Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-25-2010, 09:58 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,128,317 times
Reputation: 9383

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowne View Post
PolitiFact | Obama has increased troops in Afghanistan

In May, 2010 "..the Pentagon announced there were 94,000 troops in Afghanistan. The number was a milestone because it was the first time troops there had exceeded the number of troops in Iraq..."
Interesting from your link
About 4,000 more troops are expected to deploy to Afghanistan by the summer, bringing the total to 98,000.

So 98,000 minus the 34,000 that were there when Obama took office gives us 64,000 troops, a little shy of the 68,000 Powell mentioned.

Heck, here I am claiming Obama has sent 30,000 troops and being told he didn't, and in the attempt to prove he did, we find out that he didn't send only 30,000 troops, he sent 68,000..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-25-2010, 10:03 PM
 
5,346 posts, read 4,048,929 times
Reputation: 545
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Interesting from your link
About 4,000 more troops are expected to deploy to Afghanistan by the summer, bringing the total to 98,000.

So 98,000 minus the 34,000 that were there when Obama took office gives us 64,000 troops, a little shy of the 68,000 Powell mentioned.

Heck, here I am claiming Obama has sent 30,000 troops and being told he didn't, and in the attempt to prove he did, we find out that he didn't send only 30,000 troops, he sent 68,000..
Man... You've got some serious Obama hatred issues...

U.S. Troops in Iraq Now Below 50,000 Target - FoxNews.com

Under Obama's plan, American forces will no longer conduct combat operations but are instead to train Iraqi troops and help with counterterrorism operations — if asked for by the Iraqis.

From Aug. 2010...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 10:05 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,128,317 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by HC475 View Post
Man... You've got some serious Obama hatred issues...

U.S. Troops in Iraq Now Below 50,000 Target - FoxNews.com

Under Obama's plan, American forces will no longer conduct combat operations but are instead to train Iraqi troops and help with counterterrorism operations — if asked for by the Iraqis.

From Aug. 2010...
No, I've got some serious stupidity hatred issues...

They are there to help with COUNTERTERRORISM operations.. Isnt that why Bush sent them there...

P.s. I posted figures for Afghanistan, and you respond with Iraq..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 10:05 PM
 
19,848 posts, read 12,110,307 times
Reputation: 17578
Quote:
Originally Posted by HC475 View Post
Man... You've got some serious Obama hatred issues...

U.S. Troops in Iraq Now Below 50,000 Target - FoxNews.com

Under Obama's plan, American forces will no longer conduct combat operations but are instead to train Iraqi troops and help with counterterrorism operations — if asked for by the Iraqis.

From Aug. 2010...

Try to keep up...we are talking about Afghanistan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 10:08 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,956,928 times
Reputation: 7118
Quote:
Originally Posted by HC475 View Post
Man... You've got some serious Obama hatred issues...

U.S. Troops in Iraq Now Below 50,000 Target - FoxNews.com

Under Obama's plan, American forces will no longer conduct combat operations but are instead to train Iraqi troops and help with counterterrorism operations — if asked for by the Iraqis.

From Aug. 2010...
Good grief;

AP: Combat Operations in Iraq Are Not Over - TIME NewsFeed
AP Issues Standards Memo: 'Combat In Iraq Is Not Over'
Associated Press Memo Warns: Do Not Report Iraq Combat Over | Media Matters for America (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201009030017 - broken link)
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/us-combat-o...ry?id=11526977
http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_new...s-are-not-over
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/19/c...r-in-iraq.html

You've been duped once again - how does that make you feel?

