A deeper understanding of what’s going on in Iraq.
By on Mar 12th, 2006 at 11:07 pm
A deeper understanding of what’s going on in Iraq.
Sen. Joe Biden: “When I got back from Iraq a little while ago, I went down to see the president, and I sat with the president, and he kept talking about terrorists. And I said, ‘Mr. President, if every single al-Qaeda personality, every single al-Qaeda operative or anyone like him tomorrow were blown away, you still have a war, Mr. President. This is well beyond terrorists.’ There’s an insurgency, Tim, a gigantic insurgency that has nothing to do with terrorists.“
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Joe Biden, our next President.
Delaware reprezent!
March 12th, 2006 at 11:09 pmBiden’s clueless.
The insurgency and the terrorists are joined at the hip.
They have started a rebellion against Democracy in Iraq. Clueless moronic attention whores like Biden just can’t realize that.
I will say that there is a civil war in Iraq. But, there is also a war between the terrorist-led Iraqis and the United States.
That war is called The War on Terror.
Just calling the situation a “Civil War” ignores the fact that Iraq is the main front in the War on Terrorism, as the terrorists who caused 9/11 are now trying to destroy Democracy in Iraq and drive us out of Iraq.
Their mission is to make America cut and run.
March 12th, 2006 at 11:15 pmThere is no War on Terror. That is a convenient fiction which derails any productive discussion or Iraq specifically and US Mideast policy in general.
March 12th, 2006 at 11:21 pm#3 “on Iraq” — typo in original
March 12th, 2006 at 11:21 pmGary Ruppert
Do you not think before you post?
You people are in la la land. Dreaming up ANYTHING that allows you to be right… YOU ARE WRONG. YOU WERE WRONG FROM THE START. BECAUSE YOU DONT THINK. BECAUSE YOU MAKE A DECISION AND DONT QUESTION YOURSELF.
March 12th, 2006 at 11:31 pmBush already said all this in November in Annapolis.
“The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists, Saddamists and terrorists. The rejectionists are by far the largest group. These are ordinary Iraqis, mostly Sunni Arabs, who miss the privileged status they had under the regime of Saddam Hussein — and they reject an Iraq in which they are no longer the dominant group. . . The second group that makes up the enemy in Iraq is smaller, but more determined. It contains former regime loyalists who held positions of power under Saddam Hussein — people who still harbor dreams of returning to power. . . The third group is the smallest, but the most lethal: the terrorists affiliated with or inspired by al Qaeda.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051130-2.html
March 12th, 2006 at 11:44 pmI agree with Gary in that Biden is clueless. He voted for the piece o shyte war.
Beyond that though, I have to say Gary is hopelessly divorced from reality and is, to borrow his phrase, cluelessly moronic. Iraq is the main front in the War on Brains.
Yeah, we got bombed on 9-11, so invading a country that had nothing to do with that helps us how? Oh yeah, that’s right we get to fight them over there, so we don’t have to fight them here. Hey, how ’bout we attack Canada instead, so we can fight them there instead of here. It would be closer and easier to transport dead soldiers home and ship new prospective dead soldiers to the new front in the War on Terror.
You say “their mission is to get America to cut and run”, they say “their mission is to get America to get the fk out of our country”. Now who do you think has a better handle on that? When’s the last time you were in Iraq Gary?
March 12th, 2006 at 11:46 pmGary,
Their mission is to make America cut and run.
No, their mission is to kill Americans.
Fair’s fair, Gary, let’s put 10,000 foreign troops in your home town, randomly bombing, shooting, kidnapping and torturing–what would YOU do, hide under the bed? Don’t tell me, I already know.
March 12th, 2006 at 11:48 pmJust when I thought Gary Ruppert couldn’t say anything stupiderer….
March 12th, 2006 at 11:50 pmHey, how ’bout we attack Canada instead, so we can fight them there instead of here.
Comment by Matt Harris
Not to mention, Canada has more oil.
