The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by Boise_Lib.

With Obama's record of broken promises you should probably put the date of this speech in the description.

This may not be the last time we hear it.

*quality

Boise_Lib cannot award a quality point for this post because Boise_Lib does not have enough Power Points - ignoring quality request by Boise_Lib. (You can always purchase more Power Points.)

NBC coverage of this.
http://videosift.com/video/Obama-ALL-U-S-Troops-Will-Be-Out-of-Iraq-by-Christmas

*nochannel
*politics
*news
*waronterror
*worldaffairs

This video has been removed from all channels (Lies, Politics, Waronterror) due to invalid channel assignment - nochannel invoked by NetRunner. Please review the FAQ to learn about appropriate channel assignments.

Adding video to channels (News, Politics, Waronterror, Worldaffairs) - requested by NetRunner.

Too little, too late, brotha.

You coulda been a contenda! You coulda been somebody!!

Thanks NetRunner

He's really hammering in the point isn't he.....

Yeah, I saw this and thought "That's wonderful...I'm still not going to vote for you."

EDIT: Can someone with better research skills than I please come up with a list or something of all the American soldiers killed in Iraq since the day Barack Obama became president?

sweet. now there's just the private security force there that costs about 10x as much per man.
he ended the war. great for the resume. he continued the occupation....no need to talk about it.

I'm a little weirded out too by what just happened in Libya. As much of a fucktard as Gadhafi was, this was yet another leader of a sovereign nation felled by a U.S. and oil-interest-backed coup. No one is really talking about that. Instead, even Jon Stewart is taking an "atta-boy" attitude towards this administration. and relishing in how little it cost.

the next Lybian regime will be a democracy in name only and friendly to US and European interests: light, sweet crude.
Then the IMF will come in under the pretext of "re-building" the country and really fuck the people.

I think we are still a little complacent about our country essentially waging aggressive war.

>> ^criticalthud:

the next Lybian regime will be a democracy in name only and friendly to US and European interests: light, sweet crude.


That's not for certain...China is pushing it's influence more throughout the world and might be the one that invests in Libya and gets claim to it's oil. People in the middle east are SICK of the USofA, I wonder why.

So what, we have to accept the legitimacy of leaders who are actively exterminating their own people now? I was against Afghanistan. I was against Iraq. Gadhafi was right in the middle of killing Libyan citizens, those citizens asked for aid, and we decided to help them install a government that won't butcher civilians? How dare we! Sovereignty is a convenient concept for regulating actions between nations. It isn't a moral necessity. This was a case where the moral choice was not the one that respected sovereignty.

I don't see a world in which puppet governments are making us a colonial power, though I won't deny that Bush and Cheney hoped for that. Iraq is now aligning with Iran. Karzai is so far off the reservation that if Afghanistan were Vietnam, we'd have assassinated him twice by now. Most critics of the Libya action are worried that the transitional government is a bunch of Islamists who played nice to get our help and now intend to train terrorists and pick fights with Israel. The truth is that Libyans will probably be a lot friendlier to the US and Europe than they were a year ago. But maybe, for once, that's because we've earned it.

>> ^criticalthud:

I'm a little weirded out too by what just happened in Libya. As much of a fucktard as Gadhafi was, this was yet another leader of a sovereign nation felled by a U.S. and oil-interest-backed coup. No one is really talking about that. Instead, even Jon Stewart is taking an "atta-boy" attitude towards this administration. and relishing in how little it cost.
the next Lybian regime will be a democracy in name only and friendly to US and European interests: light, sweet crude.
Then the IMF will come in under the pretext of "re-building" the country and really fuck the people.
I think we are still a little complacent about our country essentially waging aggressive war.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

With Obama's record of broken promises you should probably put the date of this speech in the description.
This may not be the last time we hear it.


February 27, 2009 -- President Obama said Friday he would withdraw combat forces from Iraq by August 2010 and all remaining troops by December 2011. ... The deadline set under an agreement the Bush administration signed with the Iraqi government last year.



Here is what I am wondering... Didn't we spend like $3 BILLION building like the world's largest military base in Iraq? And now we are going to leave the country with not even enough people to run it?

