Don't look now

[Dukes]

From the Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101927.html


June 1, 2008 - There's been a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks -- which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war. While Washington's attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the Shiite militias that have ruled them for years and sending key militants scurrying to Iran. At the same time, Iraqi and U.S. forces have pushed forward with a long-promised offensive in Mosul, the last urban refuge of al-Qaeda. So many of its leaders have now been captured or killed that U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, renowned for his cautious assessments, said that the terrorists have "never been closer to defeat than they are now."

Iraq passed a turning point last fall when the U.S. counterinsurgency campaign launched in early 2007 produced a dramatic drop in violence and quelled the incipient sectarian war between Sunnis and Shiites. Now, another tipping point may be near, one that sees the Iraqi government and army restoring order in almost all of the country, dispersing both rival militias and the Iranian-trained "special groups" that have used them as cover to wage war against Americans. It is -- of course -- too early to celebrate; though now in disarray, the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr could still regroup, and Iran will almost certainly seek to stir up new violence before the U.S. and Iraqi elections this fall. Still, the rapidly improving conditions should allow U.S. commanders to make some welcome adjustments -- and it ought to mandate an already-overdue rethinking by the "this-war-is-lost" caucus in Washington, including Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

Gen. David H. Petraeus signaled one adjustment in recent testimony to Congress, saying that he would probably recommend troop reductions in the fall going beyond the ongoing pullback of the five "surge" brigades deployed last year. Gen. Petraeus pointed out that attacks in Iraq hit a four-year low in mid-May and that Iraqi forces were finally taking the lead in combat and on multiple fronts at once -- something that was inconceivable a year ago. As a result the Iraqi government of Nouri al-Maliki now has "unparalleled" public support, as Gen. Petraeus put it, and U.S. casualties are dropping sharply. Eighteen American soldiers died in May, the lowest total of the war and an 86 percent drop from the 126 who died in May 2007.

If the positive trends continue, proponents of withdrawing most U.S. troops, such as Mr. Obama, might be able to responsibly carry out further pullouts next year. Still, the likely Democratic nominee needs a plan for Iraq based on sustaining an improving situation, rather than abandoning a failed enterprise. That will mean tying withdrawals to the evolution of the Iraqi army and government, rather than an arbitrary timetable; Iraq's 2009 elections will be crucial. It also should mean providing enough troops and air power to continue backing up Iraqi army operations such as those in Basra and Sadr City. When Mr. Obama floated his strategy for Iraq last year, the United States appeared doomed to defeat. Now he needs a plan for success.

[Spider]

good news and bout damn time ...........

[Spider]

But you righties shouldnt be excited .After all if Bush had his way Rumsfeld would still be calling the Shots ....It was the Dems that called for Rumsfeld to get **** canned and it was the Dems that approved of Petraius . so this is clearly the work of Dems fixing yet another republican **** up ......

[Spider]

Hat tip to the Dems for`taking action and fixing Iraq

[Rigs11]

Partisanship aside, this is good news for all americans.

[Dukes]

Yes it is good news for all Americans. The sooner progress is made and things are running smoothly the quicker the troops come home. Unless you're blinded by hatred for Bush and want failure.

[Rigs11]

Yes it is good news for all Americans. The sooner progress is made and things are running smoothly the quicker the troops come home. Unless you're blinded by hatred for Bush and want failure.

See there you go bringing your bs into the thread.Bush has facked up this country royally.From the economy to the war.You'r blind hatred argument is just a Limbaugh talking point. Nothing more.I guess the 70 % of the american public just have blinded hatred huh?

[cutthemdown]

yep really good news. Liberals will have to say it's all a lie though or they will look bad. Spider is right though the Democrats who voted for the war do deserve some of the credit. They made a tough tough decision and even though they backtracked on it when things got tough in the end the dems first resposnse was the right one.

Obama however needs Iraq to be bad because he did not vote for it. He needs for the election to get here fast before news of how well Iraq is going makes it to the people. The liberal media loved reporting dead american troops but not so much when the war goes well.

