Petraeus: Troop Buildup In Iraq Is Working! »
Posted by: GLee 11 months, 3 weeks ago277 Comments Report this Story
Petraeus lays out why and how this successful buildup is taking effect in Iraq.
Read Full Story at miamiherald.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 277
-
catstevensComment removed: User banned.114 Replies
-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
Doesn't this announcement at this time sound like a calculated response to the GAO report?
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
One other thing, this story was originally published by The Australian, and we all know who owns The Australian...
Reply-
0%
injest11 months, 3 weeks ago
Deathray said:
"One other thing, this story was originally published by The Australian, and we all know who owns The Australian.."
Deathray, dude read the heading for this report it is from the Associated Press. Is the Associated Press part of your grand conspiracy theory?.
Petraeus: Troop buildup working in Iraq
The Associated Press
SYDNEY, Australia --
America's troop buildup
How bout the article just below this one, it saying the same thing and its from USA
TODAY. Is USA TODAY part of your grand conspiracy theory?
Petraeus says security crackdown working
By César G. Soriano, USA TODAY
BAGHDAD â;; When Gen. David Petraeus drives through the streets of Iraq's capital, he sees "astonishing signs of normalcy"
Reply-
-
-
0%
Goppy11 months, 3 weeks ago
WoW! Con! I dont think I evea read such hyperbolee!!
You are a natural borned inflamer!!
I just got a few questions. Ifn the Conservatives hates Commies so much, why is the Conservatives helpin ship our manufacturin to the Commies in China?
And why is Goerge W. Bush indebting our nation to the Communists in China to the toon of $1 Trillion PLUS dollors? Dont he know that that enables them to undermine our whole economie? And aint that a national security issue?
And finally, why do you buy so much stuff from the Chineese Communists? Aint you supportin a Godless state who see us as their rival and possible enemy in a fight over Taiwan?
Im just askin cause, I liek to defend Goerge W. Bush ever chance I can - just liek you - but reality makes it hard sometimes.
And you know them libbies - they has an annoyin habit of quotin reality to our crazy ideeologie!!!
Reply-
0%
amesburyroad11 months, 3 weeks ago
Goppy, because of the Fox News and right wing radio freedom to distort and lie, right-wing posters on this site mimic their enablers and hilariously emulate such, with ridiculous postings like the above, however, here, they are quickly skewered when they post; unlike fat druggie, Hannity, and O'Liar, they can't cut the mike when they are being schooled...
Reply -
-
0%
capecoralM11 months, 3 weeks ago
Senate votes PNTR for Red China- DODD VOTED YES
9/29/2000
Sen. Richard Durbin (D.-Ill.) said, "Trade is the future. Make no mistake about it: Trade can open up the exchange of ideas-ideas like democracy, freedom of speech, freedom to worship, and freedom of association. China stands on the brink of becoming the most important trading partner the U.S. has ever seen and the U.S. Senate will go on record in support of this important step in international trade and foreign policy."
A "yes" vote was a vote to grant China Permanent Normal Trade Relations status.
FOR THE BILL: 83
DEMOCRATS FOR (37): Baucus, Bayh, Biden, Bingaman, Boxer, Breaux, Bryan, Cleland, Conrad, Daschle, Dodd, Dagan, Durbin, Edwards, Feinstein, Graham (Fla.), Harkin, Inouye, Johnson, Kennedy, Kerrey (Neb.), Kerry (Mass., Kohl, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Lincoln, Miller, Moynihan, Murray, Reed (R.1), Robb, Rockefeller, Schumer, Torricelli and Wyden.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
StarLord11 months, 3 weeks ago
Actually, the Australian got an exclusive interview. And, yes, Murdoch owns the Australian. However, they don't lie. They spin, twist and manipulate, but the Murdoch press never outright lies.
Reply
-
-
-
catstevensComment removed: User banned.68 Replies
-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
The timing of this sounds suspect, in light of a concerted effort on the part of the Administration to control the message.
