McCain's embarrassing assertions on the Iraq surge

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Even military leaders involved in last year's troop escalation agree that the prospect of U.S. withdrawal is the main reason violence has ebbed.

http://images.salon.com/opinion/conason/2008/07/25/mccain_and_iraq/story.jpg

By Joe Conason

July 25, 2008 | "The surge worked."

So insistently do the media's mainstream and conservative commentators repeat the Iraq success meme -- echoing the mantra of George W. Bush and John McCain -- that to probe its premises and assumptions is not permitted.

To question the success of last year's troop escalation supposedly implies a negative assessment of the performance of American soldiers and Marines and may even imperil their morale, creating a frame that stifles dissent.

But now McCain himself has inadvertently reopened real debate on the subject by claiming that strategies and tactics used to quell the Sunni insurgency long before the surge troops arrived in Iraq should nevertheless be attributed to the surge. Indeed, the surge is so brilliant and so powerful, according to McCain, that it makes things happen in the past as well as in the present and the future.

That must be what passes for "maverick" thinking, although there are certainly other names for it. For those of us who remain tethered to reality, however, the success of the surge must be measured in a context that accounts for many other factors -- as must the simple assertion that we are winning the war in Iraq as a result of the escalation.


The rebuttals of McCain's embarrassing assertion that the Sunni insurgency's turn toward the U.S. and away from al-Qaida came because of the surge have been ample and devastating. His badly skewed sense of time and events has raised fresh doubts about his fitness for the presidency, since he was either incapable of comprehending contemporary facts or intentionally misleading the public when he told CBS anchor Katie Couric that the Anbar awakening "began" during the surge (and that troop escalation enabled the U.S. to protect a Sunni sheik who was actually assassinated during that period).

But aside from that moment of untruth, there are deeper problems in all the airy assertions about the triumph of the surge.

First there is the matter of that shift by the Sunni insurgents, which had nothing to do with the escalation. What changed the minds of the Sunni rebels in Anbar province and elsewhere was a revamped counterinsurgency doctrine that emphasized careful bribery over indiscriminate reprisals -- and that seized upon the growing alienation of the Sunnis from the bullying, murderous leadership of al-Qaida in Iraq. The American military officers who oversaw and implemented that strategy, including Gen. David Petraeus, deserve full credit. Even Petraeus, a strong supporter of the surge, makes very limited claims about its role in bolstering the Sunni turn, however.

In fact, it was the prospect of an early U.S. withdrawal, not the surge, that prompted the Sunni insurgents to change sides, according to the American officers who worked with their leaders. A fascinating article in the current issue of Foreign Affairs by Georgetown professor Colin Kahl and retired Gen. William Odom quotes Marine Maj. Gen. John Allen, who ran the tribal engagement operations in Anbar during 2007, saying that the Democratic sweep in the 2006 midterm elections and the increasing demand for withdrawal by the American public "did not go unnoticed" among the province's Sunni sheiks. "They talked about it all the time." Allen also told Kahl that the Marines exploited those concerns by telling the sheiks: "We are leaving ... We don't know when we are leaving, but we don't have much time, so you [the Anbaris] better get after this." Kahl and Odom write that "the risk that U.S. forces would leave pushed the Sunnis to cut a deal to protect their interests while they still could." They also quote Maj. Niel Smith, the operations officer at the U.S. Army and Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Center, and Col. Sean MacFarland, commander of U.S. forces in Ramadi during that crucial period, who wrote a long article on the Anbar awakening in the journal Military Review. "A growing concern that the U.S. would leave Iraq and leave the Sunnis defenseless against Al-Qaeda and Iranian-supported militias," they recalled, "made these younger [tribal] leaders [who led the awakening] open to our overtures."

There is no doubt that the surge has coincided with diminishing violence in Iraq, although kidnappings and bombings continue daily. As many critics have pointed out, surge proponents always compare the present period with the worst months of 2006 and 2007 -- and the arrival of 30,000 troops is not necessarily why the killing has ebbed.

Perhaps the most plausible reason is that there are many fewer Iraqis to kill in the places where the worst violence occurred, because so many of them have abandoned their homes or left the country altogether. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees estimates that roughly 5 million Iraqis have fled, with nearly half of them now living in Syria, Jordan or other neighboring states. Others belong to the cohort known as the "internally displaced," who have sought refuge from the militias "cleansing" Baghdad in either the northern or southern provinces. When there isn't anybody left to kill, the murder statistics tend to improve.

Another fortunate coincidence was the decision of Muqtada al-Sadr, the rebel Shiite leader, to order his militia leaders to stand down in August 2007, just as the surge troops were arriving. That cease-fire broke down last spring in southern Iraq but was then reinstated, in part at the instigation of Iran and in part because of Sadr's own political ambitions.

Why conditions became better in Iraq is a crucial issue not only because it may affect the outcome of the U.S. presidential election but, more important, because it indicates the best way out. For McCain and Bush, proving the success of the surge is important because that means the occupation must continue. For the overwhelming majority of Americans, including Barack Obama, that is an unsustainable option.

What we should learn from the history of the surge is that only the prod of withdrawal, rather than indefinite escalation, can persuade the Iraqis to defend themselves as a sovereign state.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2008/07/25/mccain_and_iraq/index.html?source=rss&aim=/opinion/conason

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

<center> http://www.bartcop.com/mccain-wheels-off-708.jpg
</center>

[Rohirrim]

Here's your surge:
Perhaps the most plausible reason is that there are many fewer Iraqis to kill in the places where the worst violence occurred, because so many of them have abandoned their homes or left the country altogether. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees estimates that roughly 5 million Iraqis have fled, with nearly half of them now living in Syria, Jordan or other neighboring states. Others belong to the cohort known as the "internally displaced," who have sought refuge from the militias "cleansing" Baghdad in either the northern or southern provinces. When there isn't anybody left to kill, the murder statistics tend to improve.

Just what we need in the White House; Another stubborn, uninformed, incurious, ignorant man.

Four more years!

[The Lone Bolt]

The American military officers who oversaw and implemented that strategy, including Gen. David Petraeus, deserve full credit.

