Obama Giving Up In Iraq; To Make It Official Tomorrow; All Brigates Out In 16 Months.

FOX News | Major Garret

[MindBender26]

Maj just got the word, on Shep Smith show, scheduled to be announced tomorrow. All combat brigades to be out in 16 months.

Real effect is immediate surrender of purpose. No commander is going to undertake any major mission knowing that, at the very longest, no US offensive military power will be in-country after next Spring, so why waste lives to gain something we soon will give away.

Offensive operations will stop. Brigades will go into a useless, purely defensive mode. It's over. Our POTUS surrendered.

About 3000 Americans volunteered to pay the ultimate price in Iraq so we could be free. Obama just ensured those sacrifices will have no lasting meaning.

Bush prayed for every one of them and their souls. Obama just pissed on every one of their graves.

The bastard.

[MindBender26]

With all respect, I suggest you study history, not Obama’s speeches.

[MindBender26]

You are right. See 161

[Repeal The 17th]

Affirmative action...
He is there for no other reason than because he is black.

[visualops]

So just announce to the world exactly when we’ll be gone, so the terrorists & Iran will just wait. Insanity.

[penelopesire]

Thanks for the info. I am sure Zero is trying to take credit for it all as well, but with his signal that his timeline will be shorter than the Official Status Agreement, he is also sending AQ a clear message. My question is how can Obama just ignore an agreement between Iraq already made by President Bush? Isn’t this like a treaty which can not be undone by subsequent Presidents?

[FateAmenableToChange]

Or alternatively, that a big chunk of the voting age population of our country consists of totally f*n clueless morons.

Yeah, I'm good with that one too.

[FateAmenableToChange]

The tragedy was, if it hadn't been for AA, this student could have entered a second tier school such as SUNY, North Carolina, Florida, fine schools all, and exceeded. He could have gotten his degree and moved on. But time and again, these otherwise qualified students did not return to second tier schools after being academically removed from Harvard and the like. The stigma of failure permeated their lives. They ended up flipping hamburgers in their home towns, another failure thanks to Affirmative Action.

Spot on. And when I used this example in presentations promoting Michigan's anti affirmative action amendment, the usual suspects nearly burst a blood vessel. BUT the important thing is that the exact same phenomenon shows up regardless of who is being promoted. Even sports scholarships can produce this phenomenon when an athlete that should go to a 2 year community college or vocational school is bumped into a college level program for which he is drastically unprepared.

[Dr.Zoidberg]

The marxist messiah did campaign on surrender to the mohammedans, at least we know he’s a treacherous cowering dog of his word.

[MindBender26]

I wish I could claim credit for the research and reasoning for that, but the credit goes to Bob Zelnick and his book, “Backfire: A Reporter's Look at Affirmative Action.” It, and his work on Algore are brilliant.

Secondly, I am not a greatly religious man, but this speaks to me about Associate Justices Scalia and Thomas’ beliefs about “Natural Law.”

Nature ordains a certain way of doing things. The students capeable of the best performance go to the best schools, people will obey a 30 MPH speed limit in a residential neighborhood, slavery is bad, etc.

The moment you try to manipulate that natural law concept with AA, a 20 mile an hour speed limit on a rural road, one man enslaving another under a color of law, you get into trouble every time.

It's not that we are Conservative so much as we are in favor of doing things the proven, smart way.

Be well

[FateAmenableToChange]

I wish I could claim credit for the research and reasoning for that, but the credit goes to Bob Zelnick and his book, “Backfire: A Reporter's Look at Affirmative Action.” It, and his work on Algore are brilliant.

I like Zelnick, but the actual source he's relying on is Richard Sander: (Sander's web page)

[Cacique]

[Retain Mike]

The agreement says 2011 and his order is supposed to say only combat brigades. Units like advisors, special forces, and air units are not combat brigades. Obama may be so dishonest as to exclude U.S. Marines, who deploy as battalions and not as brigades. I don’t know the order of battle for divisions now, but in WW II a battalion was 1/6 the size of a brigade. He may be following the letter of the agreement, but in a way which affirms his popular political illusion, and depreciates those who sacrificed for victory.

[Republic]

It is wonderful that black children see a man who looks similar in the highest office in the land. The thought makes me smile inside. And I am glad for all blacks who thought this might never happen.

But I am SICK that a man was elected who is totally TOTALLY unqualified simply because he IS black (well, half if ya want to get specific)and the press and easily fooled PC crowd in Hollywood (the intellectually deprived) and elite liberals who FEEL every ones' pain as long as that person is poor or a democrat, just went bonkers....OVER the skin shade; and they ignored the quality of his ethics, morals, associations,experience and judgment.

They failed to save America from a man who could hurt us forever.

[Red Steel]

It’s Hussein who wants the glory.

Except he may lose the peace.

