Despite formal combat end, US joins Baghdad battle

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
BAGHDAD (AP) - Days after the U.S. officially ended combat operations and touted Iraq's ability to defend itself, American troops found themselves battling heavily armed militants assaulting an Iraqi military headquarters in the center of Baghdad on Sunday. The fighting killed 12 people and wounded dozens.


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100905/D9I204T00.html


Wait, how is this possible? I thought the only troops left were for training!

Honestly are the American people so gullible that our government can say "Combat is over" and then go fight a few days later?
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
The American troops who joined the fight and provided cover fire for Iraqi soldiers pursuing the attackers were based at the compound to train Iraqi forces, said U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Eric Bloom. Iraqi forces also requested help from U.S. helicopters, drones and explosives experts, he said. No American troops were hurt, Bloom said.

Under an agreement between the two countries, Iraq can still call on American forces to assist in combat and U.S. troops can defend themselves if attacked.

From the article....

Of course, we were supposed to be down to 30,000 or fewer troops in September 2003. Can't trust what the politicians say.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
From the article....

Of course, we were supposed to be down to 30,000 or fewer troops in September 2003. Can't trust what the politicians say.

So combat is not over. Defending yourself is different.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
Stuff like this is to be expected so long as american troops remain as trainers and advisors to the Iraqis. The right of self-defense is absolute, as it should be.
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
So combat is not over. Defending yourself is different.

Obviously they should defend themselves, but notice this little gem:
Iraq can still call on American forces to assist in combat
...
U.S. forces can still help Iraqi forces hunt down al-Qaida and other militants

So, basically it is the same as before, save we have to wait for the Iraqi government to give the thumbs up?
 

Hacp

Lifer
Jun 8, 2005
13,923
2
81
From the article....

Of course, we were supposed to be down to 30,000 or fewer troops in September 2003. Can't trust what the politicians say.

So wait.. Iraq calling on US troops to fight for them? Obama is at it AGAIN. Never has US troops be under the command of a foreign entity. Never until now. Obama is trying to give away everything that makes the US powerful.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
So wait.. Iraq calling on US troops to fight for them? Obama is at it AGAIN. Never has US troops be under the command of a foreign entity. Never until now. Obama is trying to give away everything that makes the US powerful.

Gawd that's lame. Did you actually read the article? I kinda doubt it....

Why would I find that unsurprising?
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
...Never has US troops be under the command of a foreign entity...
Except, of course, for during two World Wars and several U.N. actions. I guess news of those events didn't reach your parents' basement.


edit: also, it's troops have been, not troops has be. Good luck with English class this semester...
 
Last edited:

Hacp

Lifer
Jun 8, 2005
13,923
2
81
Except, of course, for during two World Wars and several U.N. actions. I guess news of those events didn't reach your parents' basement.


edit: also, it's troops have been, not troops has be. Good luck with English class this semester...

Lol, Muphry's law strikes again.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
The US ended unilateral combat actions in Iraq but not combat in coordination with Iraqi forces, when requested. This was no secret so where's the problem?

The left already made themselves idiots under Bush with their Mission Accomplished meme. Does the right now feel a compunction to do the same under Obama?
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Stuff like this is to be expected so long as american troops remain as trainers and advisors to the Iraqis. The right of self-defense is absolute, as it should be.

Huh? This is not about self-defense.

Do you always comment on current events without understanding them?
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
The US ended unilateral combat actions in Iraq but not combat in coordination with Iraqi forces, when requested. This was no secret so where's the problem?

Let me break this down a little easier for you. I know this is very complicated:


The media and Obama administration just shoved a giant shit-sandwich down our throat, saying that the last combat brigades had crossed into Kuwait.

If there are no combat troops left In Country, then who the hell is going out to fight with the Iraqi soldiers?

In other words, the people who believed that all that is left in Iraq are US "advisors" and Mercs are either ignorant, dim, or just blind.
 

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,559
8
0
The mistake made was calling it an actual end instead of a transition. I guess that would have been too complex for the average Joe.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
The mistake made was calling it an actual end instead of a transition. I guess that would have been too complex for the average Joe.

Just like Islamic terrorisim is over, it is only man-made disasters that remain.

Semantics can be fun.
 

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,559
8
0
Just like Islamic terrorisim is over, it is only man-made disasters that remain.

Semantics can be fun.

Who said islamic extremism ended?

This overly simplified world view only existed in George Bush's mind...
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Let me break this down a little easier for you. I know this is very complicated:


The media and Obama administration just shoved a giant shit-sandwich down our throat, saying that the last combat brigades had crossed into Kuwait.

If there are no combat troops left In Country, then who the hell is going out to fight with the Iraqi soldiers?

In other words, the people who believed that all that is left in Iraq are US "advisors" and Mercs are either ignorant, dim, or just blind.
Let me break this down even easier for you. ALL troops are trained for combat. Every single one of them. You and others are twisting the meaning of the end of combat in Iraq just as the left twisted Mission Accomplished.

If you want to be the same sort of tools, please continue. If not, stop with the partisan foolishness.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Let me break this down even easier for you. ALL troops are trained for combat. Every single one of them. You and others are twisting the meaning of the end of combat in Iraq just as the left twisted Mission Accomplished.

If you want to be the same sort of tools, please continue. If not, stop with the partisan foolishness.

So then why distinguish between "combat troops" and other troops, like the Obama administration did?

I am not the one that made a big deal that a few brigades left the country in order to meet an artificial deadline/campaign promise.

These are not cooks and latrine cleaners that are being sent out to fight. These are front-line troops that are trained to use offensive weapons. This bullshit "last combat troops leave Iraq" is worse than Mission Accomplished.
 

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
The US ended unilateral combat actions in Iraq but not combat in coordination with Iraqi forces, when requested. This was no secret so where's the problem?

The left already made themselves idiots under Bush with their Mission Accomplished meme. Does the right now feel a compunction to do the same under Obama?

Well at least Obama wasn't walking around like he was wearing a codpiece while declaring combat is over. :D

images