The people who have been saying a "time table" would be a horrible mistake are now proven wrong. Likewise, those who have said we need a "time table" for withdrawal were correct all along.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121925351447057223.html
[Fox News reported the same story. For those who don't believe it.]
http://www.washingtonindependent.com...raq-on-the-way

An unnecessary war is finally reaching it's last chapter. Thank God.

__________________
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
-Albert Einstein

i don't think US will withdraw the troops out of Iraq any soon. they will find new excuses to remain, as they did till day.

__________________
Dictator Mustafa Kemal AtaJew: http://atajew.com

Masonic Dictator Mustafa Kemal Was Jewish, Here's The Proof: http://youtube.com/watch?v=jVcy7zUmZqE

Let the spin begin! It is impossible for any of the Neo-con traitors to America here on this forum to refute that the consensus among every one of them was and I quote: " Time tables for surrender" or "The Democrats want surrender" . The Republicans will say the surge is a success , but the surge is not the Iraq Invasion . The Republicans will say , The Iraq government is ready to go it on there own. I'm not against leaving , dont get me wrong . I just want to set the table for all the traitors who will employ their nonsense by reciting the predictable instead of saying what it is........ A political tool to try and get Republican favor back in the country.... Sorry war mongering bastards , its not going to work this time around. As one war contract draws to an end , we will see a new shift toward Russia (Missile defense, Iran, Break away states). Let the spin begin!

__________________
EVERY WORD YOU SAY IS A DOOR WAY TO YOU!

Well, hell -- when it's all true, it's all true.

1) Had we followed the Democratic timetable (funny how they forget there were two), it most certainly would have been surrender.

2) Obviously, the surge was a success. To suggest otherwise is complete nonsense.

3) Iraq has begun to stabilize. Of course, it is interesting to note how the OP attempted to taint the story by only telling half the story. The military will withdraw from the cities, but will remain in-country (at bases outside the cities) until at least 2011, if conditions warrant. What that means is that the US military will be there, and Iraq will have two and half years more to get politically stable.

As for the "neo-con traitors" comment, this is typical of the strident left .. throw words out there with no regard for their accuracy. It was mean-spirited and vindictive, and has no place in reasonable political debate.

I don't believe you can question the patriotism of either side, nor their intent. It is merely that the two sides arrived at different answers to the same question. (Apparently, though, the 'neo-con' answer worked).

__________________
Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them.

---- Ronald Reagan

No. Bush wanted to stay indefinitely or at least until 2015. The Iraqi's demanded 2010 and 2011 was the compromise. The US has no legal right to stay if Iraq wants us to leave.

Yes. Troop surges give the appearance of progress or success. But Iraq is an un-winnable playing field. Powell has warned all along that Iraq is in the middle of a civil war. Al Queada has only made a foothold in Iraq because of US troop presence and they can recruit an unlimited supply of insurgents. This idea of "victory" in a situation like this is none-sense.

Victory for the US would be (never invading Iraq in the first place) going after terrorist strong holds with the help of governments around the world. Not occupying an sovereign nation.

---

US Presidential Candidate Senator Barack Obama had been calling for a time table to be negotiated all along. He was correct time and time again about Iraq.

__________________
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
-Albert Einstein

Proven wrong? The situation on the ground has dramatically changed! If Barack Obama had his way we would have been out allready and the surge would have never happened! Thus a pullout would have been a celebration for Al-Quieda. It also would have resulted in ensuring that Iraq was an oil funded terror state. Liberals like to sit in the position and talk about timetables for years but eventualy they will get one due to the situation on the ground where it is safe for a legislated pullout. I guess the time is right. But the fact remains! If they got one when they first wanted it we would definantly be worse off than we were before. But thats exactly what the democrats wanted! A failed Iraq for political purposes.

__________________
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.

John Adams

http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html

the right refuses to admit that the resolution appears to be along the lines Obama has been recommending
that really sucks for them with the election on the horizon

__________________

Quote:

"I like to watch the news, because I don't like people very much and when you watch the news ... if you ever had an idea that people were really terrible, you could watch the news and know that you're right."

Frank Zappa

Over four thousand American soldiers dead and an estimated 155,000 to over 1 million Iraqis dead all directly related to the invasion of Iraq.

So I guess if the question is, how do you bring unnecessary death and destruction to a nation then I guess you could say "the 'neo-con' answer worked."

__________________
Soldiers swear to protect and defend the Constitution with their lives.

Politicians swear to protect and defend the Constitution with someone else's life.

Trying to take creidt for the success of the troops they ignore and the overall plan they have belittled since 2003.


Nothing about this is do to this crowd or has anything to do with Obama's loser position.

None of this would have even happenned without the Surge all of you jerks including Obama opposed and now ignore the success of.


Liars of convenience stop wasting peoples time and lives with your lies.








..lastly...
all of it will depend on the conditions on the ground.

Welcome to the 50th Iraq troop withdrawal thread?
Iraq withdrawl timetable

@ kaspy
Obama has been calling for a troop withdrawal? Half of Washington has been calling for a troop withdrawal. Starting with Gates who suggested a rapid withdrawal of U.S. troops back in May 2005. Lets give Obama props, because he went against W's "indefinite" Iraq occupation? Or not.

as the_gambler put it: wow are you serious? did you think obama would [publically] agree with the bush administration? president bush's ratings are down. why on earth would he agree with what bush is pushing.

say bush was encouraging a time table with his current ratings, it's common sense a candidate such as obama would have went against him just to improve his ratings.

__________________
America sneezes - and the rest of the world catches pneumonia.
If we always do what we always did, we'll always get what we always got.