Iraq General Thread

[kapkomet]

It was across all 18 provinces across the entire country of Iraq. They didn't cherry pick the provinces. Your analogy does not work.

Because you KNOW how the poll was conducted, because you were the one taking it. It may have been done in a "non biased" way, certainly. And Tex's post is right: what the hell else are they going to say when their country is at war?

 

More to the point, though: if I produced a poll saying that things are not as bad in Iraq as what is painted... you would be all over it. Your favoritism toward YOUR opinion is very clear. That's why you post all these things that you do, because it supports your opinion. I don't see you posting anything that is "good news" - I see you posting everything that supports your position. OF COURSE you dismiss every single thing that I say that could potentially discredit any information you may have. It only makes sense to you to do things in that manner.

 

The difference is, I can honestly say that both sides of the equation, both good and bad on ANY topic, can tell two sides to a story. To you, there's only one side, and that's the position of "get out".

 

 

Have a nice week.

 

 

 

 

 

[BigSqwert]

A MoveOn.org ad posted in today's NY Times:

 

General Petraeus is a military man constantly at war with the facts. In 2004, just before the election, he said there was “tangible progress” in Iraq and that “Iraqi leaders are stepping forward.” And last week Petraeus, the architect of the escalation of troops in Iraq, said, “We say we have achieved progress, and we are obviously going to do everything we can to build on that progress.”

 

Every independent report on the ground situation in Iraq shows that the surge strategy has failed. Yet the General claims a reduction in violence. That’s because, according to the New York Times, the Pentagon has adopted a bizarre formula for keeping tabs on violence. For example, deaths by car bombs don’t count. The Washington Post reported that assassinations only count if you’re shot in the back of the head — not the front. According to the Associated Press, there have been more civilian deaths and more American soldier deaths in the past three months than in any other summer we’ve been there. We’ll hear of neighborhoods where violence has decreased. But we won’t hear that those neighborhoods have been ethnically cleansed.

 

Most importantly, General Petraeus will not admit what everyone knows: Iraq is mired in an unwinnable religious civil war. We may hear of a plan to withdraw a few thousand American troops. But we won’t hear what Americans are desperate to hear: a timetable for withdrawing all our troops. General Petraeus has actually said American troops will need to stay in Iraq for as long as ten years.

 

Today, before Congress and before the American people, General Petraeus is likely to become General Betray Us.

 

 

EDIT: Believe it or not today was the first time I have ever visited the MoveOn.org website. The ad in the NY Times is quite harsh and I wanted to see if they had any facts to back up their claims. Seems like they do.

Edited September 10, 2007 by BigSqwert

[BigSqwert]

 

Have a nice week.

Your apparent claim to be some sort of centrist is quite a farce. And my motive to "get out of Iraq" isn't some tinfoil wearing extremist view in case you haven't been reading the news. It's quite a popular position.

Edited September 10, 2007 by BigSqwert

[NorthSideSox72]

Kap is correct in questioning every bit of information especially polls. Bottom line is, it makes perfect sense to me that the average Iraqi does not want a war in their living room. Duh. Pick the worst neighborhood imaginable in the US. Then start bombing it, have an army tossing grenades and other weapons around, and tell me the average citizen will think it's better. They are now living in a war zone with a foreign country controlling their lives. Well duh they are unhappy.

 

Back to the good news - bad news thing.

 

The "out party" always benefits from bad news. Nixon benefited from Vietnam f*** ups. Reagan benefited from Iran seizing hostages. Clinton benefited from Bush problems.

Questioning is all good. Kap isn't questioning here - he is saying its B.S. because somewhere, someone might have a counterpoint. In that way, anything anyone ever says can be made into a pile of steaming crap. It makes it pointless to have a discussion about it.

 

If there is a counterpoint, let's see it. Instead of just immediately saying its B.S.

 

[kapkomet]

Questioning is all good. Kap isn't questioning here - he is saying its B.S. because somewhere, someone might have a counterpoint. In that way, anything anyone ever says can be made into a pile of steaming crap. It makes it pointless to have a discussion about it.

 

If there is a counterpoint, let's see it. Instead of just immediately saying its B.S.

Come on, NSS. That's all I'm going to say about it.