March 12th, 2006 at 11:52 pm#9 – Just snorted water up my nose! Stupiderer – I’m adding that to my funny word list, Lily.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:08 am#2 Gary Ruppert: It is you who is completely clueless. You have no idea of the complete lawlessness that is Iraq. You have criminals, revenge seekers, America haters, proud nationalists, murder for political reasons, US and UK undercover mercenaries keeping the flames alight, terrorists, insurgents, religious fanatics, freedom fighters and pure opportunists fighting us and fighting each other.
There are no “terrorist-led Iraqis” on one side and the Christian Soldiers on the other side. Put your comics and the Bible down and go learn something. The idea of a “War on Terror” is moronic. There can be no such thing. War ON something is a code name for a permanent struggle against something that one can never win and where the use of a military force would be considered stupid.
You might win a war WITH/AGAINST something even a war WITH/AGAINST the rest of the world combined may be winnable by the use of barbaric military force and nuclear weapons but a war ON drugs or a war ON poverty or a war ON malaria cannot have a military solution.
John Kerry, before he lost his balls to the military-industrial complex, was right. Terrorism can only be countered by police action and surgical strikes and can only be rooted out by sensitive consideration of the grievances of the people who feel wronged and who have been robbed of all means by which they can air their grievances.
Since sensitive consideration for people of a lesser god is not an American Value, the least we can do to “win†this thing is to fight it effectively by targeted propaganda, police action and surgical strikes to ensure our enemies meet “accidental†deaths. We have done this for over 200 years and are very good at it. The moronic use of inadequate military might against a fiercely patriotic and fanatically religious Muslims ensured our defeat almost as soon as the fighting started.
Those people are “crazy†by American standards. They will prefer a life of slavery under a Muslim ruler than the benevolent rule of an Infidel. Read the history of the Muslim lands. No conqueror has ever managed to hold on. Afghanistan itself has destroyed whole empires from the reign of Alexander the Great to the British Empire to the Russian Empire and now we have put the American Empire on the line.
As for Biden, the lesser said, the better so I will only say this: I have never seen a man so in love with the sound of his own voice.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:12 amabby – hope to hear more from you, and more often…
March 13th, 2006 at 12:17 amWhat’s all the fuss!!!! George Allen said things were much calmer in Iraq now. He said that today with a straight face. Between that and GWB giving a few speeches I can’t imagine why a Democratic Iraq is not right around the corner.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:24 am“biden’s clueless”
wow, for once i agree with gary brownshirt ruppert.
it didn’t last very long though. this will be a very easy analogy to make: the insurgency and terrorists have about as much to do with one another as the democratic party and communists — yea, there are a few in there, but they are not representative of the whole. and the ideology of the latter is certainly not in keeping with the actions or beliefs of the former.
but then goose-steppers like gary live in the ‘with us or against us’ world, where everything is only either black or white.
yea, iraq is the main front in the war on terror. and gary’s house is the main front in the war on idiocy.
bring ‘em on!
March 13th, 2006 at 12:24 amBiden did vote for it and should apologize, retire from public life, and never darken our TV screens. The idea of democracy in Iraq at this point in history is just not practical. Is should be obvious to the casual observer that these people are more interested in settling scores than in living in peace. The death squads are operating out of the government offices that we established. In the summary of this sad story, the difference between us and Saddam will only be one of degree.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:25 amGary, there was a recent Frontline on PBS that focused on the different aspects of the insurgency. Foreign fighters and the homegrown insurgency have their own agendas. They are not “joined at the hip”. You are a simpleton in the vein of Bush. Just kill ‘em all right. Lack of knowledge is what got you neocon idiots in trouble in the first place. Iraq is the central front on the war on terror because you morons made it so. Where is Osama bin Laden, Gary? Your leader can’t deliver the goods he peddles. Only blind fools like yourself still believe anything Bush says.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:51 am“Biden’s clueless.”
- Gary Ruppert
If Biden’s clueless, what does that make Bush??!!
Three years, 20,000 casualties and 1/2 a Trillion dollars later, the road to Baghdad airport isn’t even secure.
Y’all are doin’ a great job, Bushie!!
March 13th, 2006 at 12:54 amHow courageous that Gary Ruppert (#2) fights his War Against Terror from the safety of his laptop.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:56 amHas Mr. Ruppert enlisted yet?
