USA Today: "Surge's Success Holds Chance To Seize The Moment; Democrats 'Lost In Time'"

[Pabster]

Story here.

The fact of the matter is that Democrats are so vested in defeat, rather than victory, they cannot even afford to acknowledge a tidbit of success. The few that have spoken up in a positive fashion vis-a-vi Iraq have been spanked down by the far, radical left (MoveOn) which controls the Democratic Party.

In my opinion, they (Democrats) are not lost in time. They're lost in a defeatist policy which was doomed from the beginning.

EDIT: And they just can't stop with the bitter, poisonous rhetoric. Here is Pelosi "Republicans 'Like' The War"

Pelosi and Reid are two of the biggest disgraces ever, and they have some not-so-impressive peers. It's frankly mind-blowing that these two have been so incompetent and ineffective.

 

[1prophet]

If this is the outcome of success, I don't want to know what failure would bring.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22235804">Iraq's young fighters build power through fear
Schoolgirls told to wear scarves, under threat of death</a>

BAGHDAD - On the first day of class, two male teenagers entered a girls' high school in the Tobji neighborhood, clutching AK-47 assault rifles. The young Shiite fighters handed the principal a handwritten note and ordered her to assemble the students in the courtyard, witnesses said.

"All girls must wear hijab," she read aloud, her voice trembling. "If the girls don't wear hijab, we will close the school or kill the girls."

That October day Sara Mustafa, 14, a secular Sunni Arab, also trembled. The next morning, she covered up with an Islamic head scarf for the first time. The young fighters now controlled her life. "We could not do anything," Sara recalled.

The Mahdi Army of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr is using a new generation of youths, some as young as 15, to expand and tighten its grip across Baghdad, but the ruthlessness of some of these young fighters is alienating Sunnis and Shiites alike.

The fighters are filling the vacuum of leadership created by a 10-month-old U.S.-led security offensive. Hundreds of senior and mid-level militia members have been arrested, killed or forced into hiding, weakening what was once the second most powerful force in Iraq after the U.S. military. But the militia still rules through fear and intimidation, often under the radar of U.S. troops.

"JAM is alive and well in Tobji, although they have gotten younger, like in many other areas," said Lt. Col. Steven Miska, using a military acronym derived from the militia's name in Arabic. For much of this year, his soldiers operated in many Shiite and mixed enclaves of Baghdad, including Tobji.

The rise of this new generation is a reflection of the Mahdi Army's deep infiltration of society and could presage a turbulent resurgence of the militia as the U.S. military reduces troop levels. The emergence also highlights the struggle Sadr faces in his quest to control the capital and lead Iraq.

 

[Farang]

It really is disgusting how a war, and our troops, are nothing more than pawns in the mess of a pissing contest that is Washington today. I blame both sides equally, the Republicans for being overzealous and the Democrats for building their strategy on seeing the Republicans fail. Either way, the interests of Americans come second.

 

[Lemon law]

Once again Pabster post another clueless link that misses the point and further polarizes the political options this nation faces. Shedding more heat than light in the process.

Lets for the sake of a rational discussion, concede four totally true points.

1. Saddam Hussein was a brutal Police State dictator. But Circa 911, he had nothing to do with 911, and his former vaunted military was decimated in Gulf war one. And as such, he posed no threat to his neighbors. And the mid-east, while not especially stable as it it was, could count on a stable Iraq trapped in a box Iraq before 911.

2. Instead of leaving well enough alone, stupid GWB&co. went where angels fear to tread and tried to make thing better. And have made a totally grand botch of it in the process. From the word go, GWB screwed up everything he touched in Iraq, and while a kick as US military made winning the war easy, initial GWB&co. blunders made winning the peace almost impossible.

3. No matter what happens now, GWB will not preside over how the Iraqi questions are finally solved. But any final Iraqi solution is almost certainly going to require certain international diplomatic efforts GWB&co. stubbornly resists even exploring.

