Last Combat Troops Leave Iraq

Submitted by: cobrakiller 7 years ago in
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_iraq_americans_head_home

Obama seems to have met his deadline.
There are 71 comments:
Male 5,167
Mwahhha i`m sure you was hoping i was death or something like that....but i`m not. I`m in an island somewere in the world far away from "civilization" but allways ready to answer to sionist or war fanatics on IAB. Good job USA you start a war you kill lot of civilians, you kill one of the puppets you have created(Saddam)and now you are ready to retire your troops leaving an entire region in the hands of chaos and revolution. Ohhh yes this is really what mean to be the Emperors...do what you want,drain some innocent blood(drain some oil over all) and finaly turn your head as if nothing heave never happen.I`m not against Obama, he is doing what he can with the current situation of the country that for ages have declared to be the leader of the world.I`m against all people that for ages have supported the sublime massacre and that today point a finger on Obama thinking all this situation is his fault.
0
Reply
Male 5,167
@auburnjunky
what you are sayng is so old but seem to be the best excuse of the sionists pigs, they like to paint the situation as if they are allways the poor virgin ready to be raped by the dirty palestinian orc.I assure you that a nation like Israel, full of mass destruction weapons,allready used lot of times against interational laws, at my eyes don`t appear like a poor lost virgin. You cry against hezbolla or whatever(i don`t like to) but remember is not allways white on one side and black on the other, real life is not the damned "Star Wars" movie(the modern epic poem for americans like Iliade or Odissea was for ancient Greeks).The sionist state of Israel have violated thousen of times humans rights so i`m not so shocked if sometime from other side the answer is not so polite as you pretend(not justifing the answer but just tryng to understand how the things works).
0
Reply
Male 5,167
Mwahhha i`m sure you was hoping i was death or something like that....but i`m not. I`m in an island somewere in the world far away from "civilization" but allways ready to answer to sionist or war fanatics on IAB. Good job USA you start a war you kill lot of civilians, you kill one of the puppets you have created(Saddam)and now you are ready to retire your troops leaving an entire region in the hands of chaos and revolution. Ohhh yes this is really what mean to be the Emperors...do what you want,drain some innocent blood(drain some oil over all) and finaly turn your head as if nothing heave never happen.I`m not against Obama, he is doing what he can with the current situation of the country that for ages have declared to be the leader of the world.I`m against all people that for ages have supported the sublime massacre and that today point a finger on Obama thinking all this situation is his fault.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
"sure getting someone assasinated is illegal but i really doubt that the higher ups who have the power to do it really gives a drat especially if they could do it without getting caught"

Well if the US did it, it would be seen by the UN as a terrible act, no matter who they assassinated.

Kinda like how they call Hezbollah and Hamas defenders when they shoot missiles into Israeli markets, but when Israel fights back they are condemned and called horrible war mongers.
0
Reply
Male 314
sure getting someone assasinated is illegal but i really doubt that the higher ups who have the power to do it really gives a drat especially if they could do it without getting caught
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Bollocks to all of this. I`ll reserve judgement until all the US troops are out of Iraq. Let`s see then what a sh*t-storm clusterf*ck of a country we left behind us.

Unsavoury as it may sound, a post-US invasion Iraq may actually be be worse off than a Saddam Iraq. I very sincerly hope I`m wrong.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
There`s a "magic number" for armies, I believe it`s 3:1. That means 3 support persons for every "front line" trooper.
Adding 50K front line troops was a big deal, and a big risk if things went badly.
But they didn`t! Bush won the war after all!

I`ll explain for the slow of mind (madest) who don`t quite get it: NORMALLY adding 50K combat troops means ALSO adding 150K support. This would DOUBLE the number of troops in Iraq, eh? Petrayus & Bush`s plan was to add the combat troops for a short time to "surge" over the enemy like a wave. Get it? Ok? It was a GOOD PLAN.

Remember the MSM wailing how this would just put 50K more troops in harms way, to become casualties for no reason?
HUMMM why didn`t they repeat that chant when Obama (half-assedly) did almost the same thing? HUMMMMM. Why is it a bad plan when Bush does it, but a great plan when Obama does it? HUMMM HUMMMMM...
0
Reply
Male 40,772
[quote]I`d have rather have had Saddam assassinated with special ops[/quote]
Actually that`s illegal under internation treaty. Remember the first commander of Desert Storm 1? He talked casually of doing just that, and got fired a few days later.

