• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Despite formal combat end, US joins Baghdad battle

O

OCGuy

Lifer
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?
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
OCGuy said:
So combat is not over. Defending yourself is different.
Click to expand...

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
Click to expand...

So, basically it is the same as before, save we have to wait for the Iraqi government to give the thumbs up?
 
Engineer said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Hacp said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

Why would I find that unsurprising?
 
Hacp said:
...Never has US troops be under the command of a foreign entity...
Click to expand...
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:
CallMeJoe said:
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...
Click to expand...

Lol, Muphry's law strikes again.
 
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?
 
Jhhnn said:
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.
Click to expand...

Huh? This is not about self-defense.

Do you always comment on current events without understanding them?
 
TastesLikeChicken said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
manimal said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

Semantics can be fun.
 
OCGuy said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
TastesLikeChicken said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
TastesLikeChicken said:
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?
Click to expand...

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

images
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top