|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Aug 21, 2008 20:19:13 GMT -6
Ah yes! Now it's aspirational timetebles. That sounds pretty solid. God, you're a stupid Ass. At least read the full article. Spokesman al-Dabbagh said that any withdrawal date in the agreement could be changed if security worsened. He said the date only refers to American combat troops. Support and training forces would remain at Iraq's request, he said.
"It is in the Iraqi interests that the withdrawal of American troops not undermine the successes we've had," al-Dabbagh said. "At the end, the situation on the ground will be taken into consideration and both sides will jointly decide whether or not to make amendments." Conditions on the ground. Where have we heard that before? These aspirational timetables sure are rigid. What really cracks me up is that the people(you) clamoring for a withdrawal timetable for the last five years are crowing that we might actually be able to bring a sizeable portion of our forces home. As if this is a mark against the stay the course proponents. This kind of mentality echos the broken clock is right twice a day theme. I hope the majority of our forces do come home in the next few years. That would mean things are stable in Iraq. That thread you're clinging on to is getting more frayed with every passing moment. Is this the same al-Dabbagh that is seen here? Here's your broken clocks: icasualties.org/oif/The thread has turned into a rope thanks to the surge/stay the course which has allowed the Iraqi Government to take shape and grow/retain power. Sweet youtube vid. In it, Mr. al-Dabbagh(pictured with President Barry no less) says the Iraqi Government wants us out by 2010 yet your USAToday link says that the pending agreement states that US combat forces will be withdrawn (conditions on the ground permitting of course as stated by Mr. al-Dabbagh) sometime in 2011. Is he just aspirationally grasping at timetables? And when in doubt, pull out coalition casualty figures that will have zero bearing on the conditions on the ground and any future time-whatevers. |
|
|
|
Post by socal on Aug 22, 2008 6:36:11 GMT -6
The thread has turned into a rope... OMFG.......  |
|
|
|
Post by thunderhawk on Aug 22, 2008 10:01:10 GMT -6
As has been repeatedly stated before, of course there is a time line. That time line is when the job is complete. No wonder you're such a big Bush fan. You're as fucking dense and ignorant as he is. |
|
|
|
Post by socal on Oct 22, 2008 20:51:20 GMT -6
The thread has turned into a rope thanks to the surge/stay the course which has allowed the Iraqi Government to take shape and grow/retain power. Sweet youtube vid. In it, Mr. al-Dabbagh(pictured with President Barry no less) says the Iraqi Government wants us out by 2010 yet your USAToday link says that the pending agreement states that US combat forces will be withdrawn (conditions on the ground permitting of course as stated by Mr. al-Dabbagh) sometime in 2011. Is he just aspirationally grasping at timetables? And when in doubt, pull out coalition casualty figures that will have zero bearing on the conditions on the ground and any future time-whatevers. Feel free to concede... www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=44394 |
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Oct 25, 2008 16:57:45 GMT -6
Funny, that's what I was going to say. www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,439244,00.html But Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said Thursday that Gates accepts the agreement and is calling senior members of the House and Senate armed services committees to explain the details."I don't think the secretary would be making phone calls in support of the document if he didn't believe it adequately protected our forces in Iraq," Morrell said. "He is comfortable with the document that he is calling people about today."
Morrell would not provide details of the draft, but acknowledged there are withdrawal timelines. He said those dates "are goals that ... will only be followed if the conditions on the ground provide for it."[/b] BTW, hack analysis by the likes of Gareth Porter should be dismissed immediately. He is pretty funny, though. Edit: Initially posted wrong linky. Edit: Same guy, more detailed comment. aubreyj818.blogspot.com/2008/10/iraq-on-ground-updates-october-16-2008.htmlMorrell would not discuss specifics on the agreement, but he did say the Iraqis desire to assume greater responsibility for their national security.
"We are supportive of that," he said. "It is a tribute to the progress that's been made by our forces, bince the surge, that conditions on the ground are such that it is stable enough, it is secure enough, that Iraqi forces have taken more of a lead in their operations."
The Iraqis are growing in strength, capabilities and confidence, Morrell said. They are at the point where they can see a time when fewer Americans will be needed to keep stability and security in Iraq.
The agreement, Morrell said, includes "aspirational timelines" for U.S. force reductions.
"We've talked about goals," Morrell said. "Any withdrawal dates that are in this – and there are dates in this document – are entirely conditions-based. These are not ad hoc, willy-nilly, arbitrary timelines. These are goals that ... we have agreed to that will only be followed if the conditions on the ground provide for it. But that is something the Iraqis strongly want. They are a sovereign nation, and we are fully supportive of those desires."
Morrell said the two sides are close to a final document, but he would not forecast a date. |
|
|
|
Post by socal on Oct 25, 2008 22:24:35 GMT -6
Funny, that's what I was going to say. I'd hate to see you on the jury for a pedophilia trial... because if the accused said "the child smiled at me", that would be all you'd need to argue for setting him free. |
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Oct 29, 2008 19:39:33 GMT -6
Funny, that's what I was going to say. I'd hate to see you on the jury for a pedophilia trial... because if the accused said "the child smiled at me", that would be all you'd need to argue for setting him free. Nice post. Concession accepted. |
|
|
|
Post by socal on Nov 17, 2008 8:05:53 GMT -6
|
|
