The Iraq War is unpopular.
The war in Iraq appears to be the biggest factor in Bush’s ratings. Public opinion on the situation there has turned sour.
Asked two years ago if they were “certain that the U.S. will win” the war with Iraq, 79% of those polled said yes. The answer last weekend: 22%.
The other side of that question has turned sharply as well. Two years ago, just 1% of those polled thought it was unlikely or certain that the U.S. would not win the war with Iraq. The latest result: 41%.
The USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup poll also showed:
” 57% said sending U.S. troops to Iraq was a mistake up from 55% two weeks earlier and the highest reading since a 59% result last October.
” 67% said the president does not have “a clear plan for handling the situation in Iraq.” That was an all-time high. But 68% also said Democrats in Congress do not have such a plan.
” Democrats fared better than Republicans on whether they would do a better job of handling “the situation in Iraq.” The split: 48% for Democrats, 40% for Republicans.
As Jack Murtha has said numerous times, the people have been ahead of Washington on this. The Democrats abdicated their responsibility by being non-existent as we marched to war. Bush took us in on lies, and with no plan to succeed. The best he can say now is “wait”. It’s ludicrous that we are allowing these people to control the entire debate on the most important issue of our time.
They have no idea what the hell they are doing. But the Democrats are worse because they refuse to endorse an alternative. Individual Democrats can disagree, but there needs to be a party position on the war in Iraq. We must redeploy from Iraq and rededicate ourselves to fighting the growing war on terror.
It’s the right thing to do and the politically smart position to take.
And not a single ‘lie’ has been documented.
Dugger
As Bush’s poll numbers “plunge” from 37% to 36%, you’re neglecting one important thing: What does the average American think of the so – called “Murtha Plan” (which is nothing more than pulling out, and actually no plan at all)?
And I love how the Republicans keep saying ‘Democrats don’t have a plan’. It’s like when Moe pushes Curly out of a window in a tall building, looses his balance and falls out himself. As they’re plunging toward the ground, Moe turns to Curly and says ’stop complaining, you don’t have a plan to get us out of this.’
And O.J. Simpson is innocent until proven guilty in a criminal court.
An honest answer by the anti-war folks here.
Do you believe any good is coming from this? New schools, hospitals, areas of town improving, life “normalizing” for citizens?
If so, and I think the answer to the above is a resounding “yes”, do you think the press spends any time reporting it? Have you seen pieces about school rebuilding or hospitals being built or improvements in infrastructure on your daily news?
We know there are a number of bombings or other killings in Iraq every day. It is a post war country of 23 million people though, so even ten killings a day is a small number compared to overal population. But do you see those reported in much detail every day?
I want to turn this into a screed on the MSM, but if you answered the above questions honestly, you have to admit that the American people are bombarded by news that skews opinion everyday. This is not to deny that people are getting blown up….but where is the rest of the story.
This whole war is the equivalent of “push” polling, the news media puts out all the negative and then, amazingly enough, everyone sees negative! Bush should be pushing the positive stuff everyday to force the media to report it, but he has been lax as well…..
The tail is wagging the dog…..
A democrat’s plan for iraq.
And unfortunatley, wilbur, its not like that, because (hopefully) we’re going to have to keep moving after bush et all leave the whitehouse. Which means we do need a plan. Its more like band of brothers when maj winters has to send in lt spears because the other lt with all the friends at headquarters is frozen and getting everyone in easy company killed.
What we need right now is a lt spears who we know can get the job done.
“We know there are a number of bombings or other killings in Iraq every day. It is a post war country of 23 million people though, so even ten killings a day is a small number compared to overal population. But do you see those reported in much detail every day?”
So according to Dr. Pedro, the “previous dictator”, only killing 10 people a day, really wasn’t that bad of a guy. I mean, only ten a day, thats not much. So if thats the case, remind me why we went in again. Let’s see, I am guessing you will say somthing about the freedoms and democracy that they now have huh? Tell that to an Iraqi child, you might have to wait a few mins first, they can’t hear over the bombs…
Even if, for the sake of argument, we acknowledge that areas like schools and hospitals are better off now, surely you can’t say that this justifies it all. C’mon, Pedro. Like wolf says, half of the time that stuff ain’t even working. Its like saying sure I broke my leg, but now I have a shiny new chair to ride in. If I were an Iraqi child, I’d be a hell of a lot more concerned about dying horribly in an explosion than what I’m doing in school tomorrow.
The media is biased because it’s reporting facts? What would you have them do? For every story about death, do a happy one aboout how great life is? Do you see maybe the inherent flaw in this plan?
DrPedro, the 4077th is calling! MASH was never the same without you. Go back DrPedro “Frank” Burns.
What a resounding YES! I hate to tell you companies like Bechtel got big contracts to rebuild the schools, then farmed it out to sub-contractors who, in many cases, slapped paint down and called it good. Bechtel never oversaw the work and the schools still stuck but are now colorful. YES!
Violence, no electricity, no water, no jobs, Death Squads operating out of the government. Is that vision of ‘normal’ the same thing you wish on America, DRPEdro Burns?
“If the shoe does not fit, you must acquit”
“Lies” is an ephemeral notion when you have the power to
derail investigations by manipulating political bodies.
Unfortunately, dugger, its all a matter of defining lie.
For us, its a lie when you deliberately mislead your country into a war. Its a lie when firstt its about chasing terrorists because saddam loves al qaeda (he didn’t), then its about protecting the world from a ROGUE NUKE STATE (he really meant n. korea and iran, honestly), then its about protecting us from chem or bio weapons (which he didn’t have), then it was about protecting the iraq people from saddam (what about darfur?). And during all of this, there is proof that the decision was made *long* before the evidence was “given” (or even found, according to the downing street memo and others).
Maybe there is no “proof of a lie”, but I know all my trust is gone. I’d rather trust just about anyone except the american white house.
drpedro, grow up. Most iraqi’s have power less than 50% of the time, which is less than even the saddam era power. Even if you do have a “new school”, it doesn’t do you shit good if you can’t go to it because your road is blocked by the aftermath of a bombing and you don’t have any lights once you get there.
Not even bush is trying to use that meme anymore. And trust me, none of the guys I know just back from iraq are talking about the schools they’re building. They’re talking about trying to keep their head above water.
You’ve got birdshot in your eye, pedro.
By pedro’s logic, we shouldn’t really care much about 9/11. After all, what’s 3,000 people in a nation of 270 million?
“Almost no one can actually admit things may be better off in Iraq …”
Pedro, book your next vacation for Baghdad now. Better get there soon, though, before all the historic building have been bombed.
drpedro Says:
March 14th, 2006 at 8:56 am
An honest answer by the anti-war folks here.
Do you believe any good is coming from this? New schools, hospitals, areas of town improving, life normalizing for citizens?
If so, and I think the answer to the above is a resounding yes , do you think the press spends any time reporting it? Have you seen pieces about school rebuilding or hospitals being built or improvements in infrastructure on your daily news?