March 13th, 2006 at 1:12 amHEY EVERYONE IF YOU HAVEN’T ALREADY, YOU MUST GO SEE “WHY WE FIGHT” BY EUGENE JARECKI. CHECK YOUR LOCAL LISTINGS. IT IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT FILMS OF OUR TIME!
March 13th, 2006 at 1:13 amOnly the politicians without strong urgings to move higher will get caught on the ‘wrong’ side of a herd type vote. On the responsibility that senators who authorized force against iraq – an admission that it was based on faulty intelligence and that if they had seen it they would not have voted for it. There’s a catch with my own standard though – they had to voice that not long after it was apparent there was no WMD. Otherwise they are simply total cowards. A herd deal is part cowardice, fear, and led by the zealots.
Biden is in love with himself and I wouldn’t vote for him in a primary – but I would pick any democrat over whatever ends up running on the repub ticket in the national election.(as in the two people, not making them nonhuman:))
As for the garbage about all the Iraqi insurgents being allied with terrorists – that’s really pretty unbelievable. They are killing each other because they hate each other and live in fear of each other. They are roming shiite death squads run by the interior ministry and sunni retaliations.
The sunnis do not want to be ruled by Shiites. Also Shiites do not equal Bin Laden’s people fyi. bin laden would like to kill them. They are heretics, in his mind (and most other sunnis in the fundamentalist arab regions as well as pakistan).
The civil war is imminent (I guess a civil war is when the US media finally has to show us video of the daily body count because there was some massive confrontation).
The Shiite militias are run by Shiite religious figures. They attack on their orders. The Kurds also have their own well trained forces. The Sunnis are more fragmented and there is a terrorist element. The terrorist element, however, was not there before Iraq was invaded. The Islamists want to provoke a civil war. But when that happens, it’s all insurgents/freedom fighters.
Honestly, if you came home and your entire family was gone and they were found a week later executed – do you think you might join the ’cause’ in some way? Well with at least 50 sunnis dying a day in Baghdad from executions, lots of people get impacted – especially since the family structures are extended.
Bush is responsible for any civil war that breaks out because of the invasion, poor planning, and then…the lack of response. They have said that the Iraqis will lead the effort to put down any civil war.
That’s a joke. if we didn’t intervene there would be massive casualties and we’d look horrible.
Hmm, Bush’s legacy?
March 13th, 2006 at 1:27 amNeal-
Excellent point.I couldn’t agree more. The negative thing about seeing this film is that my wife and I had to journey a hundred miles to see it because very few theaters are showing it but it was definitely worth a trip. After seeing it, I praised the film on various blogs but for some reason [perhaps because of the paucity of theaters which are showing this documentary] received very few comments about this worthwhile examination with America’s obsession with war over the past fifty years. The film’s linchpin is Eisenhower’s farewell address, where he makes use of the soon-to-be famous phrase military-industrial-complex. A must-see film for every American for whatever political persuasion that one may be.
March 13th, 2006 at 1:28 amI can’t figure out why Gary Rubbert #2 would come to this site. It’s progressive. He’s not going to sway opinions. He’s not going to read anything that he agrees with. So why does he come here?
1. He’s paid to.
2. He’s trying to keep honest debate at a minimum.
3. He likes to cause arguemnts. It gives him power.
Which is it? Why does he? I think a lot of these guys are young college republicans and are getting paid to cause friction. I’m probably wrong but some of the things I read are not even rational.
March 13th, 2006 at 1:31 am#18
“Foreign fighters and the homegrown insurgency have their own agendas. They are not “joined at the hipâ€. You are a simpleton in the vein of Bush. Just kill ‘em all right. Where is Osama bin Laden, Gary? ”
It is ironic that Bush’s ’simple’ characterizations of terrorists – which are really all arabs are or are potential terrorists or alternately all muslims. There’s a lovely amount of fear of muslims in this area – and we have one small mosque.
Bush can’t do complex stuff – he likes a ‘clear’ message. He either thinks himself stupid or the american people.
His ‘message’ helped his DPW support look pathetic and his base rise up – it’s hypocritical to do business with the enemy that you told us of (arabs).
The saddest part is I doubt 5 percent of the american people could name the country with the largest muslim population. Or the second largest, etc. Indonesia and India. There’s been no effort to understand the muslim world. The only effort is to ‘understand’ the terrorists and then paint everyone as one.
OBL is in Pakistan. Probably South Waziristan. He gets to stay there, along with all the Taliban leaders, because they signed a peace treaty with Musharraf and there is no central government control in the frontier provinces. The taliban is even setting up local courts again. Hmm, we’re so amazingly effective.
Perhaps once Musharraf gets toppled we can have a radical taliban leaning demoractically elected government that has control of nuclear weapons. Destabilization is such a wonderful thing – like firing missles into pakistani territory.
March 13th, 2006 at 1:35 amTrolls like Gary Ruppert are becoming more uncommon everyday. They are going extinct because they lack the survival attributes needed for survival(one being a fully functional frontal lobe). He and his ilk are akin to the Dinosaurs wailing their final roar right before they fall. It is sad though that over 2300 Americans and countless hundreds of thousands in Iraq and around the globe had to die before even people like him(not Gary. I said people like Gary) would come to grips with reality. Sadder still is the fact that 30-35% of our fellow Americans still live in their own little wonderlands. I do not hate those people. I pity them. In most cases I understand why they still think the way they do. I was once a Bushite. I loved Bush at one time, but at the time I was young and completely clueless as to what kind of person George W. Bush really was. My father was the one who helped me see how evil and stupid George W. Bush really was. I can still remember that fateful evening three years ago when U.S troops were invading Iraq. I said to my dad that Bush was a good president. To that my dad replied “Bush hasn’t done a damn thing for the American people!” It was then that I realized that OhMyGosh! my dad was right. Today I am a big fan of Micheal Moore and Al Frankin. I listen to
March 13th, 2006 at 1:39 amAmy Goodman on Democracy Now and read Ariana Huffington posts. I support Russell Feingold’s 2008 presidential bid. I now consider myself a Progressive Caucus Progressive Liberal Economic Populist Democrat. I believe Howard Dean’s Chairmanship is the best thing that has ever happened to the Deocratic Party. I respect Howard Dean, Ralph Nader, Berney Sanders, Al Gore, and ex-journalist Bill Moyer. I woke up one day and smelled the coffee. I stopped being a Bushite. I stopped being a conservative. I became a staunch Democrat. Why can’t every other Bushite. I know that there is hope for them. I pray that one day they will all wake up and see Bush for the evil scumbag that he is and always has been. I did.
#24
It’s #3.
If you go to any of the lovely wingnut sites they like to brag about their ‘exploits’. Atrios and firedog post them sometimes and C&L.
The idea is to get the thread off topic. It’s why Judd started monitoring the thread and banning users to get rid of wwallace, at least temporarily.
He isn’t being offensive, though, so there isn’t really any reason to do anything else but counter it. But by doing that you perhaps get the thread further off topic.
Repubs don’t need to pay for this stuff. They’ve got their zealots in large numbers. I never post on wingnut sites just because it doesn’t make me feel any better about myself (which this juvenile repeated stuff is about alot).
BUT as you classified TP as progressive it is only that in it’s postings/articles and they are often highly opportunistic:) This is basically doing opposition research for free for the Democrats as well as creating grassroots furor.
SO we can all disagree if we want. There’s no progressive groupthink:) I did on DPW not because I loved them but because it was hypocritical in light of our own business interests throughout the world and Dubai itself. I think maybe I’ve disagreed on a few other minor business threads – one of which was going through Halliburtons governmental services operations unit to show that it is not, in fact, highly profitable. They are just making up for not making high profits by gouging the military – something the military does to itself in every deal it does anyway.
March 13th, 2006 at 1:44 amI just love Joe Biden, he is always so common sense about things…
March 13th, 2006 at 1:49 amSo let me get this straight. Sen. Biden went to the White House and talked to Bush personally. It won’t do any good. Sorry Biden. It has been done before. Bush ignores anyone who disagrees with him. Karl Rove’s new target: Joe Biden.
March 13th, 2006 at 1:52 am#26 and #27
March 13th, 2006 at 1:59 amThank you. That was interesting.
