Ted, it looks like it was, to paraphrase Phil Collins, “it was just another [bloody] day in paradise,” uh, make that Baghdad.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18268472/

Perhaps you could start showing us on a day-to-day basis how the surge is working.


Edited to add:



You know Ted, while people like me relish poking holes in your arguments, I think what DR is trying to tell you is that you are fast becoming an big embarassment to your fellow Republicans.

Actually I could care less – I have the right to my opinion even if I disagree with you and "republicans". In any case survey or not I am not in favor of running the war as popularity pole – are you?

I think you misunderstand, the problem is not your opinions (plenty of people have those), but the way you go about making-up facts and sources, applying a total double standard of credulity, being the first to cast insults and the first to be indignant over nothing... Why do you refuse to support the things you constantly make-up? '19 democratic plans'? 'Pulling out of Iraq will send oil to $200 a barrel'? 'The Iraq war is the most Expensive war the US has ever fought'? 'Bush has openly admitted to a secret timetable'? Hey you know I'm still waiting for the issue number of that Scienticic American article you made up too... And countless other things you make up on the fly, then refuse (or are unable, as they are made-up) to source or evidence. Its not your opinions that are embarassing...


ANYways, to several people myself included, we are becoming guilty of a cardinal sin, debating a debator: which is generally pointless and I think might be against the rules. And if we don't cut it off here, it will just get far worse and get the thread closed. Since Ted cut-and-run and didn't bother answering any of my last post or any of the direct questions posed to him, I will do my small part to bringing the thread back on track.


It is unquestionable that the American people are majoritarily in favour of a timetable for withdrawal. Equally unquestionable is that the majority of American troops in Iraq are also in favour of this, as well as a majority of Polled Iraqis. Assuming for a moment that the Troops surge contnues to make little headway, what will the next step for Bush be I wonder?

Ted himself admitted right here on AD that he would consider the surge a failure if there was no progress in stabilising the government or substantially reducing violence by end of summer beginning of autumn. So if even idologues like that are prepared to admit failure at that point... well its still a year from the election... I find myself asking what Bush Jr. will do then? he can't call for another surge surely?

Actually it is much like the recent Global warming post I had to do for you for the second – or was it the third time. You are so busy making up nonsense you don’t even bother to read the links I post – including the threats of $200/barrel oil.

I suggest before you do the usual ad hominim of me read at hat others say to YOU anbout how you talk to them on line. I would post some but space is limited


Have nice day.




I never said this – sound more like you V

And just an FYI I still believe the surge is working despite AQ bombing attacks

Ted, Ted, Ted... I really TRIED to get the debate back on track, but you just aren't willing are you?

Firstly, don't make things up. After being asked literally a dozen times to justify your '$200 barrel of oil' assertion, you finally posted three links. Clearly you had not read any of these links yourself, as one was a discussion about how oil would NOT reach $200 dollars a barrel, and the other was a wild threat by Iran to drive up prices. NONE had anything to do with your assertion, for which we are all still waiting evidence. (That was post #154 of this thread, check for yourself) Same as the '19 Democratic plans', same as 'Bush admitting he has a private timetable' and all the others. You make stuff up every day, post it then cut-and-run when challenged on it. All the time. So don't blame others for your unfortunate habits, and their obvious consequences.

For heaven's sake, I even tried alternate tactics, such as singling you out when on the very rare occasions when you DO post substantive and evidenced points, and openly complimenting you for it! I had hoped the carrot might work when the stick was so unpleasant. No luck.

And I wouldn't go on about the Global warming thread if I were you: firstly, leave discussion of a thread to inside the thread, and secondly, shall I list off all the points from which you have cut and run in that thread? Shall I point out you STILL have not responded to any of the links or evidence I provided in that thread?




There you go, making stuff up again... Odd how you responded to me only when there are multiple people all saying the same thing about you right here. Especially odd considering how impossible it is to get you to respond to substantive points. Why not try responding to my previous, substantive and on topic post Ted? The one where I directed specific responses and questions to you? The one you cut-and-ran from?

Oh, and I think you need to look up 'ad hominum, you have accused me of this several times, and been shown to just be making stuff up. All I have said about you is just that Ted, and I can back it up with solid proof. By the way, which issue of Scientific American was it that supported your MD claims? Oh right, you made it up... Oh and when were you going to explain how a right-wing republican election agency is more reliable than the unanimous opinion of every respected independent polling agency in the US? And how about your assertion that the US is soft on crime in the Virginia gun thread? Again, when the assertion you made up was conclusively proven wrong through facts and stats, you cut and run: still waiting for an answer there... These (and many more) are outstanding questions of YOU Ted, based on YOUR wild assertions, and you have nobody to blame for fleeing from them but yourself.




Actually, thats my bad, a mistype on my part, my apologies, I meant to type 'least'. Sorry. What you actually claimed was:



Post #72 of this thread. Then I did look it up, and posted facts and statistics showing that Iraq is the second most expensive war the US has ever fought after WWII, proving you just made your assertion up again. Your response to that? Nothing, just like the others.




We know you do. You just can't show it or demonstrate it in any way, and when arguing for it you make facts up on the fly. Like I said, it's not your opinions which are the problem. If you actually want to DEBATE this, then post on it, and don't make stuff up as you do.


Just as I predicted, this is getting worse fast. Debating a debator is always counterproductive, and I'm a bit surprised the mods have not warned us off. I shall take this as a last chance to get things back on track. I'm not going to debate why you are the person you are any more Ted. Can we agree on that? I like this thread, and don't want to see it closed. If you want to reverse your reputation on this board its up to you to do so, and you alone. There is quite simply no more that needs to be said on the matter, and I do not intend to say any more on the matter.