We know there are a number of bombings or other killings in Iraq every day. It is a post war country of 23 million people though, so even ten killings a day is a small number compared to overal population. But do you see those reported in much detail every day?
I want to turn this into a screed on the MSM, but if you answered the above questions honestly, you have to admit that the American people are bombarded by news that skews opinion everyday. This is not to deny that people are getting blown up& .but where is the rest of the story.
This whole war is the equivalent of push polling, the news media puts out all the negative and then, amazingly enough, everyone sees negative! Bush should be pushing the positive stuff everyday to force the media to report it, but he has been lax as well& ..
The tail is wagging the dog& ..
How about an honest answer by the pro-war folks here?
Do you believe that any good coming from this should be weighed against the harm that we have caused with our illiegal invasion? More torture, rape rooms, soldiers engaging in torture and/or getting PSTD, a life of daily terror for the citizens of Iraq?
If so, and I think the answer to the above is a resounding yes , do you think the press spends any time covering it up on the orders of the current administration? Have you found out that pieces about all of the bad stuff that is happening over there are being censured on your daily news on a constant basis?
We know there are a number of bombings or other killings in Iraq every day. We also know that there are more of them today then when Saddam was in power. It is a country of 23 million people on the brink of civil war due to our meddling and incompetence. But do you see those reports being promoted by the mainstream media every day? Or do they try and downplay that sort of thing, and minimize the damage we have done to the Iraqi people?
I don’t want to turn this into a screed on the MSM, but if you answered the above questions honestly, you have to admit that the American people are bombarded by news that skews opinion everyday. This is not to deny that some people are making out like bandits over there (coughcoughHalliburtonKBRBechtelCarlylecoughcough)& .but where is the rest of the story.
This whole war is the equivalent of push polling, the administration puts out their propaganda and then, amazingly enough, harasses anyone who calls them on their BS! Bush pushes the positive stuff everyday, and tries to force the media to report his lies instead of the truth, but he hasn’t quite made that illegal yet, so I guess “Doctor” Pendejo would consider him lax as well& ..
The tail is wagging the dog& ..
And let me tell you, if the gangs in Los Angeles had so taken control of the city that the police could no longer patrol sections of the city for fear of being bombed, guess what would be in the headlines?
When we had our riots a few years back the LA Times didn’t run any stories that week about city improvements to make us all feel better about ourselves. Have you ever lived in a city while it was under martial law? I have. I have to tell you its a totally bizarre feeling to see National Guardsmen patrolling the streets of your neighborhood and sandbagged in around your local bank. LA went through four days of chaos and a week of total lockdown. It doesn’t even come close to comparing to what’s happening in Baghdad today and it was one of the most surreal experiences of my life. But people in Baghdad have been living through much, much, much worse every day for three years.
Like I said Pedro, book that vacation now.
“It is a post war country of 23 million people though, so even ten killings a day is a small number compared to overal population.”
Big Gay Al has you pegged Pedro. Can you hear yourself? I live in Los Angeles with some 10 million other people. Let’s say LA had a perfect school system, pristine infrastructure and had recently paved all its streets with gold. Actual gold. None of it would matter if the headline in today’s LA Times was this: “Reprisal Killings Leave 68 Dead Throughout Los Angeles”
Of course in Iraq, as Midder pointed out the Iraqis live with daily violence plus the companies hired to continue the reconstruction have all crapped out. BTW did you happen to catch this story in the WaPo in January:
“U.S. Has End in Sight on Iraq Rebuilding
Documents Show Much of the Funding Diverted to Security, Justice System and Hussein Inquiry
By Ellen Knickmeyer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, January 2, 2006; Page A01
BAGHDAD — The Bush administration does not intend to seek any new funds for Iraq reconstruction in the budget request going before Congress in February, officials say. The decision signals the winding down of an $18.4 billion U.S. rebuilding effort in which roughly half of the money was eaten away by the insurgency, a buildup of Iraq’s criminal justice system and the investigation and trial of Saddam Hussein.”
So that’s it. What Iraq has now by way of infrastructure is the best it’s going to get for a long, long time. Here’s the bottom line. Bush pushed for a mission that he never planned for. He wanted to make Iraq a flower of democracy but then had no plan for carrying it out.
They blazed by the fedayheen and ammo dumps on their way to Baghdad, they failed to react to the early signs of the insurgency, they failed to send in enough troops for security, they fostered corruption with loose to zero accounting standards (they were literally handing out bricks of cash for gods sake!), they disbanded the Iraqi army and have been forced to rebuild it from scratch which hasn’t been going too well. This is all Bush’s fault. You can accuse Dems for not having a plan but like WIlbur says, Bush never had a plan in the first place. That’s why were in the mess were in. And now we’re no longer building schools and repairing infrastrcture. We’re hunkered down and holding our own hoping the whole thing doesn’t blow up in our faces. Too late. It already has.
‘Why did Bush do this? ”
Because when you believe strongly enough that you are in the right,
even ‘good’ men can justify telling lies to accomplish the goal.
“End Jusifies Means”.
“Can accept you don t trust Bush. Thats your call based on your judgment.”
I’ve come around on this. I agree with Dugger. Who cares if Bush lied. The most important point is that Bush is a failed commander in chief whose incomeptence is patently obviously. Bush has failed the American people, the American military and the Iraqi people. He is a national disgrace and his presidency is an ongoing tragedy.
The lies are in overstating the case for war – misusing intelligence on pre-war WMD, removing doubts and caveats from reports to Congress, issuing vague threats about Saddam’s capababilities (nukes?) with no basis in reality. And then there’s the post-war period. Did Cheney really believe the insurgents were in their “last throes” in 2004? Did Rumsfeld really believe the insurgents were “dead enders” in 2003. In a way, I HOPE they were lying, because if they actually believed what they were saying then they are unfit to run the water management board of a small town.
The irony here is that the American people would be willing to overlook Bush’s dishonesty had he shown competence in handling the post-war period. After all, were people still angry over the lies surrounding the Battleship Maine years later? No. Because we won the Spanish-American War convincingly (despite a lengthy holdover war in the Phillippines). But are people still angry over lies about the Gulf of Tonkin incident? Yes, because it was a precursor to a subsequent disaster. Well, Iraq has been a disaster and the American people want to know how we got there in the first place. That’s why they don’t simply forgive and forget on the pre-war BS campaign.
There are seven murders a day in CA, a population of around 30 + mill.
It is entertaining and informative to review the answers to my questions. Almost no one can actually admit things may be better off in Iraq, and getting better. This doesn’t mean life there is going to look like an episode of the “OC” anytime soon.
Big Gay Al takes the cake though for insightful rhetoric, great way to make an argument Al…what have you been smoking? Never mind, don’t answer that, I KNOW…….
“There are seven murders a day in CA, a population of around 30 + mill.”
God, idiot. Asshole. Fuckhead. We may have seven murders a day in a state 35 million but they aren’t planned, organized and carried out by armed militias and insurgents. Three of those killings aren’t from daily bombs going off everyday in public squares. Two of them aren’t political assassinations. The other two aren’t kidnapping executions.