Is this report the unalloyed work of General Petraeus?
Of course, given his statements ever since his 2004 Washingtion Post op ed about our imminent victory, I tend to view his pronouncements with some suspicion.
Ever read this?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A...
And please, don't come back and tell me that Petraeus isn't a political animal. Any general who wants to be promoted past two stars is a political animal, because those promotions are all confirmed by the Senate.
The Iraq War is the best thing that's ever happened to Gen. Petraeus; in four years he's gone from a two star to a four star general, and knows where his bread is buttered.
He's been predicting imminent victory in Iraq since 2004.
You should view his repeated declarations of such with some skepticism.
So, you ask? That's why.
Reply-
0%
injest11 months, 3 weeks ago
"Of course, given his statements ever since his 2004 Washingtion Post op ed about our imminent victory,"
What he said was "I see tangible progress" not "imminent victory" as you claim. I got that from the article YOU posted. Did you read that article? Do you understand the words used? Is "tangible progress" to esoteric for you?
Do we need to lower the level of the writing to sixth grade just for you?
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
Let's see, if I wanted to banter with you, I could say "You couldn't lower the level of the writing to the sixth grade level, because you can't write beyond the third grade level" but I won't do that...so I'll just say that I laid out my case for skepticism over all this leaked reporting, and if you are incapable of understanding my sixth grade writing, then that's your issue.
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
Was there "tangible progress, injest? Were the Iraqi Security Forces all Gen. Petraeus said they were in 2004> Because if you actually pay attention, the quality of the ISF since then has been pretty low...and the quality of the Iraqi National Police has been similarly poor. I'm sure there have been tactical successes, but since the Iraqi government (just today_ stated that there are no "magic solutions" to reconciliation in the next year or so, I'm guessing that all the military successes are pretty much mainttaining the status quo, meaning no real progress.
Now, let me know if you have comprehension trouble with any of the words past the third grade level.
Reply-
0%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
It's possible that both Petraeus AND the GAO are both correct. As a military commander, Petraeus job is to secure Iraq and there are indications that violence has declined somewhat.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/world/AP/story/...
"Petraeus said there had been a 75 percent drop in ethnic and religious killings since last year, a doubling in the number of seizures of insurgent weapons caches between January and August, a drop in the number of coalition deaths from roadside bombs, and an increase in the killing and capture of al-Qaida fighters, the newspaper said."
But other reports claimed the decline in violence was more moderate. I'm not sure how Petraeus arrived at this 75% figure because from the DoD's figures:
Jun-Aug/2006: 169 U.S. fatalities
Jun-Aug/2007: 261 U.S. fatalities (54% INCREASE)
Jun-Aug/2006: 5116 ISF & Iraqi civilian casualties
Jun-Aug/2007: 4609 ISF & Iraqi civilian casualties (11% DECREASE)
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
Yes, it's possible for both the GAO and the Petraeus reports to be correct, and I've read that in other venues.
One other report that adds value to this discussion is the last National Intelligence Estimate, which makes many assertions that seem to contradict what General Petraeus is saying as well.
Reply-
-
0%
blowback11 months, 3 weeks ago
This is just more of the
same old spin to sell a
war to make a general
look like a hero.
It wouldn't be the first
time.
The story should carry
the headline: US Buys
Off Sunni Militia.
The deal includes 6000
Sunni insurgents released
from jail.
Not so glorious.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=...
And the civilian death toll
is up.
http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5i...
Reply-
0%
capecoralM11 months, 3 weeks ago
Congress: Iraq 'surge' not working
"The forthcoming GAO report offers a clear assessment that a new direction in Iraq must begin immediately, before more American lives are lost and more taxpayer dollars wasted," said Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader.
His comments were echoed by fellow Democrats.
