link
So, when can the liberals here at least have the intellectual honesty to admit the surge has done some good. You have liberal news anchors saying it is working. Republican congressmen who have been to Iraq, Democrats who have been to Iraq, anyone who has been to Iraq lately.
The only ones still trashing it are:
1. Democrats who have not been there and are so partisan they will NEVER say anything Bush does is successful.
2. Moonbat liberal bloggers who can't know how things are going in Iraq sitting in their mothhers basements.
3. People who lie about who they are and what they have done in Iraq and make up stories to sell the liberal agenda.
You can still say the war was unjust, you can still say we will never meet the objective of making Iraq a secure Democratic country. However, if you want to be seen as having integrity, as having some honestly, you have to admit when something has worked. Otherwise you are simply a partisan hack.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Couric: 'Real Progress' In Iraq
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
17 comments:
"Otherwise you are simply a partisan hack."
Like yourself.
Aside from that glaring bit of irony, the surge has had its successess, but the GAO report is a rather sobering picture of the surge in its entirety.
The larger point of the surge which you seem to forget/avoid is that it was designed to create an environment for the Iraqi government to make progress and achieve stability. Maliki looks no more competent than he did pre-surge.
THE GOAL OF THE SURGE WAS TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT COULD MAKE PROGRESS TOWARD ESTABLISHING A LASTING PEACE.
THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT HAS NOT MADE ANY PROGRESS TOWARD ESTABLISHING A LASTING PEACE
THEREFORE, THE GOAL OF THE SURGE HAS NOT BEEN ACCOMPLISHED SO FAR, I.E. SO FAR, THE SURGE HAS FAILED.
it's not that hard to figure out.
The surge can not force the Iraqis to figure out how to run an effective Democratic govt in 5 years. How long did it take the United States?
Get a clue.
Its when people like you are in charge that we have things like millions being killed in Vietnam.
"The surge can not force the Iraqis to figure out how to run an effective Democratic govt"
Then it was an incredibly poor strategy from the start since that was its intention from the start. As realism and I stated (and you "shockingly" dodged), the goal was to create an environment of security to allow the Iraqi government to make noticeable and lasting progress tward peace and stability. The Iraqi government has not done so.
"Get a clue."
game,
the libs demand perfection of others, not of themselves, and they live down to that lack of a standard daily.
The surge can not force the Iraqis to figure out how to run an effective Democratic govt in 5 years. How long did it take the United States?
Yeah, nice misdirection. It's not "run an effective Democratic government", it's "make progress toward establishing a lasting peace".
The political situation now is worse than before the surge started.
How long did it take the United States?
Well, let's see. The Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776, the Constitution was drafted in 1787 and Washington became President in 1789. So one could say that it took 11-13 years to implement an effective democracy.
If I'm not mistaken, in the 1770s and 1780s there were no telephones, no telegraphs, no cars, airplanes, or trains, and a fledgling postal system. This might have contributed to the time it took to communication and assemble the key players over a period of years to hammer things out.
So forget about this "how long did it take America..." business.
You're all nuts. The GAO is a pass/fail report. It does not deal in the realities of the situation. It so much as states such itself. Of those areas that they say Iraq hasn't met the goals, it doesn't speak of how close they are to accomplishing them. Then, it throws in a "middle" area for some other points, so that there is pass, fail and something in the middle. If you want to guage success in Iraq, of the surge that is, the GAO is not the report upon which you really want to hang your hat. It's been shredded by better people than myself already. But then again, absolute perfection in the attainment of goals is the only thing that you lefties are after, knowing full well that no one is capable of such absolute perfection. This is all you need to pretend there's no progress. Stop with your anti-American, anti-military and anti-Bush nonsense and most of all, don't spew it when I've downed a ton of beer on the first night of bowling.
"Stop with your anti-American, anti-military and anti-Bush nonsense and most of all, don't spew it when I've downed a ton of beer on the first night of bowling."
Make me, loser. MAKE ME.
First of all, Marshall can go fuck himself. I have family members who have served and who still are serving overseas. What do you do to support the troops aside from slapping a sticker on your car? Do you volunteer at Walter Reed or any other VA facility? I do.
Second, you know damn well that the GAO report deals with the reality on the ground. You're simply quick to dismiss it since it doesn't paint a Norman Rockwell picture. The report provides plenty of context to substantiate its marks- it's not a 1 page report card as you'd like to believe.
Here is more reading in anticipation of the upcoming testimony: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/05/AR2007090501282.html
All Andy, hash, and Phil are doing is reinforcing the perception that Democrats are the Cut and Run crowd. Nothing short of a video game type of victory will shut them up. They, in fact, demand a defeat to further their political goals.
PCD, you constantly reinforce the perception that you're an assclown.
I'll settle for signs of meaningful progress toward reconciliation and stability by the Iraqi government to match gains by the U.S. military.
PCD is a dirtbag liar. He is a slimy apologist for the bush administration. Picture him as Igor "yes, master, yes master".
Truth means nothing to him, as succinctly demonstrated by his refusal to admit that he lied when he claimed that Lee Baca is a Democrat, even after being shown numerous times that Baca is a republican.
He is a slavering, codpiece-worshiping, authoritarian cultist whose hatred for and fear of the truth is matched only by his eagerness to degrade himself to serve his "top", george bush.
Real progress my ass.
US monthly fatalities have been higher in 2007 every month year over year. The surge was supposed to sacrifice American soldiers in order to allow the Iraqi government to accomplish political goals.
Unfortunately, the Iraqi government has not accomplished those goals, so we just have more American soldiers dying for nothing.
Despite the sexual arousal that craven fools like PCD experience upon contemplating that fact, those of us that aren't insane would like to see this debacle brought to a conclusion ASAP.
"Unfortunately, the Iraqi government has not accomplished those goals, so we just have more American soldiers dying for nothing."
Wasn't it absolutely BRILLIANT to get rid of Saddam Hussein, and trade in a secular dictator for an Islamic theocracy, where permanent tribal strife was inevitable?
Unless, that wasn't the ultimate reason for the occupation (gasp!)
So if I understand correctly, the "debate" here and on several posts over the last month or so goes like this:
person A: you suck
person B: no you suck
person B: now I am gonna swear at you too
person a: another personal attack
I don't post as I prefer to educate myself with the debate. Looks like no one debates here anymore.
You'll now rip on me for being anon, and then start blaming each other for starting it like we did on the playground in grade school.
Used to be you could come here for some real information. Not so anymore.
-p
This may be true, but you can blame game for establishing that dynamic, and fudgie (pcd) for solidifying it, with their name-calling, ad hominems, and moishe art for attempting to assert an almost rabbinical authority ,in uncleanliness, over these proceedings.
The progressive posters aren't interested in these sort of sandbox games, but are forced into it out of self-defense. We want intelligent, reasoned debate, and the ability to challenge neocons on their core philosophies in order to (hopefully) discover common ground on issues that affect all of us, but, unfortunately, the right-wing extremists want to render this impossible.
In chaos, they can steal.
Post a Comment