[Dudeskey]

yep really good news. Liberals will have to say it's all a lie though or they will look bad. Spider is right though the Democrats who voted for the war do deserve some of the credit. They made a tough tough decision and even though they backtracked on it when things got tough in the end the dems first resposnse was the right one.

Obama however needs Iraq to be bad because he did not vote for it. He needs for the election to get here fast before news of how well Iraq is going makes it to the people. The liberal media loved reporting dead american troops but not so much when the war goes well.

I seriously doubt Obama needs Iraq to be in shambles... Our sagging economy will be enough to keep McCain on the defensive- he has nothing else to run on but national security and the usual "be afraid, be very afraid" rhetoric.

[cutthemdown]

I seriously doubt Obama needs Iraq to be in shambles... Our sagging economy will be enough to keep McCain on the defensive- he has nothing else to run on but national security and the usual "be afraid, be very afraid" rhetoric.

yes but if Obama wins and Iraq at that point is looking pretty good what will he do? Will he pull out and risk Iraq descending back into chaos or will he backtrack and say the situation in Iraq has changed?

I also have not heard anything from McCain that suggests I should be afraid. Vigilant and aware is not being afraid. If anything it's dems that suggest if Republicans elected we should be afraid the world will hate us and more terrorists will get recruited. The Republicans are the ones that say fear not because we can be safe.

[cutthemdown]

I seriously doubt Obama needs Iraq to be in shambles... Our sagging economy will be enough to keep McCain on the defensive- he has nothing else to run on but national security and the usual "be afraid, be very afraid" rhetoric.

I agree in that Americans care more about there own financial situation then they do anything else including troops deaths and national security. Sad but true. Obama's message is to raise taxes though how is that going to get me more money?

[cutthemdown]

Partisanship aside, this is good news for all americans.

It really is because regardless of who gets elected we need Iraq to not be a total civil war zone. For one if we left Iraq to the Shia the Saudis would then have to get involved to help the sunni. Turkey would go crazy in the kurdish areas and things would be a total mess.

If Iraq's govt gets the military going then we won't have to worry about those outside influences so much and we can get out. I would love to see an Iraqi pullout that leaves the country in the hands of a govt with enough power to fight its own battles. That would be a huge victory for us all.

[Dudeskey]

I agree in that Americans care more about there own financial situation then they do anything else including troops deaths and national security. Sad but true. Obama's message is to raise taxes though how is that going to get me more money?

It doesn't, but then there's uncle sam's credit card... There are going to be some hard choices to make whether it be cut spending, raise taxes, earmarks or all the above. Washington seemingly acted like a 20 year old with his first credit card, ran it up without thinking about tomorrow... and now its tomorrow.

[Hotrod]

We need to hurry and finish up in Iraq so we can move on to Iran/Syria then N. Korea......the work never ends.

[Bronco Jamus]

I seriously doubt Obama needs Iraq to be in shambles... Our sagging economy will be enough to keep McCain on the defensive- he has nothing else to run on but national security and the usual "be afraid, be very afraid" rhetoric.

Obama was in favor of the war in 04.

[The Lone Bolt]

BUSH KOOL-AID LIES LIES LIES CORPORATE-OWNED MEDIA PROPAGANDA GENERAL "BETRAY-US" COOKING THE BOOKS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!!!


Just thought I'd save you the trouble LABF!;)

[Spider]

I agree in that Americans care more about there own financial situation then they do anything else including troops deaths and national security. Sad but true. Obama's message is to raise taxes though how is that going to get me more money?

Obama Raising Taxes is a myth , I went and looked for myself , http://www.ontheissues.org/Economic/Barack_Obama_Tax_Reform.htm
People like me get a break

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Just thought I'd save you the trouble LABF!;)

Where's the part where we just captured or killed al Qaeda's #2 man?

ROFL!

[Dudeskey]

Obama was in favor of the war in 04.

