On the contrary booner, a damn relief that finally something is at least partially working after the litany of disaster and incompetence that has plagued the whole Iraq fiasco so far.![]()
We have to wait and see what Pandora's boxes may have been opened by the sweetheart deals done with some extremely unsavoury warlords, but violent deaths are definitely down.
That does not excuse the lies told to justify the invasion, the unnecesary deaths caused, the sheer incompetence of the occupation until recently.
Yes, and that the Iraqi people would welcome the invading army with bouquets, and that you were 'liberating' Iraq. You probably believe the scenes of jubilation in a tiny corner of Saddam Square were real, and that the shellshocked Baghdadi's had swarmed there of their own accord- rather than being trucked in from Kurdish areas.
Even your government has admitted there were no WMD's, with the exception of a few muttering individuals such as that lunatic Cheney- who even continued to fund via his departments private budget a search for any scrap of evidence of WMD's after the US government had given up the ghost. To no avail. Even after the head of the UN's disarming commission, American Scott Ritter (who admitted he was also spooking for the CIA) had told you all along- there were no more WMD's to be found. Hell, what would he know. He was only on the ground there and in the thick of it.
It really amazes me how so many people will only believe think what they want to believe, and it is no coincidence that the same illogical thought process is then used to 'justify' illogical, immoral, illegal and ultimately disastrous actions.
Therefore, I assume you will still believe the Gulf of Tonkin 'incident' was in fact an attack on USN ships by the Viet's, in spite of the fact the NSA has Officially admitted it was not.![]()
Enough with the Nattering Nabobs of Negativism already!
Here are some graphs I've found that might, just might cause y'all to take another look, eh?
What Does Success In Iraq Look Like?
December 2006
December 2007
But that's OK...if we had never invaded Iraq in this 'illegal' war, none of these deaths would have occurred, right? Whoops! Almost forgot, Saddam would have given up his WMD program and turned into another Mummar Quaddafi too, right?
Thanks to Power Line
A Deplorable Bitter Clinger
It's good to see you finally coming to your senses.
Yes, the death rates would likely have stayed below of what it is now, after the surge, Al Quaeda wouldn't have gotten a foothold in Iraq and it would have stayed a secular country instead of forming a Shiite alliance with Iran (still to come).
Well, the push is on to finally rid Iraq of them Al Queedas...heh
After a rash of suicide bombings and the destruction of an al Qaeda weapons factory that led to the death of more than 40 civilians, the Iraqi government announced on Jan. 25 an offensive would be launched to drive al Qaeda from its northern haven.
The Mosul Offensive - The Long War Journal
...into the southern haven...?
Sorry am a bit cynical, don't trust politicos at the best of times, if they're Arab even less, and for those in the pot don't even bother.
Heh...leave it to the Froggies - Agence France-Presse has been caught recycling two-year-old Congressional subcommittee testimony about Iraq as current news.
Confederate Yankee: AFP: Something Old is New Again
Who ya gonna believe?
That simpering left-wing, terror-appeasing Nancy Pelosi who says the Surge is a bust or ...
"Al-Qaeda leaders admit: 'We are in crisis. There is panic and fear"
Heh...
Al-Qaeda leaders admit: 'We are in crisis. There is panic and fear' - Times Online
not the US military, that's for sure.Originally Posted by Boon Mee
i for one hope it's contents are true, but the US military has given me no reason to trust them. in fact, all they've done is make doubt the default response for anyone with a memory longer than 5 days.
odds are this is simply US military propaganda devised to dishearten low level AQ members.
^
Yep...when reality begins to intrude, you just seal it off...![]()
Well, it's going to be a long war - McCain at least understands this. But the main problem is whether or not Al Sadr will hold his ceasefire and deal, or just wait till Al Queda are rooted out and then go for broke with a Shia insurgency?
I've been wondering about the al-Sadr cease-fire as well.
I'm taking a guess. He'll wait to end the cease-fire.
I don't know what specific differences al-Sadr and the Mahdi army have with the Iraqi government (I've forgotten).
I know he wanted US/Coalition troops out. That would make it easier for him. Then he joined the coalition government, to pull out last year.
I agree, also, that this won't be a short involvement by US forces.
............
...or, being the nature of the beast, that today's friends will not be tomorrow's friends.
More bad news from the heartland of the Sunni insurgency
Bad for Democrats, that is:
Michael J. Totten: The Final Mission, Part IIIThe violent strain of anti-Americanism in Fallujah and the surrounding area has ebbed almost completely. People here know Americans are not the enemy. They know Americans protect them from murder and intimidation from the head-choppers and car bombers. They know Americans provide medical care to Iraqis hurt by insurgents and even to insurgents wounded in battle.
Heh...no wonder the presidential race is all about the economy these days, eh?
whenever i want to get the mood on the streets of fallujah, i always turn to michael j totten's blog.Originally Posted by another blogger cited by Boon Mee
![]()
Shouldn't there be some sort of final determination on the status/use of blogs in Issues?
Personally I feel that because you could find a blog entry to 'support' just about any position - no matter how untenable it is - they are a waste of bandwidth.
I'm going to start quoting Boon Mee. As reputable a source as any.![]()
Quadruple hearsay.Originally Posted by Texpat
![]()
as far as i know, it is an issues 'rule'.Originally Posted by AntRobertson
now people are posting solely to be deceptive ( "i didn't say say it was his "official headquarters! snicker, snicker", "the onus is on you to prove that the info in my post is not true"), photoshopped images of US politicians in front of soviet flags, hiding the URLs of links, etc....) and it's really become quite tedious.
i've got no problem with heated debate and discussion, in fact i welcome it on a political issues web board ...and if blackgang wants to stalk me from thread to thread making baseless personal accusations against me and not addressing the issue at hand, i suppose that's fine too, but at the very least posters should not be allowed to be deliberately disingenuous.
Last edited by raycarey; 13-02-2008 at 10:45 AM.
Couldn't agree more.Originally Posted by raycarey
^
i'm going to copy my post to the 'critique and suggestions' thread in the main issues forum.
There is no rule against quoting Blogs as such, as long as a link is provided. Many blogs are a waste of virtual space, but not all.
Other posters can then check the source, and of course in the case of booner that may well be a Blog, and several times an urban legend.
Deliberate deception is of course taboo.
It is interesting that when Stroller was a Mod auntie you did nothing but complain about him, and harass him, yet now he is not you are suddenly nostalgic.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)