Are we going to be 100% out of iraq in august?

[KansasVoter]

Wasn't that the promise?

[secondwind]

1. you've got to be joking! We'll probably have "advisors" there for another 100 years!

[dipsydoodle]

2. Do you believe

in the tooth fairy too ?

[Raster]

3. Surely you jest?

:rofl:

There are five permanent, hardened, military bases strategically situated to protect the oilfields, served by a hardened communications system. We ain't going anywhere.

[tavalon]

4. Well, about that promise.................

I would love to be wrong, but I believe the PTB intended right from the start to make a permanent presence there. After all, despite a million silly reasons given, in the end, we went there to take their oil. They still have it and we're still intending on taking it, so................

[KansasVoter]

5. And that disappoints me! nt

[tavalon]

6. Same here

Human dependence on fossil oil is going to destroy most of the species on this planet and we will not be spared. Luckily, Earth measures time in a different way, and in less than a billion years, we will be her long forgotten mistake. But a costly mistake, for sure. It should be rule number one to not allow a species that shits in its nest to ascend to the top of the food chain.

In a microcosm, I look at my family and friends and fellow DUers and I love them but in the macrocosm, humans are not good for this planet.

[Hippo_Tron]

19. Well the Iraqis are contracting their oil out to foreign companies

So that whole taking their oil thing isn't going so well.

[zipplewrath]

7. No, it wasn't

I mean, it depends upon which set of promises to which you are referring. But quite honestly, the closest thing to a recent promise from Obama was that it'd be below 50K by August, with all "combat" forces out by 2011 (October?). Ultimately, they've left themselves so many loop holes in these promises that they can never "break" them. However, the SOFA basically says "all". Of course, the Iraqi government can change the SOFA, and I suspect they will be more than willing given the right incentives.

To be fair, it has not escaped my noticed that the US casualties has decreased to nearly zero on a weekly basis in Iraq, which suggests we are involved in fewer direct actions, on the ground at least. Of course Iraqi and innocent civilian casualties continue.

And one can take some sort of comfort in the fact that, from the beginning, Obama has wanted out of Iraq so he could commit those forces (and resources) to Afghanistan (and Pakistan to some extent). So he has an incentive to not leverage the loopholes too much.

In the end, we'll always have some forces in Iraq. Technically, we have forces around the world, in literally hundreds of countries. At some point it becomes an issue of definition. How small does the detachment become before they are really just a bunch of paper pushers.

[Peacetrain]

8. You mean like all Americans out 100% or combat troops?

[rug]

9. No.

Yes.

[Dr.Phool]

10. We (Our "leaders") never had any intention of leaving.

To them, Iraq is just another uppity colony of our empire. We won't leave until our own looses become hugely untenable.

[BklnDem75]

11. May I have a link stating this promise?

I remember hearing all combat troops out of Iraq. Never heard him state 100%. Thanks in advance.

[KansasVoter]

13. I will be thrilled by all Combat troops. Think it will hppen?

[BklnDem75]

14. I have no reason to believe otherwise

I think I'll wait until they actually break their promise before getting upset. Not sure what speculating months in advance will accomplish.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

12. No, we won't be out.

No, that wasn't the promise.

Pay Attention.

[HughMoran]

15. Hmmm...

perhaps you should do your homework before posting.

[HughMoran]

16. cat got your tongue?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x296334

[The Damned]

17. Uh, No

Even if things go according to plan, we'll still have 50,000 troops there till the end of next year!

[BlueIris]

18. Hmmm, let me see--do we have healthcare?

A significant reduction of troops in Afghanistan? Accountability for corrupt Wall Street thieves? Accountability for corrupt telecom spies? A stronger, more unified Democratic Party? Stabilization of the foreign policy crises left over from the Bush Admin? Greater credibility internationally?

The honest answer to all of the above questions is the same one for the questions posed by the OP.