>> ^Yogi:

Yeah, I saw this and thought "That's wonderful...I'm still not going to vote for you."
EDIT: Can someone with better research skills than I please come up with a list or something of all the American soldiers killed in Iraq since the day Barack Obama became president?


258.

Who are you gonna vote for, anyways?

Election time. Sounds like he is shoring up his base which have left in droves.

What the administration is not telling you is that total withdrawlal of the troops was not the preferred plan. The plan was to leave a remnant of a few thousand behind to oversee training. But because our negotiaters bungled talks with the Iraqi government and failed to get immunity for the troops, they pulled them all out. Iraq also recently announced that it wouldn't be having any of our bases there either. So basically Iran has taken over, and this fledging democracy, which we completely failed to establish, is going to be overtaken by extermists and brought under sharia law. We are basically symbolically handing over the control of the country to Iran and leaving in shame and disgrace. God help the Iraqi people.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/589004/201110211900/Politicizing-Our-Exit-From-Iraq.htm

>> ^shinyblurry:

What the administration is not telling you is that total withdrawlal of the troops was not the preferred plan. The plan was to leave a remnant of a few thousand behind to oversee training. But because our negotiaters bungled talks with the Iraqi government and failed to get immunity for the troops, they pulled them all out. Iraq also recently announced that it wouldn't be having any of our bases there either. So basically Iran has taken over, and this fledging democracy, which we completely failed to establish, is going to be overtaken by extermists and brought under sharia law. We are basically symbolically handing over the control of the country to Iran and leaving in shame and disgrace. God help the Iraqi people.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalys
is/Article/589004/201110211900/Politicizing-Our-Exit-From-Iraq.htm


It's funny how imperialism works. The countries we occupy seem to side with the opposition, why is that?

You're correct though, the Iraqi government is kicking us out. Of course we will leave behind thousands of mercenaries and the CIA will have a shadowy presence. And the State department will be hiring 5,500 more security contractors to protect 17,000 civilians working for the American government in Iraq.

Sounds like to me this is the perfect opportunity for the US or Israel to stage an attack by Iran on Iraq or US troops. Remember the "Iran has become bolder" talking-point that was repetitively aired after the recent fake DEA-Saudi bomb plot.

>> ^Mikus_Aurelius:

So what, we have to accept the legitimacy of leaders who are actively exterminating their own people now? I was against Afghanistan. I was against Iraq. Gadhafi was right in the middle of killing Libyan citizens, those citizens asked for aid, and we decided to help them install a government that won't butcher civilians? How dare we! Sovereignty is a convenient concept for regulating actions between nations. It isn't a moral necessity. This was a case where the moral choice was not the one that respected sovereignty.
I don't see a world in which puppet governments are making us a colonial power, though I won't deny that Bush and Cheney hoped for that. Iraq is now aligning with Iran. Karzai is so far off the reservation that if Afghanistan were Vietnam, we'd have assassinated him twice by now. Most critics of the Libya action are worried that the transitional government is a bunch of Islamists who played nice to get our help and now intend to train terrorists and pick fights with Israel. The truth is that Libyans will probably be a lot friendlier to the US and Europe than they were a year ago. But maybe, for once, that's because we've earned it.
>> ^criticalthud:
I'm a little weirded out too by what just happened in Libya. As much of a fucktard as Gadhafi was, this was yet another leader of a sovereign nation felled by a U.S. and oil-interest-backed coup. No one is really talking about that. Instead, even Jon Stewart is taking an "atta-boy" attitude towards this administration. and relishing in how little it cost.
the next Lybian regime will be a democracy in name only and friendly to US and European interests: light, sweet crude.
Then the IMF will come in under the pretext of "re-building" the country and really fuck the people.
I think we are still a little complacent about our country essentially waging aggressive war.



we have of course, actively supported dictators who have exterminated their own people or violently put down any protests. and we continue to. it's happening right now. The point is, "revolution" in the name of democracy only occurs when US interests are favored. otherwise the US categorizes 'rebellion' or 'revolution'...or even dissent as a terrorist action against a legitimate state. When it favors the US or other high powered interests, "revolution" is simply a pretext for us to topple regimes that are unfriendly to US interests.