THINSG ARE NOT BETTER OFF IN IRAQ. I can see no demonstrable difference between life in Iraq now and life in Iraq under Hussein. The population is still living in total fear and suffering from daily acts of violence. We’ve been through this Pedro. You have to be a total moron to bring it back up.
Hey at least under Saddam you knew who was going to kill you. Now you get to guess! Is it the sunni? The Shi’a? The insurgents? Al-Queda? A rogue bomb? It’s a great new guessing game for the whole family. “Who’s going to kill us now!”
quickie
Can accept you don’t trust Bush. Thats your call based on your judgment. Can’t accept the “deliberately mislead” part, however. A lie does have to have something more than just something we disagree with, a judgment that turned out to be questionable etc. I won’t bore you with the litany of quotes from left of center types citing the need for action in Iraq, the danger of Saddam’s WMD programs etc. There are bunches of them out there – by folks in power (just pre-Bush) who had access to intelligence reports. About 3/4s of Congress agreed with Bush. Were they lying? Stupid? What was Bush’s big evil game plan in ‘lying” to deliberately mislead us into war. Now, you are a rational poster and I know (maybe) you are going to tell me you don’t believe Bush is evil. But, then, what do you call ‘deliberately misleading’ us into war? Killing 2,300 – if not evil? Do you really think Bush just decided all of those people could be killed for some selfish Bush-only purpose? It just doesn’t make sense – except at a comic book level. If you believe he lied, then you must question why? Why did Bush do this? Deliberately lead us into a war that was going to kill many of America’s finest? Think Bush just decided its OK for all those men and women to die for his little, lying selfish purpose?
Dugger
“By pedro s logic, we shouldn t really care much about 9/11. After all, what s 3,000 people in a nation of 270 million?”
A very good point. An excellent point. Except that Pedro doesn’t think that Iraqi lives are worth the same as American lives.
even ten killings a day is a small number compared to overal population.
God, what an asshole.
Maybe Pedro’s right. At least we can say that mass graves are a thing of the past in Iraq. Oh wait:
Baghdad Police Find 65 Bodies in 24 Hours
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: March 14, 2006
Filed at 11:05 a.m. ET
“The dead included at least 27 bodies stacked in a mass grave in an eastern Shiite neighborhood of Baghdad.”
According to the right, there are massive carbombings and gun battles in the streets in California every day. 30-40 innocent Californians get blown up by suicide bombers all the time, right? Jesus, you guys are pathetic.
It depends on what your definition of “win” is.
The NY Times updated its headline:
“Reprisal Killings Leave 87 Dead Throughout Baghdad”
From 68 to 87 in an hour. Fantastic.
Yes, actually, I do believe that Bush delibrately sent men and women of the armed forces to die for his personal crusade. His CRUSADE. He thinks he is doing gods work over there. And he’s willing to sacrifice me and my peers to do it.
He has surrounded himself with so many sycophantic people that even though everyone else knew what a war there would mean, he didn’t. So in that regard, he’s not a liar…he’s just criminally incompetent.
From downing street to Wes Clark’s conversation with colleagues to the richard clark’s book to statements made by bush/cheney/rumsfeld, we know they decided to go to war long before they found evidence for it. Why do you think the reason changed so many times?
Yes, I absolutely believe Bush deliberatly goaded the US into a war. Because I don’t believe he actually understood the consequences. Not evil, per se. Just far to incompetent to be in the position that he is in.
End Jusifies Means .
No no no, Semanticleo, it’s only Liberals who use that argument.
Dugger, yes, Bush lied to get the popular support for going to war in Iraq. You can look at things he said and conclude that he (or his speech writers, advisers, underlings) deliberately said misleading and untrue things. For instance, constantly saying Saddam Hussein and 9-11 together to form an impression that Hussein had something to do with 9-11. Take the state of the union where he said Hussein was trying to buy nuclear materials from Africa. The CIA said, no he wasn’t, the speechwriters wanted that in, it went back and forth and ended up Bush saying the British believe this. That is a deliberate act. That is no different than repeating a rumor that you know to be unfounded and really doesn’t require a judgement call to say that is dishonest.
“his little, lying purposes”.
No, the problem is Bush thinks that this is a grand cause – the christianization, democratization, and enrichification of the middle east (and in the last case, his buddies. Its just a side benefit, in his eyes.)
The fact that he thinks he is right is the terrible incompetence that means we should get rid of him. Eisenhower dumped his subordinates when they made crucial mistakes in Africa. Not because he was “disloyal” or because they couldn’t be useful elsewhere, but because we could not afford a long learning curve and incompetence in battle.
“He s just criminally incompetent.”
Really this is all that needs to be said because it is demonstrably true.
Think Bush just decided its OK for all those men and women to die for his little, lying selfish purpose?
Dugger
Yeah, actually. I do.
Semant,
Of course, he believed (as did the Congress that supported him) he was right. But why do it? For what purpose? Oil? Terrorism? Revenge for Dad? Remember you are opining he deliberately lied us into war.
And was there only about 1/4 of Congress who was smart enough, moral enough to see through the murderous shenanigans of this left-described ‘dumb frat boy’?
Mitter,
Yes we can conclude whatever we want. Concluding anyhting is different from a known fact. I conclude Bucknell will win the NCAA because they’ve got some good basketball players. Now run out and bet your life sayings. Afterall, I concluded — and with reasons.
1. Bush mentioned Saddam and 9-11 together. He never tied the two together. He did the opposite in effect. You have ‘concluded’ via magic mind reading what he ‘really’ intended.
2. Uranium:
From factcheck:
Bush said then, The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa . Some of his critics called that a lie, but the new evidence shows Bush had reason to say what he did.
A British intelligence review released July 14 calls Bush s 16 words well founded.
A separate report by the US Senate Intelligence Committee said July 7 that the US also had similar information from a number of intelligence reports, a fact that was classified at the time Bush spoke.
Ironically, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who later called Bush s 16 words a lie , supplied information that the Central Intelligence Agency took as confirmation that Iraq may indeed have been seeking uranium from Niger .
Both the US and British investigations make clear that some forged Italian documents, exposed as fakes soon after Bush spoke, were not the basis for the British intelligence Bush cited, or the CIA’s conclusion that Iraq was trying to get uranium.
You want to believe lie, so you take events with completely different interpretations available, read minds (which you can do because you know how Bush’s foul evil mind works) and
conclude that which yu want to conclude.
Dugger
I’m coming, Elizabeth! I agree with frameone! {More troops!}
Aaaaaggghh!
Um, Frank. Between the two choices I’m actually in favor of pulling the troops out ASAP.
I don’t think Bush will ever be able to muster the political capital to put in more troops at this point because he is 1) incapable of admitting that he made a mistake and 2) even if he was able to admit he made a mistake he has proven himself a totally imcompetent commander in chief and no one should trust that he wouldn’t screw that up as well.