Weren't you earlier claiming that this was "General Betray-Us" who was "cooking the books" and lying about the decline of violence in Iraq?

[Rohirrim]

Indeed, the surge is so brilliant and so powerful, according to McCain, that it makes things happen in the past as well as in the present and the future.

Hilarious! That's a good line.

[Bob]

I know that the left have invested heavily in America doing poorly in this war, but spin all you want the surge has been working to reduce American deaths and create a tad more stability there. If it wasn’t working, all we would hear is about is how weak, we are and how noble and crafty our enemy is.
In all honesty -- If I was a terrorist I will leave Iraq too ... I would suspect that like any cancer they will retreat, and pop up elsewhere. Kinda like “Whack a Mole” -- that admittedly makes it difficult. I guess McCain and Obama both want to whack them in Afghanistan, but if we crush them there, then what? We repeat the process over and over, and spend billions doing so. If we knew how to spend money more carefully at home that would be sustainable, but eventually any war that is fought carefully is more expensive and last longer. In WWII we did horrific things, but we decided, and the media decided that we were going to almost anything to win, including dropping the A bomb. It might just be worth the money to fight terrorists wherever they are but as far as I am concerned we have run out of money already – if we are broke, we cant fight them there, Or defend ourselves here. THAT, sadly is where we are dangerously getting close to at this point.

Regarding Iraq, we have made progress there (I would not have gone in to begin with) but I cant see how intentionally loosing face helps in a backwards part of the world where that definition of honor is all that matters. Folks see weakness and chip away. I think it is very hard for the folks especially those left of center to crawl into the head religious zealots who don’t hate us because of policies but because we are considered the Great Satan, and are primarily Christian. We stand in their way of the second coming of the Mahdi. For a certain percentage of folks over there -- until we are gone, they will be millions that are willing to blow themselves up to get at that end. How do you fight against that? Do you just try to understand them better, or send them to therapy? I understand that there is ambiguity in the world, but there is no ambiguity for that percentage over there that want conversion or death to the infidel. One group is willing to kill or die for their convictions, the other (us) is barely willing to defend ourselves because we "feel" somehow that we deserve anything that happens to us. Too many Americans feel guilty of some imagined ethical offence, and feel if they were really enlightened they should fill themselves with more self-loathing. Such thinking makes us weak at the core, and we look elsewhere for false ideological/political models to emulate.

[Rohirrim]

I know that the left have invested heavily in America doing poorly in this war, but spin all you want the surge has been working to reduce American deaths and create a tad more stability there. If it wasn’t working, all we would hear is about is how weak, we are and how noble and crafty our enemy is.
.

You basically ignore those writings that you don't agree with, for example:

Perhaps the most plausible reason is that there are many fewer Iraqis to kill in the places where the worst violence occurred, because so many of them have abandoned their homes or left the country altogether. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees estimates that roughly 5 million Iraqis have fled, with nearly half of them now living in Syria, Jordan or other neighboring states. Others belong to the cohort known as the "internally displaced," who have sought refuge from the militias "cleansing" Baghdad in either the northern or southern provinces. When there isn't anybody left to kill, the murder statistics tend to improve.

By "the left" I'm assuming you mean anybody who doesn't drink the Bush Koolaid. Did you ever stop to think that there are some people out there who would prefer the truth over the political hype? What, do you think the Bushies and their cohorts are going to come out all of a sudden and go, "We ****ed up big time. Sorry folks." Hell no. It's like a used car salesman. He knows the car is a piece of ****. That's not his problem. He needs to sell it. That's where his concern begins and ends. All the Bushies want to do now is clear out with their pockets full of cash and leave their disaster in somebody else's lap. Most of the neocon slimeballs have already landed in cushy private industry payback positions. McFlip is playing the Bushie sound-loop on Iraq because he thinks it's a smart thing to play to the Right Wing.

What part of 4000 dead Americans, 10,000 wounded Americans and $1 trillion dollars down the Iraqi toilet don't you get?

Yesterday, a commission reported that we need to fix all our bridges immediately to the tune of $200 billion dollars. We'll have to raise taxes to do that because we're broke. Your hero Bush has ****canned this country for two decades into the future for Iraq.

Was it worth it? Who knows? Someday you can ask your grandkids. Just like some grandkids now might be asking if Vietnam was worth it. Sure. It was to some people. They got rich.

[BroncoBuff]

Weren't you earlier claiming that this was "General Betray-Us" who was "cooking the books" and lying about the decline of violence in Iraq?
That doesn't make this point any less valid...

The worst part about McCain's gaffe - the part that should rightly be humiliating - is that he made the timeline gaffe in the middle of a statement saying "Obama doesn't understand the fundamental reality in Iraq, what's really hapened there, the fact is that The Surge made the Anbar Awakening possible, that's just an historical fact."

So he proved HE doesn't know the facts, while attacking Obama as ... not knowing the facts. I can't imagine a more humiliating context to completely misstate the important timeline of events in a war theater.

And it just so happens that this misunderstanding supports his position on the Surge in particular and Iraq war in general :oyvey:

.

[The Lone Bolt]

That doesn't make this point any less valid...

The worst part about McCain's gaffe - the part that should rightly be humiliating - is that he made the timeline gaffe in the middle of a statement saying "Obama doesn't understand the fundamental reality in Iraq, what's really hapened there, the fact is that The Surge made the Anbar Awakening possible, that's just an historical fact."

So he proved HE doesn't know the facts, while attacking Obama as ... not knowing the facts. I can't imagine a more humiliating context to completely misstate the important timeline of events in a war theater.

And it just so happens that this misunderstanding supports his position on the Surge in particular and Iraq war in general :oyvey:

.

So in other words you also are unwilling to admit that the real liars were Move-On.org.::)

But I agree about McCain. The gaffs are very disturbing.

However even if McCain was senile and dribbling and pooping his underwear he'd still be a more competent POTUS than bush.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

So he proved HE doesn't know the facts, while attacking Obama as ... not knowing the facts. I can't imagine a more humiliating context to completely misstate the important timeline of events in a war theater.


:yep:

And the BushCo cheerleaders are making the same mistake in this discussion.

"Monkey see-monkey do," I guess. :D

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You basically ignore those writings that you don't agree with, for example:


And this:

Even Petraeus, a strong supporter of the surge, makes very limited claims about its role in bolstering the Sunni turn, however.

[Rohirrim]

So in other words you also are unwilling to admit that the real liars were Move-On.org.::)

But I agree about McCain. The gaffs are very disturbing.

However even if McCain was senile and dribbling and pooping his underwear he'd still be a more competent POTUS than bush.

That's an inspiring standard. ;)

[BroncoBuff]

So in other words you also are unwilling to admit that the real liars were Move-On.org.::)

But I agree about McCain. The gaffs are very disturbing.

However even if McCain was senile and dribbling and pooping his underwear he'd still be a more competent POTUS than bush.
I do think moveon.org went too far with that ad ... I don't think Petraeus is playing politics at all, I think like anybody doing a job - in any profession - he wants all the tools and assistance he can get to do the job right.

But he's too close to the situation to form a political opinion about the overall policy with regard to the war. Too close to the situation ... that's always been my reaction when Bush says he "listens" to his generals on the ground. I don't think commanders in the field have any business at all in formulating United States foregn policy ... their job description is much narrower.

Schwartzkopf never opined on the Gulf War politics ... he just did his job in the field. HOWEVER, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Colin Powell in Washington did have policy input. That is how it should be.

.

[Pseudofool]

moveon.org clearly jumped the gun on that ad; it was tactless, wordplay--that used Petraeus as prop to attack Bush; I doubt they thought Patraeus would become a symbol of successful Iraq policy--they were wrong.

None of us have any way knowing what kind of general/politician Patraeus is, but it's clear that eveybody gives him a lots of credit...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

None of us have any way knowing what kind of general/politician Patraeus is, but it's clear that eveybody gives him a lots of credit...

Even Petraeus, a strong supporter of the surge, makes very limited claims about its role in bolstering the Sunni turn, however..

[Bob]

You basically ignore those writings that you don't agree with, for example:

Perhaps the most plausible reason is that there are many fewer Iraqis to kill in the places where the worst violence occurred, because so many of them have abandoned their homes or left the country altogether. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees estimates that roughly 5 million Iraqis have fled, with nearly half of them now living in Syria, Jordan or other neighboring states. Others belong to the cohort known as the "internally displaced," who have sought refuge from the militias "cleansing" Baghdad in either the northern or southern provinces. When there isn't anybody left to kill, the murder statistics tend to improve.

By "the left" I'm assuming you mean anybody who doesn't drink the Bush Koolaid. Did you ever stop to think that there are some people out there who would prefer the truth over the political hype? What, do you think the Bushies and their cohorts are going to come out all of a sudden and go, "We ****ed up big time. Sorry folks." Hell no. It's like a used car salesman. He knows the car is a piece of ****. That's not his problem. He needs to sell it. That's where his concern begins and ends. All the Bushies want to do now is clear out with their pockets full of cash and leave their disaster in somebody else's lap. Most of the neocon slimeballs have already landed in cushy private industry payback positions. McFlip is playing the Bushie sound-loop on Iraq because he thinks it's a smart thing to play to the Right Wing.

What part of 4000 dead Americans, 10,000 wounded Americans and $1 trillion dollars down the Iraqi toilet don't you get?

Yesterday, a commission reported that we need to fix all our bridges immediately to the tune of $200 billion dollars. We'll have to raise taxes to do that because we're broke. Your hero Bush has ****canned this country for two decades into the future for Iraq.

Was it worth it? Who knows? Someday you can ask your grandkids. Just like some grandkids now might be asking if Vietnam was worth it. Sure. It was to some people. They got rich.

I know it is hard to keep people stright around here, but we probably have more in common then you would think. I do think it is worth it to win the conflict we are now in, but admittedly worry about the whack a mole approach to the problem. Bush has spent us to death, but I dont see anyone who I believe (except for Ron Paul) that would spent less and get us out of this mess. My point may be simply, that as we committed to Iraq I feel a responsbility to finish the job -- also it seems that the Dems (in general) were too quick to give up. Now that it might not end in a bigger bloodbath, we all should be grateful.

You know what I hate? -- It is the inability of the right or left to call out their own club. Bush has been Embarrassment to those few fiscal conservatives out there. McCain is horrible on the border, and has an ecomic plan that will likely sink us (cap and trade idiocy, just like Obama.) But man, now the Obama is the Choosen One there are few Dems willing to call him out on the issues -- that goes for the OM.

I disagreed with going into Iraq, but I would never be willing to help the enemy by assuming too frequently that we are always the evil entity – the media seemed to be against the troops to support a party that seemed to want us to do poorly (so the Donkey party would do better.) I know that war and politics will sadly always be mixed – but if a Dem pres starts a war, I can disagree but I wont be a traitor to those actually fighting it for political gain -- and confuse the troops with the enemy as happened in Vietnam, and as some have tried to do with our troops (think Code Pink.) Those idiots would have kissed Hitlers Boot, and let 6 million more Jews die, to avoid a conflict with. Sometimes war is needed. was this war needed? Nope. But do we need to win now? Yup.

[frerottenextelway]

moveon.org clearly jumped the gun on that ad; it was tactless, wordplay--that used Petraeus as prop to attack Bush; I doubt they thought Patraeus would become a symbol of successful Iraq policy--they were wrong.

None of us have any way knowing what kind of general/politician Patraeus is, but it's clear that eveybody gives him a lots of credit...


Fwiw, Moveon didn't come up with the name, Petraeus's fellow Generals did - to which Moveon then used in their NYT's ad.

[Tombstone RJ]

move-on.org is a whacko leftist site and that is all that really needs to be said. I refuse to even go there because if I did, I'd somehow validate its existence.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Fwiw, Moveon didn't come up with the name, Petraeus's fellow Generals did - to which Moveon then used in their NYT's ad.

That's correct.

