The great Iraq debate has begun...

[Pabster]

Story here.

I think we're seeing precisely what I expected. Democrats have begun the last several days to reterm the Petraeus Report as "The Bush Report" and discount anything he will say.

Apparently, they're now seeking to discredit this great man and label him as a traitor as well.

Disgusting.

 

[palehorse]

yes, it is disgusting.. but what's even worse is the majority here at P&N who probably agree with MoveOn's bullsh*t.

 

[eilute]

What can they do? Everyone is expecting the report to look like the following:

- substantial improvements in some areas
- more improvement in other areas
- surge must continue in order to see more gains
- success is just around the corner
- if leave Iraq, it could turn into a disaster

It could easily turn out to be that whole "last throes" bs again.

I do think it is premature, and potentialy unfair to label Petraeus a triator though. On the other hand, I would be very happy if he gives a Powell-UN-Iraq speech.

 

[Pabster]

Unfortunately for MoveOn.org and those who accept their agenda, Americans Overwhelmingly Trust The Military To Prosecute The War..

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Story here.

I think we're seeing precisely what I expected.

Democrats have begun the last several days to reterm the Petraeus Report as "The Bush Report" and discount anything he will say.

Apparently, they're now seeking to discredit this great man and label him as a traitor as well.

Disgusting.

Originally posted by: palehorse74
yes, it is disgusting.. but what's even worse is the majority here at P&N who probably agree with MoveOn's bullsh*t.

But your Swift Boat Liar Campaign was perfectly OK?

 

[Moonbeam]

Calling people traitors is something Republicans made popular.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Remember when the anti-war crowd used to say that we should "listen to the generals"?

I guess they've reigned in that slogan, eh?

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Unfortunately for MoveOn.org and those who accept their agenda, Americans Overwhelmingly Trust The Military To Prosecute The War..

If only the military were allowed the prosecute the war. Same thing happened in Vietnam, Korea, and after WW2. Had the politicians not controlled them so stupidly a lot of things could have been avoided.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Pabster
Story here.

I think we're seeing precisely what I expected.

Democrats have begun the last several days to reterm the Petraeus Report as "The Bush Report" and discount anything he will say.

Apparently, they're now seeking to discredit this great man and label him as a traitor as well.

Disgusting.

Originally posted by: palehorse74
yes, it is disgusting.. but what's even worse is the majority here at P&N who probably agree with MoveOn's bullsh*t.

But your Swift Boat Liar Campaign was perfectly OK?

Mine? I had nothing to do with that, I've never been a member of any Party, and the ads had zero impact on my vote.

Did you also just revert to your favorite "You did something bad first, so it's my turn" defense of MoveOn.org's bullsh*t??

wow.

 

[ayabe]

I disagree strongly with this garbage, MoveOn has debased themselves to stoop to the level of the chest thumping trash on the far right.

Petraeus is in an impossible position and if things aren't what they were 'promised' to be by the Administration then Petraeus is being set up as the fall guy. Just like Myers, Pace, Abizaid, etc.

Whoever the Admin needs to throw under the bus they've already proven they will.

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Calling people traitors is something Republicans made popular.

ya, after all these years of members of the GOP slagging people over their "patriotism" - the OP's post smacks of Crock tears.....

 

[BMW540I6speed]

Relationships will continue to erode as long as the Beltway club insists on smearing the majority of Americans who are disappointed with Congress for not doing more to change course of the occupation.

And that?s exactly what they did by using Osama?s new video to promote their ?stab in the back? campaign against the American people in order to stifle dissent.

The American people do not get their marching orders from Osama no matter what Chris Wallace and Fox News may say. Nor is it just ?lefty blogs? who are for a new way forward. They can pretend that most Americans want to stay and occupy Iraq for years & years of our treasure, but that will only reduce their virtually non-existent credibility still further.

This whole narrative demanding that we ?worship? Gen. Petraeus and treat his words as sacred text is all about making dissent illegitimate.

