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

[Misterveritis]

Who's deflecting now?

If I so love Obama, why did I vote for his pink slip?

If it quacks like a duck...

 

[Misterveritis]

Not my hero. I merely refuse to accept unchallenged that only the deal you want is success. Or that what the Iraqis want should ignored.

You protest a great deal in Obama's favor. He failed to get a good agreement. Are you denying that Obama failed to get a good agreement?

 

[obvious Child]

If it quacks like a duck...

Yeah, I love him soooooooo MUCH, I don't want him as my President.

Get a grip on reality.

You cannot even begin to explain away the problems of the ZOPA in this discussion. All you can do is rant Obama failed. And run away from explaining how anyone could deal with the nonnegotiable impasse we faced.

 

[Boo Radley]

You protest a great deal in Obama's favor. He failed to get a good agreement. Are you denying that Obama failed to get a good agreement?

What's good? It is after all not our country.

 

[obvious Child]

What's good? It is after all not our country.

Notice how he keeps arguing that Obama failed to get a good agreement, yet at the same time he keeps running away from explaining how we could get the Iraqis to move from their position of mandating Iraqi Judicial Oversight of American troops that they made abundantly clear they were never going to move from?

There apparently is some mystical jedi mind trick that Obama failed to do on the Iraqis. And because Obama failed to do his magic, he's a failure.

 

[Catawba]

What's good? It is after all not our country.

He's already indicated he's not a big believer in private property rights.

 

[Boo Radley]

He's already indicated he's not a big believer in private property rights.

Bummer.

 

[Misterveritis]

I ask this:
And I get this:
It's pretty damn clear that Misterveritis has no idea what he's talking about and he's here in this thread solely to bash Obama.

Who heads the Executive Branch?
Do you need help with the answer?

Which branch of government is responsible for negotiating agreements with other nations?
Do you need help with the answer?

Do we have a good agreement with Iraq?
Do you need help with the answer?

Obama is not up to the task. All of your excuses are just that. They are excuses. Obama failed. He prettied up his failure. You bought it. But tht does not mean I have to buy it.

 

[Misterveritis]

Notice how he keeps arguing that Obama failed to get a good agreement, yet at the same time he keeps running away from explaining how we could get the Iraqis to move from their position of mandating Iraqi Judicial Oversight of American troops that they made abundantly clear they were never going to move from?

There apparently is some mystical jedi mind trick that Obama failed to do on the Iraqis. And because Obama failed to do his magic, he's a failure.

You are offering an excuse and claiming it is sufficient. Obama failed. He nearly always does. He blamed others. He nearly always does.

 

[Misterveritis]

What's good? It is after all not our country.

Are you asking me what a good status of forces agreement is?

We are in many places that are not our country. Most places where we have stationed forces have agreements between the nations that identify the rights our military members have when they are accused of a crime or a detained by the host nation. In my opinion a good agreement is one that allows us to do what we are there to do, that is considered fair and reasonable by both parties over the long term.

 

[obvious Child]

Do we have a good agreement with Iraq?

Compared to the alternative, we do.

Bush and Obama did bang up jobs in refusing to agree to Iraqi Judicial Oversight of American soldiers.

Given the choice of no agreement and Iraqi Judicial Oversight of American soldiers, the obviously superior agreement is no agreement.

Do you need help with the answer?

Looks like you need some help with the answer here.

Obama is not up to the task. All of your excuses are just that. They are excuses. Obama failed. He prettied up his failure. You bought it. But tht does not mean I have to buy it.

You are offering an excuse and claiming it is sufficient. Obama failed. He nearly always does. He blamed others. He nearly always does.

Thanks for proving beyond a shadow of a doubt every single accusation I made against you in this thread. All you can do is claim Obama failed and deliberately ignore the problems of no ZOPA.

I know, you know, Cat knows, Boo knows, and Diavo knows that you are completely wrong here. It's just that only you are unwilling to admit it.

If there was such a good agreement out there, how does it deal with the nonnegotiable condition set by the Iraqis for Judicial Oversight of American soldiers?

Until you answer this, I'm going to keep pointing it out every time you claim Obama failed.

 

[Misterveritis]

Yeah, I love him soooooooo MUCH, I don't want him as my President.

Get a grip on reality.

You cannot even begin to explain away the problems of the ZOPA in this discussion. All you can do is rant Obama failed. And run away from explaining how anyone could deal with the nonnegotiable impasse we faced.

You accept that excuse, I do not. No one said getting a good agreement would be easy. But that is the President's responsibility. He has a State Department filled with supposed experts. But he was not too terribly interested in a sustained presence in Iraq. He was too busy working on fundamentally transforming this nation.

So he blew it off. And therefore, he blew it.

 

[Boo Radley]

Are you asking me what a good status of forces agreement is?

We are in many places that are not our country. Most places where we have stationed forces have agreements between the nations that identify the rights our military members have when they are accused of a crime or a detained by the host nation. In my opinion a good agreement is one that allows us to do what we are there to do, that is considered fair and reasonable by both parties over the long term.

Again, not our country. If it were, you'd have point.

 

[obvious Child]

You accept that excuse, I do not. No one said getting a good agreement would be easy. But that is the President's responsibility. He has a State Department filled with supposed experts. But he was not too terribly interested in a sustained presence in Iraq. He was too busy working on fundamentally transforming this nation.

So he blew it off. And therefore, he blew it.

If there was such a good agreement out there, how does it deal with the nonnegotiable condition set by the Iraqis for Judicial Oversight of American soldiers?

I'm going to start keeping track of how many times I ask you and how many times you cowardly refuse to answer.

 

[Misterveritis]

Compared to the alternative, we do.
Bush and Obama did bang up jobs in refusing to agree to Iraqi Judicial Oversight of American soldiers.
Given the choice of no agreement and Iraqi Judicial Oversight of American soldiers, the obviously superior agreement is no agreement.
Looks like you need some help with the answer here.

Obama was the president. Not Bush. Obama failed to get a good agreement. I understand your excuses. I do not accept them.

Thanks for proving beyond a shadow of a doubt every single accusation I made against you in this thread. All you can do is claim Obama failed and deliberately ignore the problems of no ZOPA.

This is an excuse. You excuse him. I do not. He failed to secure a good agreement. You have admitted it even while hiding behind your statement that no agreement is the superior agreement.

I know, you know, Cat knows, Boo knows, and Diavo knows that you are completely wrong here. It's just that only you are unwilling to admit it.

The difference between me and you is that I do not accept the feeble excuse put forth by the administration. Had Obama wanted a good agreement he could have had one.

If there was such a good agreement out there, how does it deal with the nonnegotiable condition set by the Iraqis for Judicial Oversight of American soldiers?

Until you answer this, I'm going to keep pointing it out every time you claim Obama failed.

You can try to pretty up his failure but it will still be a failure. He failed to get a good agreement. You accept his excuse for his failure. I do not.

 

[Misterveritis]

If there was such a good agreement out there, how does it deal with the nonnegotiable condition set by the Iraqis for Judicial Oversight of American soldiers?

I'm going to start keeping track of how many times I ask you and how many times you cowardly refuse to answer.

At the same time you will also be tracking the number of times you tacitly accept Obama's excuse for his failure. It seems like a good deal.

 

[Misterveritis]

Again, not our country. If it were, you'd have point.

It is because it is not our country that I have a good point.

I am beginning to believe your mind has drifted.

 

[obvious Child]

Obama was the president. Not Bush. Obama failed to get a good agreement. I understand your excuses. I do not accept them.

This is an excuse. You excuse him. I do not. He failed to secure a good agreement. You have admitted it even while hiding behind your statement that no agreement is the superior agreement.

The difference between me and you is that I do not accept the feeble excuse put forth by the administration. Had Obama wanted a good agreement he could have had one.

You can try to pretty up his failure but it will still be a failure. He failed to get a good agreement. You accept his excuse for his failure. I do not.

If there was such a good agreement out there, how does it deal with the nonnegotiable condition set by the Iraqis for Judicial Oversight of American soldiers?

Direct Question:
Post #253 - Count 1
Post #286 - Count 2
Post #289 - Count 3

 

[Misterveritis]

Welcome to another episode of wasting time with Misterveritis.

Notice how he keeps running away from the issue of the lack of potential agreement revolving around the Judicial Oversight problem. He keeps pretending there was a good agreement to be had there, but he never provides anything about such an agreement, how to overcome the unmoving requirement by the Iraqis for Judicial Oversight and just says Obama failed.

If he actually thought there was a potential good agreement, Misterveritis should have been able to actually define it. Instead all we get is vague accusations.

I am not in the government any longer. It is Obama's watch now. There is not a good agreement in place. It was Obama's responsibility to secure a good agreement. He failed. You buy the why. I do not. I believe it was an excuse that covered his unwillingness to do the really hard work involved in being the President. He preferred golf and fundraising.

 

[obvious Child]

At the same time you will also be tracking the number of times you tacitly accept Obama's excuse for his failure. It seems like a good deal.

Between a clearly bad choice and no agreement, the best option is no agreement.

There was never a chance the US would agree to put US soldiers in Iraqi courts. Not going to happen. Period.
There was never a chance that Iraq would agree to immunity for US soldiers. Not going to happen. Period.

You keep cowardly running away from this. You cite other countries were we do allow judicial oversight, but you flat up ignore that the Iraqi system is extremely corrupt. America does not allow any nation's judicial system we do not trust to have authority over American soldiers.

There was never a ZOPA here. You keep pretending there was and keep cowardly running away from explaining away the problems.

 

[Misterveritis]

If there was such a good agreement out there, how does it deal with the nonnegotiable condition set by the Iraqis for Judicial Oversight of American soldiers?

Direct Question:
Post #253 - Count 1
Post #286 - Count 2
Post #289 - Count 3

In each location you have accepted a poor excuse for Obama's failure to secure a good agreement. It is not any more complicated than that.

 

[Misterveritis]

Between a clearly bad choice and no agreement, the best option is no agreement.

There was never a chance the US would agree to put US soldiers in Iraqi courts. Not going to happen. Period.
There was never a chance that Iraq would agree to immunity for US soldiers. Not going to happen. Period.

You keep cowardly running away from this. You cite other countries were we do allow judicial oversight, but you flat up ignore that the Iraqi system is extremely corrupt.

I think we agree that some parts of the job are harder than other parts of the job. The difference between us is that you accept Obama's excuse. I believe he was lazy and disinterested.

 

[Boo Radley]

It is because it is not our country that I have a good point.

I am beginning to believe your mind has drifted.

No. We brought war that cost the lives of thousands and displaced millions. How can anyone expect the deal you expect?

 

[obvious Child]

In each location you have accepted a poor excuse for Obama's failure to secure a good agreement. It is not any more complicated than that.

Where "poor" means anything you dislike. Which is typical.

You still are completely unable to explain away the lack of ZOPA here.

Your sole argument is Obama failed. Not why or how, but that he failed. And you offer NOTHING to explain why he could have gotten an agreement that dealt with the nonnegotiable issue of Iraqi Judicial Oversight.

You just proved that you are solely here to bash Obama. You cannot provide a single reason why Obama could have dealt with the nonnegotiable issue of Iraqi Judicial Oversight. The Iraqis made it clear they will not move on it. We will never subject our soldiers to a system we do not trust. There was never a ZOPA here and you keep pretending that there was solely because you want to keep bashing Obama on something the past administration realized couldn't be overcome either.

If there was such a good agreement out there, how does it deal with the nonnegotiable condition set by the Iraqis for Judicial Oversight of American soldiers?

This will be the 5th time you cowardly run yet keep saying Obama failed.

 

[Misterveritis]

Earlier I wrote, "People like me can see that Obama has only one real success to his credit. He got re-elected. Where do you see successes?"

Your views are so partisan that they frankly aren't worth much of anything. You argue anything you don't like is a government coverup.

It is true that there are similarities between this failure and Obama's Benghazi Massacre. In both cases he was not up to the job. In both cases he was lazy. In both cases he was disinterested.

Which is worse? He abandoned the Four and the were murdered.
He abandoned Iraq and the US lost an opportunity.