Iraqis cannot forget what Americans have done here’ [W:124]

[Catawba]

Unfortunately, Obama is calling for $200 B in new spending in his "plan"...on top of current spending. So...big deal.

I've only seen $50 billion in stimulus. Pretty small potatoes to a trillion dollars in new revenue and $500 billion in spending cuts over 10 years.

That reduces our deficit more than the increased spending on military and reduced taxes for the wealthy that Romney proposed.

But, its a moot point as the people already chose their leader.

 

[Mycroft]

I've only seen $50 billion in stimulus. Pretty small potatoes to a trillion dollars in new revenue and $500 billion in spending cuts over 10 years.

That reduces our deficit more than the increased spending on military and reduced taxes for the wealthy that Romney proposed.

But, its a moot point as the people already chose their leader.

Nope...it's $200B. Obama's fiscal cliff plan has $200 billion in economic boosters - Dec. 4, 2012

And tell me...why on earth would you mention Romney? Especially since "the people already chose their leader"?

You would have more credibility if you compared Obama's plan to the Republican's plan.

But hey...I understand your reluctance to do so...the Republicans haven't proposed ANY new spending, after all.

 

[iguanaman]

Nope...it's $200B. Obama's fiscal cliff plan has $200 billion in economic boosters - Dec. 4, 2012

And tell me...why on earth would you mention Romney? Especially since "the people already chose their leader"?

You would have more credibility if you compared Obama's plan to the Republican's plan.

But hey...I understand your reluctance to do so...the Republicans haven't proposed ANY new spending, after all.

The Republicans have also made no jobs proposals at all. That is our number one problem, not cutting spending. How are we ever going to reduce the defict if we can't get our people to work?'

 

[Mycroft]

The Republicans have also made no jobs proposals at all. That is our number one problem, not cutting spending. How are we ever going to reduce the defict if we can't get our people to work?'

Our number one problem is that fiscal cliff we will leap off of in a matter of days.

 

[Catawba]

Nope...it's $200B. Obama's fiscal cliff plan has $200 billion in economic boosters - Dec. 4, 2012

And tell me...why on earth would you mention Romney? Especially since "the people already chose their leader"?

You would have more credibility if you compared Obama's plan to the Republican's plan.

But hey...I understand your reluctance to do so...the Republicans haven't proposed ANY new spending, after all.

Good! It appears you missed the very first sentence in the article you referenced:

"But even deficit hawks say spending more now is fine and even warranted to support a fledgling economic recovery."

Would you mind getting back on topic now.

 

[Mycroft]

Good! It appears you missed the very first sentence in the article you referenced:

"But even deficit hawks say spending more now is fine and even warranted to support a fledgling economic recovery."

Would you mind getting back on topic now.

LOL!!!

Me? Get back on topic?

Dude...you are the one who deflected to Romney, for god's sake.

 

[Catawba]

"Iraq has the world's second largest proven oil reserves. According to oil industry experts, new exploration will probably raise Iraq's reserves to 200+ billion barrels of high-grade crude, extraordinarily cheap to produce. The four giant firms located in the US and the UK have been keen to get back into Iraq, from which they were excluded with the nationalization of 1972. During the final years of the Saddam era, they envied companies from France, Russia, China, and elsewhere, who had obtained major contracts. But UN sanctions (kept in place by the US and the UK) kept those contracts inoperable. Since the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003, much has changed. In the new setting, with Washington running the show, "friendly" companies expect to gain most of the lucrative oil deals that will be worth hundreds of billions of dollars in profits in the coming decades.

The Iraqi constitution of 2005, greatly influenced by US advisors, contains language that guarantees a major role for foreign companies. Negotiators hope soon to complete deals on Production Sharing Agreements that will give the companies control over dozens of fields, including the fabled super-giant Majnoon. But first the Parliament must pass a new oil sector investment law allowing foreign companies to assume a major role in the country. The US has threatened to withhold funding as well as financial and military support if the law does not soon pass. Although the Iraqi cabinet endorsed the draft law in July 2007, Parliament has balked at the legislation. Most Iraqis favor continued control by a national company and the powerful oil workers union strongly opposes de-nationalization. Iraq's political future is very much in flux, but oil remains the central feature of the political landscape."