The right-wing disinfo slingers also consistently ignore the fact that Petraeus' boss (Admiral William J. Fallon - hardly a Moveon member) called Petraeus an "ass-kissing little chickensh*t."

[frerottenextelway]

move-on.org is a whacko leftist site and that is all that really needs to be said. I refuse to even go there because if I did, I'd somehow validate its existence.

Way to back up your opinion. Let me do the work for you.

What does "the far left" mean? Here's the attitudes of Americans as a whole on these issues:

Iraq War (http://pollingreport.com/iraq.htm):

Do you favor or oppose the U.S. war in Iraq?

Favor Oppose Unsure
30 68 2

If you had to choose, would you rather see the next president keep the same number of troops in Iraq that are currently stationed there, or would you rather see the next president remove most U.S. troops in Iraq within a few months of taking office?

Keep Same Remove Most Unsure
33 64 3


Stem Cell research (http://pollingreport.com/science.htm#Stem):

There is a type of medical research that involves using special cells, called embryonic stem cells, that might be used in the future to treat or cure many diseases, such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, diabetes, and spinal cord injury. It involves using human embryos discarded from fertility clinics that no longer need them. Some people say that using human embryos for research is wrong. Do you favor or oppose using discarded embryos to conduct stem cell research to try to find cures for the diseases I mentioned?

Favor Oppose Unsure
73 19 8



Abortion (http://pollingreport.com/abortion.htm):

Do you think abortion should be legal in all cases, legal in most cases, illegal in most cases, or illegal in all cases?

Legal: All Most Illegal: Most All Unsure
19 38 24 13 6



Minimum wage (http://www.pollingreport.com/work.htm):

Do you favor or oppose an increase in the minimum wage?

Favor Oppose Unsure
80 18 2


The Moveon and DailyKos "fringe left" reflects the majority opinion of this country on pretty much every issue, yet people like you continue to pretend that it's the far left, the lunatic fringe because it's been repeated enough times by losers like Bill O'Reilly. The nuts and the sheep are still unwilling to admit the obvious... liberalism is mainstream America.

[Tombstone RJ]

Way to back up your opinion. Let me do the work for you.

What does "the far left" mean? Here's the attitudes of Americans as a whole on these issues:

Iraq War (http://pollingreport.com/iraq.htm):



Stem Cell research (http://pollingreport.com/science.htm#Stem):




Abortion (http://pollingreport.com/abortion.htm):




Minimum wage (http://www.pollingreport.com/work.htm):



The Moveon and DailyKos "fringe left" reflects the majority opinion of this country on pretty much every issue, yet people like you continue to pretend that it's the far left, the lunatic fringe because it's been repeated enough times by losers like Bill O'Reilly. The nuts and the sheep are still unwilling to admit the obvious... liberalism is mainstream America.

Sorry, I don't cowtow to the far right either. So, I'm not sure what the extreme right believes because I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh either...

[frerottenextelway]

Sorry, I don't cowtow to the far right either. So, I'm not sure what the extreme right believes because I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh either...

So, you don't know what anyone believes - you just know they're all wrong. Excellent!

The fact is - as shown above - the positions of the Moveon/DailyKos crowd is the same positions held by mainstream America - whether you dig that or not.

[Pseudofool]

I'd be really resistant to lump Moveon with DailyKos. DailyKos is a diaried liberal website, that often breaks news and shares personal stories rather than spread propaganda as Moveon does.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The fact is - as shown above - the positions of the Moveon/DailyKos crowd is the same positions held by mainstream America - whether you dig that or not.

Exactly.

People like W*GS, Texan Bob, et al, don't seem to understand that they represent the right-wing fringe in America.

[Rank&File]

That's correct.

The right-wing disinfo slingers also consistently ignore the fact that Petraeus' boss (Admiral William J. Fallon - hardly a Moveon member) called Petraeus an "ass-kissing little chickensh*t."


So did you think the ad was a good one then?

Hello all by the way, I stumbled across this site today and found a pretty lively bunch. I will be hanging on the general discussion for the most part, but a drop in for a guilty pleasure from time to time ain't all bad right?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The Moveon and DailyKos "fringe left" reflects the majority opinion of this country on pretty much every issue, yet people like you continue to pretend that it's the far left, the lunatic fringe because it's been repeated enough times by losers like Bill O'Reilly. The nuts and the sheep are still unwilling to admit the obvious... liberalism is mainstream America.

QFT! :thumbsup: ^5

[Rank&File]

So did you think the ad was a good one then?

Hello all by the way, I stumbled across this site today and found a pretty lively bunch. I will be hanging on the general discussion for the most part, but a drop in for a guilty pleasure from time to time ain't all bad right?

Don't bother with a response. I just finished reading some of your handy work on other threads. Good day.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

???

[BroncoBuff]

Don't bother with a response. I just finished reading some of your handy work on other threads. Good day.

http://www.reallyfunnypictures.co.uk/general/pics/23.02.06/chillpill.jpg

Generic version:
http://www.tail-waggers.com/images/dogs/toys/chill_pill.jpg

.

[Tombstone RJ]

So, you don't know what anyone believes - you just know they're all wrong. Excellent!

The fact is - as shown above - the positions of the Moveon/DailyKos crowd is the same positions held by mainstream America - whether you dig that or not.

No, I just tend to go onto the internet and look for news from different sites. The AP, Rueters and other types of news sources like the BBC (which can be considered liberal) are where I'll go to research an issue.

I don't like the sites that have an agenda, whether that agenda is to the far right or the far left.


As for DailyKos, I've never heard of that site.

[gunns]

Don't bother with a response. I just finished reading some of your handy work on other threads. Good day.

The WPR room is probably not the best place to introduce yourself because most of us are hot about some topic or another.

But welcome! Kick your shoes off, put the lounger back, and enjoy your stay!

[cutthemdown]

I could care less why things are better I'm just glad they are better. McCain deserves very little credit the credit goes to the troops and the Iraqis who decided to try harder. Hell even the ones who decided to stop fighting in hopes we leave. They deserve credit also.

Obama deserves none also though he would have pulled out when things were not so rosy.