So...

--------------------


It is unquestionable that the American people are majoritarily in favour of a timetable for withdrawal. Equally unquestionable is that the majority of American troops in Iraq are also in favour of this, as well as a majority of Polled Iraqis. Assuming for a moment that the Troops surge contnues to make little headway, what will the next step for Bush be I wonder?

Ted himself admitted right here on AD that he would consider the surge a failure if there was no progress in stabilising the government or substantially reducing violence by end of summer beginning of autumn. So if even idologues like that are prepared to admit failure at that point... well its still a year from the election... I find myself asking what Bush Jr. will do then? He can't call for another surge surely?

Can you straighten me out on this?

The surge is working so well (of course, two days ago you said the surge hasn't happened yet), that the US feels the need to build a fricken fence to keep Shiite suicide bombers from blowing up Sunnis. Last time I checked, Al Qaida was Sunni.

You and Bill Kristol make these points as if these are facts when the wall is evidence that what you say is not true. Is Al Qaida a problem? Probably. But they aren't even on the radar screen when compared to what straight up sectarian violence is doing to Iraq.

I can only partially accept this as true DR. Over the last couple of weeks I've read a few articles detailing the disintegration of the shia-american alliance and Al-Sadr pulling out supporters. Reports of both shia and sunni taking part in the same protest rallies of timetable withdrawl says to me Iraq still has a chance of pulling itself back together.

If such moves at reconcilliation become more widespread the walls separating the two will not prove effective. Then again were they ever a viable option? Whose bright idea were they?

While this is encouraging the broader direction points to failure on the part of the Maliki government to maintain order as Al-Sadr gradually pulls out his mp's. My biggest fear is that they sneek an Iyad Allawi or Ahmed Chalabi in under the cover of darkness to dispose of Maliki altogether. Allawi, a guy who has many similarities with the late great Mr. Hussein would be put in to put a stranglehold on parlament. At this point we will have come full circle from dictator to dictator.

As usual the devil is in the details – and of course if you disagree with V you are “making it up”- usually I post a reference – which you dismiss and go back to the old personal attacks. If it was the “second most expensive” it would cost more than Korea or Vietnam.

Well here is a reference that disagrees with your data. One ninth of Korea and about 1/14 of Vietnam.

Please refrain from attacking me if you don’t like the data below. You should no that unless the numbers are related to GDP they are misleading at best – or just plain WRONG.



http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...aqwarcost_N.htm

NEW YORK — In four years, the United States has spent close to $500 billion on the war in Iraq — more than the total for the Korean War and nearly as much as 12 years in Vietnam, adjusting for inflation. The ultimate cost could reach $1 trillion or more.
A lot of money? No question.
But even though the war has turned out to be much more expensive than Bush administration officials predicted on the eve of the March 2003 invasion, it is relatively affordable — at least in historical terms.
Iraq eats up less than 1% of the nation's gross domestic product, compared with as much as 14% for Vietnam and 9% for Korea.



I heard Maliki stopped the fence. I will look for link. The sectarian violence is fomented by AQ. This is their tactic. Blow up a Shiite market and hope they retaliate – same for Sunni. Many of the bombings are “suicide” bombings and AQ is the only group doing this to the best of my knowledge. So if we can end the AQ activity we may be able to end the sectarian violence.

In any case I am willing to give the general time to either make it work or fail.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268002,00.html

No Ted, not even close. Firstly, you 'usually post a reference'? No you absolutely do not. In the case of the cost of the war, you made that assertion a MONTH ago, have been called on it DOZENS of times, cut-and-run every single time, and this a month later is the FIRST link or citation you have ever cited on the topic. Don't pretend otherwise, please.

While I applaud you for posting a reference now, don't imagine that it retroactively excuses the past month of cutting-and-running and refusing to justify your statement.

Oh, and were you going to justify or explain the other half dozen wild comments you made up, listed above at any point soon?




See how easy that was Ted? You posted a reference to your claim! Well done. And see the effect t has? NOW we can debate the reference and its significance, as opposed to just you repeating your unsubstantiated opinion. I heartily encourage you in this vein, and hope you will be justifying all your other wild assertiong (some of which are listed in my last post) soon.


With regards to THIS link (a month late, but here none the less) firstly I would like to point out that according to YOUR OWN link:

In four years, the United States has spent close to $500 billion on the war in Iraq — more than the total for the Korean War and nearly as much as 12 years in Vietnam, adjusting for inflation.

In other words your initial comment was completely wrong, this war HAS been more expensive than Korea or Iraq, and is in fact the second most expensive war in US history. The article in no way denies that or vindicates your assertion. What it DOES say is that the economy is a lot stronger than it was in the 1970s, and overall the war is more easily afforded as a percentage of national GDP. Absolutely. Too bad thats not even close to what you claimed a month ago.


We shall wait for the remainder of your comments to be justified with baited breath, but I must say, even if in this case your link didn't actually support your comment, at least you are trying links and evidence as opposed to just making things up on the fly, and for that I give great thanks.




So is everybody else. The Democrats have in no way interfered with the surge nor the planning thereof, Peterus has all the time Bush originally asked for, and more besides. Nobody has interefered one whit, and there is nobody else to blame is this plan has the same result as the previous four years of war: failure. Of course, too early to judge yet... though its not looking good...

