Out on a limb: US military Iraq withdrawal

Not sure if I nailed the correct forum so mods, please move if need be.
Not sure if anything like this has been posted and using search would be a fruitless exercise as this thread is pure speculation and could be in a number of different forums and titled many different ways. Blah blah blah lets get down to business...

G'day ATS

Scrolling through the boards and skimming across a couple of threads I had a notion.
Does anyone else think there was an alterior motive behind the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq?

Here's my thoughts...

Who agrees that the whole end to the Iraq war has a hidden agenda and it boils down to a couple of things. Firstly with the upcoming election, the case could quite possibly be, Barry O is searching for public favour? Now this has been speculated a number of times in numerous threads and this political tactic has arguably been utilised many times in the past come election time. It's probably not that far fetched a reality.

Ok, further down the rabbit hole we go...

With tension building in other parts of the Middle East, perhaps the withdrawal from Iraq has tactical reasons behind it. With an ever looming confrontation with Iran and the like, it's not out of the question that a kind of regroup is taking place amongst military ranks to prepare for an invasion of these other countries. With an enemy in Iraq almost spent, it's time for the "mercenaries" to move in so the military forces can be put to use in other regions.
A reminder that this is pure speculation but once again not at all grasping for straws.

Now for the finale and we're through the looking glass now people...
I debated with myself whether to add this and after self reasoning I decided what the hell. This is afterall ATS.

Ok so combining these thought processes I took this to another level. As I said this could be a political tactic with the upcoming election to gain public favour. After speculation of a covert war happening in Iran, what if (and this is a big "what if") it's all meant in an antagonistic nature to back Iran into a corner and leave them no choice but that of retaliation. Timed right and this could work perfectly (or a false flag op is used at which timing no longer is an obstacle) To elaborate on what I'm getting at, the biggest threat to a second term in office for Obama is Ron Paul. If RP fails in his bid to get the nomination all this goes out the window. But. If he is successful in the republican election here's a tactic I can see the democrats using to perhaps gain a big upper hand in the run for office.
There's much talk about RPs "soft" policies on foreign affairs, timed right as I said before, to cut to the chase, Iran retaliates, the recently returned troops get deployed, Obama is the "hero" Ron Paul is "soft" Barry gets his second term. What do you guys think?

I know I am grasping at straws now and as I've stated, this thread is speculative at best but it's a possible scenario in my opinion. I could be bonkers but hey, it would be foolish to suggest that TPTB are completely sane and wouldn't go to these lengths to further their agenda.

Any other ideas feel free to share or if of a different opinion, flame away. I couldn't care less I ain't here stating fact, just some crazy ideas.

Hope you all enjoy

So...the people against the Iraq war get what they want, a full withdrawal, and now there's a conpiracy behind that too?

:shk:

uh!

reply to post by TOMFROMOZ

Wait. Didn't we already win that one?



edit: I agree... close to an election.
And we haven't really left.
We just done subjugating them for the most part.
Now the resource stealing is an ongoing thing and if anything disturbs the flow of oil, we'll be back.

Sorry to be a thread killer: Its'been posted several times; the(dec31,2011) withdrawal was negotiated under the bush administration as part of the
2008(?) ("SOFA") Status of forces agreement. no last minute "change" here! of course we built and staffed the worlds largest embassy compound.

reply to post by TOMFROMOZ


War time Presidents usually get re-elected. I don't know of one who didn't.

People in trying times often stay with the devil they know, rather than gamble with a new guy. Who knows though. Americans of all stripes are getting sick and or apathetic towards constant warfare.

Obama may have another first in his chapter. The first President to lose re-election during a war.

At the moment I don't agree with everything RP says, but I'm willing to give him a chance....more so than the rest of the current electoral crop out there.

Dont often reply to posts but heres my two cents. By removing military presence from Iraq there is now a possibility of Iran exerting a greater amount of influence in the region. It also will allow access to a certain other country in the region who seem to be in the news a lot lately. Syria.

Why do this. All ruling parties are Shiite in these three nations. It seems probable that some form of coalition will be formed be it informal or otherwise. Wouldn't this just increase the threat level for other allies in that area. Hmm, I think it would. This in turn gives the west an excuse to go back to any of these regions at any time given an excuse.

Saudi Arabia, as well as its smaller neighbors -- Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates are all Sunni countries (pardon the pun) are not too happy with this situation and want too see it end soon so see you at desert war 3 soon. Or is it 5. Losing count now.

Stay safe.

reply to post by projectvxn


Dude, it was just a passing thought as I stated a number of times in my OP. I did however also expect a flame or two so you answered that expectation. Instead of answering my questions with, yes, another question. How about adding something with a bit of substance to the thread? I mean as wild as my suggestions are, they're not half as outlandish as some of the conspiracies spilled onto these boards. I actually think there's a chance, no matter how minuscule, that these speculations may have some legitimacy to them.
Anywho I dunno how you did that blue head animation thingy so I'll do it this way

...[blue head thingy]... You know what I mean

reply to post by intrptr


Haha yeah apparently so. Yet the bombs kept dropping and the casualties kept piling up and most likely will continue to do so for years to come.
Oil will be the death of us all!!

reply to post by 46ACE


Maybe so although it still came as a surprise to most when announced. I wonder why?
Perhaps they keeping to a tight schedule and Iran is pencilled in for post Dec 31 2011?
All speculation of course

I am getting older every story is a repeat.