Source: http://english.aljazeera.net/
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
Petraeus makes no claims about progress in Iraq's political deadlock, economic stability, and public services accessibility. However, the GAO report must look at the larger picture and considers more than just the military objectives with which Petraeus is charged. Remember, that the leaked GAO report claims Bush met 5 of the 18 objectives. Of these 5 objectives, the GAO agrees with Petraeus in that:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
"The interim July report determined that satisfactory progress was being made toward eight of the 18 benchmarks, most of them on the SECURITY front."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20518951/
"The GAO found that Iraq had fully met requirements to: Establish political, media, economic, and services committees in support of the Baghdad SECURITY plan, Establish joint SECURITY stations in neighborhoods across Baghdad, and Ensure the rights of minority political parties."
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
Petraeus ought to be rightfully proud of the moderate progress he has made on the SECURITY front. Outside this, the picture is less optimistic. The leaked GAO report addresses these shortcomings in the remaining 13 of the 18 benchmarks NOT met by Bush's troop escalation, including political deadlock, financial quarrel (i.e., oil revenue sharing), and Iraqi Army training & development.
ON THE POLITICAL FRONT:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
"Only one of eight political benchmarks -- the protection of the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi legislature -- has been achieved, according to the draft. On the others, including legislation on constitutional reform, new oil laws and de-Baathification, it assesses failure...Progress has been complicated by the withdrawal of 15 of 37 members of the Iraqi cabinet, [which] ends any claim by the Shi'ite-dominated coalition to be a government of national unity."
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
ON THE ISF TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT FRONT:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar... security forces are also assessed more severely in the GAO study than in the administration's July report. Although the White House found satisfactory progress toward the goal of deploying three Iraqi army brigades in Baghdad, the GAO disagrees, citing "performance problems" in some units. "Some army units sent to Baghdad have mixed loyalties, and some have had ties to Shiia militias making it difficult to target Shiia extremist networks," it says. The GAO draft also says that the number of Iraqi army units capable of operating independently declined from 10 in March to six last month. The July White House report mentioned a "slight" decline in capable Iraqi units, without providing any numbers."
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/world/AP/story/...
"A separate independent commission established by Congress to study Iraq's security forces is expected to recommend scrapping the 25,000-member national police force and starting over because it is so corrupt and influenced by sectarianism."
So, Petraeus' and the GAO's report may not conflict as much as they first appear. It's just that Petraeus report will focus on the security issue while the GAO will take a more comprehensive look that includes the security issue is one of many pieces.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20502905/
"The GAO, the congressional watchdog, is expected to find that the Iraqis have met only modest security goals for Baghdad and none of the major political aims such as passage of an oil law."
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
What will be interesting is to see how these reports are politicized by ideologues. Republicans, of course, will focus on Petraeus' security report, trumpeting it as a sign that the Surge is working and berating critics of refusing to listen to the generals on the field (despite the fact that many generals and soldiers are coming out against the war). Democrats will turn toward the GAO's more comprehensive analysis and argue that there really has been little overall progress because, although modest security gains have been made, these gains will mean nothing unless political progress is made, economic stability is established, and basic services are provided reliably.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20518951/
"But Democrats and even some Republicans say military progress made in recent weeks is not the issue. If Baghdad politicians refuse to reach a lasting political settlement that can influence the sectarian-fueled violence, the increase in troops is useless, they said."
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
blowback11 months, 3 weeks ago
I can speak only for myself,
but I believe the truth matters.
The last 6 years have been
anything but. There's no
reason to believe this is
any different. The shame
comes from holding the truth
in contempt. Does the truth
matter to you? Where is
the shame in demanding it?
Reply
-
-
-
0%
injest11 months, 3 weeks ago
Was there "tangible progress, injest? Were the Iraqi Security Forces all Gen. Petraeus said they were in 2004
As in 04 as compared to 03 yes.
However, that's not the point. YOU claimed Gen. Petraeus has made statements of "imminent victory" and YOU gave a link to back up your claim, problem is nothing in the article YOU cited states anything close to "imminent victory"
So please don't try and change the subject. If you cannot provide a source to back up your claim, your "credibility is shot.
