Originally Posted by Guest

First of all, let me say thanks for a reasonable response. This is what this forum is about, ie. to exchange thoughts, share information. All too often, anything said is met with snarky smart !@@ comments, so thank you.

You are correct that there was no agreement with Maliki, but almost EVERY military and foreign relation expert I have read insist that if we wanted to have such an agreement, it would be done. For example...Leon Panetta who was a member of the administration at the time.

"In a new book, former Defense Secretary and CIA Director Leon Panetta suggests that President Obama failed to heed his advisers who wanted to leave troops in Iraq past December 2011, which may have contributed to the rise of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS)."

"Panetta acknowledged the difficulties of putting together the agreement that would have allowed U.S. forces to stay in the country - it had the support of various leaders in Iraq, but none who were willing to back it publicly - but also said the U.S. could have used its leverage, such as reconstruction aid money, to convince then-President Nouri al-Maliki to support a continued U.S. presence."

Leon Panetta criticizes Obama for Iraq withdrawal - CBS News

I hope you are still reading because here is the most informative...

"He said that Under Secretary of Defense Michele Flournoy advocated that position - which was shared by military commanders in the region and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Panetta writes - but found that Mr. Obama's team at the White House "pushed back, and the differences occasionally became heated."

"Those on our side viewed the White House as so eager to rid itself of Iraq that it was willing to withdraw rather than lock in arrangements that would preserve our influence and interests," he said.

Panetta writes of his frustration at the White House, which he says coordinated negotiations but never really led them. And without Mr. Obama's "personal advocacy," a deal with Maliki was allowed "to slip away."

So I must admit that literally you are correct, but as so much in the realm of politics and foreign affairs we are surrounded by nuance and context.

On the food stamp question, I simply asked you to validate your claim as to the direct cause of the increase. I never ever blamed anyone and will not because I do not know, but so many either blame Obama or Bush and I just want someone to validate what they are saying. We had a poster suggest yesterday that Bush, himself, caused the auto slow down which is absurd at best.