Oil in Iraq

 

[Misterveritis]

That's a rather subjective opinion. You realize, it was heading the same way under Bush. The fact is, they don't want us there.

Who was in charge? Wasn't it the Obama regime? Did we get a status of forces agreement?

He bungled it.

 

[Misterveritis]

Didn't Clinton say "the era of big govt. is over"? We are going back to his rates. Ones that allowed him to balance the budget of all things. Don't you wish even one Republican Administration had at least reduced the deficit? How is it that that never happened again?

You are going to be disappointed. You will fall when we fall.

 

[Davo The Mavo]

Who was in charge? Wasn't it the Obama regime? Did we get a status of forces agreement?

He bungled it.

So you would allow the Iraqi government to charge, bring to trial, and imprison American Troops . . . at least we know where you stand. Stop . . . please stop. I'm not even asking you to be ashamed of your thoughtless comments. Do you have any idea how different every SOFA agreement we have is? Stop . . . you are a misinformation gift.

Stop. You are just wrong. I would never give an early Iraq government power to punish our troops. Why would you?

 

[Misterveritis]

So you would allow the Iraqi government to charge, bring to trial, and imprison American Troops . . . at least we know where you stand. Stop . . . please stop. I'm not even asking you to be ashamed of your thoughtless comments. Do you have any idea how different every SOFA agreement we have is? Stop . . . you are a misinformation gift.

Stop. You are just wrong. I would never give an early Iraq government power to punish our troops. Why would you?

One can get a good agreement but only if one wants to. The Obama regime barely tried so of course they failed.

Don't flatter yourself. Unless you have worked on previous SOFA I know as much as you, having served as a company commander under one.

 

[Davo The Mavo]

One can get a good agreement but only if one wants to. The Obama regime barely tried so of course they failed.

Don't flatter yourself. Unless you have worked on previous SOFA I know as much as you, having served as a company commander under one.

SAFE!! I do not flatter myself. But you don't answer questions. You want to get into SOFA agreements . . . I will compare my overseas duty to most on this forum. You have failed in your SOFA agreement argument. Answer the question. To understand you should probably know who started the Iraqi SOFA agreement. Honesty is a virtue. What you dislike in others may be what you are.

 

[Misterveritis]

SAFE!! I do not flatter myself. But you don't answer questions. You want to get into SOFA agreements . . . I will compare my overseas duty to most on this forum. You have failed in your SOFA agreement argument. Answer the question. To understand you should probably know who started the Iraqi SOFA agreement. Honesty is a virtue. What you dislike in others may be what you are.

Why do you deflect? Who failed to get a status of forces agreement? May I help you with the answer? It was the Obama regime.

I served for 20 years. I spent about half of that overseas. For two of those years I was a company commander overseas. I dealt with SOFA issues about once a month.

Honesty is a virtue. Deflection is not.

 

[Davo The Mavo]

Why do you deflect? Who failed to get a status of forces agreement? May I help you with the answer? It was the Obama regime.

I served for 20 years. I spent about half of that overseas. For two of those years I was a company commander overseas. I dealt with SOFA issues about once a month.

Honesty is a virtue. Deflection is not.

No, I did not deflect, I thoroughly acknowledge there is no SOFA agreement with Iraq. Now, if you were president, would you allow the Iraq government to arrest, bring to trial, and put American Troops in their prisons? Simple Question . . . the president prior to Obama would not agree to it . . . would you? Simple . . . it seems like someone is deflecting, it sure ain't me. Now, go ahead and Google to your hearts content . . . but I knew this crap before you brought it up the first time you ignored it.

 

[obvious Child]

Why do you deflect? Who failed to get a status of forces agreement? May I help you with the answer? It was the Obama regime

Because the conditions for it would have been far worse.

People like you will never give Obama any credit for anything.