Typical of you. Post something – no reference – I show it is dead wrong and I gat back is this??? Want to tell us how you were so wrong??? - talk about “made up”




Come on please – I thought you were a smart guy V. Do you really think the article would be that inconsistent within two paragraphs??? And now its “my comment is wrong” – never mind the reference. God help us.

The mistake you are making is the relation to GDP – get it. When you use this it is, as the article states 9% the cost of Korea.





But they would like to – wouldn’t they.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Monday he wants to cut off money for the Iraq war next year, making clear for the first time that Democrats are willing to pull out all the stops to end U.S. involvement.
In recent weeks, the House and Senate voted separately to finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but set an end date for combat in Iraq. The House proposal orders all combat troops out of Iraq as of Aug. 31, 2008, whereas the Senate orders some troops to leave right away with the nonbinding goal of ending combat by March 31, 2008.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070403/D8O8SP7G0.html


How do you surge while pulling troops out “right away”.

Deep breath Ted. I didn't post a reference this time, because I posted a reference proving you in error back when you first made the comment a month ago. I can link you to the post, and repost it if you like. Now don't you wish you hadn't gone off half-cocked with your diatribe? cause now you just look silly.

Secondly, Ted either you didn't read the post or you are deliberately ignoring what I said. I explained in detail my point, and supported it with YOUR link: This is the second most expensive war in US history.


Now you are correct, the GDP has risen, the country is much wealthier than it was in the 1970s per capita, so as an overall percentage of GDP it is not as much. Congratulations.

But that was not your original point, nor even close. And trying to wiggle 'the cheapest war in US history' into this new argument a month later is just cheap theatrics. Your original claim was completely wrong, proven so by my source AND by your sorce. You NEW (and quite completely different) claim is correct, but then that was never up for debate.


I mean seriously here Ted, let me put it simply for you.

-You stated the price of lugnuts has dropped enormously in the past 20 years.

-I provided proof that this is completely untrue, and the price of lugnuts has ben going up, even considering inflation. You then provide a link confirming that accounting for inflation, Lugnuts have been ging up in price for 10 years. Thus your original contention is completely wrong, period.

-You respond by saying 'ah, but I was poor 10 years ago and am rich now, so I can afford lugnuts better than I could back then!' Well good for you, but that does not alter the fact that your contention is still 100% wrong, end of story. I'm not sure who you thought you were fooling with this attempted wiggle, but it didn't work.




Your original comment was wrong. period. Your own source stated as much. I don't care what your new version of it is, that was not up for debate, and its not the comment you posted a month ago and took a month to bother supporting.



What part of cut off funding 'next year' didn't you understand? YOU yourself admitted the surge would be a failure if it doesn't produce results by end of summer beginning of autumn this year. The surge was supposed to last 6 months. How does threatening to cut off funding after 18 months affect anything at all?

I hope you aren't back to making things up again... you were doing well for a bit there.

That was my point – apparently you misunderstood. It is senseless to look at any large expenses decades apart without GDP.




What part of – Senate plan orders troops out right away did you miss. And I am not in favor of “cutting funds” but of starting a withdrawal next year depending on results – big difference.

Whoa there. The wait and see approach was implemented argueably without clear vision as early as Mission Accomplished stunt was pulled in May of '03. The wait and see attitude was criticised with good measure. The point of the Baker-Hamilton report was unless a new approach can be implemented, Iraq is quickly deteriorating to the point where American-led efforts will have no positive effect. Ergo the idea we can still do something constructive has been flushed thoroughly down the toilet.

IE Give us something new, not more of the same. The surge is more of the same.

The results speak for themselves. The latest HRW report deals with the 1 January – 31 March 2007 period.

• 3,000 people arrested since launch of Baghdad security plan in mid-February
• 37,000 people detained in Iraqi and US prisons, many without charge or trial
• 200 academics killed since 2003 and 12,000 doctors have fled the country
• 54% of Iraqi live on less than a US dollar a day
• 69% unemployment rate

The premise of dangling results-dependant withdrawl in front of us has been abused so extensively that you will get alot of criticism over it Ted. I have serious doubts these are your thoughts but instead a regurgitiation of party line. DR addressed this earlier. The "just a little longer" stance is so laden with ideological fervor that it completely obfuscates the picture. There are quite a few that take exception to the carrot and horsecart arguement. In fact the Daily Show has shot more than a few quips at waiting and demonstrated with hard-hitting satire that waiting has exasperated the situation.

Jon Stewart thoroughly stripped John McCain down last night when McCain tried his usual talking points.

Stewart's point was pretty simple - the democrats are getting the "loss" pinned on them. The point of this thread seems to be fulfilling itself. But McCain couldn't answer what the win-loss was.

There are multiple factions on each side - the Sunnis and the Shiites - at war with one another. They are doing this with or without us there. For us to win, which side are we defeating? For a win and loss to occur, somebody must lose. So, who is it? The Sunnis who are aided by Al Qaida? Or the SHiites who are aided by Iran?

Which side are we on that is helping to defeat whoever the loser is?

The answer is, there is none. We cannot take sides. And if we don't take sides, we're not in the fight. We are simply an occupation force trying to survive the dangers there. Maybe Ted and the war supporters are ok with allowing our military men and women get slaughtered like cattle under this plan. Anybody with an ounce of sense is not.

The same people that led us into this quagmire and bungled every single facet of this war have no way to get us out honorably. So they rely on people like Ted to justify dead Americans in the absence of a real plan for victory.