 

So, who said this?

 

Let me be clear on what the U.S. objectives are:

The United States wants Iraq to rejoin the family of nations as a

freedom-loving and law-abiding member. This is in our interest and that

of our allies within the region.

The United States favors an Iraq that offers its people freedom

at home. I categorically reject arguments that this is unattainable

due to Iraq's history or its ethnic or sectarian make-up. Iraqis

deserve and desire freedom like everyone else.

The United States looks forward to a democratically supported

regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the

reintegration of Iraq into normal international life.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

So, who said this?

What does that quote have to do with evidence of the surge actually working?

 

I'm going to guess that some Democrat said that, and that it somehow justifies your anger that they changed their mind. That does nothing to address the issue of the surge and security, which is what Sqwert was talking about.

 

[kapkomet]

Who cares what it has to do with? And candidly, I'm not "angry" at anything.

 

Topics change around here all the time within the same thread, and BS really took this a different direction anyway - if you go through this thread, it's been all over the place... you're just getting pissed off at me and it's starting to show from the whole AQ = Dem thing. I don't really give a rat's ass if you or any one else are going to follow me around and tell me how meaningless everything I have to say is, because that's pretty much what's happened for the past two days now.

 

What it really boils down to is, people have "made their minds up", like most in this forum and will not listen to any piece of "good news" from Iraq. So what we get are these "polls" saying that America sucks and get the hell out. It seems to me that I have cited at least one first hand source from over there - and his sector has been cleaned up - and they are treated well (oh NOES we can't have THAT!). There are COUNTLESS other blogs from Iraq that say the same thing. The Patreaus report is saying the same thing (but THAT has to be discounted because it's "washed down" by the Administration...) When I read you all putting stuff like that, you've already discounted everything that's "good" because you feel nothing is "justified" over there. You all come across as righteous, pompous and arrogant as you are making me out to be on the flip side. Fine. But at least ADMIT your bias. That's all I'm saying.

 

There's never any easy answers to any of this. It's so easy to just say "screw it, bring them home"... and it's really easy (especially in this media environment) to support that notion. You have to work a little harder to find things going well - which says something in and of itself that not much is (going right). I freely admit that, and I understand that very well. The difference is, I don't just take every piece of news and say to myself "oh, woe is me, it's over, bring our guys home, because we can't fight the war on terror". Whether we like it or not, that is exactly what it is, and I don't care about the circumstances that led to it. It is what it is, so it's time we start acting like it.

 

And time marches on...

 

[Texsox]

Yep Kap, the world would be a better place with US troops everywhere. But we can't afford it, and soldiers shouldn't be dying without a very good reason. We, the American public, was sold a bill of goods that wasn't accurate. I could care less if it was a mistake or lies, what we know now is what we know and to continue to risk American lives keeping people apart who hate each other isn't on my toip ten lists of good reasons.

 

We removed the dictator, we secured the WMD, Mission Accomplished!! We Won!

 

[Texsox]

And add this thought, isn't good news in Iraq good for the GOP? So if a few hundred or thousand more soldiers are killed, and we pump a couple billion more into the country, but the GOP can show some good news, isn't that a great thing?

[kapkomet]

And add this thought, isn't good news in Iraq good for the GOP? So if a few hundred or thousand more soldiers are killed, and we pump a couple billion more into the country, but the GOP can show some good news, isn't that a great thing?

Isn't it though?

 

How many times do I have to say that Bush has been wrong as well? It's AMAZING how much you all want to just keep going right over that every single time I say it, because my message doesn't cowtow the Democrat talking points. THEY ARE BOTH wrong, and they are BOTH wrong for political reasons. That's the part that sucks the most. Our guys are being politicized... and I hate it. But, we're there, and if the political ramifcations were taken off the table, I think we could have a lot more success.

[Texsox]

Kap, ths wasn't directed to you, but to the entire concept, which was basically a continuation of my earlier post mentioning Nixon, Clinton, Reagan, etc. Sorry it got your blood pressure up. In reality, I guess I was just talking to myself, the usual.

[kapkomet]

My blood pressure isn't up. Trust me.

 

 

[Texsox]

My blood pressure isn't up. Trust me.