Pull out now? Y / N
One of two things:
1) Admit we’ve fucked it up and gather an international coalition (as an aside…isn’t it funny how we stopped hearing about all the countries with us in Iraq…Don’t forget about Poland!) that approaches the level of troops during the first Gulf War, around 500,000; or
2) Pull out yesterday.
We aren’t serious about making Iraq work. If we were, Bush would radically change his game plan: way more troops and a new, revitalized approach to reconstruction (you know, one in which corruption isn’t job one).
But since none of that is going to happen we should pull out ASAP.
Deft change of topic, lefties! The question is: Pull out now? Y / N
Everything else is bovine feces
“The world will never stop hating us, until they imitate us, which is why they hate us.”
Frank, think before you type. You might start making sense.
Pedro,
.Almost no one can actually admit things may be better off in Iraq, and getting better.
BECAUSE IT IS NOT HAPPENING, YOU MORON! Jesus. I’d smack you if tcp/ip allowed it.
Lessee: Try something we can’t do, or pull out…
Reminds of that thing we used to do as kids: Which way would you rather die?
Sliding down a razor blade, or being eaten by a shark?
Hobson’s choice, anyone?
If I was a righty, my strategy would be to change the topic (typically) and call into question the patriotism of anyone who disagrees with me.
“What, you man you don’t think the Iraqi people deserve a chance at democracy??”
“You must not love America”
“The mainstream media hates this country”
“Liberals have no strategy (nevermind the fact that the strategy that is used by the current administration is a COMPLETE FAILURE)”
“Cut & Run, Cut & Run, cluck, cluck, cluck….”
Oh yeah, and don’t forget to use the term “moonbat” every now and then to let the rest of the righties know you’re on the same talking point number.
Rightys, feel free to use all above, nothing new, just something we on the left like to laugh at…
“Reminds of that thing we used to do as kids: Which way would you rather die?”
Welcome to the foreign policy of the Bush administration, Frank.
By pedro s logic
“Pedro”, “Logic”?
A contradiction in terms, to be sure.
It certainly couldn’t have been a mistake to”bring democracy to Iraq.” If there was a mistake made, it was a failure to follow Gen. Forrest’s prescription to get there “fustest with the mostest”.
The rest is all rhetoric. The “world” will never stop hating us, until they imitate us, which is why they hate us.
Fighting wars “on the cheap” is an unfortunate leftover from the Viet Nam days. And it is costing us dearly in Iraq. We got away with it in Gulf War I and Kosovo, but it was never meant to be the best strategy. Unfortunately, Forrest’s advice is still the best.
Yeah, frank, thats exactly what it is.
The only difference is that it comes from a mistake bush made.
Choice 1: A) Go to war with iraq to “bring democracy to the region” OR B) concentrate on fighing bin ladin.
If (choice == A)
{Choice 2: A) spend trillions of dollars on a fruitless war that hurts more than it helps, looking really bad and helping terrorists or B) pull out of Iraq, looking really bad to the international community.}
else (not go to war in iraq)
{
Accomplish something useful without making the world hate us.
}
Those were our choices, frank. When you say we’re stuck with a choice between the lesser of two evils, you’re right. Just remember how we got there.
Shoulda known…
A fair and balanced assessment from someone who really knows, not someone who just thinks they know:
“Do you think the American public are fools for supporting George Bush?
Yousif Basil, TIME’s translator and resident tech guru, responds:
I can’t blame the American public for the actions of their President – and anyway, I don’t disagree with everything he has done. As an Iraqi, I can tell you that the war was necessary, from our point of view, because it was the only way to get rid of Saddam. But I blame President Bush for not doing enough AFTER the war, to secure the country and rebuild it. Bush’s post-war policies were foolish.
Nicole, from Austin, TX asks:
Since the US has invaded Iraq, what are some of the significant changes you have seen. We all hear about the bad stuff. We want to know how your lives have changed and hopefully gotten better.
TIME’s Yousif Basil responds:
Nicole, there have been many positive developments since the U.S. toppled Saddam. Just from my own narrow perspective, here are some the things I can do now that I could not under Saddam:
1. I can get a passport and travel abroad.
2. I am free to choose a job that suits me; I don’t have to be a member of a ruling party to get it.
3. I have access to a free press, to cable TV.
4. I have access to the internet.
5. I have a cellphone.
Those are just some of the examples – there are many others.
But, you ask if our lives have gotten better – and my answer must be ‘No.’ Because of the worsening security situation, all of us are aware that our lives are in constant danger, whether from terrorists, insurgents or the civil war. It is difficult to appreciate the benefits of freedom when you’re not sure you will be alive tomorrow to enjoy those benefits. I love my job and would have never had this opportunity four years ago. But every morning, when I leave for work, somewhere in the back of my mind is the fear that I may not return alive – or that my loved ones may not be alive to greet me.
If you can imagine how that feels, you can understand why most Iraqis have mixed feelings about the war.”
Dr. Pedro – my gawd…
“It is entertaining and informative to review the answers to my questions. Almost no one can actually admit things may be better off in Iraq, and getting better”
The mental, moral and semantic gymnastics required to make, believe and support such a statement are mind boggling.
As you yourself state – things MAY be getting better (easy enough to do considering the deplorable state of things immediately post “shock and awe”. But to even try and posit that things are “better off”
“Fighting wars on the cheap is an unfortunate leftover from the Viet Nam days. And it is costing us dearly in Iraq. We got away with it in Gulf War I and Kosovo, but it was never meant to be the best strategy. Unfortunately, Forrest s advice is still the best.”
Holy Mother of God! Are you telling us you’ve known all along this has
been a formula for failure?
Frank, think before you type. You might start making sense.
Why don’t I learn?
Ignore him! Ignore him!
How come stuff like this has no impact on Bush
Iraqi Police Find 87 Bodies in 24 Hours
Yes, it could have been a mistake to “bring democracy to iraq”. Democracy is not something you can force on people. It took western culture 500 years between when the seeds were sown and when they were reaped.
If you want to know how to bring democracy and stability to the region, you have to look to the places where advances are being made. Egypt, for instance. Jordan. Are they perfect? No. But they are making strides.
Going in with guns blazing was *exactly* the wrong move.
Especially without convincing everyone else that it needed to be done. You’ll notice that in afghanistan, where we were legitigmate, we’re not having *nearly* the problem with foreign fighters that we’re having in iraq. Why? They don’t have the ‘legitimacy’ to fight us that they do in iraq, because they know that we had a legitimate beef with afghanistan.
By going to iraq, we just proved bin ladin right in the eyes of the hard-line islamic world.
is just silly.
Dugger – please…
“And not a single lie has been documented”
Ummm… then tell me sparky? Where are those WMDs – that “we know Saddam has”, the ones “we know exactly where they are”?
dr.P is noticably quiet after that….
Facts have a nasty habit of fucking up your talking points….
“Dr” Pedro seems to forget his political master was willing to let Saddam stay in power if he turned over the mythical WMDs. Additionally, Wolfowitz is on record as saying we wouldn’t go to war in Iraq for humanitarian reasons.