[quote]The "Surge" was all media bluster by Bush.[/quote]
Careful davymid, your Bush Derangement Syndrome is showing! lolz!
I clearly remember when General BETRAYUS (as the liberals called him, oh until Obama put him in charge! NOW he`s a grrreat general!) proposed the surge the MSM was all over this aspect of it. He explained that this would be 50K COMBAT TROOPS not support, truck drivers or cooks. These were already in place, see? So every grunt the `surge` brought in went directly to combat the enemy.
And HEY IT WORKED! Damn that Bush for his STUPID policies, like winning!
0
Reply
Male 17,511
IamBored29: [quote]Way to support our troops CJ. I`m sure they`re glad to know you`re more than willing to send them off to die.[/quote]

Don`t blame me, I`d have rather have had Saddam assassinated with special ops. Like to see the same done to Amendenutjob and Kim Jong Sicko.

No troops killed that way, But that is seen as too `cowboy radical`.
0
Reply
Male 44
heh heh, duty.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@crosstraffic why would you join the army if you don`t believe in what they are doing over there? If you believe that the war is about money (and I do too) then why are you over there risking your life and limb for that? Personally I think it`s wrong to enlist if you don`t believe in the war. Make them try and draft our @sses then we`ll see if they can wage pointless wars.
0
Reply
Male 9
All I know about this war is that it would of always happened. I didn`t join because I think everything we do is the best. I am not here in Iraq right now because I think it is going to make a difference. I joined because no matter what we would send troops here and I`d rather it be me getting shot at than my friends and family. I am here so they don`t have to be. So to all the people debating why we are here and what could`ve been done. Nothing would of changed what happened. We will always be at war at sometime or another because to America that means money to be made. Just know that our media is a joke and I wish that they would use this "freedom" we are fighting for and report the truth about who is still here, and what we are still doing. Instead they put that we are supporting IA and IP`s (iraqi army, iraqi police) Belive me they are the ones planting the bombs. We are still fighting the same people we released a few months ago, till they tell us that we can go home to.
0
Reply
Male 602
Technology has changed the way we wage wars, but because of the media and speed in which casualty and battle photographs reach the mainland.

Our troops should be held to a higher standard, but that doesn`t necessarily mean how they wage war, but how they conduct themselves in other ways. No beheading, raping, or pillaging. Decent treatment of prisoners. We have created the most awesome killing machine on the planet, and every time in the last 40 years we have used it, we have handicapped the ability to use its full potential.

When you are at war it is live or die. No "higher moral standards" should make the life of any civilian, or especially enemy combatants worth more than those of our troops.

A perfect example is the treatment of Masjids in Iraq. In WW2 the best place for a sniper was in the belltower of a church. The first thing a tank hit in any city? The church tower. Cant` do that sort of thing now...even when pretend Muslims desecrate
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]There is no way that EVERY U.S. Soldier is out of Iraq. I bet there are thousands still there.[/quote]
50,000 to be exact. Says so right there in the article.
0
Reply
Female 90
There is no way that EVERY U.S. Soldier is out of Iraq. I bet there are thousands still there.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]and davy your a drating idiot[/quote]
*YOU`RE a drating idiot.
0
Reply
Female 151
GO OBAMA!
0
Reply
Male 266
Yes we still have troops there, but not necessarily combative troops. They`re trying to move to diplomacy at this point and allow Iraq to govern itself. A+
0
Reply
Male 2,850
" Also, I believe our troops should be held to a higher standard than in the past otherwise we`d be no better than the bad guys we`re fighting. "

One of the rare occasions where CrakrJak speaks, and I agree.
0
Reply
Male 226
It`s all a bunch of PR spin bullpoo. We still have troops there.
0
Reply
Male 648
@CrakrJak

"Yes America has a weak stomach for bloodshed. Blame the Vietnam era protesting Hippies for that."

Yes, blame the American people for not wanting to watch their sons and daughters die to "free" another country who doesnt want it. Way to support our troops CJ. I`m sure they`re glad to know you`re more than willing to send them off to die.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Gerry: [quote]I don`t think we`re done over there.[/quote]

I don`t think we are either, But the will of the American people to continue it is gone.