Erroll-
March 13th, 2006 at 2:05 amI know what you mean. “Why We Fight” was substantially better than “Farenheit 9/11″. Much more informative and delved much deeper into the complexity of the issue. Yet it has recieved far less popularity. It’s a shame. Hopefully the dvd release will have better success. This movie is not liberal or conservative, it is purely made in the best interests of the American people and our democratic ideals. It must be seen by all Americans, if we are to prevent a fate similar to Ancient Rome’s.
Senator Biden never “voted for the war”. As of today, there still has not been an official “Declaration of War” made by Congress. What was voted on was an “Authorization for the Use of Force”. And it was considered to be used for “persuasion” to get Saddam to cooperate with the UN, and the weapons inpectors, etc. But as we know all to well, the President has used this conditional Authorization, to wreak all sorts of havoc, including illegally wiretapping American citizens.
March 13th, 2006 at 2:07 amAmerica is in its final throws.
March 13th, 2006 at 7:35 amDINO Biden is tone deaf!
He still doesn’t get it: the American people aren’t interested in a new deployment of US troops in Iraq or a strategy of containment — WE WANT THE TROOPS HOME!
It’s the very presence of our troops in Iraq that’s causing the insurgency and the civil war. Hand Iraq back to the Iraqis and let them own it and run it.
March 13th, 2006 at 7:50 am‘i don’t want to hear about no stinkin’ insurgency’.
March 13th, 2006 at 8:10 am.
Biden is simply trying to get on the runaway bandwagon of opposition to Bush and the war. His despicable voting record, however, will follow him around like a bunch of tin cans tied to his ankles. P.S. to the troll. You’ve done it again! You’ve actually got everybody talking about your ridiculous nonsense.
March 13th, 2006 at 8:19 amSenator Biden never “voted for the warâ€. As of today, there still has not been an official “Declaration of War†made by Congress. What was voted on was an “Authorization for the Use of Force
—————————————————————-
Cyra your right and the Media and Everyone has been blindsided by the spinmeisters of roveco.
Not one person republican or democrat voted to go to war against Iraq.
g w bush overstepped his bounds as king. Its time that Congress Censure’s bush on many things ,then impeach him for treason.
Unless someone can prove to Americans that Congress voted to give bush the authority to go to war.
I watch Biden and Allen yesterday Biden was choking back something and Allen was trying to cover up his compliance in this bushco since he’s planning on running for president.
March 13th, 2006 at 8:22 amMBNA Joe has never met an anti-consumer bill he didn’t like.
March 13th, 2006 at 8:36 am“The terrorists and the insurgency are joined at the hip.”
That’s an interesting statement that simply cannot be proved.
Unfortunately, this is a war where people are not wearing uniforms. It would be easier for all sides if we came across someone in red and we could then say, “aha, that’s a terrorist”. Oops, we’ve got someone in yellow, they’re not a terrorist.
What evidence do we have that it’s terrorists, or as the administration is now claiming Iranians, that are the motivating forces? Little to none.
At the same time this administration has caused their own problems.
It is one of the most secretive administrations since Nixon. They are using their political clout to delay or avoid any true investigation into wiretapping, the Plame case, and the justification for the run up to war.
America was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt about these issues, but at some time moderate America steps back and wants more than rhetoric. It appears that point has been reached.
For Gary and others like you, I’m willing to have an open mind. Other than a few tapes by terrorists, what proof do you have that there are any terrorists behind what is going on in Iraq?
March 13th, 2006 at 8:53 amYou do realize that Gary Ruppert comes in here, drops a comment obviously meant to inflame the passions of rational people like ourselves… and then leaves?
Don’t let the trolls bait you. That’s all they have at this point. Their power base is crumbling around them and poking sticks at the sleep bear that is progressive America is all they have.
March 13th, 2006 at 8:56 amHey, I like trolls.
They set ‘em, up, and we knock ‘em down!
March 13th, 2006 at 9:11 amHuffPo has a great article about George Allen being Rove’s next figurine; really good picture too. I say, in republicanesque form, we start digging into his virtuous background. If he is weak enough to feel he needs Rove, we cannot let this win even his Senate seat.