Who cares though as long as we can pullout. Ending this mess is all I have ever wanted, the sooner the better.

[BroncoBuff]

I could care less why things are better I'm just glad they are better. McCain deserves very little credit the credit goes to the troops and the Iraqis who decided to try harder. Hell even the ones who decided to stop fighting in hopes we leave. They deserve credit also.

McCain and these silly Repubs insisting and insisting on Obama "giving them credit" for the surge "working," after all these years of ineptitude and failure, reminds me of a gambler who drops $1000 the first day in Vegas ... then $1000 the day after ... then another $1000 the third day. And his wife is screaming at him "Stop Gambling"!" But he goes and drops another $1000 on day four ... then another $1000 on day five .... they fight and fight, but he refuses to stop gambling! He drops yet another $1000 on day six. Then finally on Day 7 - he WINS $1000!

And he goes to his wife and says, "Admit it! I won BIG! And you didn't think gambling was a good idea, admit you were wrong, admit I won!"
.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

These Repubs insisting and insisting on "getting credit" for the surge "working" after all these years of ineptitude and failure, reminds me of a gambler who drops $1000 the first day in Vegas ... then $1000 the day after ... then another $1000 the third day. And his wife is screaming at him "Stop Gambling"!" But he goes and drops another $1000 on day four ... then another $1000 on day five .... they fight and fight, but he refuses to stop gambling! He drops yet another $1000 on day six. Then finally on Day 7 - he WINS $1000!

And he goes to his wife and says, "Admit it! I won BIG! And you didn't think gambling was a good idea, admit you were wrong, admit I won!"

Ha!

Great analogy!

[cutthemdown]

like i said labf can take credit for all i care. Things are getting better in Iraq, oil is dropping, I'm pretty stoked about that. It's good for all of us. Let the politicians quibble over who gets the credit, I could care less.

[cutthemdown]

Soon the left may have to govern, I hope they can make the switch from antagonist to leader.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Soon the left may have to govern, I hope they can make the switch from antagonist to leader.

Soon you may have to use your brain - I hope you can make the switch from Rush Limbaugh to reality.

[The Lone Bolt]

Ha!

Great analogy!

Very poor analogy actually. This analogy depicts a person doing exactly the same thing over and over again and producing results with dumb luck. The "surge" strategy represented not just an increase in troops but a completely different approach to their use, ergo not doing the same thing over and over.

[Rohirrim]

Very poor analogy actually. This analogy depicts a person doing exactly the same thing over and over again and producing results with dumb luck. The "surge" strategy represented not just an increase in troops but a completely different approach to their use, ergo not doing the same thing over and over.

But again, as numerous analysts have pointed out, the "success" of the surge may be nothing more that a coincidence of unrelated events, ie. some areas of Baghdad quieted down simply because one side of antagonists had been eradicted or fled the country. I remember reading one retired general's assessment of the surge as being similar to pushing down on a balloon. Where you push down you see results but a bulge happens elsewhere. Where there was a concentration of troops things quieted down. When they left, things went back to normal, normal not being good.

Those who think things in Iraq are winding down should read this: http://www.amazon.com/Churchills-Folly-Winston-Churchill-Created/dp/078671557X/ref=pd_sim_b_2

It ain't over til it's over.

[Tombstone RJ]

Very poor analogy actually. This analogy depicts a person doing exactly the same thing over and over again and producing results with dumb luck. The "surge" strategy represented not just an increase in troops but a completely different approach to their use, ergo not doing the same thing over and over.

Agreed, the analogy shows inflexibility whereas the Iraq situation shows an adapting strategy to try and stabilize the government.

Regardless, the sooner our troops can leave Iraq the better, and I think everyone here can agree to that. The seeds of democracy have been planted and it's up to the Iraq leadership to tend the garden and harvest the fruit. They have two choices really, either fight to maintain what has been established, or to give in and let the extremists tear down all their hard work.

I think its safe to say that once the US withdraws, the real test will start.

[BroncoBuff]

oil is dropping, I'm pretty stoked about that.
You have GOT to be kidding ...

You're pointing to a two-three week "trending down" in oil prices as something to be stoked about? Sure it's good, but how shortsighted is it to point to that minor drop as a "plus," when the price at the pump has doubled the past year?
.

[The Lone Bolt]

But again, as numerous analysts have pointed out, the "success" of the surge may be nothing more that a coincidence of unrelated events, ie. some areas of Baghdad quieted down simply because one side of antagonists had been eradicted or fled the country. I remember reading one retired general's assessment of the surge as being similar to pushing down on a balloon. Where you push down you see results but a bulge happens elsewhere. Where there was a concentration of troops things quieted down. When they left, things went back to normal, normal not being good.

Those who think things in Iraq are winding down should read this: http://www.amazon.com/Churchills-Folly-Winston-Churchill-Created/dp/078671557X/ref=pd_sim_b_2

It ain't over til it's over.

While I agree that there are probably other factors, the fact remains that the decrease in violence began just after the surge was completely implemented:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/blogphotos/Blog_Iraq_Casualties_January_2008.jpg

http://www.zen111450.zen.co.uk/casualty_monitor/iraq-surge-trend-march08-lowres.JPG

That's quite a coincidence, wouldn't you say?

[BroncoBuff]

Very poor analogy actually. This analogy depicts a person doing exactly the same thing over and over again and producing results with dumb luck.
Agreed, the analogy shows inflexibility whereas the Iraq situation shows an adapting strategy to try and stabilize the government.
Okay, I'll add an element to my analogy:

Days 1 thru 6 he was playing roullette, dropped 6 grand, and sufered the recrimination of wife wife and kids.

But on Day 7 he had a NEW STRATEGY! Blackjack! He won $1000, and berated his wife to ADMIT I WON! ADMIT the Blackjack "strategy" worked, and ergo, the idea to gamble was right all along! ADMIT IT!

There.
.

[The Lone Bolt]

Okay, I'll add an element to my analogy:

Days 1 thru 6 he was playing roullette, dropped 6 grand, and sufered the recrimination of wife wife and kids.

But on Day 7 he had a NEW STRATEGY! Blackjack! He won $1000, and berated his wife to ADMIT I WON! ADMIT the Blackjack "strategy" worked, and ergo, the idea to gamble was right all along! ADMIT IT!

There.
.

If he's a skilled blackjack player, maybe he's right.

[Tombstone RJ]

If he's a skilled blackjack player, maybe he's right.

Game, set, match. :thumbs:

[BroncoBuff]

Well, I dunno about skill ... but the cards sure fell into place for the surge: Anbar Awakening; ultimate thinning of Sunni civilian population; Shi'a militia ceasefires.

Maybe the analogy is: first 6 days, no strategy at blackjack, 7th day he counts the face cards and sticks with a minimum/maximum limit for hits. Either way, the point is that after the first 6 days, he loses the high ground to demand "credit" for anything. All the Surge did was 'break even' at best ... after years of incompetence, death and strife. And stop-loss and extended tours. And giving bin-Laden (the REAL criminal) a free pass ...
.

[BroncoBuff]

Game, set, match. :thumbs:
You cannot possibly - in a million years - truly think that.

No political persuason or position is valid if it suppresses intellect. And your intellect should tell you something is VERY wrong in that: We were NOT greeted as liberators; Iraqi oil did NOT pay for the invasion; Sunni and Shi's DID in fact have a history of violence; the greatest criminal in U.S. history is still at large on GW's watch; and our economic house is in worse shape than since the 1930s.

Now ... tell me again how great that surge is? :~ohyah!:
.

[Rohirrim]

While I agree that there are probably other factors, the fact remains that the decrease in violence began just after the surge was completely implemented:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/blogphotos/Blog_Iraq_Casualties_January_2008.jpg

http://www.zen111450.zen.co.uk/casualty_monitor/iraq-surge-trend-march08-lowres.JPG

That's quite a coincidence, wouldn't you say?

The surge may have been a success on a small scale in an overarching strategy (or is that strategery?) that is a dismal failure, and was doomed to fail from the start, mainly because it is based on false presumptions. As the book I alluded to points out, there really is no such thing as "Iraq" just as there was no such thing as "Yugoslavia." They are two conglomerations of disparate cultures that were held together by strong dictators (Tito and Saddam). Iraq was a colonialist manufacture.

Iraq must decide what it is going to be in the future. For the U.S. to keep a military presence in Iraq thinking they will somehow determine the outcome is as ludicrous as if the French decided to assist the U.S. in Reconstruction. No doubt the Bush cabal would somehow like to ensure that their oil cronies get to hold onto their new oilfield contracts for eternity, but in all likelihood they would require the security of U.S. armed forces in perpetuity.

Arguing about the success of the surge is like arguing about the use of river patrol boats in the Mekong Delta. Sure it worked. But it was pointless.

[Tombstone RJ]

Well, I dunno about skill ... but the cards sure fell into place for the surge: Anbar Awakening; ultimate thinning of Sunni civilian population; Shi'a militia ceasefires.

Maybe the analogy is: first 6 days, no strategy at blackjack, 7th day he counts the face cards and sticks with a minimum/maximum limit for hits. Either way, the point is that after the first 6 days, he loses the high ground to demand "credit" for anything. All the Surge did was 'break even' at best ... after years of incompetence, death and strife. And stop-loss and extended tours. And giving bin-Laden (the REAL criminal) a free pass ...
.

You keep changing your analogy. That ain't fair! That's akin the the US changing it's strategy in order to get the best results.

Now, there is a good analogy about your analogy...

[cutthemdown]

You have GOT to be kidding ...

You're pointing to a two-three week "trending down" in oil prices as something to be stoked about? Sure it's good, but how shortsighted is it to point to that minor drop as a "plus," when the price at the pump has doubled the past year?
.

I'm no expert in oil commodities that's is for sure and I wasn't trying to say that i felt it was all good now. I did read an article though that said if oil starts to trade at 120 a barrel that will trigger another drop to maybe around 110 by the first of year.

Just seems like good news to me sorry

[cutthemdown]

Soon you may have to use your brain - I hope you can make the switch from Rush Limbaugh to reality.

Why would I have to use my brain, the take care of you party is about ready to take over.

[Tombstone RJ]

You cannot possibly - in a million years - truly think that.

No political persuason or position is valid if it suppresses intellect. And your intellect should tell you something is VERY wrong in that: We were NOT greeted as liberators; Iraqi oil did NOT pay for the invasion; Sunni and Shi's DID in fact have a history of violence; the greatest criminal in U.S. history is still at large on GW's watch; and our economic house is in worse shape than since the 1930s.

Now ... tell me again how great that surge is? :~ohyah!:
.


I never said anything about the surge, I agree that there are many different factors that have attributed to the surge working, but that doesn't stop the fact that the surge is working.

We'll all have to wait and see if democracy takes hold in Iraq, and that test will come only after the US has left.

[BroncoBuff]

I agree that there are many different factors that have attributed to the surge working, but that doesn't stop the fact that the surge is working.
I'll pretty much buy that sentence ... WITH the proviso that 4+ years of death and suffering caused by this administration's stubborn incompetence preceded it :thumbs:
.

[Drek]

I never said anything about the surge, I agree that there are many different factors that have attributed to the surge working, but that doesn't stop the fact that the surge is working.

We'll all have to wait and see if democracy takes hold in Iraq, and that test will come only after the US has left.

If the surge can encompass things that happened months before it was even proposed, let alone enacted, then yes, the surge is working.

Unfortunately it can't.

The change in strategy regarding Iraq appears to be working. The surge is just one part of that. McCain is trying to lump the whole ball of wax into the surge vote to make himself look good when in reality a handful of other factors were equally, if not moreso, important.

[Bob]

Soon you may have to use your brain - I hope you can make the switch from Rush Limbaugh to reality.

Yes, like Code Pink, and Internet versions of what happened on 911? Political orientation does not define intelligence -- too many go through all kinds of mental gymnastics to come to previously drawn conclusions. It doesn’t make them smart or flexible; it often just means they cannot change their opinion when presented facts because of fear.