4. Right now partisan politics is the piss in the soup. This nation is not asking the real question, what do we do about Iraq? After all, we can't just go back, pretend it didn't happen, restore the now hanged Saddam, but Going back to point #1, we had a stable Iraq before and will have, if we are lucky, a merely still unstable Iraq when GWB leaves office.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now lets cut to the chase and ask the real what do we do NOW question.
and we now have an unstable Iraq now that is a huge and continuing international danger.

Now let concede another four undoubtedly true things.

A. GWB is and remains an idiot on Iraq. He did not deliver what he over optimistically promised, he bungled what he did, while the surge may be doing marginally better for reasons probably unrelated to the surge cited reasons, the GWB&co present strategy cannot be a viable future Iraqi strategy long term. We flat out can't afford to piss away 3/billion/wk for the next five years or more years.

B. We have another one plus years of GWB&co. I would impeach and convict their ass yesterday if it were up to me, but since he is already a lame duck failure, why is the GOP
so worriedly about saving his already in the toilet legacy regarding Iraq as the decider?

C. This is about what we can do today!!!! And today we can recognize that diplomatic progress in Iraq is not possible with GWB. So we must plan beyond GWB. And we can start with losing the partisan noise that all democrats want only withdrawal and all republicans think the GWB stay the course mini surge is the only cats meow.

D. And start to realize that whichever party "wins" the election of 11/08, its going to take a bipartisan commitment to cut our loses in Iraq.

 

[First]

It was a failed war from the beginning once it was clear the goals were fudged and the planning was completely shot, and continued to be shot, until Rumsfeld finally left. It has been mostly a lost cause since. American public is still strongly against this war: http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm. Near super-majority of Americans still against the war/Bush, 73% of Americans want out immediately and/or by 2009, 52% say surge had no impact or made things worse with 10% still unsure about surge's effects, etc.

Once it's clear the political progress has failed (and it'll be clear by next summer), it's going to get real ugly for the Republicans come election time. Best case they don't lose a lot of seats, but they'll lose some either way, including the presidency.

Btw, you going for the record for most 1-star threads OP? Oh right, liberal conspiracy.

 

[compuwiz1]

All things aside, it is the current issue of Republicans that got us into this debacle. Just calling it as it is.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Story here.

The fact of the matter is that Democrats are so vested in defeat, rather than victory, they cannot even afford to acknowledge a tidbit of success. The few that have spoken up in a positive fashion vis-a-vi Iraq have been spanked down by the far, radical left (MoveOn) which controls the Democratic Party.

In my opinion, they (Democrats) are not lost in time. They're lost in a defeatist policy which was doomed from the beginning.

EDIT: And they just can't stop with the bitter, poisonous rhetoric. Here is Pelosi "Republicans 'Like' The War"

Pelosi and Reid are two of the biggest disgraces ever, and they have some not-so-impressive peers. It's frankly mind-blowing that these two have been so incompetent and ineffective.

You just cross the line from outrageously partisan to hilarious.

What's next, how can you top looking at the most incomepetent war in American history, and not mention that while you attack the *opposition* for not being competent?

How the House committee that voted to impeach Nixon abused power?

How Nicole abused OJ?

How Grenada bullied the United States when it invaded?

I look forward to your next comedy performance.

 

[GenHoth]

Originally posted by: Farang
It really is disgusting how a war, and our troops, are nothing more than pawns in the mess of a pissing contest that is Washington today.

QFT

And I just couldn't resist

Originally posted by: Lemon Law
went where angles fear to tread

hehe, I guess Iraq was made of nothing but straight lines and circles!

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
All things aside, it is the current issue of Republicans that got us into this debacle. Just calling it as it is.

Correct answer. Despite the full court press by some posters here to spin and divert, the American people are not as blind and stupid as they were in 2004. They can't swiftboat the truth this election cycle. So they are grasping at straws, they can surge this and surge that, fact is their heros have failed us all.