We would be defending the parliamentary government the people of the country overwhelmingly elected. Its make no sense to have any other “side”. If that fails the country either breaks up or decends into chaos and emerges, most likely, as a Shiite run theocracy headed by Al Sadre and beholden to Iran.



Maybe “people like Ted” would like to see something positive come out of the lives spent rather than just quit. What exactly is your plan Dayton? The Baker plan where we hide in compounds and try to “aid” the Iraqi government? What is your “real plan” for victory?

I can't comment much on the wall, it's not in my area, but the Iraqi military has stated that they will continue to build it.

The sectarian violence cannot be placed at Al Qaeda's feet alone. In Baghdad proper, AQ actually counts for less than a third of the daily violent events. A larger problem is the influence of Shia Jaysh Al Mahdi, and the infiltration of the government by JAM. The Iraqi police and National Police are rife with JAM members, and to be honest, I don't foresee anyway to stop them. Not while Iranian weapons and equipment pour into Iraq like Noah's flood.
The 'safe neighborhoods' are working for the most part, there are too few to show a real difference. The government is a mixed bag of posturing blowhards who are interested in job security and mid level bureaucrats who feed astounding information that saves lives. The surge plan is still being tailored to meet differing threats in the different sections of Baghdad....creating the right force package and the right placement of those forces. Events occur daily that give hope to the optimists and dismal satisfaction to the pessimists.......it could still go either way.
On a slightly brighter note, I now have the utmost confidence in the uparmored HMMWV's (M1151 variety)........
To be such a vociferous advocate of the surge, and to do some amount of justice to the soldiers fighting it, requires some basic knowledge of the problem at hand. Simply to state that AQ is the problem and Democrats are abetting them, is to be ignorant of the facts.

Ted, you have gone from giving us talking points to giving us clichés. This is a major step backwards.

What makes this a fallacious argument is that "people like Ted" would have more people killed to make the sacrifice made by those already killed have meaning. This becomes a vicious circle.

Here's the latest on U. S. Military casualties.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/stor...6584353,00.html

These were the 3332nd. and 3333rd. U. S. military deaths in Iraq. How did they give the other 3331 any more meaning?

Your beloved Iraqi government is about as open as the one the Bush regime is here at home. Here's an interesting story on Iraqi deaths.



http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/25/iraq.main/


It now seems that that government “of the Iraqis, by the Iraqis, for the Iraqis,” propped up by the Bush administration, of course, may soon “perish from the earth.”

Pardon the parody on the Declaration of Independence.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7041100321.html

I read the “wall” was to protect a Sunni neighborhood surrounded by Shiite neighborhoods. I tend to agree that the sectarian violence has not dropped enough to claim any sort of progress yet for the new strategy. Maybe with more “safe neighborhoods” in the months to come, and a stronger Iraqi army and police, the tide will turn. I agree it could go either way.



There will be new, better vehicles than this coming. I still feel the surge is our only chance. To “pull back” and let the Iraqi army do alone what they may not be able to do with us next to them seems ridiculous to me. If the surge fails I see nothing in the other “plans” proposed that will save the day. At that point we are left with making the best of a very bad situation – for us and the region. I still feel that AQ is a major part of the “problem” in that their strategy to constantly “stir the sectarian violence pot” is working wonderfully for them.

This point of view is interesting – Certainly some truth here. Question is how to pull it off. The current government is rather weak IMO.

“Iyad Allawi, Iraqi MP and leader of the Iraqi National List, said that the surge in the number of US troops will be a “waste of time” unless the underlying roots of the conflict are dealt with, AFP reports.
"It will not succeed without political and national reconciliation," Iyad Allawi said to journalists at a conference on democracy and development in the Qatari capital Doha on Tuesday.
"If this does not take place, then the surge is going to be a waste of time," Allawi added. “

http://www.iraqslogger.com/index.php/post/...e_Waste_of_Time

Thanks for the update, DTOM. That's a refreshing break from the bickering going on in this thread, on the Daily Show and among others who either don't have facts or twist them for political gain.

Here's Wiki background on JAM: Mahdi Army

I noticed many other links from the Google search on the full name for JAM. This has been going on for a while, yet this is the first time my attention went to it. What's that say, I'm not paying attention or that the media I get doesn't report on this subject very often, if at all?

I'll admit to being busy on other issues, such as making a living and digging out of what might be the last spring snowstorm. Still, I check three newspapers every morning online, so it's not like I've got my head in the sand. And I waded through this thread to get your take on things, DTOM.

Very happy that you're getting better armor. Not so happy with our politicians that it took so long. Hope the surge works, and that's all I'm going to say on that subject. I'll take your word for it that the surge could go either way right now, so for whatever it's worth, I'm on the optimistic side, or more accurately, the hopeful side.

This is one of the problems with this entire debate (not specifically AD). There is no evidence that shows Al Qaida to be a major factor and someone actually there has told you it's not. But you still beleive otherwise.

No amount of facts will convince you of the reality because you won't accept them. Bush created a mess of biblical proportions and is using politics for cover. And it works. Just re-read your posts Ted.

Thanks – here is some more info. Seems “sectarian” violence is down but the AQ folks will not let Baghdad go quiet for obvious reasons…………

“Petraeus told reporters sectarian killings in Baghdad were only a third of what they were in January, before Bush began sending in additional U.S. forces. He added that progress in the troubled western Anbar province was "breathtaking," and that he thought Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was "doing his best" at leading the country.

