Obama won't end war by 2013

[Raistlin]

In an interview a few months ago with Tim Russert, which I only just found out about, Obama refused to promise that under his administration our troops would come home by January 2013, five years from now. He also said that American forces may REMAIN in the region under his administration to "protect American diplomatic and military personnel in Iraq, and continue striking at al Qaeda in Iraq... continue training othe [sic] Iraqi Security Forces", ie., what we're already doing.

Discuss.

[Shin666]

neither will Mccain

[ViperSRT3g]

I can personally tell you from the mission I'm about to do in Iraq, that we currently are in the process of returning Iraq to their own Government. It's just a time consuming process slowed down by all the **** the insurgeants keep throwing at us. We are also helping to rebuild public municipals such as waste water treatment plants, power generators, building standards, etc just so that the facilities will meet their standards, which isn't very high. What we're doing is making it harder for rebels to take the country back once we leave it, since we are trying to leave it in a self sustaining environment. As with the issue of leaving Iraq, yes, we really are in the process of doing so, it's just going to be a while.

[Raistlin]

Originally Posted by Shin666

neither will Mccain

That's all you can say? Obama used to promise that he would withdraw within 16 months of his inauguration (he only said it to steal the primaries from Hillary, but he still said it, and it is the reason most of you guys supported him).

[Shin666]

Originally Posted by Raistlin

That's all you can say? Obama used to promise that he would withdraw within 16 months of his inauguration (he only said it to steal the primaries from Hillary, but he still said it, and it is the reason most of you guys supported him).

"If Barack Obama wins the election, he has pledged to bring in a major reform of the health services and he has promised to cut the tax rate for the middle and working classes. He wants to expand the war in Afghanistan. If John McCain wins he wants to keep in place the tax breaks for the rich, fight to “victory” in Iraq, expand the war in Afghanistan and challenge Iran in such an assertive way that it could well lead to another war."

[Raistlin]

Originally Posted by Shin666

If Barack Obama wins the election, he has pledged to bring in a major reform of the health services

Numbers show Obama plan won’t work | ZDNet Healthcare | ZDNet.com
Obama socialism -- dailypress.com
Badtux the Snarky Penguin: Why Obama's plan won't work
Obama's Health-Care Plan: Wrong RX

and he has promised to cut the tax rate for the middle and working classes.

They both want to give tax cuts to the middle/working class. The difference is that Obama wants to give more tax cuts to them than McCain, by RAISING taxes on other Americans and businesses, a blatant appeal to class warfare (do you realize how many times he said "class" during the debate?). And the glaring, unaddressed problem with Obama's tax proposal is that he has yet to explain how raising taxes on the businesses that employ, and provide products and services to, the public could possibly be good for the economy.

I also have to point out that Obama got himself elected in Illinois by promising tax cuts for the middle class, something he never did or even tried to do. When legislation was introduced to raise taxes on the middle class, he voted YES. Do you really believe him when he says it now?

He wants to expand the war in Afghanistan.

If it had been up to Obama we would have pulled out of Iraq in defeat instead of allowing the surge to succeed as it has (even Obama now admits that it succeeded). John McCain supported the surge and he was right, Obama opposed the surge and he was wrong. I don't think he is the man to run our armed forces right now.

If John McCain wins he wants to keep in place the tax breaks for the rich

If the government is giving out tax breaks, it shouldn't pick and choose who gets them. Money belongs to the people the government takes it from, regardless of how much money they have.

fight to “victory” in Iraq

There is no doubt that the war in Iraq is a victorious one. I could run through the list of reasons but I will leave it up to you whether to get into that debate.

challenge Iran in such an assertive way that it could well lead to another war.

Iran needs to be challenged, and there is nothing over the top about saying that the President of the United States will not sit across the table from a maniac like Ahmadinejad without preconditions.

[Shin666]

I'd prolly be more compelled to argue if i actually cared about either people =/

that quote was just pulled of some random journalist, not my words in the least btw

[Dyndrilliac]

Originally Posted by Raistlin

That's all you can say? Obama used to promise that he would withdraw within 16 months of his inauguration (he only said it to steal the primaries from Hillary, but he still said it, and it is the reason most of you guys supported him).

Correct me if I'm wrong but I was under the impression that he intends on -beginning- a slow, strategic, concentrated withdrawal within 16 months of his inauguration, and that he's never said anything about a complete withdrawal of all US Forces from Iraq. Additionally, I think its important to consider that the vast majority of our Military support McCain because they think that a complete withdrawal from Iraq would be more trouble than it is worth at the moment (and they have problems with some of Obama's other military policies, such as all soldiers being forced to learn a primary language of the region in which they will be in, and not just translators - I have a bunch of friends in the Airforce who are kind of pissed that they as EOD's might be forced to learn some "retarded sand ****** language", as they put it).