 

[bl4ckfl4g]

Iraq probably could become moderately stable as long as US troops stay there for the rest of freaking eternity. As soon as we leave(we won't) it is all over. I've been there a few times already. Have your great grandkids take pictures for me.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g
Iraq probably could become moderately stable as long as US troops stay there for the rest of freaking eternity. As soon as we leave(we won't) it is all over. I've been there a few times already. Have your great grandkids take pictures for me.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exactly the point, if the US leaves Iraq, there is too high a probability of the resulting power vacuum igniting a larger Mid-east war.

Leaving the USA with a damned if we do and damned if we don't.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Pabster
The fact of the matter is that Democrats are so vested in defeat, rather than victory, they cannot even afford to acknowledge a tidbit of success.

...

EDIT: And they just can't stop with the bitter, poisonous rhetoric. Here is Pelosi "Republicans 'Like' The War"

So you claim Democrats are rooting for failure in Iraq, and then a couple sentences later criticize them for THEIR bitter rhetoric. Do you even read what you write? I think I might have heard the phrases "cut and run" and "they don't support the troops" and "they want to help the terrorists" uttered a time or two (ahem, million) from republicans. Quit the one sided bs.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
All things aside, it is the current issue of Republicans that got us into this debacle. Just calling it as it is.

Correct answer. Despite the full court press by some posters here to spin and divert, the American people are not as blind and stupid as they were in 2004. They can't swiftboat the truth this election cycle. So they are grasping at straws, they can surge this and surge that, fact is their heros have failed us all.

That's what I thought in 2004 too, and I woke up with heartburn on a cold November morning to find a chimp still ruled our land. Don't celebrate till it's time to celebrate. I have low confidence in the dems winning squat, and high confidence in them f'ng up what now looks like a sure thing.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Story here.

The fact of the matter is that Democrats are so vested in defeat, rather than victory, they cannot even afford to acknowledge a tidbit of success. The few that have spoken up in a positive fashion vis-a-vi Iraq have been spanked down by the far, radical left (MoveOn) which controls the Democratic Party.

Pabster's take. :roll:




From the Posted article:

On the Republican side, the White House has been busy making excuses for the Iraqi government's failure to move toward national reconciliation (which is the goal of the troop surge), and it has lowered the benchmarks for success to the level of irrelevance. That translates into reduced accountability, continued dependency and an open-ended commitment. Lowering the bar for the Iraqi government sends a message that Baghdad can enjoy security paid for in American lives, and reconstruction aid paid by America's taxpayers, and ignore its responsibilities.

Perhaps you could comment on the actual article you post next time, instead of simply trolling, mmmkay?

 

[Capitalizt]

5,000 dead Americans
Slightly less violence than there was a few months ago
Two civil wars still going on

= WIN?

 

[senseamp]

Chance to seize a moment = Bush is gonna blow it
I guess we'll just have a referendum on Iraq next fall. Bring it on.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: GenHoth

Originally posted by: Farang
It really is disgusting how a war, and our troops, are nothing more than pawns in the mess of a pissing contest that is Washington today.

QFT

And I just couldn't resist

Originally posted by: Lemon Law
went where angles fear to tread

hehe, I guess Iraq was made of nothing but straight lines and circles!

He forgot the 5 in the Pentagon.

 

[Starbuck1975]

It really is disgusting how a war, and our troops, are nothing more than pawns in the mess of a pissing contest that is Washington today. I blame both sides equally, the Republicans for being overzealous and the Democrats for building their strategy on seeing the Republicans fail. Either way, the interests of Americans come second.

Well said :thumbsup:

 

[senseamp]

Interest of Americans came second when we went into Iraq. We blew Iraq and because of it we blew Afghanistan too. Disengaging from that mess is in our interest.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: sirjonk
So you claim Democrats are rooting for failure in Iraq, and then a couple sentences later criticize them for THEIR bitter rhetoric. Do you even read what you write? I think I might have heard the phrases "cut and run" and "they don't support the troops" and "they want to help the terrorists" uttered a time or two (ahem, million) from republicans. Quit the one sided bs.

