The Surge In Iraq Working?

[Cold_Zero]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/....html

According to the US Embassy in Baghdad, 15 of the 18 Congressional mandated Bench marks have been satisfactorily met in Iraq.

Personally, I dont think this report is going to matter. Because in the current political and social climate, 'Bush Bashing' has become a religion. Just like Global Warming everything is predicated as an apology for their religion. If its hot outside, its global warming's fault. If its cold outside, its global warming's fault. If there are more hurricanes this season, its global warming's fault. If there are no hurricanes, its global warming's fault. If the glacier ice melts, its global warming's fault, if the glacier ice grows, its global warming's fault.

Its the same damn exact way with 'Bush Bashing.' Its a religion.

[HashiriyaS14]

I agree that "Bush Bashing" has become a religion, even in the rare cases where he's actually done a good job and it isn't warranted.

That said, I do NOT think that public opinion is going to really sway what we do in terms of our troop situation.

Obama calls for a hasty withdrawal and McCain calls for escalation.

Petraeus, on the other hand, is going to request a decent-size troop drawdown, which puts him between both camps. Withdrawal slower than Obama promises, but also a withdrawal, rather than the escalation that McCain is supporting.

Ultimately, no matter who is elected President, everyone who knows anything about defense and foreign policy is agreeing that the next President is going to do whatever Petraeus tells them to do (which is a good thing).

Neither candidate was ever a theater general, and neither is qualified to override Petraeus, who is REALLY GOOD at his job.

Petraeus knows that we need to balance maintaining a "winning" troop count with maintaining the sustainability of our military, and his measured drawdown is how he plans to achieve that. Keep enough troops there to KEEP WINNING (as we ARE winning), but bring some home so that the military isn't overextended and that we aren't percieved as working our soldiers into the ground.

This is why the Iraq conflict isn't a major issue for me in selecting a candidate. I'm utterly convinced the same things are going to happen no matter who is elected President.

Iran, on the other hand, is another matter. I worry about McCain and Iran.

[telcoman]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/....html

According to the US Embassy in Baghdad, 15 of the 18 Congressional mandated Bench marks have been satisfactorily met in Iraq.

Personally, I dont think this report is going to matter. Because in the current political and social climate, 'Bush Bashing' has become a religion. Just like Global Warming everything is predicated as an apology for their religion. If its hot outside, its global warming's fault. If its cold outside, its global warming's fault. If there are more hurricanes this season, its global warming's fault. If there are no hurricanes, its global warming's fault. If the glacier ice melts, its global warming's fault, if the glacier ice grows, its global warming's fault.

Its the same damn exact way with 'Bush Bashing.' Its a religion.

Well hundreds of scientists from around the world that study in the Artic and Antarctic would strongly disagree. The effects of global warming are clearly visible in Alaska which I saw first hand. You can try giving that bs to people who lost their homes along the Misissippi river or to those that lost homes to fires on the west coast. Bush's problem is he just doesn't listen to those that know more than he does.

Sorry Bud, you are just plain wrong on this one. The facts do not support your position painful as that may be.

Telcoman

[Cold_Zero]

Well Telcoman,When the Scientists come to central Indiana and explain why it has been unseasonably cool, when it its normally Hot and Humid then I might consider it. Oh, I dont need to go down to the Mississippi River to find people that lost their homes to flooding. But then again, the people didnt loose their homes to Global Warming. The ice caps didnt melt and flood the Mississippi. Nor were the glaciers responsible for the flooding in Southern Indiana. It was the results of heavy rains over a weekend. These in Southern Indiana live in a 100 year flood plain and received a 300 year flood. But this is a talk about the Surge in Iraq, not about Global Warming. The reference to Global Warming was an illustration of the faith and conviction needed to believe in such a concept like the demonization of GW Bush.bud

[skylndrftr]

CZ,

I tend to disagree with most of my 'liberal' friends on the war as I personalaly do not support a withdrawl. Obama does not support anything like the policy you mentioned and is part of why I can continue to support him despite his recent manuever to the 'center'. I cannot possibly support a candidate who literally says 'I hate to tell you there is going to be other wars'. Maybe McBush meant it in terms of the obviosu, eventually its just about inevitabel we willl have a nother war. But I think what he meant was he intends to pursue Iran militarily.

I actually agree that the surge is working. Theres no doubt in my mind. But where I get into the "Bush Bashinng" is, why didn't we do something like this in the first place? I don't see how putting more troops on the ground is ever a bad thing, especially against an embedded populace that is on their turf and fighting in a disorganized urban warfare style. Why should he get credit for something he was told he needed to do in the first place. Maybe if we had done that and we had been able to control the country in a more effective way initially, we wouldn't still need to be there.

Where the "Bush Bashign" really starts is that he lied to get us there in the first place, thats a crime and he should be impeached for it.

[Cold_Zero]

Sky,Thank you for your candor. But, I mentioned nothing about Obama. Maybe you mean Hash?And when I refer to 'Bush Bashing' I do not mean logically disagreements that people may have with the current administration. I think political disagreement and dissent is what makes this country strong.What I am referring to is the blind and even arrogant blaming all of our social, economic and political ills on GW Bush.

We had a project at work IRP (Interest Rate Plan Type Expansion) that didnt go very well and had a lot of problems that we needed to fix. It got so bad that all problems that were encountered on the system were blamed on IRP. So I use to and still do joke with the Developer of the project. If I stub my toe, its IRP's fault. If my alternator in the car goes out, IRP.

[smockers83]

Was watching/listening to the news today. The science behind global warming is starting to be debunked. The hottest decade was not in fact the 90s, the hottest year was not in fact 1998 but 1939 or something close, and temperatures today are as they were in the 40s. I think I heard that NASA said this.

[telcoman]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/....html

According to the US Embassy in Baghdad, 15 of the 18 Congressional mandated Bench marks have been satisfactorily met in Iraq.

Personally, I dont think this report is going to matter. Because in the current political and social climate, 'Bush Bashing' has become a religion. Just like Global Warming everything is predicated as an apology for their religion. If its hot outside, its global warming's fault. If its cold outside, its global warming's fault. If there are more hurricanes this season, its global warming's fault. If there are no hurricanes, its global warming's fault. If the glacier ice melts, its global warming's fault, if the glacier ice grows, its global warming's fault.

Its the same damn exact way with 'Bush Bashing.' Its a religion.

I don't think its working?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...pnews

In my opinion Bush deserves to be bashed for his poor performance over the past eight years. He claimed "Mission Accomplished"! What a joke Its not funny that over 4100 Americans are dead and who knows how many wounded? And he doesn't want to provide educational benefits for our troops? What a loser

Telcoman

[Cold_Zero]

I see no correlation between the article you quoted and the success or failure of the surge? Are you insinuating that because there is (some) violence, the surge must not be working? The Democratically controlled Congress sent benchmarks and I dont believe that NO violence in Baghdad was one of the bench marks.

[smockers83]

Don't worry, he likes to take random and/or small, isolated events and turn it against the Bush admin as a failure without making an argument or even a single valid point.

[audtatious]

Well hundreds of scientists from around the world that study in the Artic and Antarctic would strongly disagree.

If you want to discuss Global Warming, go here and you will be debated.

zer...age=1

[telcoman]

I see no correlation between the article you quoted and the success or failure of the surge? Are you insinuating that because there is (some) violence, the surge must not be working? The Democratically controlled Congress sent benchmarks and I dont believe that NO violence in Baghdad was one of the bench marks.

The administration dropped the ball in Afganistan also.

http://www.martiniboys.com/mar....html

"Howard Stern almost lost his entire staff of comedians this week. Stern’s producer Gary Dell'Abate, show regular Artie Lange and comedians Nick DiPaolo, Jim Florentine and Dave Attell had just performed a comedy show for troops in Afghanistan when they were suddenly attacked. The comedians were about to leave the base when motor fire started to descend on the area. The Stern staffers were rushed to a bunker and survived, but it was still a surreal and stressful situation for all involved. I guess the Afghan army just isn’t a big fan of offensive humor about sex and beer. Who knew?"