[MiCrOz]

Which president would get more crap, the one who finishes it out in a reasonably timely manner, or a president who completely pulls out and lets Iraq fend for themselves. It's not as simple as simply pulling out. We're there, we're doing what needs to get done, it just needs to get done ASAP.

[ViperSRT3g]

Originally Posted by Dyndrilliac

Correct me if I'm wrong but I was under the impression that he intends on -beginning- a slow, strategic, concentrated withdrawal within 16 months of his inauguration, and that he's never said anything about a complete withdrawal of all US Forces from Iraq. Additionally, I think its important to consider that the vast majority of our Military support McCain because they think that a complete withdrawal from Iraq would be more trouble than it is worth at the moment (and they have problems with some of Obama's other military policies, such as all soldiers being forced to learn a primary language of the region in which they will be in, and not just translators - I have a bunch of friends in the Airforce who are kind of pissed that they as EOD's might be forced to learn some "retarded sand ****** language", as they put it).

Hey we already have guys in classes learning Arabic for our deployment. :/ I personally see no problem in this, hell, even I am studying a bit about it.

[Raistlin]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I was under the impression that he intends on -beginning- a slow, strategic, concentrated withdrawal within 16 months of his inauguration, and that he's never said anything about a complete withdrawal of all US Forces from Iraq.

His policy was withdrawal on a 16-month timetable beginning upon his inauguration.

Which president would get more crap, the one who finishes it out in a reasonably timely manner, or a president who completely pulls out and lets Iraq fend for themselves. It's not as simple as simply pulling out. We're there, we're doing what needs to get done, it just needs to get done ASAP.

Exactly. This has been McCain's position, while Obama's has been to pull out and let Iraq fend for themselves since back before the troop surge. They both want to end it; the difference is that McCain wants to finish it and Obama wants to walk away from it. Although now I guess that's gone in the wind since he no longer even promises to withdraw by 2013.

[Belphegor]

Originally Posted by Raistlin

They both want to give tax cuts to the middle/working class. The difference is that Obama wants to give more tax cuts to them than McCain, by RAISING taxes on other Americans and businesses, a blatant appeal to class warfare (do you realize how many times he said "class" during the debate?). And the glaring, unaddressed problem with Obama's tax proposal is that he has yet to explain how raising taxes on the businesses that employ, and provide products and services to, the public could possibly be good for the economy.

How does more taxes on the poor help? It already been shown, Reaganomics didn't work. It pushed the problem off until recently. Which, is indeed exactly what that current bill did. Postpone it until later, so our children will have to handle it.

Originally Posted by Raistlin

If it had been up to Obama we would have pulled out of Iraq in defeat instead of allowing the surge to succeed as it has (even Obama now admits that it succeeded). John McCain supported the surge and he was right, Obama opposed the surge and he was wrong. I don't think he is the man to run our armed forces right now.

You're right, and its a good thing he doesn't. Look what Bush did with what little power he had over the armed forces, specifically the marines. Like deployment without authorization.

Originally Posted by Raistlin

Iran needs to be challenged, and there is nothing over the top about saying that the President of the United States will not sit across the table from a maniac like Ahmadinejad without preconditions.

think we still have more then we need on our plate. Over 1 trillion into armed forces of Iraq, almost 1 trillion into a bailout for private greedy bank investors, who invested terribly in order to of lost the money anyway. As I previously stated somewhere, 250Billion dollars, is enough to provide health care for every American Citizen. Enough to repave every road, and fix every bridge. Almost a quarter of what it costs to save these banks from crying. Which in my opinion is more useful? Lets not ask...

These trivial prices people, just aren't as hard to come by now days. Its what we do with them that makes the difference.

[Raistlin]

How does more taxes on the poor help? It already been shown, Reaganomics didn't work. It pushed the problem off until recently. Which, is indeed exactly what that current bill did. Postpone it until later, so our children will have to handle it.

More taxes on the poor doesn't help... but McCain isn't proposing that. Obama IS proposing more taxes on businesses.

think we still have more then we need on our plate.

There is a lot, but there are some subjects we can't afford to be soft on and Iran, in my opinion, is one of those.

[6satan6archist6]

Neither candidate will get us out of Vietnam 3.0. I personally have no faith in any of the candidates. The only thing they agree on is to continue the ban on gay marriage. That pisses me off, why should they care if gay people want to get married, it isnt really any of their buisness. It is just another example of how even though the church and the state should be seperate, they arent.