But "the ability of Al Qaeda to conduct horrific, sensational attacks obviously has represented a setback and is an area in which we're focusing considerable attention," Petraeus said.

Petraeus said he would not touch on the "minefield of discussions about various legislative proposals," but he noted that the new strategy in Iraq was just beginning. He said he planned to provide more details in early September.”
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268562,00.html
Needless to say if we start pulling out by fall, as the Democrats plan calls for it will be over. IMO this is not a war that can be won with half measures. If we don’t want to support Petraeus then lets just get out and live with the consequences.



The Madhi army, which we allowed to develop is a serious threat and is IMO allied to Iran and is receiving weapons and help form them (IEDs etc). If/when we leave, and the elected government falls they will be the power broker in southern Iraq. I am sure Al Sadre’s recent visit to Iran was to discuss this very possibility.


We all need to make a living and your area got hit this year, as Upstate NY did with lots of snow!



Well we threw about 5 billion at it and the reality is it takes 5-10 years to “develop and field” an army vehicle – so this was not too slow. Newer and even better vehicles are on the horizon as part of FCS -
http://mae.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Di..._NUM=2&p=32
Good hearing from you again – Take care.

I disagree. This is punishment for not voting the right way on the occupation. This is a classic case of not being able to see the forest through the trees.

Love them or hate them, the Mahdi army is an integral component in the success of the Maliki government and to undermine one is to undermine the other.

I cannot emphasize enough the brazen folly of targetting one of the few forces capable of bringing and enforcing real security to a region which has none.

I remembered some comments a couple months back which are very appropriate. Took me a while to find the link.

[The Mahdi Army]...."is much more than just a force, it's a movement. And it has mobilized the great disfranchised, impoverished Shi'ite population". The Sadrist "genie is out of the bottle", he warned, and "it can't be put back in".

If we are to believe being on the ground offers us a better understanding of the situation, think again. More likely, we are presented with the view of a gopher, a perspective so close to the ground one cannot see the larger picture. Inferring the Mahdi traffics arms is a no brainer, in fact it is expected considering the difficulties the new-Iraqi trained army has encountered. Remember Maliki's government reached an agreement with Muqtada's organization last year that prohibited US troops from going into Sadr City, the Baghdad base of operations which you well remember was Muqtada's political-military organization. In today out tommorrow hmm? What a plan!

Does the phrase "war against all" have any resonance here? Now the kicker here is the Mahdi army is opposed to A.Q. support. General Petraeus' comments betray the true state of confusion gripping the US army at this point in time,



Auxiliary police force? Has the left hand had discussions with the right hand lately? Not a confidence building measure at all. I'd like to say more but it would incur a strike under the rules.

I'm going to quote retired US Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor to accentuate the likelihood of success of going to war with the new populist strongman and because his words are much passive than mine at the moment.

"a blunder of Hitlerian proportions"

Macgregor was quick to point out the strangeness of the situation. Here we have the militant Sunnis being recruited by A.Q. members as one front, non-jihadist Sunni resistance, and finally Moqtada supporters. Maybe it would easier to segregage the janitor in the corner as the only guy left who has has not been targeted for war. It would definitely be easier.

Macgregor also has some words for the ground troops buzzing away in their new HMMWV's.


Wouldn't you agree it is time to reform and reorganize our approach to the Mahdi army?

Certainly the dynamic in Iraq is complicated and that is exactly why an accommodation is required. The Mahdi Army rose up as protection against Sunni insurgents and it was a mistake to allow it to become a force in the country. Too late now to make them just "go away". Certainly Petraeus is thinking ahead to a time when the MA might become a sanctioned force of some kind – i.e. an “auxiliary police force”.

Certainly military force alone has no chance to succeed in Iraq. The solution will be political but will only come IMO when all sides see that there is no “other option” that would benefit themselves at the expense of other factions. Thus if the surge is to “work” it must bring about this condition and lead the factions to an accommodation that keeps Iraq together. This could bring the MA into the picture as a legal force.

If it fails IMO the country breaks into at least 3 pieces - one of which will be owned and operted by Iran.

This could add a new wrinkle to the situation.

Not only has Iraq not implemented one single benchmark set before the surge, the Iraq parliament may take the summer off. Two months - while we escalate our forces.

Since the war supporters have stated nothing other than victory (whatever the hell that is) is acceptable, I suppose that means we have to pick up the slack.

Oh...and just a word about the so-called reduced violence: Apparently, Iraq is hiding death figures from the UN - straight out of the Bush playbook.

This is a key passage in your link:

“But in pressuring the Iraqis to speed up, U.S. officials are encountering a variety of hurdles: The parliament is riven by personality and sect, and some politicians are abandoning Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government. There is deep mistrust of U.S. intentions, especially among Shiites who see American efforts to bring Sunnis into the political process as an attempt to weaken the Shiites' grip on power”

This goes to the importance of forcing a political solution. There is little reason for the Shiite majority to give up anything to the Sunni minority (politically) unless they have to. The Shiites aligned with Al Sadre IMO would love to just take control (of southern Iraq), with help from Iran. If we cannot get passed this with a compromise, even a forced one, the ball game is over.

Well, just a follow up to your absurdity...

It seems the the White House has decided to downplay the results of the surge so far because it just isn't working. They decided to wait until Septemeber to roll out a new set of lies and obfuscation. My bet is, this coincides with the Iraqi Parliment taking a summer vacation while we get blown up for them.

I really wish Hillary were president now. The republicans might actually try to put a stop to this madness.

But that would require principles they don't have.