Yeah... We have an agreement w/ the Iraqi gov't... So even if he gets elected, a withdrawal in 18 months is basically a moot point

[Bronco_Beerslug]

If Iraq's govt gets the military going then we won't have to worry about those outside influences so much and we can get out. Are you serious?

[Spider]

yep really good news. Liberals will have to say it's all a lie though or they will look bad. Spider is right though the Democrats who voted for the war do deserve some of the credit. They made a tough tough decision and even though they backtracked on it when things got tough in the end the dems first resposnse was the right one.

Obama however needs Iraq to be bad because he did not vote for it. He needs for the election to get here fast before news of how well Iraq is going makes it to the people. The liberal media loved reporting dead american troops but not so much when the war goes well.

No that isnt what I said , I said the Dems Fixed the situation in Iraq ..... Bush is the Decider and he will decide , and He decided Rumsfeld was the best man for the Job ........ Dems forced Rummy out , approved Petraous , and Iraq started getting Better ......... And it will only get better from here on out , the Dems know how to fix republican **** ups

[cutthemdown]

No that isnt what I said , I said the Dems Fixed the situation in Iraq ..... Bush is the Decider and he will decide , and He decided Rumsfeld was the best man for the Job ........ Dems forced Rummy out , approved Petraous , and Iraq started getting Better ......... And it will only get better from here on out , the Dems know how to fix republican **** ups

yes but Bush appointed Petreuas so he deserves some credit. I knew what you meant though I just took it one step further. Dems voted for the war also ya know?

[cutthemdown]

We need to hurry and finish up in Iraq so we can move on to Iran/Syria then N. Korea......the work never ends.

you're worst then me :notworthy I don't think we need war with those countries. Just finishing off iraq and not quitting will be enough to show our enemies to bargain. Don't make the mistake Saddam made appease America and prosper instead. But if we turn tail and run they won't care what we say they will see us as weak.

[Spider]

yes but Bush appointed Petreuas so he deserves some credit. I knew what you meant though I just took it one step further. Dems voted for the war also ya know?

Thats ok I dont feel like fishing right now , after that post in the McCain Obama thread

[Taco John]

Yeah... We have an agreement w/ the Iraqi gov't... So even if he gets elected, a withdrawal in 18 months is basically a moot point



We don't have an agreement with the Iraqi government. It fell through. The Iraqis cut off the discussion because they said the agreement didn't respect Iraqi soverignty.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25135814/

[Taco John]

Obama was in favor of the war in 04.

This is a pretty gross distortion of the truth. Did you do it on purpose, or do you really believe what you wrote?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Obama was in favor of the war in 04.Really, you have a link or just posting BS? You know of course, funding the troops is entirely different than backing aggression and occupation for nation building?

Iraq is a radical religious sh*thole that will remain so no matter what we do there.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

This is a pretty gross distortion of the truth. Did you do it on purpose, or do you really believe what you wrote?

Gross distortions of the truth are the only way people like Jamus can keep their "us and Bush against the world" bubble inflated.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Gross distortions of the truth are the only way people like Jamus can keep their "us and Bush against the world" bubble inflated.You know what LABF, Bush has screwed a lot of sh*t up in 7 years but all you end up doing with your NEVER ending insertion of his name in every post in every thread on this forum is water down your input to basically zero. You almost never respond on topic, no matter what it is without a disclaimer (a Bush disclaimer) and it reflects pretty badly on you as far being taken seriously by anyone. You have the intelligence and knowledge to point out important messages about important topics but can't seem to overcome the Bush obsession that seems to rule you.

And getting into name calling games with posters (usually W*GS) does the exact same thing. One of you two need to see if they can become a little bigger than the other (reply to each other with tact, references, fact and maturity, without the childish crap) to end that constant BS that litters this forum to no end. I'm not pointing fingers at you or him or anyone else over the other but there isn't anyone here doesn't see it.