Where did I say Democrats are "rooting for failure"? (Although a poll in the not-so-distant past did find that 1 in 5 Democrats hope the USA loses in Iraq). I never said that. I said they are vested in defeat by their policies and political strategy.

I have used the phrase "cut and run" before, but never the latter two. And I've never implied that "they want to help the terrorists". That's absurd, and I wish you'd quit putting words in my mouth.

As for poisonous rhetoric, both sides are guilty, and it is disgusting. It is never a good thing to have such a polarized climate in the middle of a conflict.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: 1prophet
If this is the outcome of success, I don't want to know what failure would bring.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22235804">Iraq's young fighters build power through fear
Schoolgirls told to wear scarves, under threat of death</a>

I think in the end, Iraq will look more like Saudi Arabia than anything even resembling a democracy. That's what is in the US's interest. Dumb Iraqi's, who won't use their own oil, which instead will be sold to the US, cheaply, by a totalitarian government.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Pabster

The fact of the matter is that Democrats are so vested in defeat, rather than victory, they cannot even afford to acknowledge a tidbit of success.

The fact of the matter is that brown nosing neocon ass lickers are so vested in pimping any transitory upturn in Iraq that they're reduced to vain attempts to paint over the fact that their TRAITOR IN CHIEF and his criminal cabal of incompetent MURDERERS, TRAITORS and LIARS are the ones who dug us into this hell in the first place.

As of 12/14/07 11:33 am EDT, 3,891 American troops are DEAD, tens of thousands more are wounded, scarred and disabled for life in this criminal administration's war of LIES, and we've squandered TRILLIONS of dollars that could have provided REAL security, along with maintaining infrastructure, education, medicine and more.

Crow about any "tidbit of success" your fucking surge when it can make even the slightest measurable dent in all the damage the Bushwhackos have done to our once great nation since they took office. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

 

[LLCOOLJ]

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Pabster
Story here.

The fact of the matter is that Democrats are so vested in defeat, rather than victory, they cannot even afford to acknowledge a tidbit of success. The few that have spoken up in a positive fashion vis-a-vi Iraq have been spanked down by the far, radical left (MoveOn) which controls the Democratic Party.

Pabster's take. :roll:




From the Posted article:

On the Republican side, the White House has been busy making excuses for the Iraqi government's failure to move toward national reconciliation (which is the goal of the troop surge), and it has lowered the benchmarks for success to the level of irrelevance. That translates into reduced accountability, continued dependency and an open-ended commitment. Lowering the bar for the Iraqi government sends a message that Baghdad can enjoy security paid for in American lives, and reconstruction aid paid by America's taxpayers, and ignore its responsibilities.

Perhaps you could comment on the actual article you post next time, instead of simply trolling, mmmkay?

He would if he wasn't so busy being Bushes Colostomy Bag

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: feralkid
Perhaps you could comment on the actual article you post next time, instead of simply trolling, mmmkay?

Perhaps you can start your own fucking thread if you want. Now quit trolling mine. :|

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Where did I say Democrats are "rooting for failure"? (Although a poll in the not-so-distant past did find that 1 in 5 Democrats hope the USA loses in Iraq). I never said that. I said they are vested in defeat by their policies and political strategy.

The question was not "Do you hope the US loses the war in Iraq?" which would have given support to the statement you posted. Had that question been asked, the poll results would have undoubtedly been much closer to zero, including the 5% of republicans who responded in the affirmative.

The actual question asked was "Do you think the world will be better off if the US loses in Iraq?" Now besides being vague since we don't even know what constitutes winning or losing (Saddam? gone. Elections? Had em. When do we win exactly??) the question more closely resembles "do you think the US should get the hell out of Iraq right now regardless of it being seen as 'losing'?" A natural response from democrats who see an unending occupation in the works is Yes, let's get out even if its considered a loss, it will be better for everyone if we leave.

This only translates to "I hope the US loses" in your head.

PS. that was question 40 on the poll. 41-43 asked people how much they pray, and 1-39 are not listed on the published pdf Fox posted. Context and lead-in questions are kinda relevant when asking a question like that.