As for Duggy’s “no lie has been documented”–there’s a very good blog posting on this at this site:
Having lived both, (although the “dangerous life” was admittedly short), I can tell you why there is a great deal of truth to the saying, “Better to live standing up, than to die on your knees.”
Almost no one can actually admit things may be better off in Iraq
How can one admit something that may be true. Christ, what an asshole.
…you ask if our lives have gotten better – and my answer must be No. Because of the worsening security situation, all of us are aware that our lives are in constant danger, whether from terrorists, insurgents or the civil war. It is difficult to appreciate the benefits of freedom when you re not sure you will be alive tomorrow
Those facts, man, from someone who actually lives there.
You asked if anyone here could say whether things were better there now. Here is someone who actually lives there answering your question, and you continue to belittle the “liberal left.” Like everything from Katrina to high gas prices is all our fault.
What facts?
You lefties prefer to live a “safe” life under a dictator than a “dangerous” life free….
Your choice.
Impossible to argue with someone who thinks people are happier in a situation where they have no personal freedom, but the trains run on time.
Me, I would take the risk of being blown up by a car bomb over the risk of my daughter being hauled off in the middle of the night by the government.
Better to live standing up, than to die on your knees.
It sounds much nobler, though no less pretentious, the other way around.
I guess it is.
Wow, Frank, you assume to know a lot about me, don’t you? Don’t.
BTW, what is so wrong about being a rationalist? Does that mean that conservatives must then take the opposite approach? Are you saying that conservatives are not materialistic aned irrational?
Well, that explains it.
Thus, we see the conservative Republican’s modus operandi; Say something dumb, don’t admit to having said something dumb, and attack those who would question it.
Maybe you’ve got it backwards, Duros. It’s better to go throught life with your head up, then it is give up your pride and dignity for a few extra hours of electricity. But since you have probably neither been deprived of anything in your life, nor have you ever been in danger, the choice would be meaningless to you, as it is most materialist, rationalist liberals
My humble theory on why the right wants to keep the army fighting an unwinnable war as long as possible:
A recent Zogby poll of soldiers in Iraq found not only that some 72% of them want to leave within a year, but that 90% believe the Iraq War was in retaliation for Saddam’s part in 9/11. Serioulsy, lets imagine a large mass of military trained men and women coming home to find that they just spent three years in the desert getting shot at and watching their friends die in the name of a lie.
Bush cant let them come back yet, because he fears a military insurrection. And with good cause. They’d fight him where the opposition party and the American citizenry, both of which severely disapprove of him, wont.
What I want to know is…when did Congress declare war?
Alright, maybe if I go first then, maybe an example will help you not to feel so afraid, Frank. Firstly, I misspelled decency as deecency. (I may also have just mispelled misspelled, but enough of that) Also, I failed to explain what exactly was ironic about your inability to admit your mistake. The saying “Better to die standing up than to live on your knees” is about how fuundamental dignity is to the human condition. Something I think we both agree upon. However, by refusing to admit your mistake, and attacking those who point it out to you, it seems you show that you in fact, dont have any. I point out though, it only seems that way. Maybe you do, any maybe you’ll cop to your error. Maybe you’ll apologize for attacking people who pointed it out to you. Maybe pigs will fly out of my butt.
“I can tell you that the war was necessary, from our point of view, because it was the only way to get rid of Saddam”
rainlion,
I have yet to have one progressive, just one, document “lie”.
Note you actually have to understand the meaning of the word “lie”. I give you le dictionairie:
“NOUN:
A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression. ”
Notice the words ‘deliberately” and ‘meant’. Unless you are able to read minds….
Dugger
Frank, please, in the name of sensible deecency, please just say that you misspoke. There is no saying “Better to live standing up, than to die on your knees, and you know that. Are you honestly so afraid of admitting to an honest mistake that you wont, quite ironically, admit that you meant the actual saying “Better to die standing up than to live on your knees”? See, that second one is quite akin to “Give me Liberty or Give me Death” whereas the one you had was like saying “I’d prefer a thousand dollars over being stabbed in the eye.” Please, just admit you made the mistake. You’re embarassing yourself.
Better to live standing up, than to die on your knees.
I think you’ve got that backwards.
Better to live standing up, than to die on your knees.
That’s your answer?
Frank, I think Mussolini said it better: “It is better to live one day as a lion than a hundred years as a sheep.”
If cornered, say something even dumber, i.e.,
…as it is most materialist, rationalist liberals
Rinse and repeat.
Did I make a mistake, OK, fine… Everybody happy? I thought so…
Anything I can do to cheer up the groundlings…
Jeebus!
And you guys really think there’s something wrong with me?
Three or four comments, hundreds of words — holy jump up and sit down again!
Do I get another chance, or am I banished now?
Yes, it’s dangerous, but they are free… Some people would rather be free, with some danger, than unfree, with no danger…
Can we resume our normal positions now?
I have yet to have one progressive, just one, document lie .
–”I would remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied finally denied access [in 1998], a report came out of the Atomic the IAEA that they were six months away from developing a weapon.” (AWOL George, 7 Sep 02)
–”We gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn’t let them in.” (AWOL George, 14 Jul 03)
–”"We know he’s been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.”
(Unka Dick 16 Mar 03)
–”We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat. ”
(Donny Rumsfeld, 30 Mar 03)
–”…You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons….They’re illegal. They’re against the United Nations resolutions, and we’ve so far discovered two.* And we’ll find more weapons as time goes on, But for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong. We found them.” (AWOL George, 31 May 03)
I have yet to have one progressive, just one, document lie .
-The Patriot Act was written with clear safeguards to ensure the law is applied fairly. The judicial branch has a strong oversight role. Law enforcement officers need a federal judge’s permission to wiretap a foreign terrorist’s phone, a federal judge’s permission to track his calls, or a federal judge’s permission to search his property. Officers must meet strict standards to use any of these tools. And these standards are fully consistent with the Constitution of the U.S.
–President George Bush, June 9, 2005, in Columbus, Ohio
-First of all, any action that takes place by law enforcement requires a court order. In other words, the government can’t move on wiretaps or roving wiretaps without getting a court order. (S)o what the Patriot Act said is let’s give our law enforcement the tools necessary, without abridging the Constitution of the United States, the tools necessary to defend America.
–President George Bush, July 14, 2004, in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin
“I didn’t know people were suffering down there until I saw them screaming from the rooftops of their homes.”
Do you consider videotape adequate documentation of a lie?
I saw a film, several years ago, about Saddam’s takeover. In the film they showed a meeting of many political figures, led by Sadaam. I do not recall what the stated purpose of the meeting was, but at some time during the meeting, someone started reading out names, and people were escorted out of the room.
They were not coming back. As more names were read, it began to dawn on the people in attendance why that was so. People were being killed. Then, as names were called, men resisted. Dragged, literally kicking and screaming, they left the room to go to their deaths. That was just the beginning.
Iraq was a place where people who were “disloyal” were killed in front of their families, whole regions were flooded for their dissent. Ethnic groups were hit with missiles loaded with poison gas.