I have my doubts that you can get past your emotional roadblocks and one track mind here but had to say it, it needed saying.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You know what LABF, Bush has screwed a lot of sh*t up in 7 years but all you end up doing with your NEVER ending insertion of his name in every post in every thread on this forum is water down your input to basically zero. You almost never respond on topic, no matter what it is without a disclaimer (a Bush disclaimer) and it reflects pretty badly on you as far being taken seriously by anyone. You have the intelligence and knowledge to point out important messages about important topics but can't seem to overcome the Bush obsession that seems to rule you.

You completely miss the point, I think.

I don't expect anyone on the right (or anyone who is still covering for Bush) to take me seriously. Are you kidding me? :rofl:

I gave you credit for being more perceptive than that.

Nothing is going to change these people's minds. Even if Christ Himself descended on a cloud and announced that I was correct in everything I've ever said on this board, these people would just give Him the finger. I thought you, of all people, understood that much.

As for responding on topic, all I can say is "been there/done that - a million times since 2000 (first on the DPO and then here.) Don't you ever get tired of having to repeat yourself? Don't you get sick of newbs asking you to provide material you posted (several times, in some instances) four years ago?

At this juncture, no one should have to respond (ad infinitum) to most of the topics presented by the Bush minions insofar as the latter have already been discredited a hundred times over. Once again, I gave you credit for being able to see this.

Therefore, I see this forum mostly as entertainment and as a chance to exercise the privilege of speaking my mind - with no attachment to whether anyone agrees with me or "takes me seriously" or not. I couldn't give a sh*t less.

BTW, as for your comment about inserting Bush's name at every opportunity - are you kidding me?

News flash: If you want to win in November then you had best be mentioning Bush's name and reminding people about his record at every opportunity too!

It's the GOP's strategy to push Bush and his record as far away from the discussion and our collective consciousness as possible. The neocons need nothing more than for Americans to forget all about Bush - it's their only hope!

So, if you want four years of McSame, then keep busting my chops.


And getting into name calling games with posters (usually W*GS) does the exact same thing. One of you two need to see if they can become a little bigger than the other (reply to each other with tact, references, fact and maturity, without the childish crap) to end that constant BS that litters this forum to no end. I'm not pointing fingers at you or him or anyone else over the other but there isn't anyone here doesn't see it.

1) I have W*GS on ignore.

2) If you were really paying attention, you would realize that W*GS initiates the name-calling and personal attacks 99% of the time (and you know me - I'm not the 'turn the other cheek' type.)

If you want to lecture someone about tact and maturity then you should address Tourette's Boy here - not me.

I have my doubts that you can get past your emotional roadblocks and one track mind here but had to say it, it needed saying.

Wow - when did you become so arrogant and condescending? (Didn't want to go there, but it needed saying.)

[W*GS]

1) I have W*GS on ignore.

Yeah, right.

2) If you were really paying attention, you would realize that W*GS initiates the name-calling and personal attacks 99% of the time (and you know me - I'm not the 'turn the other cheek' type.)

You poor dear. You're never responsible - just reactionary, right?

You lie so much you don't even realize when you're doing it, despite the fact that everyone else does.

If you want to lecture someone about tact and maturity then you should address Tourette's Boy here - not me.

...and with this comment, you entirely miss BB's point.

Heaven forfend you take responsibility for your own behavior; much easier to deflect to me and avoid any hint of accountability!

The above is why your demands for accountability and responsibility from politicians ring so hollow - you don't follow those principles yourself. Just one more reason you're a hypocrite.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

You completely miss the point, I think.No, but you just did.


1) I have W*GS on ignore. But you still feel you have to reply to EVERY one of his posts.

2) If you were really paying attention, you would realize that W*GS initiates the name-calling and personal attacks 99% of the time (and you know me - I'm not the 'turn the other cheek' type.)Exactly my point, neither of you have the ability to get past yourselves.

If you want to lecture someone about tact and maturity then you should address Tourette's Boy here - not me.Neither of you are "better" than the other when it comes to acting like children.

Wow - when did you become so arrogant and condescending? When you two started polluting this forum to the point that most people won't come here or can't participate in threads because of never ending juvenile BS that permeates almost every thread.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

But you still feel you have to reply to EVERY one of his posts.

"Every" one of his posts?

Christ, that's the same sort of hyperbole I'm used to hearing from the rightards.

I have him on ignore - how can I respond to "every" one of his posts?

The only time I see his posts is when someone else quotes him.


Neither of you are "better" than the other when it comes to acting like children.

If this is your perception then your powers of observation leave a lot to be desired.

If you can't tell the difference between W*GS' style, i.e., his constant, vitriolic name-calling, personal attacks, and expletive-laden tantrums, and my typical tone here (which is pretty light-hearted by comparison) then you simply have not been paying attention.

I'll tell you what I can do:

I'll post a sample of W*GS' "childish" posts here, and you can tell me if you have ever seen anything even remotely as "child-like" from me in all of my time on this forum.

When you two started polluting this forum to the point that most people won't come here or can't participate in threads because of never ending juvenile BS that permeates almost every thread.

Another BS claim.

"Most people" won't come here?

Last I checked, this forum was just as active as ever.

In fact, there have been so many new members posting here lately I'm having trouble keeping track of them.

"Juvenile" to me is the sort of whining you are doing here, i.e., arguing that you are unable to participate in discussions on this forum simply because one or two other people aren't behaving the way you want them to.

My advice: Either ixnay on the control issues (you can't change other people - you can only change yourself) or put me on ignore.

[W*GS]

LABF, you've got the "poor me, pity me" act down pat.

It takes two to tango, dearie...

[Bronco_Beerslug]

My advice: Either ixnay on the control issues (you can't change other people - you can only change yourself) or put me on ignore.My advice to you would be grow a pair, get beyond yourself and quit the pissing contests with W*GS that destroy a high percentage of threads around here. Same goes for him. It's not a problem for that kind of stuff to go on occasionally for you or me or anyone else but for you two it's constant.

As for "changing" you or W&GS maybe someone else here will change things if you two continue your never ending BS and remove both of you.


It takes two to tango, dearie...That's the problem and you're no better than him when it comes to trashing threads with your juvenile BS with him.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

My advice to you would be grow a pair, get beyond yourself and quit the pissing contests with W*GS that destroy a high percentage of threads around here. Same goes for him. It's not a problem for that kind of stuff to go on occasionally for you or me or anyone else but for you two it's constant.

As for "changing" you or W&GS maybe someone else here will change things if you two continue your never ending BS and remove both of you.

That's the problem and you're no better than him when it comes to trashing threads with your juvenile BS with him.

"Grow a pair?" Maybe you just need to grow a thicker skin.

In any event, there you go with another attempt to force others to behave and interact in ways you deem appropriate.

That's not how life works, friend.

Your insinuation about "removing" people reminds me of the same sort of mentality exhibited by so many right-wingers on this forum before Bush began his fall from grace, i.e., their constant efforts to get people whose input they didn't like banned. I'm sure you remember those days.

When you could simply and easily put both W*GS and myself on ignore then there really is no excuse for this kind of complaining.

[kappys]

I will be shocked if Obama actually withdraws all the troops in Iraq.

We are building a giant embassy and series of bases there with the understanding that our military can strike any near by country we choose.

That 4 year of horrific violence and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths have quashed many of the rebel elements is not surprising. Typically violence is an effective means of instituting a colonial regime.

[Cito Pelon]

I'm not convinced America's future is tied completely to 'success' or a 'win' in Iraq.

Stay and it's a drain on the economy, and the region will still be unstable. Withdraw and the region is no more unstable than it has been for all of recorded history.

It's kind of a wash, either option is crap. My opinion is all you can do is try to keep the pot from boiling over in the MidEast. Don't pour too much money into it, it's wasted, the pot will continue to be at boiling point 500 years from now.

[W*GS]

http://media.economist.com/images/20080614/D2408WW0.jpg