The talking point that dissent is wrong (?emboldens the terrorists?) is everywhere. Fred Thompson, the latest GOP entry to replace Bush, put it like this, "If we look weak and divided in this country, we're going to pay a heavy price for it in the future."

But, would a ?united? front actually keep the terrorists from attacking us? If, suddenly, all ?lefty blogs? and war critics stopped criticizing Bush and supported the occupation in Iraq would Osama stop planning terrorist attacks against us? Would Al Qaeda just call it quits and give up because all Americans - now ?united? - love Bush and the occupation?

Please. Is this the best they?ve got?

Bush & his supporters told the Dixie Chicks to ?Shut up and Sing? and now, using Petraeus and Osama, they?re telling the majority of Americans who support a different way forward to just ?Shut-up?.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
Relationships will continue to erode as long as the Beltway club insists on smearing the majority of Americans who are disappointed with Congress for not doing more to change course of the occupation.

And that?s exactly what they did by using Osama?s new video to promote their ?stab in the back? campaign against the American people in order to stifle dissent.

The American people do not get their marching orders from Osama no matter what Chris Wallace and Fox News may say. Nor is it just ?lefty blogs? who are for a new way forward. They can pretend that most Americans want to stay and occupy Iraq for years & years of our treasure, but that will only reduce their virtually non-existent credibility still further.

This whole narrative demanding that we ?worship? Gen. Petraeus and treat his words as sacred text is all about making dissent illegitimate.

The talking point that dissent is wrong (?emboldens the terrorists?) is everywhere. Fred Thompson, the latest GOP entry to replace Bush, put it like this, "If we look weak and divided in this country, we're going to pay a heavy price for it in the future."

But, would a ?united? front actually keep the terrorists from attacking us? If, suddenly, all ?lefty blogs? and war critics stopped criticizing Bush and supported the occupation in Iraq would Osama stop planning terrorist attacks against us? Would Al Qaeda just call it quits and give up because all Americans - now ?united? - love Bush and the occupation?

Please. Is this the best they?ve got?

Bush & his supporters told the Dixie Chicks to ?Shut up and Sing? and now, using Petraeus and Osama, they?re telling the majority of Americans who support a different way forward to just ?Shut-up?.

WTF did Bush&Co. have to do with Osama's latest video being released by Osama this week!? Remember, it was announced and first appeared on an AQ website that is outside of US control, not Fox News.

So, is that just another tinfoil-inspired accusation?

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
Relationships will continue to erode as long as the Beltway club insists on smearing the majority of Americans who are disappointed with Congress for not doing more to change course of the occupation.

And that?s exactly what they did by using Osama?s new video to promote their ?stab in the back? campaign against the American people in order to stifle dissent.

The American people do not get their marching orders from Osama no matter what Chris Wallace and Fox News may say. Nor is it just ?lefty blogs? who are for a new way forward. They can pretend that most Americans want to stay and occupy Iraq for years & years of our treasure, but that will only reduce their virtually non-existent credibility still further.

This whole narrative demanding that we ?worship? Gen. Petraeus and treat his words as sacred text is all about making dissent illegitimate.

The talking point that dissent is wrong (?emboldens the terrorists?) is everywhere. Fred Thompson, the latest GOP entry to replace Bush, put it like this, "If we look weak and divided in this country, we're going to pay a heavy price for it in the future."

But, would a ?united? front actually keep the terrorists from attacking us? If, suddenly, all ?lefty blogs? and war critics stopped criticizing Bush and supported the occupation in Iraq would Osama stop planning terrorist attacks against us? Would Al Qaeda just call it quits and give up because all Americans - now ?united? - love Bush and the occupation?

Please. Is this the best they?ve got?

Bush & his supporters told the Dixie Chicks to ?Shut up and Sing? and now, using Petraeus and Osama, they?re telling the majority of Americans who support a different way forward to just ?Shut-up?.

"dissent is the highest form of patriotism" -ben franklin

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: eits

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
Relationships will continue to erode as long as the Beltway club insists on smearing the majority of Americans who are disappointed with Congress for not doing more to change course of the occupation.

And that?s exactly what they did by using Osama?s new video to promote their ?stab in the back? campaign against the American people in order to stifle dissent.

The American people do not get their marching orders from Osama no matter what Chris Wallace and Fox News may say. Nor is it just ?lefty blogs? who are for a new way forward. They can pretend that most Americans want to stay and occupy Iraq for years & years of our treasure, but that will only reduce their virtually non-existent credibility still further.

This whole narrative demanding that we ?worship? Gen. Petraeus and treat his words as sacred text is all about making dissent illegitimate.

The talking point that dissent is wrong (?emboldens the terrorists?) is everywhere. Fred Thompson, the latest GOP entry to replace Bush, put it like this, "If we look weak and divided in this country, we're going to pay a heavy price for it in the future."

But, would a ?united? front actually keep the terrorists from attacking us? If, suddenly, all ?lefty blogs? and war critics stopped criticizing Bush and supported the occupation in Iraq would Osama stop planning terrorist attacks against us? Would Al Qaeda just call it quits and give up because all Americans - now ?united? - love Bush and the occupation?

Please. Is this the best they?ve got?

Bush & his supporters told the Dixie Chicks to ?Shut up and Sing? and now, using Petraeus and Osama, they?re telling the majority of Americans who support a different way forward to just ?Shut-up?.

"dissent is the highest form of patriotism" -ben franklin

/psst

Franklin never said that. It's also been wrongly attributed to Thomas Jefferson. In fact it was Dorothy Hewitt Hutchinson, a WW2 pacificst who said it.

"Quoting as an appeal to authority is the lowest form of attempted intellectualism" - TastesLikeChicken

 

[Lemon law]

I have not read the moveon.org argument. But I think that partial case for that might be made. Or also be made in various dubious cheapshot ways also.

Rather than spin the report outrageously, I plan to look at the quality of the arguments made and the quality or lack thereof in the logic. Which of the three makes the better overall arguments?

Which then puts both the Patraeus report in fact written by the WH, Gen. Patraeus himself, and moveon.org under the same criteria of quality of logic and truth in statistics.

And since certain predictions about the unknowable future may also be made in all three, we may have to wait quite a few months to make a followup judgment which may or may not differ from our initial impressions.

 

[BMW540I6speed]

palehorse74 said

WTF did Bush&Co. have to do with Osama's latest video being released by Osama this week!

Absolutly nothing.

So, is that just another tinfoil-inspired accusation?

Only from so called "journalists" such as Chris Wallace & the like minded, who want to use Osama's propaganda for political gain, fear & labeling Americans who may be sceptical of the way things are going & favors dialogue to a new way forward as "supporting the terrorists".

 

[Lemon law]

The other point is that no one to my knowledge ever called William Westmorland a traitor. But that charge of traitor has nothing to do with the fact that the judgment of history is
that William Westmorland failed. Maybe one may be so cruel that assert that his judgments at the time should be properly be called lies but still one can also attribute them to honest overoptimism.

But regardless if someone chooses to attack a person's integrity or not, yes, Virginia, US Generals are not immune from failure, and in the grand scheme of things cheapshots and clever plays on words by moveon.org will have absolutely no impact on the success or failure in Iraq.

 

[tweaker2]

i don't see how this "patraeus" report will be any different than any other neocon piece of propaganda that comes out of that overworked spin mill they've had running 24/7/365 since bush's poll numbers took a nose-dive.

my guess is the report will have to say something about how difficult things are over there but only to give it enough validity for its intended audience to swallow the rest of the shinola hook line and proverbial stinker....err, sinker.

what needs to be done is for patraeus to be sworn under oath before delivering his report.

well, on second thought, it didn't keep alberto honest, so why should it work for patraeus?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Some of the comments in this thread are pretty hypcocritical. For the longest time those supporting the war in Iraq have been complaining about the lack of good news being reported from Iraq. The response from the anti-war crowd? "Show us some good news."

Now that we have a bit of good news they proceed to plug their fingers in their ears and go "Lalalalalalalala. I can't hear you." and make slimey remarks about one of the best generals in our US military. They make pre-emptive strikes claiming the report will be some sort of neocon propaganda with ZERO proof of that besides their anti-war bias driving their opinion.

It just goes to show that they never really wanted to hear any good news about Iraq or anything else that might destroy their closed minds and firm conviction that Iraq is a failure. Good news from Iraq is bad news for them.

 

[First]

^ What good news? Iraq is still a mess and is minimum 12 months away from any semblance of stability. Most (left and right) just don't want to be misled like they have been for YEARS with false hope. Examples of false hope:

- Last throes.
- Greeted as liberators.
- WMDs and mobile nuclear labs.
- Iraq seeking uranium yellow cake from Niger.

All used as reasons to stay and fight the "war on terrorism" or were used in the run-up to the war. What credibility does this administration have when they've been wrong since March 2003? The whole time. Not right once about anything significant. Had the administration booted Rumsfeld earlier like EVERY sane critic of the war was saying years ago, we'd have stablized Iraq enough by this point to leave the mess to sort itself out. Instead he waits until he's forced to with the November elections bringing Democrats back to power.

Why trust a guy with a horrible track record when nothing has changed?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

If Petraeus has no good news from Iraq then what is the anti-war crowd all in a dizzy tizzy about concerning his report? Why are they already working so hard to discount anything and everything he might say as neocon propaganda?

Sheesh. The willfull blindness by some in here is absolutely staggering in its proportions. And people wonder why the anti-war types are called swamp-fevered and moonbats? The answer to that question is painfully obvious.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
If Petraeus has no good news from Iraq then what is the anti-war crowd all in a dizzy tizzy about concerning his report? Why are they already working so hard to discount anything and everything he might say as neocon propaganda?

Sheesh. The willfull blindness by some in here is absolutely staggering in its proportions. And people wonder why the anti-war types are called swamp-fevered and moonbats? The answer to that question is painfully obvious.

The only thing that is obvious is your distaste for irrelavant BS. MoveOn doesn't matter much/at all, all matters is reality; and reality is that this war is a failure and isn't "winnable" but any sane definition no matter how long the occupation continues and no matter the good intentions, and that this administration has been a failure on so many levels that it doesn't have ANY right to be trusted by the American people; socially (Katrina), economically (recession, job creation, rich/poor divide), and diplomatically (Iraq).

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Some of the comments in this thread are pretty hypcocritical. For the longest time those supporting the war in Iraq have been complaining about the lack of good news being reported from Iraq. The response from the anti-war crowd? "Show us some good news."

Now that we have a bit of good news they proceed to plug their fingers in their ears and go "Lalalalalalalala. I can't hear you." and make slimey remarks about one of the best generals in our US military. They make pre-emptive strikes claiming the report will be some sort of neocon propaganda with ZERO proof of that besides their anti-war bias driving their opinion.

It just goes to show that they never really wanted to hear any good news about Iraq or anything else that might destroy their closed minds and firm conviction that Iraq is a failure. Good news from Iraq is bad news for them.

The point being TLC, each side will see enough information to support their positions. For some the GAO report is the holier grail, for others its going to be the Patraeus report. In truth this whole report is going to be spun all kinds of ways. With the truth somewhat driven out of the debate as each side says listen up to their arguments and Lalala can't hear you to the counter arguments.

Only much later will the truth return from exile and allowed to examine the reports from the more sober perspective of time.

Like I have said in other threads, the only question worth asking now is how much additional time will this buy GWB&co. But I suspect the US congress will be far less gullible than you are? But self appointed cheerleaders for either side will not be rare endangered species.

In terms of phony arguments, each side will probably have enough to totally wrinkle the most over starched set of panties. I think I will do my judging after watching the upcoming dog and pony show, fully expecting to find the only possible rational conclusion will be that both sides are probably going to have everything mostly wrong, and I am watching two separate groups of adults engage in proving themselves bereft of any logic or common sense.

 

[tomywishbone]

I agree with the general. We're winning. This war is beautiful. I hope it last at least another 10 years.

I love this war.:beer: