Via Twitter instead of an aircraft carrier: "Today, I can report that, as promised, the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of this year."

Comments

[Occupy Corporate Mouthpiece?]

Today, I can report that, as promised, the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of this year."*President Obama

Sure! Right! And I won't have a ejection in your mouth like the last time, I promise!

[Billy Jones]

That's still not going to get him an endorsement from Occupy. As a matter of fact, he might find that bringing all those military personnel and mercenaries home to no jobs will having him wishing he's kept them overseas.

[Thomas]

I don't think they fire the soldiers when they bring them home. Could be wrong.

[dale]

Does "our troops" include the mercenaries?

[Billy Jones]

Thomas: "I don't think they fire the soldiers when they bring them home. Could be wrong."

Usually, some are discharged almost immediately and others stay in longer.

Dale: "Does "our troops" include the mercenaries?

I do not mean to imply that US Troops and mercenaries are one in the same. They are not. But both are working there. And the numbers of mercenaries in Iraq are somewhere above 10,000.

[dale]

Billy:

My intent was: After we bring our troops home, how many thousands of mercenaries will we still have there?
I think that's what you're saying, too.

[justcorbly]

Man, 2003 has been a really long year.

[greensboro transplant]

obama's presidential bucket list.

• iraq withdrawal. check.
  
• keeping americans safe abroad. no. (see unlawful assassination of US citizens)
  
• victory in the "right war". no.
  
• transparent govt. no.
  
• fixing healthcare. no.
  
• comprehensive immigration reform. no.
  
• summer of recovery. no.
  
• egyptian democracy. no.
  
• gitmo closure. no.
  
• keeping unemployment from rising past 8%. no. (note: one of the stated justifications for stimulus)
  
• improving US's image abroad. no.
  
• middle east peace. no.
  
• ending partisan bickering. no.
  

Rep's conclusion. Utter failure.
Dem's conclusion. He just needs a 2nd term.

[michele]

"That's still not going to get him an endorsement from Occupy. As a matter of fact, he might find that bringing all those military personnel and mercenaries home to no jobs will having him wishing he's kept them overseas."

Billy, what does that mean, specifically?

[Billy Jones]

Michele, For starters, Occupy is not going to endorse Obama for 2 reasons, 1. Occupy doesn't endorse candidates and 2. Occupy has what appears to be a majority of members who are very unhappy with Obama, myself included.

As to wishing he'd kept them overseas, bringing the troops home will increase unemployment and homelessness in America, two things that will not reflect good on a President hoping to be reelected to a second term.

And finally, a lot of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who are already home are very upset and only know how to do one thing that none of us want them doing on our shores. Let's not forget that WWI Veterans marched on the Whitehouse during the Great Depression.

[Billy Jones]

greensboro transplant, I personally know a lot of democrats who wouldn't feel bad if Obama didn't get his second term and most of those I know have joined Occupy.

[A.C.]

"That's still not going to get him an endorsement from Occupy. As a matter of fact, he might find that bringing all those military personnel and mercenaries home to no jobs will having him wishing he's kept them overseas."

Maybe not, but it gets him the endorsement of this moderate. If only it could happen sooner. Also, the "military personnel" you speak of will have the opportunity to re-enlist if they so choose, so to say that they'll be jobless is a big stretch. Even if they were jobless, wouldn't that possibly be of some benefit to the OWS cause, as they may join your ranks? Either way, they're serving under a chief executive who has been hesitant to send troops into harms way, unlike their old boss who played war like we were back in the 1940s.

On a side note, I can't help but think that the Iraq of 2011 is a mirror image of the Afghanistan of 1989. I'd be willing to bet the house that a future generation of Americans will pay a visit to Iraq in the near future. That doesn't mean we should stay there. I'm still curious as to why we went there in the first place.

[Billy Jones]

A.C, "On a side note, I can't help but think that the Iraq of 2011 is a mirror image of the Afghanistan of 1989. I'd be willing to bet the house that a future generation of Americans will pay a visit to Iraq in the near future. That doesn't mean we should stay there. I'm still curious as to why we went there in the first place."

I share your concerns.

Also, if the military doesn't see a need for them then reenlistment will not be an option. The military always reduces troop levels when fewer are needed. And the pressure will be on to reduce military spending. Some will be allowed to reenlist and some won't.

Yes, it could be good for Occupy... or not.

"Either way, they're serving under a chief executive who has been hesitant to send troops into harms way, unlike their old boss who played war like we were back in the 1940s."

Agreed, but Obama plans to raise over $1 Billion mostly from Wall Street to fund his 2012 campaign and in the last election he was the largest beneficiary of Wall Street campaign funding in the history of our nation. This doesn't reflect well on him in the eyes a movement that aims to take corporate money out of the election process.

To quote a worn out phrase, "It's the economy, stupid."

And I'm not implying you're stupid.

[A.C.]

"Agreed, but Obama plans to raise over $1 Billion mostly from Wall Street to fund his 2012 campaign and in the last election he was the largest beneficiary of Wall Street campaign funding in the history of our nation. This doesn't reflect well on him in the eyes a movement that aims to take corporate money out of the election process."

In the words of David Byrne, "Same as it ever was..."