Friday, February 27, 2009

Pants. On. Fire. Yet. Again.

"Vote for me, I will withdraw from Iraq."
Psych!

Have faith! Believe! He's not fucking trashing his campaign promises! You didn't elect a total fucking liar!

5 Comments:

At 10:45 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

boots sez:

If I'm not mistaken the US has troops in Germany and other places, manning bases.

If Obama was the man you wish him to be they'd already have crucified him and he'd be rotting in his tomb waiting for some follower to stage his resurrection.

 
At 11:42 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

boots sez:

I'm no blind Obama-follower, but the previous administrations left him a mess to clean up in Iraq.

If it was me in charge I'd withdraw every US soldier overnight and let the vacuum fill itself, which implies a willingness to deal with any bunch of ragamuffin fundamentalists who happened to fill the vacuum. Some people would consider that irresponsible, probably the very ones complaining about Obama's plan for dealing with the mess his predecessors left.

Being President of the US is a shit job and I cannot comprehend why anyone would work to gain the position. They must fancy themselves costumed heroes.

 
At 6:31 am, Blogger Arleen said...

It's a start. I would be more concerned if he weren't bringing back troops at all. As boots says, the whole thing is a mess, and as he (the prez, not boots) is privy to things the rest of us aren't, there may be method to his madness. Probably not, that's wishful thinking, but God, I'm just so thankful Bush is gone and the Republicans are out, I'm willing to be optimistic at this point in time. It's only been a few weeks.

 
At 8:49 am, Blogger Dr Zen said...

He's bringing back troops so he can "surge" in Afghanistan. I don't see any change at all in the overall plan.

And what could he even conceivably be "privy" to that you aren't that would require 50K troops to remain in Iraq? That's a ton of troops.

 
At 8:29 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

boots sez:

"And what could he even conceivably be "privy" to that you aren't that would require 50K troops to remain in Iraq? That's a ton of troops."

If they were all there for the purpose of subduing Iraq it would be a drop in the bucket just as 150,000 is too few. On the other hand if they were simply stationed there in a state of readiness for some forthcoming mess arising in nearby nations that could be a different story. It will unfold.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home