I think I just described the far right and far left that cant give credit when its due.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yes, like Code Pink, and Internet versions of what happened on 911?

Does Code Pink have the same track record for lies and hypocrisy as Limbaugh?

Examples, please.

And are you suggesting that if you read something about 9/11 on the Internet that it is automatically suspect just because it was found on the Internet?

Wouldn't that apply equally to both sides of the debate, then?


Political orientation does not define intelligence -- too many go through all kinds of mental gymnastics to come to previously drawn conclusions. It doesn’t make them smart or flexible; it often just means they cannot change their opinion when presented facts because of fear.


You just described Bush and his remaining followers to a 'T.' ^5

[Rohirrim]

Saying "the surge is working" is the same thing as saying "the Edsel had a nice interior." ;D

[TailgateNut]

Saying "the surge is working" is the same thing as saying "the Edsel had a nice interior." ;D



LOL , but there were/ are buyers who thought/ think it's a good "deal".

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

LOL , but there were/ are buyers who thought/ think it's a good "deal".

:giggle:

Would those be the same buyers who say "praise Jesus - the free enterprise system works" everytime they fill up their gas tanks, by any chance?

[Bob]

The surge may have been a success on a small scale in an overarching strategy (or is that strategery?) that is a dismal failure, and was doomed to fail from the start, mainly because it is based on false presumptions. As the book I alluded to points out, there really is no such thing as "Iraq" just as there was no such thing as "Yugoslavia." They are two conglomerations of disparate cultures that were held together by strong dictators (Tito and Saddam). Iraq was a colonialist manufacture.

Iraq must decide what it is going to be in the future. For the U.S. to keep a military presence in Iraq thinking they will somehow determine the outcome is as ludicrous as if the French decided to assist the U.S. in Reconstruction. No doubt the Bush cabal would somehow like to ensure that their oil cronies get to hold onto their new oilfield contracts for eternity, but in all likelihood they would require the security of U.S. armed forces in perpetuity.

Arguing about the success of the surge is like arguing about the use of river patrol boats in the Mekong Delta. Sure it worked. But it was pointless.

If people like you were in charge in WWII we would have kicked back and let more Jews die, and England get bombed into non-exsistance. The weaker one is in dealing with teh throat cutters, the more likely the violence will continue. Do you think that Germany and Japan after a few punches rolled over and gave up? It was not until they were crushed, and a second A-bomb was dropped that efforts could be made to rebuild, but fighting a "kind war" usually results in more bloodshed, and never destroys the will of those you are fighting. All the far left has spouted since the conflict started was how we cant win, the surge cant work, well it has -- the numbers show it. You could loose a war with Micronesia, be convincing Americans that we are evil, everyone else are perfect.

[Bob]

Does Code Pink have the same track record for lies and hypocrisy as Limbaugh?

Examples, please.

And are you suggesting that if you read something about 9/11 on the Internet that it is automatically suspect just because it was found on the Internet?

Wouldn't that apply equally to both sides of the debate, then?



You just described Bush and his remaining followers to a 'T.' ^5

Have they protested at our troops funerals? Or is that some other idiotic group?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

If people like you were in charge in WWII we would have kicked back and let more Jews die, and England get bombed into non-exsistance. ....

OMG - you're not seriously trying to compare Bush's Operation Iraqi Handjob to WWII, are you?

:oyvey:

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Have they protested at our troops funerals? Or is that some other idiotic group?

I don't know - you tell me (you're the one making the claim.)

Link?

[Bob]

I don't know - you tell me (you're the one making the claim.)

Link?

Nope, it was a weird religious group that throught we were punished for Gays in America... Code Pink is soo much better though.... but I guess it is just that they care so much.

Washington (CNSNews.com) - The Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., the current home of hundreds of wounded veterans from the war in Iraq, has been the target of weekly anti-war demonstrations since March. The protesters hold signs that read "Maimed for Lies" and "Enlist here and die for Halliburton." [SNIP]

Among the props used by the protesters are mock caskets, lined up on the sidewalk to represent the death toll in Iraq.

Code Pink Women for Peace, one of the groups backing anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan's vigil outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford Texas, organizes the protests at Walter Reed as well.

Most of the demonstrations have been held on Friday evenings, a popular time for the family members of wounded soldiers to visit the hospital.

But the anti-war activists were unapologetic when asked whether they considered such signs as "Maimed for Lies" offensive to wounded war veterans and their families.

"I am more offended by the fact that many were maimed for life. I am more offended by the fact that they (wounded veterans) have been kept out of the news," said Kevin McCarron, a member of the anti-war group Veterans for Peace.

And I am offended that such people would rather step on wounded soldiers and their families to get to George Bush; soldiers that volunteered for military service, knowing what fate might await them. But, as I reel in my impulse to anger and adopt a clinical viewpoint, I’m forced to conclude that Code Pink’s actions are just about the most self-defeating ones they could take toward their own admitted goal, stopping the war.

[Bob]

OMG - you're not seriously trying to compare Bush's Operation Iraqi Handjob to WWII, are you?

:oyvey:

If the media in WWII had the same influence and political mindset as they do now, we likely would have had our will eroded, and could have eventually lost. Back then, the American people would have not stood for it though ...
there were too many folks that were not filled with self-loathing.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Nope, it was a weird religious group that throught we were punished for Gays in America... Code Pink is soo much better though.... but I guess it is just that they care so much.

Washington (CNSNews.com) - The Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., the current home of hundreds of wounded veterans from the war in Iraq, has been the target of weekly anti-war demonstrations since March. The protesters hold signs that read "Maimed for Lies" and "Enlist here and die for Halliburton." [SNIP]

Among the props used by the protesters are mock caskets, lined up on the sidewalk to represent the death toll in Iraq.

Code Pink Women for Peace, one of the groups backing anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan's vigil outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford Texas, organizes the protests at Walter Reed as well.

Most of the demonstrations have been held on Friday evenings, a popular time for the family members of wounded soldiers to visit the hospital.