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
The tangible successes have been for Gen. Petraeus; he has gone from a two star to a four star, and gotten to try out his counterinsurgency methods in practice, so, for him, personally, the war is a great success, as I've pointed out above.
If the "tangible success" the General was touting in 2004 concerning troop training was true, followed by the subsequent utter failure of those troops since, I'd say my skepticism is warranted.
The Administration has been touting imminent victory since 2003, and so far, things have generally gotten worse in Iraq, not better. If you choose to make a narrow rhetorical argument instead of looking at the facts in context, it's your credibility that seems impaired.
Reply-
-
0%
Goppy11 months, 3 weeks ago
Yeah, because we Christian Conservatives is full of logik.
Always has been - always will be.
And personally, I dont liek it when poeple insist on bein accurate when they debate. I believe in 'fuzzy logik'. Its an offshoot of 'fuzzy math'.
The fuzzier the logik, the easier we Conservatives can wriggle out of any issue!! And THATS when we zing our opponent with mindless stereotypes, hyperbole, and wacky ideeologie.
oh, and buzzwords.
Reply
-
-
0%
injest11 months, 3 weeks ago
The tangible successes have been for Gen. Petraeus;
It's your claim of "imminent victory" starting, as YOU claim in 2004 that is in question.
Source please.
If the "tangible success" the General was touting in 2004 concerning troop training was true, followed by the subsequent utter failure of those troops since, I'd say my skepticism is warranted.
It's your claim of "imminent victory" starting, as YOU claim in 2004 that is in question.
Source please.
The Administration has been touting imminent victory since 2003, and so far,
It's your claim of "imminent victory" starting, as YOU claim in 2004 that is in question.
Source please.
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
You are clearly capable of typing, so do your homework and use the search engine of your choice yourself.
Maybe you'll only read them if they show up on townhall or freerepublic...oh, wait, we've been seeing claims of imminent victory from the Administration until the Republicans lost Congress in 2006 from the Administration, on webistes just like that...
Reply-
0%
injest11 months, 3 weeks ago
"You are clearly capable of typing, so do your homework and use the search engine of your choice yourself."
I all ready have and that's why I know either your lying or stupid. There is no such quote from Petraeus stating "imminent victory". The only quote that comes close to that is from the head surrender monkey H. Reid.
Press Release of Senator Reid
http://reid.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=2...
http://democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm...
http://blog.radioleft.com/blog/News/_archives/2...
Friday, April 20, 2007
He claimed again that his new escalation strategy is working, that the signs of success are everywhere, that victory is imminent.
Exactly how did you mistake Gen. Petraeus for the Surrender Monkey H. Reid?
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
LOL, injest, you certainly seem to be spoiling for a confrontation, aren't you. All this confrontation and aggression must be symptomatic of some real inadequacies in your life.
There is a difference between quoting "imminent victory" and using the phrase "imminent victory" as a euphemism for all the rosy pictures we have gotten from the Administration concerning Iraq over the last 5 years, but I forgot that I am probably dealing with someone who believes that the Earth was created in seven days. Literalists are so funny.
Reply-
-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
Let's take the literal phrase "tangible progress" by Gen Petraeus relating to the training of Iraqi police, since you are such a literalist. I'm sure they've trained many policemen in Iraq, but recently, an independent commission (meaning independent of the White House) claimed that the Iraqi national police force would require an overhaul because of corruption and Shiite militia infiltration.
Now, where is the "tangible progress" the Gen was touting? Basically, he didn't have a policy to weed out sectarian militia members from the force he was in charge of training, so now the national police force has to be rebuilt and the Shiite militia know enough about police procedure to be able to thwart police strategy.
Where's the "tangible progress" now? Well, the results are tangible for Gen. Petraeus. He got a promotion.
In light of results like that, no wonder the majority of Americans view reports from the White House with skepticism.