March 13th, 2006 at 9:28 amMr.Ruppert, your check for blogging just bounced. Sincerly , Your Bank.
March 13th, 2006 at 9:54 amSPLIT IRAQ INTO TWO OR THREE SEPARATE COUNTRIES! SUNNI, SHI’ITE, AND KURD.
Whats the worst that could happen???
Could it be any worse than what we they have now??
Its so crazy, it just might work!
March 13th, 2006 at 10:27 amI guess this means Biden is about to vote Bush’s way on something big?
Happens every time.
March 13th, 2006 at 10:32 am.
Senator Allen is one of the 20 or so repuke alcoholics in the senate.
Check out his home delivery of booze.
March 13th, 2006 at 10:44 am“Just who is the enemy to the Democrats, the president of the United States or the terrorists working to destroy our way of life?” asked Ron Bonjean, spokesman for House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, Illinois Republican. “Their political smear tactics represent everything the Democrat Party stands for: absolutely nothing.”
March 13th, 2006 at 11:43 am#47 – How about the political smear tactics of the Republicans?
Based on that information, the Republican party stands for:
March 13th, 2006 at 12:06 pm1 – Don’t hold US responsible for our own actions!
2 – Blame Pres. Clinton for everything bad.
3 – Refuse to properly armor our troops and their vehicles.
4 – Tax cuts for the top 1% of the top 1%, and screw everyone else.
5 – “Life” begins at conception and ends at birth!
6 – Democrats are the only ones who are corrupt! (Ignore all the Republican scandals)
7 – Impeach Pres. Clinton for telling a lie, ignore Pres. Bush’s lie after lie after lie.
8 – Cut funding for the VA
DS – just answer the question because Republicans will be asking it this fall – who is a bigger enemy to the left? Terrorists or Bush. If you get that wrong, it’s gonna hurt real bad at the polls. TRUST ME.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:12 pm#49 Considering Bush went on vacation and allowed terrorists to attack a liberal city, that is a tough question to answer.
Remember, Clinton’s policy of pursuing al Qaeda was under review at the time. Bush obviously didn’t think it was that important.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:32 pm““Just who is the enemy to the Democrats, the president of the United States or the terrorists working to destroy our way of life?”
My way of life feels a lot more immediately threatened by Bush and Co. than by any terrorist group.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:33 pmAlso important to remind people that Reagan gave al Qaeda and the Taliban their start. Oliver North sold weapons to Iran. And Rumsfeld sold weapons to Saddam.
I would like to see Republicans defend their record for once, instead of using smokescreens and smears.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:34 pmPlease Moron, explain to us how your people can call a terrorist arms dealer like Oliver North a hero. They do. Please explain that to us.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:35 pmIraq is a replay of Yugoslavia, with differences In the Balkans we allied with Muslim terrorists against Christians, in order to break up the country. In Iraq we’re allied with the Muslims again against one of their own sects (which favors a non-sectarian government). That puts in a position of fighting for a government allied with our self-chosen mortal enemy Iran, which makes no sense, unless you think OIL and CORPORATE PROFITS and PERSONAL INCOME.
Now don’t go expecting poor Joe Biden to understand all this, he’s just another dumb pol.
As for “terrorists” the word has lost all meaning and we do ourselves a dis-service by using it. Were the embattled farmers at Concord Bridge terrorists? Were the French resistance fighters terrorists? How about the CIA, aren’t they terrorists? How about the US Marines destroying Fallujah and many of it’s inhabitants, or free-fire shooters at an Iraqi checkpoint? Or Isaelis rocketing an apartment block in Palestine? Or a cruise missile taking out a drug factory?
March 13th, 2006 at 12:36 pm#47 Is your world always summed up with a elementary question? Is that all you are – an up or down vote? Plus, it’s a stupid question that you already know the answer to. It is merely stated/asked to confuse people. You and your party are just buzz words. You are all marketing and nothing of substance. It is you that is our nation’s internal enemy; capable of much more than violence.
But seeing as though you can smoke out an enemy, why are doing such a horrid job at it? Why are there more ENEMIES than before? It looks to the world that republicans are just inefficient with our money, troops, social reform, etc. You name it and your party screwed it up. Way to go, enemy.