At least we have a group that supports the troops.

http://www.nydailynews.com/gos....html

Telcoman

[smockers83]

What the freakin hell does this have to with any ****ing thing? I don't give a **** if Howard Stern's staff almost got killed...they're in a war zone, what the hell do they expect? If I cared, I would listen to Howie or read about it on my own. And Afghanistan has nothing to do with the surge. Seriously telcoman...for someone your age, you need to learn a few things. Your "arguments" if that's what we're going to call them go absolutely nowhere and mean absolutely nothing to the issue and discussion going on within.

Can we add a rule that one has to know how to present an argument and back it up before posting in here? This is just posting random, meaningless stuff, essentially equivalent to one who's trying to get by the post limit in order to post in Classifieds.

[skylndrftr]

Smockers it goes both ways. People like this exist on both sides of the proverbial aisle. Honestly he hurts the arguement of peopel like me more than he annoys people like you.

He does however provide the basis for a point regarding the surge. Any progress in Iraq has likely come at the expense of progress in Afghanistan.

I don't understand a lot of the rhetoric surroundign the war. One side says 'violence = terrorlst exist = need more war' and the other says 'violence=hate us=run and hide'. Unfortunately they arre both wrong. First, neither Afghanistan nor Iraq is a war. If we're going to get away from having people like Telco infect an arguement lets be clear and precise and accurate on that.

Setting that aside, Iraq and Afghanistan represent the reality of occupying a country for any reason, ueople dislike you and will likely try and kill you. Is this surprising? Didn't we do this to the British?

[audtatious]

"occupation" in Japan and Germany did not cause hate nor resentment. You are correct, technically the war was over when Saddamn and the Baath party were outed. Of course, this is still the "war on terror".

[wingFeather]

Sorry Bud, you are just plain wrong on this one. The facts do not support your position painful as that may be.

Telco, "bud", I'm afraid you're wrong, too.

[Cold_Zero]

Telco, "bud", I'm afraid you're wrong, too.

I thought Telco was talking to me? My name is Bud.bud

[skylndrftr]

"occupation" in Japan and Germany did not cause hate nor resentment. You are correct, technically the war was over when Saddamn and the Baath party were outed. Of course, this is still the "war on terror".

[smockers83]

Maybe I'm a little confused and/or not as brushed up on Afghanistan as I should be (blame myself for that and the media since they don't cover it anymore, I do want to hear more about it), but I was under the impression that NATO took over operations with a significant US presence? Yes, no, maybe, sort of?

Occupational forces in Europe and Japan after WWII are very unique in how well they actually worked. We did it to the British because they were trying to impose rules on us without representation...I don't think we're really imposing rules on anyone besides maybe curfews? But to see success from an occupational force like that of WWII may never be seen again in world history, I'll give it a max of once a millennium for as long as humans are around.

The two rhetorics you present skyln and your analysis is A+ in my book. Afghan and Iraq may not be explicitly defined wars in traditional sense, but they are war zones nonetheless in the name of the War on Terror. The War on Terror is foreign policy for offensive pre-emptive measures against suspected terrorists. As certain situations during the Cold War taught us (Vietnam), these types of actions don't go over very well. If we have a threat of terrorism, the best policy is a policy of containment.

[skylndrftr]

In other cases though they do. Execution is a big piece of that. I don't think we have a real threat of terrorism. I think if you look at the timing of most of the' 'terrorlst threats' that the DHS and White House and FBI released, there are a pretty shocking number of correlations with things they want out of the news.

9/11 was a horrible thing, but so was the first trade center bombing and we have suspects in federal jail after being convicted. We didn't chose to abandon the constitution and imprison people without charges, or start two wars.

Understand that I do not want us out of Iraq or of Afghanistan right now. I simply think the initial justification and the track record on terrorism threats is poor at best. Re: my fear thread.