[Virosponna]

RealClearPolitics - Obama's Speech on the End of Operation Iraqi Freedom

I didnt really watch the whole thing as it was pretty boring and nothing new. The only comment I have is when he said this was a historic moment, I tried to imagine anyone remembering this moment in 50 years and couldnt do it. Nothing has really changed except a date ticked over and some paper was shuffled. We still have a mission in Iraq. I also would have liked to have seen him lead a moment of silence for Americans who have died in Iraq.

Your thoughts?

I think he should have said the word "victory" at least a dozen times and also done a victory dance at the end.

A lot of Obama's critics gave him credit for delivering a pretty straight forward speech instead of revisiting the questionable reasons that we went into the conflict. Not many people are recognizing that he was delivering on one of his major campaign promises without gloating too much about it. The only jab he took was the monetary cost of the war. As parthian shots go, it was pretty tame.

[NKUDirectory]

I think he should have said the word "victory" at least a dozen times and also done a victory dance at the end.

A lot of Obama's critics gave him credit for delivering a pretty straight forward speech instead of revisiting the questionable reasons that we went into the conflict. Not many people are recognizing that he was delivering on one of his major campaign promises without gloating too much about it. The only jab he took was the monetary cost of the war. As parthian shots go, it was pretty tame.

He wasnt gloating about it THERE. He does it elsewhere even though he has nothing to gloat about. He hasnt done anything about Iraq but execute Bush's agreement made before he left office.

[Viafdrear]

BTW, what was with this tired old talkikng point?



Any number of studies have shown that Iraq spending was minimal. Obamas one stimulus bill equaled the entire Iraq spending over 7 years.

Please link to these studies.

[Haftdrarp]

BTW, what was with this tired old talkikng point?



Any number of studies have shown that Iraq spending was minimal. Obamas one stimulus bill equaled the entire Iraq spending over 7 years.

Note, he said "at war", not "on Iraq". And he's right, both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have cost well above a trillion dollars.

[erroxiainsona]

Please link to these studies.

FOXNews.com - CBO: Eight Years of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act

[Alina20100]

Note, he said "at war", not "on Iraq". And he's right, both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have cost well above a trillion dollars.

I know.

[Annyllop21]

I know.

...so, what's the beef?

[snova]

...so, what's the beef?

He overstates the importance of the amount of national security spending.

[BalaGire]

BTW, what was with this tired old talkikng point?



Any number of studies have shown that Iraq spending was minimal. Obamas one stimulus bill equaled the entire Iraq spending over 7 years.

As I said many times over there is little our government can do to change the current picture. We all played a part in creating the problem with the Republicans leading the pack over their term in office.

Our piss poor position has become an international problem because of the interconnecting effects and therein will lie part of the solution.

To top off the day it appears our Afghanistan venture is unravelling due to massive corruption at the top that seems to discredit and derail our whole effort there.

(see bank bailout situation) Just announced on CNN.

IMO We are in for a "long stretch" of bad news. Plan for the worst and hope for the best. Don't be "wussies" !

[Babposa]

As I said many times over there is little our government can do to change the current picture. We all played a part in creating the problem:

So true.
People just can't seem to be able to wrap their feeble little minds around the fact that the Dems., Reps., and the voters of this country spent 30 or more years to get us where we are today. It's gonna get alot worse before it gets better. But that's ok, it will weed out the dead weight.

[Hdzcxqoi]

Note, he said "at war", not "on Iraq". And he's right, both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have cost well above a trillion dollars.

How do you know the war didn't save us trillions of dollars?

How much would it have cost if we did not invade and then Saddam Hussein & his regime's AQ associates nuked a few American cities?

[DurryVony]

So true.
People just can't seem to be able to wrap their feeble little minds around the fact that the Dems., Reps., and the voters of this country spent 30 or more years to get us where we are today. It's gonna get alot worse before it gets better. But that's ok, it will weed out the dead weight.

Which people are you talking about? Thats all some of us on this forum have been saying.

[trettegeani]

How do you know the war didn't save us trillions of dollars?

How much would it have cost if we did not invade and then Saddam Hussein & his regime's AQ associates nuked a few American cities?

I think our imaginary anti missile defenses could have handled his imaginary nukes, but that debate belongs in the imaginary forum.

[ViktorialHDY]

Truncated: It's gonna get alot worse before it gets better. But that's ok, it will weed out the dead weight.

That remark stands out in my mind because of a real life experience;

The employees of a client firm virtually in unison after a layoff exercise would "repeatedly" as it progressed explain; "he, her they were dead weight" until that is THERE WERE NONE LEFT TO EXPLAIN !. :

[Nekas48]

How do you know the war didn't save us trillions of dollars?

How much would it have cost if we did not invade and then Saddam Hussein & his regime's AQ associates nuked a few American cities?

Get serious !

[refsherne]

Which people are you talking about? Thats all some of us on this forum have been saying.

All of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time but not all of the people all of the time. (P.T. Barnum). It fits.

[esdfsdflast]

How do you know the war didn't save us trillions of dollars?

How much would it have cost if we did not invade and then Saddam Hussein & his regime's AQ associates nuked a few American cities?

Nuked us with what, harsh language? They still did not have these weapons, still has not been made real clear what all of Saddam's associations were with AQ, and under this brilliance we would have invaded Iran (and probably several others) years ago. Don't get me wrong, the world is a much better place without Saddam and his crew but at the same time the above logic... why the hell did we go after the county that did not have the nukes and then pretty much ignore and default to the UN and resolution __ (what number are we up to?) in dealing with the one that does?

[RilmAlime67]

Which people are you talking about? Thats all some of us on this forum have been saying.

Some is not all.

[lammaredder]

How do you know the war didn't save us trillions of dollars?

How much would it have cost if we did not invade and then Saddam Hussein & his regime's AQ associates nuked a few American cities?

You're rebutting with fantasy? Heck, why stop there? How do we know the wars didn't save the whole planet from the Galactic Federation coming down and obliterating mankind with giant Ion cannons? How do we know the wars didn't prevent the collapse of the entire space time continuum, ripping asunder the Universe and reality as we know it?

[education]

Some is not all.

You should be more clear then. You didnt say "some" you just said "people".