Reply
-
-
0%
injest11 months, 3 weeks ago
There is a difference between quoting "imminent victory" and using the phrase "imminent victory" as a euphemism for all the rosy pictures we have gotten from the Administration
Ah, so now your calling your lies "euphemism" clever if your mentally challenged.
So "imminent victory" a euphemism for "tangible progress" which you believe is a euphemism for "all the rosy pictures" That are based on Bush saying the sky is blue?
You have a real problem with honesty don't you?
Reply-
0%
injest11 months, 3 weeks ago
And "leaked report" is a euphemism for a "published interview with a reporter".
"The Australian said it interviewed Petraeus at his headquarters in Baghdad after he briefed visiting Australian Defense Minister Brendan Nelson"
And the "The Associated Press" is a euphemism R. Murdoc Fox news? As are all the news papers below. Note: there are over 200k on this article.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Austra...
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1106AP_A...
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/world/AP/story/...
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/20...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,...
A Euphemism is saying "male DNA" instead of "sperm"
"Person of interest" for "suspect"
Reply-
0%
injest11 months, 3 weeks ago
Cognitive dissonance?
Would that be like rejecting all these sources for this article and believing that its only R. Murdoc, Fox news reporting it?
Ya mean like pretending that you never heard of WMD's in Iraq BEFORE Bush?
"you choose to support the Administration blindly"
All I've asked of you is to back up your claim that Gen Petraeus said "imminent victory"
Obviously you lied, I called you on it, and your not honest enough to admit you made it up. That's clear to everyone
"but I forgot that I am probably dealing with someone who believes that the Earth was created in seven days".
Earth was created in seven days? Isn't that a religious thing? Since I don't belong to ANY religion how would I know?
So what have I said that makes you believe I'm religious? Or do you believe anyone who's not in lock step with you "must" be religious?
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
Let's see.
Fox News did not report this. A reporter for The Australian (owned by News Corp. as well) did the interview with the General, and it was picked up by AP. I guess you don't really understand that linear causality thing.
As I've indicated above, you latch onto a semantic argument when I didn't make a claim of a direct quote, I did not provide quotations around the phrase "imminent victory",; had I quoted General Petraeus, I would have done so appropriately, and provided the link. You would not have had a problem with my statement had I substituted "rosy scenarios" for "imminent victory" and "President Bush" for General Petraeus.
Your religious predisposition is worship at the altar of Bush, and you read chapter and verse the Gospel of Cheney, as interpereted by the prophets Norman Podhoretz and William Kristol, son of Irving.
Reply
-
-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
It's clear that your reading comprehension is seriously impaired. The original "leaked report" to which I was referring was the GAO report.
The rest is just masturbatory rhetoric on your part.
Reply
-
-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
LOL, apparently you like to drink your Kool Aid, Cheney flavored.
I have no problem with honesty. That's why I don't trust much out of the Bush Administration. After all, we've heard "Mission Accomplished", "Turn the corner", "progress is being made", etc. etc ad nauseum. I guess you believed it then, and you must believe it now. That lowers your own credibility, as you are no judge of the truth.
I recommend the "Elements of Style" by William Strunk. It will show you the distinction between a quotation and a turn of phrase. Apparently you missed that at whatever learniong isntitution you attended, or didn't attend.
As far as my mental faculties are concerned, I can see that you are no judge.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
catstevensComment removed: User banned.1 Reply
-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
Isn't the positive report from Petraeus a fulfillment of that prediction?
Look at my posts; I am not saying that the surge is a bad thing for the Iraqis (it's a terrile thing for the soldiers' families back home, and it is ruining the credibility of the Admnistration) but you'll notice that my main beef is the lack of a corresponding (and comprehensive) diplomatic effort in the space of the surge.
When the last funding go round occurred, the benchmarks were the ruler against which the surge would be measured (by the Iraqis, the President, and the Congress), and as it becomes clear that the benchmarks will not be met, the White House is playing the bait and switch politics of success with the Congress and the American people.