Iraq was not America, where anti – war coffee shops could be set up, and demonstrations could be organized at the drop of a hat. If your friend, or neighbor, or relative, had just been dropped feet first into an industrial shredder, how ready would you be to “rise up and revolt”? If it were me, I would have hesitated until they captured Hussein — taking down the statue wouldn’t have been enough for me.
Good news — and bad news
I report, you decide
http://tinyurl.com/l45n3
Civil war a reality in Iraq, experts say
“In academic terms, this is a civil war, and it’s not even a small one”
Militarily, Fearon said, “I don’t think there is a lot we can do, short of troop increase.”
Fine Frank, and yes, as you say “some people” would rather be free. Thing is, the Iraqi people didnt deem to have it too ready in their minds, or there would have been an effrot by the citizens held under Saddam’s thumb to rise up and revolt. Yes, they probably lacked the capacity for victory themselves, but they could have asked for help, which yes, we would have gladly provided. The people did not fight for their freedom, we did. The difference there is that for them to fight they would have had to organize a whole lot in advance and been able to self regulate afterwards. They could not. The likely reason for this is culturally endemic and has to do with them not being ready for freedom. Not a nice thing to say, I know, but there it is, and I do feel it is rather true. Otherwise we would not be struggling so to make them as free as they do not, it seems, want to be.
We are fighting them to give them what we want. We cannot win that fight. We are losing men in the struggle. We should get out immediately.
Frank;
All of what you are saying is true, but common knowledge, as well.
Can you tell me if you were outraged when the elected President
of Chile was assasinated by a military Junta who ruled with an iron
fist for 25 years? Thousands of disappeared artists, journalists, musicians
and regular citizens were slaughtered while Kissinger moved his
Anti-commie chess pieces around the globe.
Aside from our little triangulated gamesmanship, and interference in
the affairs of foreign nations; is it America’s role to save the world
from the scores of dictators who oppress their people?
Frank, I realize life under Saddam must have been brutal for the poor people who had to endure it. You know what though? I think things were also pretty crummy for the American citizenry coming up into the 1770s. Oppressive British troopers stationed themselves in our houses to be able to enforce the kings rule, in some cases shooting civilians who got in the way. The difference I think is one of degree, which is a relevant point, but still it means we’re dealing with citizenry who should be rising up against their unjust ruler. We couldnt do it on our own, so we asked the dirty evil French for help, which they provided, but it was still us leading the charge. The Iraqi, conversely, were not leading the charge, and still arent even three years after Mission Accomplished. The reason being they never had a Patrick Henry figure saying Give me Liberty or Give me Death, or as you were attempting to say, Better to die standing up than to live on your knees.
Interestingly enough, from your statement that “If it were me, I would have hesitated…” it seems you do not even live by the creed you were attempting to recite. Frankly, Frank, its no wonder you didnt say it right.
Increasingly, I wonder if Dugger, Pedro and Frank are “real” people, and not just some RNC computerized response program.
They seem “machine-like” in their inability to give a damn about human beings. First and foremost, American troops.
“Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression”
Mission Acomplished.
JK
They can spin their talking points until they are blue in the face. We have the TRUTH on our side. Americans witness the truth being reported every single day, with the exponential deterioration of the political, social and economic climate in Iraq.
Keep hammering away, as we are, and American involvement in this horrible, mistaken war will come to an end. We’ll bring our troops home, and we will recover from the failed policies of the Bush years, and from a failed Bush Presidency.
Don’t give up, and don’t give in to the right-wing propoganda machine. What they are doing, and what they are saying is simply wrong, people.
This is a different kind of America than that which witnessed the failures of the Vietnam War, and the grassroots Anti-War movement that grew out of the failed policies of the Johnson and Nixon years.
History may show that this generation’s “anti-war movement,” consisted of average, ordinary Americans using technology, and the power of the written word to effect change.
Never stop questioning this mistaken war.
JK
P.S. For Pedro:
Now this: Electricity output at lowest point in 3 years in Iraq.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060314/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_powerless
“Me, I would take the risk of being blown up by a car bomb over the risk of my daughter being hauled off in the middle of the night by the government.”
Pedro, book your vaction to Iraq now, please. Take you and your daughter and spend two weeks in Baghdad. Afterall, they have the internet there.
“I can tell you why there is a great deal of truth to the saying, Better to live
standing up, than to die on your knees.
Frank, maybe you can book a flight to Baghdad with Pedro, you know, take a vacation from taking freedom for granted and spend a few weeks savoring the thrill of wondering whether you’ll die before the end of your cell phone call — by a bomb detonated with another cell phone.
Pedro, you’ve spent the better part of this week asking us liberals here if we think the Iraqis are better off now than under Hussein. What part of this statement don’t you understand:
“But, you ask if our lives have gotten better – and my answer must be No. Because of the worsening security situation, all of us are aware that our lives are in constant danger, whether from terrorists, insurgents or the civil war. It is difficult to appreciate the benefits of freedom when you re not sure you will be alive tomorrow to enjoy those benefits.”
Cell phones, the internet, a job. Who cares when 80 people are found dead in your neighborhood over the weekend and you’re just damn lucky that you weren’t one of them? If bombs went off every day in the neighborhood where you lived how stoked would be about your awesome calling plan?
“Hundreds were injuried in my neighborhood this week when a car bomb went off in front of the market … but dude, check it out, free text messaging!”
“Your position is clear& .you re a coward, but happy to let other people live shackled and weak.”
And here comes the bullshit. Pedro, Hedley quoted an Iraqi who totally snuffed out your talking point: He doesn’t think his life is better off now mainly because his life now is in constant danger. We know Hussein was a tryrant. We know he killed, tortured and imprisoned thousands of people. But you have yet to suggest anyway in which living in Iraq now is different from living in Iraq then, except for your completely inane notion that dying at the hands of a suicide bomber is somehow better than dying at the hands of a firing squad.
How in the hell do you protect your family from a random car bomb you moron? Never go outside? Wow. Bitchin. The freedom to live like a prisoner in your home for fear of dying on your way to the market.
frame you can stop repeating your idiotic 3-in-a-row posts anytime now.
Your position is clear….you’re a coward, but happy to let other people live shackled and weak.
I said it before, I would rather live free and take my chances protecting my family, than have no choice but to watch the government drag my children away from me without any defense.
You choose your way, I choose mine. History will be the judge ……
And I might add, who gives a rats ass how YOU would rather live? I thought we were talking about the Iraqi people. You know for a doctor you have some serious readin comprehension problems. From Yousif Basil, quoted in Heldey’s post:
“Every morning, when I leave for work, somewhere in the back of my mind is the fear that I may not return alive – or that my loved ones may not be alive to greet me. If you can imagine how that feels, you can understand why most Iraqis have mixed feelings about the war.
Can you imagine how that feels, Pedro? Have you given a single seconds thought to how it must feel knowing that you and your family is in constant danger from an enemy you cannot see wich can strike at any moment with impunity? All your tough guy posing and dick wagging is just that. You’d wet your pants 30 seconds after touching down in Iraq.