John Lennon - Happy Xmas (War Is Over)

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by TOMFROMOZ

 

War time Presidents usually get re-elected. I don't know of one who didn't.

Is that a fact? Source? Genuine question here despite the delivery.
I wouldn't be surprised you know. Hopefully you guys in the states wake up in time to realise the next fork in the road is fast approaching and could be the last. We as a species are counting on you.

reply to post by murch


You claim holds weight I say. An established coalition in the middle east could quite possibly be the proverbial straw that broke the camels back. Perhaps it's all playing out according to plan. If such a coalition were given birth, I'd still be against the west asserting themselves in the region. If the middle east wants to destroy itself then let it do so without our intervention. I'm inclined to agree with Ron Paul as far as the west being the problem and we the west need to sort our own #e out before trying to play dad anywhere else.

reply to post by Gmoneycricket


This day and age we need someone with as loud a voice and as much influence as John Lennon. He defines "Legendary"

War is over? I doubt it but merry Christmas all the same.

Originally posted by TOMFROMOZ

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by TOMFROMOZ

 

War time Presidents usually get re-elected. I don't know of one who didn't.

Is that a fact? Source? Genuine question here despite the delivery.
I wouldn't be surprised you know. Hopefully you guys in the states wake up in time to realise the next fork in the road is fast approaching and could be the last. We as a species are counting on you.

Crap! I hate it when people are counting on me. Now I'm all self conscious.

But a quick Google shows me that no POTUS has lost his bid for re-election since Madison.

reply to post by TDawgRex


Haha I hesitated to write it for that reason. Probably why I stated several times in my OP that it was speculation so no one would ask the same of me. I did genuinely ask out of interest it was something I'd never heard before. I googled also and turned up the same as you did.... Very interesting indeed, thanks

reply to post by TDawgRex


By the way I gave you a star to hopefully extinguish your self conscious feelings

reply to post by TOMFROMOZ

Hopefully you guys in the states wake up in time to realise the next fork in the road is fast approaching and could be the last. We as a species are counting on you.

Scary observation from "stateside." Actually the world is going to be the one to have to do something. We here are to busy with our selfish interests to care on any meaningful level. I am as scared of America's Military Industrial Complex as the rest of the planet. It seems unstoppable and ravenous as a dog. What would you do if you were an american?

reply to post by TOMFROMOZ


Thanks, but I really only have two feelings left. Happy and Pissed. Some have called me Bi-Polar.

But to be truthful, I hope our current POTUS does not get re-elected. His Admin seems to be stumbling about the world stage even worse than Bush Jr.

I like to think that Paul would be a breath of fresh air...but we really won't see until his term is up, if he is elected.

History always tells the tales, or as I like to say, "Hindsight is 20/20, but the future is blind."

Originally posted by intrptr

Actually the world is going to be the one to have to do something. We here are to busy with our selfish interests to care on any meaningful level.....


.....What would you do if you were an american?

You're more right than what you think. I would have to agree that the problem is that of the entire world and not just the Americans. For change to happen, the problem first needs significant recognition which the majority of the population fails to accomplish. Revolutions in countries can fix problems in countries. In order for a world wide fix.... The only answer I see is a world wide revolution.

If I was an American I know what I'd like to do whether i could or not. I believe to initiate such a movement is easier said than done, absolutely. But I also believe for such a movement to occur it would have to start in the west and particularly America. Populations like Australia won't support it unless Americans initiate it. We are your lap dogs. We need that encouragement for fear of getting squashed without the backing of the mighty US. Of course this has to happen at a public level as our enemy is the political level. Once the ball is rolling us Aussies would throw our weight behind such a cause as well as other western nations. Begin to show tolerance to eastern countries and I think the general populace of these countries would fight for the same cause.

TPTB are the problem and the citizens are the solution.

Originally posted by TOMFROMOZ
reply to post by 46ACE

 

Maybe so although it still came as a surprise to most when announced. I wonder why?
Perhaps they keeping to a tight schedule and Iran is pencilled in for post Dec 31 2011?
All speculation of course

Yeah; guess I spend way- heyyy. too much time online ( here)

The U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (official name: "Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq") is a status of forces agreement (SOFA) between Iraq and the United States. It establishes that U.S. combat forces will withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011, subject to possible further negotiations which could delay withdrawal and a referendum scheduled for mid-2009 in Iraq which may require U.S. forces to completely leave by the middle of 2010. ....

... Ratification by Iraqi Parliament

On November 27, 2008, the Iraqi Parliament ratified a Status of Forces Agreement with the United States, establishing that U.S. combat forces will withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011, but allowing for further negotiation if the Iraqi Prime Minister believes Iraq is not stable enough.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Well that "syrian thing" IS coming up.
Obamas dayrunner forJan2012 must be"packed full"already