You really need to expand your "news" sources to other than the White House propaganda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 10:10 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,128,317 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
You really need to expand your "news" sources to other than the White House propaganda.
Whats funny about your posting is I even posted directly from WhiteHouse.gov that more troops were sent to Afghanistan, and I was told to not post links to right wing blogs...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 10:12 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
6,327 posts, read 9,157,682 times
Reputation: 4053
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
wrong they dont ignor it.

but the liberals sure ignore that the debt almost doubled under clinton fron 3.6 trillion to 5.87 trillion

or that obama has added 3.5 trillion in less than 2 years

or that the debt went from 8.7 trillion when the liberals took over to the current 13.6 trillion
3.6*2=$7.2 trillion. $5.87 trillion is $1.3 trillion less than what it would be if the debt doubled under him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 10:17 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,128,317 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradjl2009 View Post
3.6*2=$7.2 trillion. $5.87 trillion is $1.3 trillion less than what it would be if the debt doubled under him.
Did you do the same math comparison by the OP?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HC475 View Post
09/30/2008 -10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2000 - 5,674,178,209,886.86
$5.675*2=$11.344T, 10.024 T is $1.32 trillion less than what it would have been if debt doubled under Bush.. How odd.. Just about the EXACT same amount.. Why the selective defending of Clintons deficits as not "double" but not Bushs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 10:21 PM
 
Location: Flippin AR
5,513 posts, read 5,242,711 times
Reputation: 6243
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Then tell me how people are still dying there?
Local soldier killed in Iraq - FOX23 News - The 10 O'Clock News
Our glorious leaders have transferred the costs to the State Department and private mercenaries: "Can diplomats field their own army? The State Department is laying plans to do precisely that in Iraq, in an unprecedented experiment that U.S. officials and some nervous lawmakers say could be risky." State Dept. planning to field a small army in Iraq | McClatchy

The State Department has requested that the Pentagon give them "Black Hawk helicopters; 50 mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles; fuel trucks; high-tech surveillance systems; and other military gear."
State Dept. planning to field a small army in Iraq | McClatchy

"As of Tuesday, Aug. 10, 2010, at least 4,414 members of the U.S. military had died in the Iraq war since it began in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count....Since the start of U.S. military operations in Iraq, 31,907 U.S. service members have been wounded in hostile action, according to the Defense Department’s weekly tally." Immelman for Congress » Blog Archive » Iraq-Afghanistan Casualties

It's really sad that terrorists killed 3,000 Americans one day, but our own leaders killed more than that (all young Americans who had not had time to live their lives) in just one of the two most recent senseless foreign wars.

A mere 50,000 troops will remain in Iraq now that the war is over.

How much will Iraq cost us now that we have declared the war over? "The president’s 2011 budget includes an additional $43.4 billion for Iraq, and even if the withdrawal continues as planned, we are likely to see a request of $10 billion-$5 billion in the 2012 budget....And the number could be much higher depending how broadly you define the cost of the war. Some experts believe you should include the continuing costs of disability compensation and medical care for Iraqi war veterans -- costs that will last for decades."

I propose a US Constitutional amendment that no American taxpayer dollars be spent on foreign aid or waging war in a foreign country that has not attempted to invade us. Of course, the Founding Fathers thought this was both patently obvious, and already written down, but we all know what modern Socialists think of the ideals that allowed America to become a world power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 10:32 PM
 
5,346 posts, read 4,048,929 times
Reputation: 545
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Good grief;

AP: Combat Operations in Iraq Are Not Over - TIME NewsFeed
AP Issues Standards Memo: 'Combat In Iraq Is Not Over'
Associated Press Memo Warns: Do Not Report Iraq Combat Over | Media Matters for America (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201009030017 - broken link)
U.S. Combat Operations Ending in Iraq, But Country Remains a War Zone for American Soldiers - ABC News
The Maddow Blog - 'Combat operations are not over'
Combat Operations Aren't Really Over in Iraq - Newsweek

You've been duped once again - how does that make you feel?

You really need to expand your "news" sources to other than the White House propaganda.
Duped?... THE IRAQ WAR IS OVER... This is from FOX news... I'm surprised they didn't put a right wing spin on this...

U.S. Troops in Iraq Now Below 50,000 Target - FoxNews.com

Under Obama's plan, American forces will no longer conduct combat operations but are instead to train Iraqi troops and help with counterterrorism operations — if asked for by the Iraqis.

Under the agreement between the U.S. and Iraq, all American troops must be out of Iraq by the end of next year.

The troops now remaining in the country will mainly be responsible for training Iraqi security forces.

The 4th Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, which was officially designated at the last combat unit to leave Iraq, drove out last week in their eight-wheeled Strykers.

From Aug. 2010...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:03 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top