Gen. Petraeus is a capable officer, but he's following the orders of an incompetent CinC. You may be willing to give Mr. Bush just one more chance, but most aren't.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
I never dismissed Genreal Petraeus. I believe that he is a capable officer. I also believe that he is being used by the Administration to trumpet tactical successes because the White House has no credibility on the issue any longer.
Dungeun [sic] and dragons is a waste of time, and when you get enough graph theory and topology under your belt, I can explain the shortest walk for a solution.
Reply-
0%
AmericanIdiot11 months, 3 weeks ago
Dungeun [sic] and dragons is a waste of time, and when you get enough graph theory and topology under your belt, I can explain the shortest walk for a solution.
Nah, I don't do that stuff. I do metaphysics, epistomology, cognition, analysis, counter-intelligence.
And i do not work for a government agency.
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
LOL, sure.
Metaphysics (and one presumes you mean the formal philosophical study of being and knowing, rather than crackpot pseudo-philosophy) will not help you discern the truthfulness of General Petraus' report.
I might believe you study you "epistomology" if you could spell it. It's epistemology.
As far as cognition is concerned, it's becoming apparent that you would be ill served by making yourself the subject of your studies on that topic.
Maybe you are in "analysis" but going to your therapist doesn't count.
Counter-intelligence? Too many good options for me to have fun with you there...quite a smorgasbord, actually.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
badnootka11 months, 3 weeks ago
What you appear to be saying is that you don't care what Petraeus says or believes as you KNOW the truth and the US is goijng to lose the fight and be humiliated. YOu have already ordained it and there is no amount of success or any event on the ground whihch will change your mind. Committed to failure, and proud of it?
Reply
-
-
0%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
LOL!!! I bet if the article said it wasn't working Death would be doing the ole SEEEEEEEEE we were right Jig no matter what the source
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
No, because I know there are no absolutes when it comes to reports of success or failure in Iraq; I'm simply skeptical further assertions of success, because I know the Administration has spun the successtop on this story multiple times.
Tactical successes? Probably. Strategic success? Probably not.
If it's important that real cross sectarian reconciliation is proceeding, the surge is likely failing. If you want to count some tactical successes, the surge is likely succeeeding.
I can tell the difference, and so can you.
Reply-
-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
No question...my issue with the Administration is not an attempt to try to restore civil order to Iraq, it's the lack of facilitation to expedite reconciliation on the part of the Iraqis.
We've rebuilt other countries; my issue is that we aren't really doing our best to help the sectarian factions build some trust. That's not a military task, it's a public policy/ diplomatic/civil affairs task.
Reply-
0%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
I have to agree, the diplomatacy aspect has been far from stellar. I'm far from sure that one we really understood how things worked there when we went in and/or the lack of wanting of all the sides actually wanting to live in peace. The Middle East is one messed up place and only those in the Middle East can do what is needed to come to some sort of peace between themselves, though I don't personally see that happening anytime soon.
Reply-
0%
blowback11 months, 3 weeks ago
> The Middle East is one messed up place and only those in the Middle East can do what is needed to come to some sort of peace between themselves.
.
Can I take it that you are supporting
a radical review and overhaul of our
interventionism, as it has been for
the past 60 years, via US foreign policy
in the Middle East?
A policy that has made peace in the
Middle East increasingly elusive and
has much to do with why you "don't
personally see that (peace) happening
anytime soon."
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
Goppy11 months, 3 weeks ago
Jeesh! Thats a new one!
I thought Saddam was tryin to develop WMD! I dint know he fostered terrorists!
It seems liek we Conservatives find a new way to justify invadin Iraq every time I turn around!
Well, I gues it all makes sense in our crazy mixed up logik. We spend the most of any nation on the military - by an unimaginable multiplier - it only makes sense to use the ding dang military once in awhile.
I mean, whats the point of havin all them weapons ifn you caint use em?
We Conservatives is all about gettin the most for our money, after all. Well, thats whut we say. It aint necessarily whut we do.