[quote]The people of the US are pussies who want wars with no casualties and no brutality or violence. I don`t think the bad guys are beaten by any measure.[/quote]

Compared with earlier wars, Yes America has a weak stomach for bloodshed. Blame the Vietnam era protesting Hippies for that.

[quote]We carpet bombed Berlin in ww2 and we were hero`s. Nowadays, let one civilian get his feelings hurt `cause he wasn`t treated respectfully and the troops are facing courts martial.[/quote]

Technology is such now that we don`t need to carpet bomb, Smart bombs have changed the way war is waged. Also, I believe our troops should be held to a higher standard than in the past otherwise we`d be no better than the bad guys we`re fighting.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
davymid: It wasn`t the number of troops in `The surge` it was the tactics of the surge that worked.

Our troops entered a city, Got rid of any insurgents, Got intelligence from sources in those communities, Raided weapons caches, And most of all they stayed there in those cities living with the population for several months until they could recruit and train new police and military.
0
Reply
Male 1,360
should never have been there in the first place.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
wow!
0
Reply
Male 1
god they are just going to the neighboring country, that was his big plan remeber get them outa iraq and into afganistan b/c by his intel thats where they are located, so when we build up a base there, they will shift back into what the iraq people built with us and terrorize them. remeber kids where not fighting iraq where fighting the people who are terrorizing there own. and davy your a drating idiot omfg hardcore liberal? no liberal can be hardcore your all pussys go create another mtv show about how young people should run their lives
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]... in the middle east, they just cant quit fighting...someone has to babysit thier dumbasses. its been that way since the kuwait invasion,anything before that i dont know.[/quote]
Rakoon, someone needs to constantly babysit the dumbasses in the Middle East? And by someone, you presumably mean "America"? Damn, most of your posts are quite sensible, I fear we may have lost another one.

I`m just gonna focus on your last statement of "I don`t know" and put this all behind us, and move on from there. Tomorrow`s another day, let`s start afresh.
0
Reply
Female 654
it hasnt been going on for a good while now, just because there are people in the country doesnt mean they are kicking ass and taking names,well in that sense. no matter who, someone will always be in the middle east, they just cant quit fighting...someone has to babysit thier dumbasses. its been that way since the kuwait invasion,anything before that i dont know.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
@ crosstraffic, full and sincere respect for the job you and others like you are doing. Stay safe, and come home in one piece. All the very best to you and your colleagues (from a hardcore left-wing liberal).
0
Reply
Male 12,138
"Obama tried to block the surge. Funny how he now wants to take credit"

----------------

The "Surge" was all media bluster by Bush. Sure, more troops were sent in, but when you look at the general scheme of things, it wasn`t that big of a deal compared to the number that were already there. "The Surge" sounded good, like a Hollywood blockbuster, but the actual data are not so impressive:

0
Reply
Male 113
Obama tried to block the surge. Funny how he now wants to take credit
0
Reply
Male 49
I like how many people are bitching STILL. 50,000 troops thats a pretty big deal
0
Reply
Male 602
Iisbored, I hope that is sarcasm, because Bush claimed "Mission Success" in Iraq, not on the GWOT, which everyone from the beginning said would be a generations long battle. Terrorism can`t be defeated, merely contained as best as you can. They have to get it right just once, and we have to look out for it every day.

And to say 50,000 *soldiers* won`t be doing "military things" is just...well..stupid. Of that 52k that are left, at least 4,500 are Special Operation Forces, which will continue to perform combat action. It is as was stated before, they are just calling it something else, combat support. Even if they are delivering ammunition or intelligent support, they aren`t over there working in a call center or flipping burgers.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Actually the caption should have read, "Obama seems to have met Bush`s deadline." This date was negotiated with the Iraqi government while Bush was still in office.

