Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama to withdraw most troops from Iraq by August 2010

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 07:58 PM
Original message
Obama to withdraw most troops from Iraq by August 2010

Obama to withdraw most troops from Iraq by August 2010.

President Obama is expected to announce this week that he will withdraw most U.S. troops from Iraq by August 2010, 19 months after his inauguration. Obama’s plan will initially leave a “residual force” of 30,000 to 50,000 troops. “A further withdrawal will take place before December 2011, the period by which the U.S. agreed with Iraq to remove all American troops.” Obama was also considering 16-month and 23-month timetables; the 19-month time frame was reportedly a “compromise.”




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. You are a good soldier, Prosense. And a good Democrat.
And all presidents are constrained by what is possible.

:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:09 PM
Response to Original message
2. 30,000 to 50,000 residual force?
Fonzie makes less in residuals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. “A further withdrawal will take place before December 2011...to remove all American troops.” n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
3. Thanks for this. Olbermann was just talking as if it was a broken promise. It's the FIRST
Edited on Tue Feb-24-09 08:11 PM by jenmito
time I disagree with Keith. 3 months longer than he said he would keep combat troops in during his campaign is NOTHING, considering he's now the president and has to work with others to get it done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. He does this for two reasons.....
1. it gets your attention

and

2. it's a journalistic trick. He plays Devil's advocte so that the pundent can have an opportunity to refute the claim. And that's exactly what happend. "The sight of those troops coming home will be amazing." So the viewer is left with the POSITIVE image.

It's when he starts OFF with the thing you agree with and the "expert" starts sounding like he just left the Faux News studio that we need to worry. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EraOfResponsibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. ah, that's a good point!
I didn't know that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. It happens ALL the time.....
.... he did it last night with the whole Bagram/Rendition/More of the Same BS.

I see so many folks getting upset about what the talking heads say when they're not listening to the WHOLE conversation ...... just the set up.

Also, you have to watch the caption at the bottom of the screen. If his point as to call Barack out backpeddling, but that's not what the caption said. It said, "reality on the ground" which implies that the rhetoric of the campaign sometimes have to be set aside for the REALITY of how things are when you are privy to Intel.

Ehh, it's three months. Considering the fact that I've always understood McCain's claim that we could be in Iraq "forever" as we have been in Korea, I'll take it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EraOfResponsibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
17. Clio, is what RAchel did also a journalism trick?
cuz she sho' nuff did it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Numba6 Donating Member (355 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. She's gone from being a minor disappointment to an utter failure, IMHO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. But he has Rachel on now saying this looks like a BUSH plan...
Edited on Tue Feb-24-09 08:54 PM by jenmito
which is wrong. She's disappointed and Keith is agreeing with her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EraOfResponsibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. EXACTLY! Her lying ass talking about 2013
WRONG, RAchel! 19 months is NOT 2013! Learn to count, woman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. I hate when she starts with the unjustified doom and gloom...
with the wrong information like you just said. Very disappointing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Keith and Rachel do this and I flip to CNN. Bush plan? She can't be serious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Sadly, she IS serious. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uzybone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Something is wrong with that lady sometimes
In a rush to appear independent, she screws up her facts. The "residual" troops are planned to be out by December 2011, not 2013.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Yup...
she was way off tonight. Just like when she kept saying Hillary was going to "take it all the way to the Convention." :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. Rachel annoys me sometimes and this is one of them.
I usually agree with her on policy but her political radar is way off base. And I've had it up to my eyeballs with the gloom and doomers lately.

For cryin' out loud, McCain would have kept them there forever. Obama extended his time table by 3 months and in the process he probably made the generals feel like they have some input, so they're happy now. And that just might pay off on some other things in the long run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uzybone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
8. Not on schedule, but I see the light at the end
of the tunnel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-09 01:03 AM
Response to Original message
19. 38% of Troops to Remain in Iraq - this is bull shit
That's just awful.

How about letting the Iraqis vote on it directly. You know how that would come out. 805 have wanted us out
for years.

What bull shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 01:41 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC