Hillary admits that the surge is ?working? the latest in a growing lost of Democrats to do so

[ProfJohn]

During a recent speech in front of the VFW Clinton admitted about the surge "It's working. We're just years too late in changing our tactics,"
link

This follows comments by Senator Durbin: ?are starting to have an impact? by ?making real progress? in ?routing out the al Qaeda.?
link

Senator Levin: "We visited forward operating bases in Mosul and Baghdad. In these areas, as well as a number of others in Iraq, the military aspects of President Bush?s new strategy in Iraq, as articulated by him on January 10, 2007, appear to have produced some credible and positive results."
link

Democratic Rep. Brian Baird "saw enough progress on the ground that he will no longer vote for binding withdrawal timelines."
Rep. Jerry McNerney "suggested that his trip to Iraq made him more flexible in his search for a bipartisan accord on the war."
Rep. Tim Mahoney of Florida, who says the troop increase 'has really made a difference and really has gotten al-Qaida on their heels.'"
link

I think the quotes above are enough to prove that the surge is in fact working.
No one, outside of P&N, is even debating the effectiveness of the surge anymore.

The debate has now moved towards deciding if the surge has worked well enough to continue our presence in Iraq. And even on this front the Democrats seem to be mowing away from the hard dead line for withdrawal to a more long term view of Iraq and our mission and reasons for being there.

All of this will have a HUGE impact on the 2008 elections. With Democrats moving away from their efforts to win the war will the anti-war crowd seek out a third party candidate or will they just sit at home?

I think one thing is certain, the more progress we make in Iraq the easier it becomes for a Republican to win in 2008.

 

[jonks]

Commence backpedalling:

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/...rge_quote_AP_0821.html

"Clinton believes there's been progress quelling violence in Iraq's Anbar province, but doesn't believe the overall troop surge has been effective and continues to argue there is no military solution to end US involvement in Iraq, Singer said."

 

[Lemon law]

While I agree that certain aspects of the mini-surge appear to be working, I very much wonder if the mini-surge is working. The past four years has been consumed by the insurgencies gradually becoming entrenched. Most of the Sunnis are now driven out of Baghdad, the various factions are now driven into segregated populations, and in such conditions there is little remaining to squabble over. In short, it just not feeding time at the zoo right now.

So how to we tell if what we are seeing is the real actual deathbed of the Iraqi insurgencies or just a time and place to take a short nap? And the answer will come when some events start to put the Iraqi insurgencies under some stress. Things like the Iraqi government either passing insurgent unfriendly legislation or trying to actually establish some semblance of police control in Iraqi neighborhoods could be possible triggers. But I suspect something will happen to wake up Iraq insurgents and all this foolish talk of the surge working will be swiftly be forgotten.

US congressmen are easy to fool. They bought a war based on many from GWB remember.

 

[umbrella39]

"Can we finally put the ?is it working? debate to rest?"

When it actually starts working, yes. Until then, no. Stop trying to blow sunshine up everyones ass PJ. As always, HINT: If you have to make OP after OP trying to convince people of something that isn't true, it is a sign of insanity.

EDIT:

But hey, The Iraqi soccer team won an important game and this is all the proof we need that the surge is working and that our soldiers have not died in vein. A victory such as this is easily worth 3500+ American lives.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Say it ain't so, Joe. ProfJohn misrepresenting quotes out of context to change their meanings completely?!?!?!

What is the forum coming to? :roll:

From your link:

Clinton said new tactics have brought some success against insurgents, particularly in Iraq's Anbar province.

"It's working. We're just years too late in changing our tactics," she said. "We can't ever let that happen again. We can't be fighting the last war. We have to keep preparing to fight the new war."

She was talking about the tactics used...not the surge.

 

[piasabird]

I would not vote for Hillary if she was the last candidate on earth.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

She was talking about the tactics used...not the surge.

The new tactics and the surge are basically the same thing.

What the Dems polititions are saying is that the (military) surge is showing progress, but we're not seeing any Iraqi political progress. And that the point of military progress is to drive (Iraqi) political progress. (Recently, there was an Iraqi political agrement reached by 4 parties IIRC, the only party not yet involved is the Sunni. But for some reason this doesn't get much discussion). So, military success without political success is failure.

Anyway, a nifty little political arguement. At the beginning of the Summer the importance of military progress was emphasized, now it's being de-emphasized as the Dem polititions come to the realization they aren't going to get the negative report they so hoped for.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

The Dems just can't have this war being a success. They are far too invested in it being a (Repub) failure. Gotta have a failure for the upcoming Pres election. The bigger the better too.


EDIT: Looks like they've decided not to pursue Harvey's "Patraeus is a liar" type strategy.

Fern

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: umbrella39
"Can we finally put the ?is it working? debate to rest?"

When it actually starts working, yes. Until then, no. Stop trying to blow sunshine up everyones ass PJ. As always, HINT: If you have to make OP after OP trying to convince people of something that isn't true, it is a sign of insanity.

EDIT:

But hey, The Iraqi soccer team won an important game and this is all the proof we need that the surge is working and that our soldiers have not died in vein. A victory such as this is easily worth 3500+ American lives.

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Say it ain't so, Joe. ProfJohn misrepresenting quotes out of context to change their meanings completely?!?!?!

What is the forum coming to? :roll:

From your link:

Clinton said new tactics have brought some success against insurgents, particularly in Iraq's Anbar province.

"It's working. We're just years too late in changing our tactics," she said. "We can't ever let that happen again. We can't be fighting the last war. We have to keep preparing to fight the new war."

She was talking about the tactics used...not the surge.

He'll never stop while being paid to post such drivel.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: piasabird
I would not vote for Hillary if she was the last candidate on earth.

I wouldn't expect any of the resident Republicans in here to vote for her or any Democrat.

You guys have made it abundantly clear you would rather die than support anything other than your Republican heroes.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Fern
The Dems just can't have this war being a success. They are far too invested in it being a (Repub) failure. Gotta have a failure for the upcoming Pres election. The bigger the better too.

QFAT!! (Quoted For Absolute Truth!) :beer:

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: umbrella39
"Can we finally put the ?is it working? debate to rest?"

When it actually starts working, yes. Until then, no. Stop trying to blow sunshine up everyones ass PJ. As always, HINT: If you have to make OP after OP trying to convince people of something that isn't true, it is a sign of insanity.

EDIT:

But hey, The Iraqi soccer team won an important game and this is all the proof we need that the surge is working and that our soldiers have not died in vein. A victory such as this is easily worth 3500+ American lives.

I don't understand your post. He comments that the war is showing progress, and cites multiple examples of politicians speaking to this fact, and you reply by saying it's not working, making derogatory comments, and basically presenting no argument whatsoever.

Why are you getting mad at him, and not at Hillary et al? After all, he's just relaying what they said.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Fern
The Dems just can't have this war being a success. They are far too invested in it being a (Repub) failure. Gotta have a failure for the upcoming Pres election. The bigger the better too.

QFAT!! (Quoted For Absolute Truth!) :beer:

The Dems are praying for failure in Iraq as much as the Reps are praying for 9/11 The Sequel.

Edit: let me clarify. Do I as a Democrat believe any (mainstream) Republican is hoping another terrorist attack occurs on US soil claiming the lives of thousands of Americans merely to generate political capital for their party? No, of course I don't. And any Republican who believes I'm praying for the failure and death of our troops in Iraq just so I can say "I was right" about Iraq is equally delusional.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Fern
The Dems just can't have this war being a success. They are far too invested in it being a (Repub) failure. Gotta have a failure for the upcoming Pres election. The bigger the better too.

QFAT!! (Quoted For Absolute Truth!) :beer:

LOL, define success. You guys move the goal post so often I don't know what the current definition is.

You have another year to put it in perspective for the voters, so maybe, just maybe you'll have the definition refined to where you want it by then?

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Fern
The Dems just can't have this war being a success. They are far too invested in it being a (Repub) failure. Gotta have a failure for the upcoming Pres election. The bigger the better too.

QFAT!! (Quoted For Absolute Truth!) :beer:

The Dems are praying for failure in Iraq as much as the Reps are praying for 9/11 The Sequel.

Edit: let me clarify. Do I as a Democrat believe any (mainstream) Republican is hoping another terrorist attack occurs on US soil claiming the lives of thousands of Americans merely to generate political capital for their party? No, of course I don't. And any Republican who believes I'm praying for the failure and death of our troops in Iraq just so I can say "I was right" about Iraq is equally delusional.

I honestly do not believe that the Dems who represent you in congress have the same moral barriers as you. Too many of them are quite literally banking on total and complete failure in Iraq.

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: umbrella39
"Can we finally put the ?is it working? debate to rest?"

When it actually starts working, yes. Until then, no. Stop trying to blow sunshine up everyones ass PJ. As always, HINT: If you have to make OP after OP trying to convince people of something that isn't true, it is a sign of insanity.

EDIT:

But hey, The Iraqi soccer team won an important game and this is all the proof we need that the surge is working and that our soldiers have not died in vein. A victory such as this is easily worth 3500+ American lives.

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Say it ain't so, Joe. ProfJohn misrepresenting quotes out of context to change their meanings completely?!?!?!

What is the forum coming to? :roll:

From your link:

Clinton said new tactics have brought some success against insurgents, particularly in Iraq's Anbar province.

"It's working. We're just years too late in changing our tactics," she said. "We can't ever let that happen again. We can't be fighting the last war. We have to keep preparing to fight the new war."

She was talking about the tactics used...not the surge.

He'll never stop while being paid to post such drivel.

I wish someone would pay me for my drivel :frown:

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Fern
The Dems just can't have this war being a success. They are far too invested in it being a (Repub) failure. Gotta have a failure for the upcoming Pres election. The bigger the better too.

QFAT!! (Quoted For Absolute Truth!) :beer:

You sound very excited!!!!!!! Shame that the war always was and always will be an anchor of shame and failure to the GOP so there is really no need for the dems to worry about the flip side ever happening. So eh, wrong answers boys but if it helps you sleep better..

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: umbrella39
"Can we finally put the ?is it working? debate to rest?"

When it actually starts working, yes. Until then, no. Stop trying to blow sunshine up everyones ass PJ. As always, HINT: If you have to make OP after OP trying to convince people of something that isn't true, it is a sign of insanity.

EDIT:

But hey, The Iraqi soccer team won an important game and this is all the proof we need that the surge is working and that our soldiers have not died in vein. A victory such as this is easily worth 3500+ American lives.

I don't understand your post. He comments that the war is showing progress.

Progress != surge is working no matter how many times he pulls these threads out and will never justify the deaths. Again, WWYBYWB?

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: sirjonk
Commence backpedalling:

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/...rge_quote_AP_0821.html

"Clinton believes there's been progress quelling violence in Iraq's Anbar province, but doesn't believe the overall troop surge has been effective and continues to argue there is no military solution to end US involvement in Iraq, Singer said."

She's letting people hear what they want to hear at the moment. Playing to the crowd.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: umbrella39
"Can we finally put the ?is it working? debate to rest?"

When it actually starts working, yes. Until then, no. Stop trying to blow sunshine up everyones ass PJ. As always, HINT: If you have to make OP after OP trying to convince people of something that isn't true, it is a sign of insanity.

EDIT:

But hey, The Iraqi soccer team won an important game and this is all the proof we need that the surge is working and that our soldiers have not died in vein. A victory such as this is easily worth 3500+ American lives.

I don't understand your post. He comments that the war is showing progress.

Progress != surge is working no matter how many times he pulls these threads out and will never justify the deaths.

So wait... are you conceding that progress is being achieved? That seems to be your position... that we are making progress, but it's not because of the surge.

You claim that the surge is not a success, yet we are still making progress. How can you admit success yet label the surge a failure?

Again, WWYBYWB?

What would Ybywbjesus do?

 

[nageov3t]

to answer the original question, I would absolutely not vote for a candidate who advocated an immediate withdraw unless my only other option was, like, Mayor 9/11 or wtfThompson.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: umbrella39
"Can we finally put the ?is it working? debate to rest?"

When it actually starts working, yes. Until then, no. Stop trying to blow sunshine up everyones ass PJ. As always, HINT: If you have to make OP after OP trying to convince people of something that isn't true, it is a sign of insanity.

EDIT:

But hey, The Iraqi soccer team won an important game and this is all the proof we need that the surge is working and that our soldiers have not died in vein. A victory such as this is easily worth 3500+ American lives.

I don't understand your post. He comments that the war is showing progress.

Progress != surge is working no matter how many times he pulls these threads out and will never justify the deaths.

So wait... are you conceding that progress is being achieved? That seems to be your position... that we are making progress, but it's not because of the surge.

You claim that the surge is not a success, yet we are still making progress. How can you admit success yet label the surge a failure?

Again, WWYBYWB?

What would Ybywbjesus do?

You create contradiction where it doesn't exist. Say you threw 100,000 soldiers into a war with some country. Every year of the war, you advance 1 mile further towards their capital city at the cost of 5000 of your soldiers killed. You're making progress, but clearly still failing. See?

More clearly, if you go from getting 30s and 40s on exams, but improve to 50s, you've made progress, but are still failing, literally.

 

[Lemon law]

At least bbdub333 asks a rational question in----What would Ybywbjesus do?

I think Jesus would have driven the money changers in the oval office out of the temple and told them to all go to hell. As for me, I will settle for the Hague for a GWB&co. next destination. Maybe PJ will volunteer to work for the GWB defense team---ole George will be really doomed then----but at least it will keep him off Anand Tech and the Judges can get five minutes of chuckles and grins while tossing his latest crapola motion in the waste basket.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Fern
The Dems just can't have this war being a success. They are far too invested in it being a (Repub) failure. Gotta have a failure for the upcoming Pres election. The bigger the better too.

QFAT!! (Quoted For Absolute Truth!) :beer:

LOL, define success.

-snip-

1) Continued decrease in violence etc.

2) Contined training of Iraqi forces

3) Increased level of Iraqi force patrols & control and resulting decrease in US troops doing such missions

4) Avoiding chaos & killing expected with premature withdrawl

5) Avoiding increased influence of Iran and other regional players

6) Continued rebuilding of Iarq's infrastructure

Fern

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Fern
The Dems just can't have this war being a success. They are far too invested in it being a (Repub) failure. Gotta have a failure for the upcoming Pres election. The bigger the better too.

QFAT!! (Quoted For Absolute Truth!) :beer:

LOL, define success.

Maybe you should ask all the Democrats in the OP that question.

And for the record: I haven't claimed anything in this thread, I am just repeating the words of a few Democrats. They are the ones claiming progress in Iraq. Maybe you should be angry with them and not me.

 

[theeedude]

It may be working in areas where surge is concentrated. But to concentrate it on the whole country would take a lot more troops, pretty much indefinitely. Shinseki was right from the beginning, Republicans were wrong. So basically what are our options for Iraq? Commit the troops to expand the surge to all areas and keep 300,000 troops there indefinitely? That is not politically, financially, or militarily sustainable. Or leave now. I think all that the surge is doing is suppressing the violence until it is over. So it looks like it's making progress, but in reality it's only delaying the inevitable at an enormous cost. It's like keeping Terry Schiavo alive on life support. Expensive and ultimately pointless because it's already a lost cause.