[Marine_Uncle]

We are dealing with things in Afghanistan and Pakistan. And pulling the majority of troops out prematurely will have it's consequences. The SOFA agreement was agreed upon to give the Iraqi enough time to reach certain points that made sense to the military on both sides.
One thing not being discussed enough is the fact we shall see no large number of combat troops in Afghanistan. The logistics are as tough as they are. It is a totally different type of SASO then Iraq was in many ways. We have no reliable close routes such as we had with Kuwait just to name one to truck in the huge amount of daily supplies of all types.
We are going to have to depend on the Russians to allow us to ship by trains most everything that enters Afghanistan in the near future, if Pakistan cannot guarantee a safe means for the existing suppply routes.
The Afghanistan SASO according to Petreous as well as a number of other high ranking generals over the past few years also differs quite a bit as how one can operate in high elevated terrain. So don't expect some type of surge with huge numbers of combat troops along with all the required support units to simply move into Afghanistan.
And interestingly there where already plans on the table to send some thirty thousand combat harden Marines into A in the spring.
As for the Iraqi shouldering some responsibility. What do you think they have been doing for the past few years. They continue to build upon their successes. But they need huge amounts of logistics and effective Intel to yet be put into place, not to mention their slowly budding air force.
Keep the original agreed upon SOFA with them would have enabled them to come along much further, with less risk of Iran playing some nasty games before the Iraqi where able to protect themselves adequately. Imagine. They don't have one jet or prop yet in place to go against Iranian aircraft.
The SOFA included many things to be established before we pulled out. Now this Zero is going to screw things up. I wonder how long Gates will stay in place, and for that matter if Mullins, Petreous and others may decide to call it a day.
I see the same crap that happened during the Clinton years coming to past again.

[Marine_Uncle]

Thanks RM. Zero is going to royally screw the whole works up that is for sure. And he surely has not a clue as how military must plan counter insurgency campaigns and it appears does not heed the warnings of those that know how to proceed in Afghanistan, nor how to maintain the many meet goals in Iraq.

[Cindy]

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=52779

Iraq Drawdown Options Discussed at White House Meeting

By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Jan. 22, 2009 – Among the military options being considered by President Barack Obama involves a plan to remove most U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months, the Defense Department’s top civilian and military officials said here today.

The 16-month timeframe was among some possible Iraq drawdown plans discussed at yesterday’s White House meeting between Obama and members of his National Security Council staff, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates told Pentagon reporters.

“I would say that yesterday’s meeting was the beginning of a process of evaluating various options,” Gates said.

Since Obama’s election to the presidency last fall, Gates said, senior U.S. military planners have been “looking at several options” regarding planning for a drawdown of U.S. troops from Iraq. About 140,000 U.S. troops are in Iraq today.

“And, obviously, 16 months is one of them,” Gates told reporters. He emphasized that Obama “wants a responsible drawdown,” regardless of the option chosen.

“We’ve certainly heard ’16 months’ for a long time; we’ve looked at that option and the risks that are associated with that,” said Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who attended the White House meeting with Gates and accompanied the secretary at today’s Pentagon news conference.

Gates and Mullen said the Joint Chiefs would be consulted during the evaluation of options for U.S. troop drawdowns from Iraq.

“And, when the time comes to have that full engagement with the president with respect to that … I will advise him accordingly, and he’ll make a decision,” Mullen said.

[HotLead61]

My reference was specifically limited to his ADVISORS, not to the rank & file.

God bless & protect our military!

[HotLead61]

Good points about AA, MB26. I hadn’t realized that...

[Retain Mike]

Your note reminds me I update the following letter when ever I see our “hopeless” situation in Afghanistan hit the news cyle.

Afghanistan is at risk, because people like General Petraeus and his philosophy are scarce commodities. NATO, Pentagon and intelligence bureaucrats, many masquerading in military uniforms, have consistently ignored and depreciated counterinsurgency warfare. Successful career development worldwide requires resumes applying advanced technologies for conventional warfare in Europe and on blue water seas to third world small wars. Counterinsurgency warfare receives scant attention for being low tech, labor intensive and unspectacular.

When General Petraeus commanded the 101st Airborne in Iraq in April 2003 he said, “Now the hard part begins”. However, he had only two stars and did not co-author Army’s counterinsurgency field manual until 2006. The Marine Corps, not Army, has unpopular distinction for embracing the culture of counterinsurgency warfare. As Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine General Peter Pace had the watch for internal political battles allowing General Petraeus prominence. Seldom would such a gifted, experienced soldier obtain significance needed within ossified intelligence and defense bureaucracies to implement proven counterinsurgency tactics.

Application of counterinsurgency tactics would increase momentum among local religious, tribal and political leaders to reject the Taliban and accept national government. The objective would be to help them make pragmatic, consistent decisions recognizing utility of and alignment with Kabul. Afghan and NATO combined units would clear Taliban from marginal regions, remain militarily present, and allow reconstruction teams entry. Locals would assume authority as behavior confirmed commitment to national goals. In rebellious regions attacks would disrupt Taliban units planning offensives, until regular presence expanded from adjacent pacific areas.