You are correct DR. Equally defender[s] of Bush Iraq policy on this board just blow by information they apparently cannot refute and even refuse to defend bold statements they make.



I pointed this out two days before you did. The lone defender of Bush’s Iraq policy just ignored it and is still ignoring it.



Here’s another bold statement the author has not defended.



Former Senator Mike Gravel of Alaska made the same point I made in the Democratic Debates. I realize Gravel doesn’t stand a chance. I do, think, however, that he is important to the debates. Like Al Sharpton in 2004, Gravel says what needs to be said and what nobody else seems willing to say.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18352397/page/7/

Here is some more evidence the surge is not working.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18367419/

Let us get this straight. Our forces are acting as policeman, not soldiers. The soldier part of the job ended about the time GW announced mission accomplished. we are at the stage we were at in post WWII Germany and Japan. The difference was those countries did not have the deep divisions Iraq has. Nor were we foolish enough to allow the Japanese to vote for their leaders right away. At the core of neoconservatism is Wilsonian idealism that is incompatible with certain cultures. The only way we can win is to install a ruthless dictator, similar to the former Shah of Iran. Sadly, it was another Wilsonian whose failure to support the Shah that has led to our current debacle. The police action is unwinnable as long as its goal is a democratic state.

No need to keep our soldiers in Iraq any longer. The ignoramt, idealistic policies of the new Wilsonians has led us to destroying the critical balance of power in the Middle East. Iran and Iraq balanced each other out in that region. That is no longer the case.Setting a withdrawal date is the height of stupidity. It just tells the insurgents to keep killing our soldiers for a few more months. Let's get our soldiers out now.

It just started DR – SO either we give it a chance or give up. We need to have a better military position to get a good political solution. If we don’t want to do that IMO just get out NOW. Pulling back to watch the Iraqi army fail makes no sense to me. Lets just pack up and leave and then deal with whatever happens later.

Downplay what results? Didn’t we just have the Petraus speaking to congress? What t the hell more to you want??? He is the ultimate authority. He never said we would have conclusive results now.

What is you great solution to “put a stop to this madness”.

And I just read the budget holdup is effecting new heavily armored vehicles needed in Iraq. Just great.

I hate to break this to you Ted, but by and large, the Iraqi Government is the Jaysh Al Mahdi. Yes, they receive weapons and influence from Iran.........but with the reports I see day in and day out, we will never be able to root out the card carrying JAM members and JAM sympathizers from the Iraqi Government, the National Police and the Iraqi Police. The infiltration is nearly complete in most parts of Baghdad. If the surge fails to achieve it's goals, and by that I include the Iraqi people deciding to live in peace instead of following the mysticism of an invisible guy in the sky......teachings that are nearly identical to those of their supposed enemies......then the only way to insure stability is to allow the Shia (and JAM) to wield power.
On a brighter side, JAM is endeavoring to take on a more politically legitimate flavor, expelling some of the more violent members, and attempting to distance itself from JAM's so called 'special groups'. (those that carry out extra-judicial killings and other violent acts)
If we could eventually view JAM in the same light as the IRA or other former terrorist groups that we now legitimize....if we could entrust them not to carry out a genocide against the Sunni population, Iraq may have a chance. It's possible alignment with Iran remains a complication, but right now, we can't trust our Iraqi 'allies' with information. Mere hours after briefing them on planned operations, our Intel apparatus picks up the fact that JAM has been briefed also..............


Sorry no. Policemen do not face mortar fire, IED's, snipers and complex attacks. Our forces are acting like a counter-insurgency force. No police force in the world engages and reacts to events such as these. This is classic insurgency/counter-insurgency, but in a nearly strictly urban environment.

You place a lot of faith in General Petraeus. The last time I checked, he hadn’t registered anywhere as god.

So, the General reported to Congress. It appears, according to the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, that a majority of the bosses of Congress, “we the people” don’t like Bush’s current Iraq policy.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9332076/

BTW: Ted, have you got a newer Republican dominated POS poll to counter NBC/WSJ?

I understand and agree. The objective is to bring all parties to the table and reach a conciliation that allows for (hopefully) a peaceful settlement. This just might be possible unless the Shea feel they can have it all – which is why leaving too soon would be a bad idea. Pertaeus has even referred to the JAM as an “auxiliary Police Force” – first step in legitimizing them in a political solution.



BoF


Well BoF the Congress approved the General and he was up there last week. So what has a “poll” to do with the current status of the war?? Should we tell the General to wait here while we get a poll result on what he should do next??

No he is not god but he IS our best and last chance and I have more faith in him than any Poll.

Not exactly, Ted. The Senate, not the House of Representives, approved Gen. Petraeus. That's half of Congress. Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats are not bound by the Senate's vote and I think the issue of Petraeus's approval by the Senate and Senate opposition to the surge are dependant on each other.

There were even two Republicans who joined democrats in voting to include timetables in the funding bill.



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268699,00.html

None of this is not to say that General Petraeus isn't a good man. He's just not a panacea.

.


I think (public) timetables are idiotic – lets have private ones or all we do is tell the enemy to hold out until (July, Oct. – pick one) and they win. Why do you think the Senates approval of Petraeus and their “opposition to the surge are dependant on each other” - makes no sense – why approve a man and then oppose his plan and defund his efforts??





Meaning what? He “can’t win” – if this is the case let’s not waste more lives – lets just run out of there and let it all go straight to hell. Why play games?

Observation, Ted, observation.