Dr. P, in previous eras, people with views like yours didn’t fight from their keyboards. If it is freedom of the oppressed that moves you, by God, get out there and prove it. Otherwise, sit here with the rest of the patriots and cowards and defend your position.
Your position is clear& .you re a coward, but happy to let other people live shackled and weak.
Thus, we see the conservative Republican s modus operandi; Say something dumb, don t admit to having said something dumb, and attack those who would question it.
Geez, Frame, why do you hate America?
JK wonders if we are human. Interesting. The left has this tendency to get frustrated when thewy don’t get thewir way and resorts to dehumanizing the opposition when their “persuasion” fails. And, as the history of the left amply demonstrates, once dehumanized, its OK to do lots of bads thing to millions and millions of these non-conforming ‘objects’.
Dugger, Bush Cultist #374652
frame you can stop repeating your idiotic 3-in-a-row posts anytime now.
Your position is clear& .you re a coward, but happy to let other people live shackled and weak.
I said it before, I would rather live free and take my chances protecting my family, than have no choice but to watch the government drag my children away from me without any defense.
You choose your way, I choose mine. History will be the judge, & &
Mother of God, he’s a pod person. War is peace!
its funny how the meme changes with lefties.
First it was conservatives are “cowards willing to destroy the constitution because they are frightened of the terrorists. You have less chance of being blown up by a terrorist than being eaten by sharks…buck up!”
But when it suits your argument, the Iraqis are reasonably frightened of car bombs going off….even though the number killed is a tiny fraction of the 23 million living there. 50,000 americans die on the highway every year…you going to stop driving?
finally frame, as usually makes stupid statments
“Can you imagine how that feels, Pedro? Have you given a single seconds thought to how it must feel knowing that you and your family is in constant danger from an enemy you cannot see wich can strike at any moment with impunity?”
My three month old child, wife and I were forward deployed with the US military when 9/11 hit. My friends had M-16’s in their hands 15 minutes after the pentagon was hit, standing post in a foreign land. We had NO idea what was going to be next.
Frame when you have served this country, you can pop off…otherwise, shut your pie hole and let the other folks protect your right to be an idiot….
“I said it before, I would rather live free and take my chances protecting my family, than have no choice but to watch the government drag my children away from me without any defense.”
But oddly enough, Peedro is in favor of wireless wiretaps of US nationals. Hmmmm. I guess freedom is good enough for Iraqis but not Americans.
You wonder just how much worse the Cheney Adaministration has to be before the duggerpedros and hedleyfranks of this world finally come around and start believing their lying eyes. What a bunch of maroons. Go on guys, put a smiley face on it all.
“And, as the history of the left amply demonstrates, once dehumanized, its OK to do lots of bads thing to millions and millions of these non-conforming objects .”
When Pedro has no where else to go he resorts to the “You’re all cowards and I’m superman” argument while Dugger falls back on the every entertaining “You’re all closet Stalinists” defense.
Guys, come back when you get up the integrity and courage to actually face reality. Sheesh, you guys are pathetic.
“We had NO idea what was going to be next.”
Nobody did you, idiot. I don’t give a fuck if you were forward deployed or not because on 9-11 the front was anywhere and everywhere in the United States.
Of course, it’s hard to match the super heroic life you’ve lived, Pedro as a world famous heart surgeon who just a few years ago was also forward deployed in defense of his nation but now devotes all his time to trolling liberal blogs fighting the good fight on the internet. Damn. Truly a man among men.
“its funny how the meme changes with lefties.”
Pedro I give you the words of an actual Iraqi:
“But, you ask if our lives have gotten better – and my answer must be No. Because of the worsening security situation, all of us are aware that our lives are in constant danger, whether from terrorists, insurgents or the civil war.”
Please drop Yousif Basil a line and tell him he hasn’t got the right meme.
>>Frame when you have served this country, you can pop off& otherwise, shut your pie hole and let the other folks protect your right to be an idiot
Is there an inherent contradiction in the above statement, or is it just me?
Besides, lots of people served their country….eg: Tim McVeigh. I don’t think many of us would lend too much credibility to his thoughts on Iraq were he alive.
Note to Dugger. No, I do not think you display human like qualities in your robotic responses, and defense of the war. You’re the guy who repeatedly tells us that 2300 dead American troops is not that large a number.
Sue me, lightweight.
JK-Popping Off
factcheck,
Would you prohibit all wiretaps of US citizens or are you also, perhaps, also in favor of wiretaps? (be careful, possible trick question!)
Dugger
Is this where I point out that we actually armed Saddam from 1980-1988? So we kinda gave him the toools to run that whole Disneyland of torture?
DrPedro “Frank” Burns is right. Iraqi’s aren’t dying in multitudes on Iraq’s highways. Being too scared to leave their homes and drive has saved their lives!
Here’s a meme for you: say Iraq was a horrible place to live under Saddam Hussein; I think we can all agree, does that mean that we have replaced him with an ideal or even acceptable situation? I can say the current state of Iraq is probably worse in some aspects then when Hussein was ruler, but I can also say with him gone it has the potential to become better for the Iraqis. But then we come to the rub: why is it so bad right now, and what has to change to make it better? The answer of course is the current US civilian leadership that has set a disasterous policy refuses to acknowledge that or change the policy and to make the situation better we have to change policy and thus the unresponsive leadership.
Then we have to look at the situation as it applies to the US. WHat benefits have we accrued from the invasion of Iraq? We have destabilized a volatile middle eastern country. Our president has had some major diplomatic failures with our traditional allies, our president has damged the credibility of the US, we have our army bogged down and unable to complete its mission because of bad policy, we are spending literally tons of money to little effect, we have created a proving, funding and training ground for terrorists, we are slowly draining the readiness and effectiveness of our entire army, we have damaged our world leadership ability in areas such as human rights, it goes on and on. So what is the answer?
Can we increase our troop levels to a level able to provide ample security?
Can we continue on with more of the same?
Can we pull out?
Its a dilemma. We’ve watched Iraq slowly deteriorate for three years.
“You have less chance of being blown up by a terrorist than being eaten by sharks”
Ya, unless you live in Baghdad, Pedro.
“Saddam, he’s a Hitler!”
“So what does that make you, Goebbels? Quit arming him!”
JK,
Simmer, down son. 2,300 dead American troops is a huge number of dead brave American heros, but not a huge number of casualties in a shooting war – as compared to other shooting wars.
And I don’t want to sue you. All of this really does require rational thought, but I ain’t gonna sue you if continue to be irrational – its not actionable for me
Dugger (remember I bailed you out not too long ago when you messed up on the Republican presidents and other less compassionate posters were mocking your moniker – well I mocked it a little bit but then I ceased)
I have yet to have one progressive, just one, document lie .
Here you go. Read ‘em and weep.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-john-murtha/claims-and-facts-the-war_b_17311.html
BTW, 1049 days since “Mission Accomplished.”
“All of this really does require rational thought …”
Just don’t mention how long we’ve actually been at war.