After all - that Ted Stevens wanted $2 BILLION for a bridge that served less than 200 poeple.
I dont know, sometimes I wonder ifn the staunchest Conservative even believes the ding dang crazy hype we spew.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
KING1CON:
"deathray thinks, 'because I know there are no absolutes when it comes to...' That statement is an absolutist statement!"
KING1CON quoted DEATHRAY out of context by truncating the quote. It should read:
DEATHRAY: "No, because I know there are no absolutes when it comes to reports of success or failure in Iraq"
And this statement is true. Reports coming from Iraq have detailed mixed results. If Bush's Surge had been a complete success, the U.S. would have already redeployed.
Of course, it's not unusual for KING1CON to post misleading and out-of-context information. He has done it before and will likely do it again. It is laughable, however, that he would insult another member's logic, when the only faulty logic present is his own. There's nothing funnier than a clown accusing others of being clownish.
Reply-
0%
repealthe22ndbush200811 months, 3 weeks ago
"No, because I know there are no absolutes when it comes to reports of success or failure in Iraq"
Which is a self-falsifying statement, as is any "no absolutes" statement, because the statement itself is a absolute.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
Let's see:
I have never called for the impeachment of the President. I think impeachment is a bad idea, although the CinC is an incompetent.
I have never stated that all troops need to be withdrawn immediately from Iraq. I have always called for additional efforts for nation building, and diplomatic and public policy programs.
I have never stated categorically my preference for a Presidential candidate.
I rarely make statements about religion, although I believe that policy expressions of theology in American political discourse are a bad thing.
I suppose that in your mind I am a "liberal". Whatever. The biggest difference between my expressed opinions and yours is that I give both sides due consideration.
Reply-
0%
bigG11 months, 3 weeks ago
death - you just don't get it. If you say anything bad about Bush or his policies then you automatically are a lib or leftist, as well as an atheist and a tree hugger who will only vote Dem.
Never mind the fact that the moron we have in the WH spends money like a Navy full of drunken sailors or starts "preemptive" wars (under false pretenses). Both of those are hardly "conservative" Values.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
It's clear my arguments are too subtle for you.
Here's my argument so you'll understand,Idiot:
The Administration has a credibility gap when it comes to declarations of progress in Iraq. Their record is quite poor on the subject. Most Americans apparently believe Gen. Petraeus is either in on the deception, because he knows where his bread is buttered, or he is being used by the Administration for propaganda purposes. It's likely the General is complicit for a combination of reasons.
I know how to win. The Adminsitration doesn't know how to win smart.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
injest11 months, 3 weeks ago
Doesn't this announcement at this time sound like a calculated response to the GAO report?
You noticed that too?
Seems like ever "new" thing happens just before or just after or during something else?
Is this the "smoking gun" that proves all those conspiracy theories?
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
If we're waiting for a report from Iraq on September 11, and there was a report leaked from the GAO that disputes the positon the Administration is taking, and then all of a sudden we see a leaked report from Gen Petraeus supporting the Administration, my sense is that, in context, there is a political calculation here, and your comment, without context, seems somehow puerile.
Reply-
0%
injest11 months, 3 weeks ago
"and then all of a sudden we see a leaked report from Gen Petraeus"
Leaked report? How stupid are you? This is from an interview with the AP reporter.
SYDNEY, Australia --
America's troop buildup in Iraq has sharply reduced sectarian killings and roadside bombings and lowered al-Qaida's influence, the top U.S. general in the country said in an interview published Friday.
Reply-
0%
deathray11 months, 3 weeks ago
This is in direct conflict with the GAO report, injest, which supports my original assertion that this is a prepared response to the GAO report, and a completely political maneuver.
While there is some containment of al Qaeda, according to the GAO report, the amount of sectarian killing has not gone down.
"While the Baghdad security plan was intended to reduce sectarian violence, U.S. agencies differ on whether such violence has been reduced,"
and
It also finds that "the capabilities of Iraqi security forces have not improved."
and
(continued)
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