Fifty-one of the senators (a unanimous total of 81 - apparently 19 did not vote) who voted to confirm General Petraeus, including two Republicans, voted for the war spending bill with timetables. Sounds like the two are independent variables to me.

Ok....who wins? Al Qaida backed Sunnis or Iran backed Shiites? All I hear from you and your kind is "we can't leave or the consequences will be severe".

Well, guess what Ted - the consequences are already here. Everything you said needed to be headed off has arrived. And you follow the people who have been 100% wrong about every single facet of this invasion as if eventually, they'll get it right.

The surge started Feb 14th, 2007. We lost another 100 Americans just this last month and the numbers - as usual - are rising.

The "we can't leave or else" is already here. The sooner you and your kind realize that, the sooner we'll come up with a solution instead of political cover.

I just watched six videos of a stoning death dealing with a Yezidi Kurd whose only crime was falling in love with a Muslim Kurd and converting to Islam to marry him. Yazidi combines Islam and Zoroastrianism. After being assured by her family that the teenager was forgiven, a Muslim sheik sheltering the girl returned the her to her family. She was dragged out of her house, stripped from the waist down to mark her defiled, beaten, stoned, and mercifully finished off with a large rock to the head. Kurdish territories are blessedly free of the daily strife we see in Baghdad and the street looked busy. No one intercepted. At least one local police officer is present and helps kill the girl. Several cell phones were out.

I watched the videos to see how the "moderate" Kurds reacted to crisis in a situation that has nothing to do with our presence in Iraq. If any group understands oppression and tyranny in Iraq it's the Kurds. I wanted to see who we can die for, who can give our sacrifice meaning.

Ted, not one man in Iraq is worth dying for. Thousands of Iraqis may "confront" the insurgency in uniform for altruistic, sectarian, or tribal interests—it's all beside the point. It doesn't matter which side wins. They are stuck in Maslow's second from the bottom hierarchy of needs. I think I'm being generous.

If Iraqis can't give three thousand deaths meaning, one more death is an outrage. In the end not one successfully implemented U.S. goal will drive social change. Iraqis won't stop deserving to die if the military stays another four years and security is restored. I'm not speaking from hate or ethnocentrism. Conciliation will not make a dent in such a horribly misogynist culture and our men—our men and women—are dying for men like Iraqis while they murder Yezidi heretics.

They did not deserve having their government toppled four years ago and they do not deserve our lives today.

No its stupidity that makes no damn sense. Lets not confuse “politics” with warfare. Petraeus comes in to do a job, we know what he needs and now we are going to pull the rug from the plan. Let’s just pull the whole thing and go home NOW. It cannot succeed – Republicans get the loss Dems head for the White House – Mission accomplished!




Well guess what DR – this is exactly what Petraeus said. When you bring the fight to them they fight back. Sectarian killings are down – I posted it – want to refute – do it. Want to quit and pull back – OK let’s get the hell out NOW. Not one more life on some stupid pull back and watch Iraq go to hell plan – just cut funds and run.

Ted it is amusing to watch a man in a wrestling match with reality.

Let’s review.

Variable 1

On Friday, January 26, 2007 the U. S. Senate voted to confirm Gen. David Petraeus.

.

http://www.pacifica.org/program-guide/op,s...segment_id,246/

Variable 2

Three months later both houses of Congress voted to send Bush a war spending bill that included timetables for withdrawal.



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268699,00.html
I must be slipping I used Faux News link

Ted, whether or not it’s “stupidity” and “makes no damned sense” to you is irrelevant – it’s what happened, uh...it's called reality. The rest of your post is just meaningless rant.

Ted, honestly: why do you keep saying things like this? Do you think if you repeat made-up comments often enough people will start to believe them?

Nobody is pulling the rug out from under anyone. As you may recall, the Troop surge as laid out by President Bush Jr was a 6 month plan. The Democrats have guarenteed funding for 14 months, all the money Bush asked for and more. Even YOU admitted that had their been no progress by end of summer beginning of autum of this year you would consider the surge a failure. Your icon Petraeus has openly stated that if the troop surge fails then Iraq may be unrecoverable.

Bush asked for something, the Democrats gave him FAR MORE than he asked for. How exactly is anyone pulling the rug out from under anything? If ANYONE has pulled the Rug from under your glorious commander, it is Bush jr: Petraeus declared he would need a minimum of 120,000 troops to pacify Baghdad: Bush jr gave him about 40,000. The ONLY person who has stood in ANY WAY in the way of Petraeus is Bush jr.

The Democrats are NOT playing 'politics' with the war, not at ALL. Name me ONE thing Bush has asked for that they have not given him MORE than he asked, name JUST one. Unfortunately, Bush apparently sees himself as a dicator, not responsible to anyone: god forbid the recently elected two houses should express the overwhelming with of the American people, which was the reason they were elected, and ask for a withdrawal date. Note carefull how their date interferes with Bush jr's current plan NOT AT ALL.




That has been the actions of the Republicans in utterlymismanaging this absurd war from the get-go. If they are unceremoniously dumped out of the white house in 2008 it will be completely and entirely THEIR OWN fault. The desperation to lay the blame on the Democrats or anyone else is dead obvious, but equally impossible.

Now you have started a new tactic, and I have to say it really confuses me. You seem to be arguing that if Bush cannot rule by Fiat and ignore the nature of the American government, the two elected houses and the wishes of the people, then the US should 'pull out now and watch it collapse'.

That of course is the AD version of 'I'm going to take my toys and go home'. If He can't have it EXACTLY his way regardless of what anyone says, then lets do the worst possible thing and guarentee utter disaster. "That'll show em all!!!"

