothing but mere imbeciles in your presence.

    Dude, seriously, get off your horse.
  • OffHeGoes29
    OffHeGoes29 Posts: 1,240
    I didn't vote for Obama, but I'm happy to see he is doing the smart thing. I was worried that it was going to be a hasty draw down for the sake of the left.
    BRING BACK THE WHALE
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    Not really. It depends what the goal is. The lesser "Hollywood" or "mainstream" candidates were less status quo and offered more change at face value than what Obama actually presented, (and has still yet to present). If the goal is war these days, then status quo is your man. Ultimately this action will destroy the country given the global understanding and impressions, and interpretations, of such action (not to mention past history). Chaos will ensue the world around sure as the sun rises.
    How do you know what Obama presented; all you ever heard was "Change" and "Yes we can." But, have you ever read his website where he explains where he stands on issues? Or, did you just get caught up in the hype? Because Obama actually holds more of my values and morals and opinions than Nader or McCain. But again, why am I telling you this, you already think you know everything about everyone and how they think.

    I am actually for the war on terror. You must be agianst it. So right there, I ask that you never ever speak on behalf of ANYONE else ever again and just stick to your opinions. And remember, opinions are like ass holes, we've all got one.

    Status quo; you love that phrase. I actively vote from all sides of the political aisles - don't ever pretend as though you know who I am, how I think, and what I beleive. You are one of the worst debaters on this forum because all you ever want to do is tell others what they think, and then you think you are right because you just told the other person what they think and why they are wrong. Yet, you hardly EVER answer anyone's questions.
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    US troops will be removed from Iraq in the next 2 years.

    the generals are advising a 16 month withdrawal anyway...not complete as the op says, but still, less troops = good for the people of Iraq. soldiers are trained to do 1 thing....
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    Commy wrote:
    US troops will be removed from Iraq in the next 2 years.

    the generals are advising a 16 month withdrawal anyway...not complete as the op says, but still, less troops = good for the people of Iraq. soldiers are trained to do 1 thing....
    The thing is, Obama never once even pretended to say that he was going to end our "occupation" in Iraq. That is just the OP's projection in an attempt to get others to rally with him on his anti-Obama campaign.

Categories