But the anti-war activists were unapologetic when asked whether they considered such signs as "Maimed for Lies" offensive to wounded war veterans and their families.

"I am more offended by the fact that many were maimed for life. I am more offended by the fact that they (wounded veterans) have been kept out of the news," said Kevin McCarron, a member of the anti-war group Veterans for Peace.

And I am offended that such people would rather step on wounded soldiers and their families to get to George Bush; soldiers that volunteered for military service, knowing what fate might await them. But, as I reel in my impulse to anger and adopt a clinical viewpoint, I’m forced to conclude that Code Pink’s actions are just about the most self-defeating ones they could take toward their own admitted goal, stopping the war.

There's a big difference between a group that claims we're being punished for gays in America and a group that simply wants to end the war/prevent more Americans from being maimed or killed.

If you can't see the difference then you must be wearing some serious partisan blinders.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

If the media in WWII had the same influence and political mindset as they do now, we likely would have had our will eroded, and could have eventually lost.

Are you kidding me?

The media in America served as Bush's cheerleading squad in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.

Dissenting voices were banished from the discussion and labeled "traitorous" or "anti-American."

[Bob]

There's a big difference between a group that claims we're being punished for gays in America and a group that simply wants to end the war/prevent more Americans from being maimed or killed.

If you can't see the difference then you must be wearing some serious partisan blinders.

Different folks yes in terms of what drives them -- but VERY simular in terms of what level they are willing to stoop to in order to make a political point. Code Pink may have the right to protest near Walter Reed, but it is repulsive -- just like the idiots that confused Vietnam War vets (and spit on them) with those they opposed in Washigton.

I think if I saw blatant dishonoring of a member of the military I would have a hard time not expressing myself as forcefully. There are lines when crossed that weaken all of our collective rights & freedoms. I think that some on teh left get confused about who the real enemies are at times, and let that political frustration come out sidwise toward those that have made more sacrifices than just about anyone else in America -- and that includes the religious whackjobs as well.

[Bob]

Are you kidding me?

The media in America served as Bush's cheerleading squad in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.

Dissenting voices were banished from the discussion and labeled "traitorous" or "anti-American."

In the run-up to the Iraq war I remember many in the media expressing concern, I honestly dont have stats on it though. But I do remember that they were not cheerleading him to do it, dissent was not banished -- some where talking about the American bloodbath that was surely coming. I think Bush ran into Iraq pretty damn quickly to avoid more talk about it, before political forces could mobilze and to reduce the amount of prep time Saddam had.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

In the run-up to the Iraq war I remember many in the media expressing concern, I honestly dont have stats on it though. But I do remember that they were not cheerleading him to do it, dissent was not banished -- some where talking about the American bloodbath that was surely coming. I think Bush ran into Iraq pretty damn quickly to avoid more talk about it, before political forces could mobilze and to reduce the amount of prep time Saddam had.

Are you kidding me?

Even the supposedly "liberal" NY Times was forced to publish a public apology for its one-sided reporting of WH propaganda in the run-up to Bush's invasion of Iraq.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Different folks yes in terms of what drives them -- but VERY simular in terms of what level they are willing to stoop to in order to make a political point.

:bs:

A clear majority of Americans (not just liberals or partisans) want America out of Iraq.

The other group, by contrast, is promoting a religious agenda, i.e., it's anti-gay beliefs.



Code Pink may have the right to protest near Walter Reed, but it is repulsive -- just like the idiots that confused Vietnam War vets (and spit on them) with those they opposed in Washigton.


Oh no - you're not going to try to use that "spitting hippies" urban legend again, are you? :oyvey:

[Bob]

:bs:

A clear majority of Americans (not just liberals or partisans) want America out of Iraq.

The other group, by contrast, is promoting a religious agenda, i.e., it's anti-gay beliefs.

Oh no - you're not going to try to use that "spitting hippies" urban legend again, are you? :oyvey:

Its the level of base, discusting things they do and say that are simular -- your right about agendas -- they have very different end-games and agendas. But look how crass they get in order to be noticed. Look at who they dishonor to have media attention drawn to their different causes.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Its the level of base, discusting things they do and say that are simular -- your right about agendas -- they have very different end-games and agendas. But look how crass they get in order to be noticed. Look at who they dishonor to have media attention drawn to their different causes.

"Crass?"

The war protestors are just pointing out the realities of war (something the "liberal" media refuses to do.) Bush and the thugs who profit from this war understand that if the mainstream media were to show what's really going on (like it did during Vietnam) then this thing would have been over a long time ago.

The other group, by contrast, is promoting an agenda of hate and intolerance targeting an entire group of people, viz., gays.

[Bob]

"Crass?"

The war protestors are just pointing out the realities of war (something the "liberal" media refuses to do.) Bush and the thugs who profit from this war understand that if the mainstream media were to show what's really going on (like it did during Vietnam) then this thing would have been over a long time ago.

The other group, by contrast, is promoting an agenda of hate and intolerance targeting an entire group of people, viz., gays.

I am assuming that you think what Code Pink did was great for discourse and civility? Both groups are sick and demented -- and are willing to do freakish sick, and dishonoring things for the media spotlight. People should stay the hell away from our wounded troops, and funerals -- if we cant agree on that low standard, then I guess we have to move on to football.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I am assuming that you think what Code Pink did was great for discourse and civility? Both groups are sick and demented -- and are willing to do freakish sick, and dishonoring things for the media spotlight. People should stay the hell away from our wounded troops, and funerals -- if we cant agree on that low standard, then I guess we have to move on to football.

Wanting to end an illegal and immoral war in which thousands of Americans are being maimed and killed isn't "sick and demented."

You can't say the same thing about an agenda of hate and intolerance which targets an entire group of people, viz., gays.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

<center> http://www.bartcop.com/justice-league-confused.jpg
</center>

[BroncoBuff]

http://www.bartcop.com/justice-league-confused.jpg
One of Monica Goodling's questions to applicants was: "What is it about President Bush that makes you want to serve him?" :oyvey:






(Seriously though, wouldn't you just LOVE to hammer that Monica Goodling?! I know I would ... ::))