The level of silly in that pouting argument cannot easily be measured.





Sectarian killings are down slightly in Iraq in April, if you take a monthly average: thats because they were much lower in the first week or so. If you take it week by week of course, sectarian killing have been steadily increasing and this last week was MORE bloody than the weekly average before the surge started. Oh well.

But thats not all. The slight drop in killings at the biginnong of Apil was overmatched by the massive increase in violence outside baghdad as some insurgents simply left baghdad until the surge was over, and continued their killing elsewhere. This is sectarian killing by the way, not AQ.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4762669.html

And to make things worse, even the drop in baghdad deaths is in doubt as it has been revealsed the Iraqis have been hiding the actual number of killed each week in baghdad.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/25/iraq.main/ (Thank you BoF)

Last NIGHT in Baghdad Iraqi police reported finding another 27 blindfolded bodies, victim of sectarian death squads. 11 people were killed by a sectarian attack on a Baghdad Bus, 20 were killed at a Shia funeral, and so on, and thats just in the last 24 hours.

Not a rant just trying to agree with you. My point is if you approve the man and his strategy and then feel free three months later to pull the rug out – fine!! No problem let’s go home unless the Congress wants to run the war day to day. And just to be clear my I have never had a problem with a timetable – only a “public”, tell the enemy timetable.

The Dems have made it clear the war is over and lost and they will do everything they can to undermine the efforts – so let’s stop playing games and get the hell out.

The Congress is now holding up money needed for the newer armored vehicles and endangering lives. Time to quit.

No Ted. They are trying to protect the troops from people like you.

The war was won long ago. But the salvage operation is a lost cause because Bush went with his gut instead of listening to people who knew what they were talking about.

Nobody wants a loss and I defy you to find one instance of somebody hoping/asking for it. Just one Ted. I'm calling you out on this. You've repeated this enough that this should be easy for you to back up.

Give us our troops back so we can fight the real war on terror. Apparently something you nor Bush know anything about.

Pity you missed, or chose to ignore my last post to you Ted, as it dealt with every one of the assertions you just keep repeating ad nausium.



Yes, and you even told us all Bush jr had openly stated he had a private timetable! Of course when called to evidence that made-up point... well we all know what you did then...



Yes, again, too bad you cut-and-ran from my last post considering this is EXACTLY what I was talking about. You keep making these things up on the fly when of course the exact opposite is true. 'everything they can to undermine efforts'? The democrats have done NOTHING, NOTHING to undermine ongoing efforts whatsoever. I DEFY you to name a single thing, just ONE tangible thing the Democrats have done to impede the troop surge in ANY way. Bush Jr got MORE time and money than he asked for, what else could you possibly want? Please Ted, name us one thing the Democrats have done to impede the trooop surge. Just one.

Of course THIS challenge to evidence your made-up points will undoubtably go the way of challenges to make you evidence your '19 Democratic plans' assertion, or your 'Withdrawal will equal $200 oil barrel' assertion, or your 'Iraq is the cheapest war the US has ever fought' assertion, or your 'Bush has openly admitted to a private timetable' assertion, or all the other made up stuff we are still waiting to hear evidence to...

Of all the things you make-up here from day to day, this is one of the least connected to reality.



Only you could come up with that bizarre interpretation Ted.

In fact, the Congress just passed Bush jr's budget with every single dollar and line item he asked for intact, the Congress is not denying anyone anything, they are not enying a single dollar to the troops at the front. Now in a short time, Bush Jr himself may CHOOSE to deny the troops at the front the money they need. But that is HIS decision and HIS action that denies them their money, not anybody else's. HE may VETO the budget, and so the fact that the troops won't get the money they need is entirely on George Bush Jr's head. nobody else's.

I would add that the timetables/benchmarks included in this bill are non-binding. Bush can ignore the benchmarks if he so chooses. If Bush signed this bill, nothing would change - ever.

Instead, he will use the military as a political football. Bush has no problem ignoring the constitution when it fits him via signing statements, but suddenly he has a conscience when it comes to the troops.

I am sorry that Congress dithers over timetables and benchmarks when it is well within its power simply to defund the war. Once the special war spending bill is vetoed, no further legislation funding the war should be sent to the president. So more Americans and Iraqis must die because there aren't enough souls in Congress with the courage to do what's necessary to prevent it. The only good thing about that is that it ensures that the war will still be raging next year and, unless the Republicans have the foresight to nominate a war opponent such as Hagel, it will sweep the Democrats into the White House and into many more Congressional seats than they enjoy now. Personally however, I believe that the national interest demands that the war end immediately.

Some here believe there is a contradiction between Congress's approval of General Petraeus and its short-circuiting his plan. On the one hand, the troops in the field need leadership, and considering Petraeus's record, there was scant reason to oppose the President's choice of him. The president being the Commander-in-Chief, it would be quite extraordinary if Congress denied him his choice of field commander.

Whether continued war is in fact a good thing is quite another matter. Congress has the power to approve war and, one would assume, the power to rescind that approval. It also controls the budget. So it lies well within the ambit of Congress to bring an end to any given U.S. military involvement.

So there is no contradiction between Congress approving the appointment of Petraeus and also acting to terminate this war.

In any case, the decision to fight on in Iraq does not belong to General Petraeus, but to the elected government of the United States. Fortunately we don't live in a country where generals get to decide these things. Unfortunately, we also have a fool for a president and a flock of pidgeons for a Congress.