If Obama had agreed to the Iraqi's hard demand for judicial oversight of US soldiers, you would have went ballistic. We were not going to get a SOFA agreement without that. And Obama was right to turn it down and vacate Iraq.

You blame him for not getting a SOFA, but you would have blamed him for getting one. You find SOMETHING to blame him in order never to give him credit for anything.

 

[obvious Child]

No, I did not deflect, I thoroughly acknowledge there is no SOFA agreement with Iraq. Now, if you were president, would you allow the Iraq government to arrest, bring to trial, and put American Troops in their prisons? Simple Question . . . the president prior to Obama would not agree to it . . . would you? Simple . . . it seems like someone is deflecting, it sure ain't me. Now, go ahead and Google to your hearts content . . . but I knew this crap before you brought it up the first time you ignored it.

Misterveritis will never give Obama credit for anything. Don't expect him to be honest with you on anything involving the current administration.

Obama was right for turning down the SOFA with Iraq.

 

[obvious Child]

One can get a good agreement but only if one wants to.

Considering judicial oversight of American forces was a make or break part of the Iraqi agreement, no you can't get a good agreement.

When your partner in negotiations has a condition that is entirely unacceptable to you and neither of you will budge, you cannot come to an agreement. There never was a ZOPA in the SOFA.

 

[Mycroft]

SAFE!! I do not flatter myself. But you don't answer questions. You want to get into SOFA agreements . . . I will compare my overseas duty to most on this forum. You have failed in your SOFA agreement argument. Answer the question. To understand you should probably know who started the Iraqi SOFA agreement. Honesty is a virtue. What you dislike in others may be what you are.

While I have some experience with SOFA, I'm sure it's not to the extent of either you or Misterveritis since I was only an NCO, but I really feel the need to point something out to you:

SOFA = Status Of Forces Agreement

Therefore, the phrase, "SOFA agreement" is redundant.

Carry on...

 

[Davo The Mavo]

Misterveritis will never give Obama credit for anything. Don't expect him to be honest with you on anything involving the current administration.

Obama was right for turning down the SOFA with Iraq.

In its form . . . yes. Bush was right about that too.

 

[Davo The Mavo]

While I have some experience with SOFA, I'm sure it's not to the extent of either you or Misterveritis since I was only an NCO, but I really feel the need to point something out to you:

SOFA = Status Of Forces Agreement

Therefore, the phrase, "SOFA agreement" is redundant.

Carry on...

Yet it is different in every country. For instance . . . an American Service member can be punished under Japanese law and sent to one of their prisons. Not so for other places on the globe.

 

[obvious Child]

In its form . . . yes. Bush was right about that too.

Indeed. I personally guarantee you that if Obama had agreed to Iraqi Judicial Oversight, Misterveritis would have instantly called for his impeachment.

 

[Davo The Mavo]

While I have some experience with SOFA, I'm sure it's not to the extent of either you or Misterveritis since I was only an NCO, but I really feel the need to point something out to you:

SOFA = Status Of Forces Agreement

Therefore, the phrase, "SOFA agreement" is redundant.


Carry on...

You see, I was speeding again . . . that was funny and I missed it. Nicely and not redundantly done.

 

[Mycroft]

Yet it is different in every country. For instance . . . an American Service member can be punished under Japanese law and sent to one of their prisons. Not so for other places on the globe.

Ummm....

Why are you telling me this?

Besides being Captain Obvious to someone who does, as I've said, know something about SOFA, you are acting like you are disputing something I've said. But, you know, I haven't said anything even remotely relevant to your response.

 

[Davo The Mavo]

Ummm....

Why are you telling me this?

Besides being Captain Obvious to someone who does, as I've said, know something about SOFA, you are acting like you are disputing something I've said. But, you know, I haven't said anything even remotely relevant to your response.

See response 247, I'm an idiot.

 

[iguanaman]

You are going to be disappointed. You will fall when we fall.

And you will rise when we rise. Whether you deserve it or not. Life isn't fair.