Mistyped actually, meant warrantless wiretaps. Against them for US nationals.
Indeed. Mission accomplished: our military performed oustandingly and won the major ground war.
Dugger
Dugger,
If I had the time, or inclination, I’d track down your various and sundry entries which downplayed the number of troop fatalities. At one point, you were downright offensive about it.
Now, you’re spinning it quite a bit differently than you had been in the past. Ho-hum. More of the same.
I don’t recall messing up on the Republican Presidents, nor the mocking of my monkier. I well could have messed up. Hey, we’re all human.
What I’m more concerned about, however, is the screw ups by the current Republican President. They happen daily.
JK
From The Washington Post
http://tinyurl.com/f8tu6
Gov Tom Kaine:
Kaine has been critical of the invasion of Iraq, and he said his visit did nothing to change his opinions about how the war began. But the governor said the trip reinforced his belief that troops should not be quickly withdrawn.
“I feel even more strongly, being here now, that this is not something in Iraq where you can just set a date and say, ‘Well, we’re going to leave by that date,’ ” he said. [emphasis added - fd]
“I just don t think he s the anti-christ and get tired of the virulent hate directed his way.”
I think you’re misreading this Dugger. I’m directing my virulent hate at you.
“Our military performed oustandingly and won the major ground war.”
Dugger have you ever heard the saying, “Win the battle but lose the war”? What you call a major ground WAR, the invasion of Iraq and the taking Baghdad, has turned out to be the opening battle in a much larger insurgent war.
Now we know now that in the race to Baghdad major ammo dumps and fedayeen positions were bypassed, thus setting the stage for the insurgency to come. Commanders on the ground reported back to Franks that they had to slow the push to Baghdad to clean up the pockets of resistance being left behind and Franks overruled them. From the NY Times:
“The paramilitary Fedayeen were numerous, well-armed, dispersed throughout the country, and seemingly determined to fight to the death. But while many officers in the field assessed the Fedayeen as a dogged foe, General Franks and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld saw them as little more than speed bumps on the way to Baghdad …
After Nasiriya, Lt. Col. Joseph Apodaca, a Marine intelligence officer in that critical first battle, drafted a classified message concluding that the Fedayeen would continue to be a threat. Many had sought sanctuary in small towns that were bypassed in the rush to Baghdad. The colonel compared the Fedayeen attacks to insurgencies in Nicaragua, El Salvador and Colombia, and warned that unless American troops went after them in force, the enemy would continue their attacks after Baghdad fell, hampering efforts to stabilize Iraq.”
And they call us Moonbats?
BTW, what does that even mean?
Frame
..and he was reprimanded and almost fired for that assesment/warning.
JK,
Any “downplaying” (your word) of troop casualties would have been in the context just mentioned. Historically, this is a very small war. To everyone’s utter boredom, I pointed out the WWI battle of the Somme where the Brits lost 20,000 in one day. And you did do a little thing about Repubs (historically) elected President that we chided you about – no big deal.
And if you expect me to deny the Pres screws up, you’ll be disappointed. I just don’t think he’s the anti-christ and get tired of the virulent hate directed his way.
Dugger
Dugger –
For all your claims to rational strategic thought you live in a Mission Accmomplished fantasy land.
Usage:”Definition of a ‘barking moonbat’: someone who sacrifices sanity for the sake of consistency”
-Adriana Cronin
I dunno, sounds like your side of the fence, Frank.
moonbat
http://www.samizdata.net/blog/glossary_archives/001981.html
Okay then what does Gov. Kaine suggest we do? Keep the current troop levels as is or put more troops in? If someone believes we can’t take our troops out because the situation is so dire, how can they justify leaving the troop levels at their current level indefinitely?
Dugger,
I think it’s a bit “mechanical” at this point, to talk about the Iraq war “bodycount” in historical terms. Frankly, it’s grotesque. And I served.
We’re right in the middle of it. Daily reports of dozens being killed, many of them our own troops. Real people. Real families being affected.
You’re a freak. I don’t like you. I think you lie. I think you exaggerate because you’re afraid. You’re junk.
Sue me.
JK
Ask him… He said it.
“Ask him& He said it.”
And you quoted him why?
Dug;
Someone way up in the thread made a reference to the OJ trial.
I made a vague paralellism which you may have missed.
“ If the shoe does not fit, you must acquit
Lies is an ephemeral notion when you have the power to
derail investigations by manipulating political bodies. ”
That, “no lie has been documented” in your view,
could have a connection to the control of information.
Dugger;
(responding to way earlier comment-missed it-sorry)
“Of course, he believed (as did the Congress that supported him) he was right. But why do it? For what purpose? Oil? Terrorism? Revenge for Dad? Remember you are opining he deliberately lied us into war.”
He invaded a foreign country and removed the leadership of that land
because he believed it would have a long range
benefit in the war on terror. That is the best case scenario for his
a.)motives b.)state of mind that I can conjure for him.
But he allowed his desire to find a good end, to be justified by
lying to get there.
Frank;
You have already made the tacit admission that this war was
doomed from the start. Get over.
frameone, you ignorant idiotic moron! (I was just trying it out… It doesn’t seem to do much for me. What does it do for you? Still getting that tingly feeling in your “private parts”?)
I quoted him, because he was a particular (liberal) hero of Oliver’s, who, after returning from Iraq, came back sounding very much like GWB.
You dimwitted asshole (nah.. still not doing anything for me).
Yes, Frank. Kaine remains critical of the war and how it began but now realizes that Bush’s incompetence has put us between a rock and a hard place. He sounds a lot like Bush.
Who are you, and what have you done with Paul? No insults (of me, anyway, just the President), no name calling? I want to talk to Paul, and I mean now…
If I knew I wasn’t going to be set up for the ususal outpouring of insults by way of introduction to a mostly insubstantial comment, I’d ask you which was the “rock” and which was the “hard place,” but I know better.
Just so you don’t lose any sleep worrying about me, Frank: You’re an idiot.
Good answer, frameone. One I’ve come to expect from you — evidence of the heights to which you aspire.
Sermant
This is probably too old for you to catch, but—-
“he allowed his desire to find a good end, to be justified by
lying to get there. ”
You are actually close IMO. “lying” of course is your mind reading. But it is quite possible for someone, anyone, to ‘know’ the right answer, the best thing for all concerned’ ahead of time and fixate on it to the point that they don’t properly judge the importance of other events/data. That is called “misjudgement” not be confused with lying —- if, in fact, it happened.
Dugger (Mind you, I don’t swear there has been no lying – that would equally be myself mind reading. We would be better off judging the war on its merits/defects than guesing about peoples’ motives.)
And not a single lie has been documented.
And so I Humbly offer this..
http://www.bushlies.net/pages/10/index.htm
Who are you, and what have you done with Paul?
I knew it, you guys, deep down….
i·ro·ny (+’rY-n, +’Yr-), n. humbly spelled with a capital “H”.
I don’t get it, Frank. My shift button sticks. Sorry, didn’t mean to capitalize.