Obama made no significant changes to Bush`s Iraq policies, even though he vehemently opposed them while he was a senator. Now he wants to take credit for their success. No doubt the media will give it to him.
0
Reply
Male 2,419
@satan
what war? the war on terror was won years ago according to the previous president, and those 50,000 soldiers obviously aren`t there to do any military like things
0
Reply
Male 321
does that mean the wars over?
0
Reply
Male 4,014
Yeah, he did. Oh, but I forgot, he`s ineffective.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@Homegrown71 I`m not saying that many of the soldiers coming home from Iraq are going to commit violent crimes, the people who work with soldiers with PTSD are saying it. Law enforcement officials are saying it. [Idiot.">

@Crakrjak I`m not trying to stereotype anyone. Every person/soldier is different, but come on, you troll IAB, you`ve seen the high suicide rate among Iraq Veterans. These people were put in violent situations and now they are coming home mentally ill and more dangerous than the average bear. If you don`t believe me check out this article I found on military.com it`s even biased towards the war mongering side of things *cough* I mean conservative.


"The volume of military-related crime off-post is beginning to tax civilian law enforcement authorities"

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/
Male 39,958
Reignblazer, wars are won only 1 way. Overpowering force. Anything less and you haven`t won. you might have a stale-mate or some such, but not a victory until you`ve beaten them so hard they no longer wish to fight.

It aint nice. It aint pretty. But anything less is not a lasting victory.
0
Reply
Male 602
We aren`t dealing with an enemy who can`t win a ground war. We are dealing with an enemy that doesn`t need to and knows it. All they have to do is make us spend enough money and publicize enough death and "atrocities" to combat the public`s will to fight. Bin Laden said that his intention on 9/11 was to bankrupt America, and that is precisely what he accomplished.

And Reign, Occam`s Razor :) There were very simple solutions to either of these combats. Defeat the enemy, then rebuild the country; not defeat the enemy while tying your hands behind your back and concurrently building the country. Give them a constitution, instead of letting a country of people who have lived their entire lives under tyranny make a half-assed attempt at writing one from scratch.

Look to Japan and West Germany for your answers, not Vietnam.
0
Reply
Male 2,332
Gerry, you cannot have a simple solution for a complex problem. US troops could`ve stayed there for another 10 years and all it would`ve done is drained more money from the US.

As much as you`d like it to be, reality isn`t black & white. You are dealing with an enemy that knows they can`t win in a ground war. Having an army parked on site in this case, is fairly useless.
0
Reply
Male 39,958
Ruthless1990 .... "US" ? Opinionated? What makes you say that?
0
Reply
Female 3,001
wow, people are very opinionated on this topic, almost as fun to read as the religious debates this site has, though not, because it has the feel of politics, and i detest politics...
0
Reply
Male 9
@auburnjunky No worries its my job and I love it. It def just sucks to see the media forgetting the fact that of those 50,00 troops left we were all once combat. They need to stop worrying about looking good and tell the truth. If the world only knew what actually happens here. @Gerry1of1 I agree. The fact that I have to shout at someone after they have shoot at me then shoot a warning round before I can retaliate just so I don`t have to worry about going to jail for 10 years boggles my mind.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Thank you for your service crosstraffic.
0
Reply
Male 39,958
No, CrakrJak, it`s not a quiters attitude. It`s reality. I don`t think we`re done over there.

The people of the US are pussies who want wars with no casualties and no brutality or violence. I don`t think the bad guys are beaten by any measure.

We carpet bombed Berlin in ww2 and we were hero`s. Nowadays, let one civilian get his feelings hurt `cause he wasn`t treated respectfully and the troops are facing courts martial.

My theory to winning the war. Shoot first, ask questions later. If he can answer, shoot again.
0
Reply
Male 9
So just putting this out here. I am in Iraq right now. Getting back from mission and watching this on TV. Its laughable. We just go our brigade changed to Combat support so it can be said that we are not combat troops. Pretty sure I go outside the wire everyday. We get hit every mission, still get shot at, still get blown up. Combat is far from over. We are not here just helping the country out. The amount of threats we have gotten this month in my area alone are more than last year for the entire country. Doesn`t understand how my orders are till 2012 here but we are out in 2011 and I get shot at everyday. But good for the 2nd ID for going home. We are still here doing the same work as them but are now "combat support"
0
Reply
Male 684
@Crackjack he isn`t saying give up. In a parallel to Vietnam war. You "won" as so far that a within a year afterwards the country got taken over. Gov. or army wasn`t built up strong enough to keep control. Which arguably is the same now considering that there is trouble forming a strong government after election.