 

Trust me, I know how you feel. Alone against every other post in the thread. Just check any thread marked Illegals for me

[EvilMonkey]

Just a quick thought about the 'poll'. Who took this poll and how the hell did they get the answers? Surely some pollster wasn't going door to door, were they? And I thought phone service was spotty at best? I simply question the ability of any objective pollster to be able to GET the information in the first place.

[Texsox]

Just a quick thought about the 'poll'. Who took this poll and how the hell did they get the answers? Surely some pollster wasn't going door to door, were they? And I thought phone service was spotty at best? I simply question the ability of any objective pollster to be able to GET the information in the first place.

It was the Morning Zoo on WIRQ and a call in

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Isn't it though?

 

How many times do I have to say that Bush has been wrong as well? It's AMAZING how much you all want to just keep going right over that every single time I say it, because my message doesn't cowtow the Democrat talking points. THEY ARE BOTH wrong, and they are BOTH wrong for political reasons. That's the part that sucks the most. Our guys are being politicized... and I hate it. But, we're there, and if the political ramifcations were taken off the table, I think we could have a lot more success.

 

 

DING!

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Just a quick thought about the 'poll'. Who took this poll and how the hell did they get the answers? Surely some pollster wasn't going door to door, were they? And I thought phone service was spotty at best? I simply question the ability of any objective pollster to be able to GET the information in the first place.

 

 

I love that avatar and Im going to blatantly copy it.

 

[EvilMonkey]

I love that avatar and Im going to blatantly copy it.

 

Be my guest! I took it from a t-shirt site. Have to go back and buy on of those, just to piss off my brother-in-law!

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Be my guest! I took it from a t-shirt site. Have to go back and buy on of those, just to piss off my brother-in-law!

 

 

If you find the site again please send me a link. I have a few friends who I plan on sending one to.

[BigSqwert]

Biden still sounds the smartest with regards to Iraq:

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said Tuesday -- on the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks -- that the Bush administration's troop "surge" in Iraq is at best a "stopgap" measure.

 

Sen. Joe Biden, D-Delaware, told Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker at the start of a hearing on their reports that the time to start troop drawdowns is now, and that a "diplomatic surge" is imperative.

 

He said a federally decentralized Iraq with a limited central government is the "last best hope" for Iraq.

 

Biden said he found little reason to believe that sectarian violence will end in Iraq.

 

"Are we any closer to a lasting political settlement? If we continue to surge, is there any evidence Sunnis, Shias and Kurds will stop killing?" Biden asked.

 

"The answer to both those questions is 'No,' " Biden said.

 

Full Article

[Rex Kickass]

The President is supposed to call for a reduction of 30,000 troops by next summer within the next 48 hours, according to WNBC TV at 11PM. This will bring the troop load down to about what it was before the surge began.

 

It seems to me that the conventional wisdom on this was that, there would have to be a draw down of about 30,000 people beginning in March or April because they won't have enough troops to rotate back in to maintain 20 combat brigades in Iraq.

[Balta1701]

Less than a month ago, 7 soldiers from the 82nd airborne wrote a pessimistic op-ed piece about Iraq featured in the NYT, that I believe I linked here. It started with these words:

VIEWED from Iraq at the tail end of a 15-month deployment, the political debate in Washington is indeed surreal. Counterinsurgency is, by definition, a competition between insurgents and counterinsurgents for the control and support of a population. To believe that Americans, with an occupying force that long ago outlived its reluctant welcome, can win over a recalcitrant local population and win this counterinsurgency is far-fetched. As responsible infantrymen and noncommissioned officers with the 82nd Airborne Division soon heading back home, we are skeptical of recent press coverage portraying the conflict as increasingly manageable and feel it has neglected the mounting civil, political and social unrest we see every day.

It appears that 2 of those 7 soldiers were killed Monday in Baghdad.

[Texsox]

Less than a month ago, 7 soldiers from the 82nd airborne wrote a pessimistic op-ed piece about Iraq featured in the NYT, that I believe I linked here. It started with these words:

It appears that 2 of those 7 soldiers were killed Monday in Baghdad.

[FlaSoxxJim]

[Texsox]

Surge: 50% More Troops in Iraq

60% Less Nuke Posts

What's Not To Like?