Another War America won but for how long...
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Yeah Gerry, Let`s just give up because the task is too hard. <sarcasm>

That`s a quitters attitude and that is exactly the sort of attitude Al-Qaeda & The Taliban are counting on.
0
Reply
Female 48
Home from Iraq. Next stop Afganistan.
0
Reply
Male 150
two words; good riddance.
0
Reply
Male 39,958
So? Anyone want to take bets on how long it takes the Iraqi government to collaps and someone takes over who`s ever worse than Saddam Hussein?

Not that I`m pessimistic or anything, but look at the region ~ It`s a probable outcome.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
@luniz:

You are an exception to the rule.

Out of all the US service men/women I know, NONE voted for Barack Obama.

They all actually ENJOYED being deployed to Iraq/Afghanistan as well.

99% of the people who join the military do it because they want to, and they love to serve this country.

0
Reply
Male 587
Unholy we cannot have it both ways. First everyone just wants our troops out.. Now that Obama is acting on it everyone has a problem.. Funny how people opinions of situations change with what their party believes. We need to stop running our lives along the political line and start thinking for our selves.
0
Reply
Male 587
As A member of the militray I feel we are WAY better off under our new leadership.. Bush did not care about troop he cared about lining his pocket. Say what you want Bush put us in a situation we should have never been in and in doing so he put thousands of our troops in a bad place. He split out military so far that we were so un effective in both wars. He is a corporate tool and should be shot on sight.
0
Reply
Male 224
So now we wait, a few decades later we`ll be back. Isolationism was just so much easier, why can`t we just go back to that? Enough of this whole arming rouge governments, economically supporting terrorists against our enemies and militarily policing parts of the world we have no business in. If the UN doesn`t tell us to go there, we shouldn`t.

@NotTHATbored think about your stupidity for a second. Vietnam was an era of draft soldiers, regular people who were put in dense jungles filled with ambushes and booby traps. At least in Iraq its a professional army all of whom choose to be there, sure they have to deal with the close knit social contact but they should be way more prepared then your average vietnam vet who came home and was pelted and scorned by the very people he was fighting for.
0
Reply
Male 196
Dave32891, I`m sorry, but that`s a stupid thing to say. As a former active duty Marine, everyone knows (especially now, after 9/11) that when you sign up you`re signing up to be in harm`s way. You don`t join the military so you can have more time with your family. They are overseas doing a job, and sure, they`d rather be home than there. But mostly they`d like to finish the job.
0
Reply
Male 2,796
@Dave32891: Ask many of the current military people like myself if they miss their former Commander in Chief and you will get a resounding "yes". And there are really good reasons for it.
0
Reply
Male 541
i know some will stay and many will be moved to Afghanistan but this is still a big step to bringing all our troops home. This is much better than anything George Bush did for the troops.

I`m not trying to start a political debate, I just want to stop all those innocent soldiers from losing their lives over there. They deserve to be home with their families
0
Reply
Male 17,511
NotTHATbored: That`s an undeserved stigma and prejudice that I hope we are beyond now. Soldiers are no more criminally violent then the general population on average. Of course many will need counseling, But please do not contribute to spreading a false stereotype.
0
Reply
Male 4
The remaining 50,000 are there to train, coordinate, advise, and assist in the development of an Iraqi army that can defend itself- and with the Iraqi "government" bickering over a prime minister seat right now, they`re a necessary force. Combat is officially over, but the democracy that we tried to build is yet to be consolidated- I think pulling out everyone now would just be asking for trouble.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
Yay, now they can come home and commit violent crimes! I just watched a special last night on war veterans (with PTSD) and apparently after Vietnam 1/4 of the U.S. prison population were ex-soldiers and with this batch they expect it to be much much worse!
0
Reply
Male 10,338
50,000 remain, and 25,000 sit in Kuwait.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
I hope they manage to survive America now
0
Reply
Female 136
wow that picture almost made me cry
0
Reply
Male 36
Yea, too bad most of `em will now go to Afghanistan.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
They aren`t all gone, As the article states "..50,000 will stay another year.." and the combat brigade will stay close by in Kuwait.
0
Reply
Male 648
cue political debate in 3...2....1
0
Reply
Male 6,737
Troups?
0
Reply
Male 7,834
Link: Last Combat Troops Leave Iraq [Rate Link] - Obama seems to have met his deadline.
0
Reply