March 13th, 2006 at 1:23 pmCynical – The Clintons and Gore gave us 9/11… Instead of fighting Al Queda, they were busy fundraising and selling secrets to the Chinese.
March 13th, 2006 at 1:27 pmhttp://warfolly.vzz.net/thesetup.html
good read.
March 13th, 2006 at 1:35 pmYes, and when someone as dim as Sen. Burns is re-elected this fall in Montana, it will be the radical left’s fault. Montana is blood red and calls to impeach the President will not resonate well there. But why listen to someone common sense? Go for impeachment!
March 13th, 2006 at 1:48 pm#58 2006 and 2008 are already lost to the Right.
They should start aiming at 2012 — which is when the world ends in the Mayan calendar.
Obviously, the Mayans foresaw a big conservative victory…promptly followed by a 12-way policy clusterfuck that annihilkates all life on the planet.
March 13th, 2006 at 2:43 pmYO Gary is the General Brainless also;
“Sectarian violence now has become the No. 1 problem in Iraq, more than the insurgency. Or on a par” with the insurgency, said Ashraf Jehangir Qazi, the U.N. envoy to Iraq. Gen. John P. Abizaid, the head of U.S. Central Command, said last week that “sectarian violence is a greater concern for us security-wise right now than the insurgency.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11800917/
March 13th, 2006 at 2:58 pmU.S. to Hand Over Afghan Mission to NATO
KABUL, Afghanistan – The American mission to bring order to this unruly country is being handed to a multinational force led by the NATO alliance, a move that will subordinate U.S. troops under foreign command in a combat situation for the first time since World War II.
We will show you how to wins the hearts and minds of the Afhan people without the American gun ho mentality of its troops
March 13th, 2006 at 3:22 pm#61
Situation in Afghanistan must not be as dangerous as it once was….NATO is in charge.
March 13th, 2006 at 4:16 pmNo Tracy Rummy is actually running out of troops.
March 13th, 2006 at 4:19 pmThere are plenty of U.S. troops. The U.S. has about 1.2 million guard and reserve. Current rules regarding deployment could be changed if the Pentagon determines the need. NATO gets to be in charge after most of the hard work is done.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200409/s1200173.htm
March 13th, 2006 at 4:40 pmIt is not the # it is the repeated deployments, the troops need to recover both in training and equipment (plus most of them really need a rest ) but not having been in the military you would miss those things.
March 13th, 2006 at 4:55 pm#65
I talk to my brother who is a Major in the U.S. Airforce and friends who are in the Army 1st Calvary and they agree that redeployment is a huge problem. Agreed. That is where rules that the Pentagon has in place regarding repeat deployments need to be changed. These troops are getting tired going on tour for a year and in sometimes as short as two weeks being redeployed. That would make anyone infantry personnel tired. Currently the U.S. Army and Marines are attempting to move people from non combat operations and training them for combat. The force structure is being changed to meet the current demand in Afghanistan and Iraq.
March 13th, 2006 at 5:55 pmBut that does not currently meet all the requirements, and I do not have to talk to any one since I served for 13 years and as a company commander who deployed his unit to operation Desert Sheild/Desert Storm, I actually know a little bit about it. and the military is streached thin, read the Army times, not the headlines but the smaller stories and the yearly polls the Military Times takes of the troops….
March 13th, 2006 at 6:02 pmSo is this retraining of reserve personnel into combat positions the way to go?
March 13th, 2006 at 7:01 pmNot if you plan to have a proper logistics train to fully support the troops, because most military battles have been won or lost due to logistical problems not actual bullets shot. The Germans streached their log trains so far into the Ussr they lost the military advantage their units had over the russians, the same for Rommel in pushing to the suez canal against montgomery. Ask any one the logistics supplky dictate when and where to fight as much as anyother companent of the battle, and if the logistics are missing the battle goes badly very quickly. The Reserves are the back up logistical troops for the Army that fill many jobs needed in battle but not needed for peace time training. Most divisions need a second supply company attached as they go into battle because the enormity of the mission to keep a modern mechanised Infantry or Armor Division supplied with all the Ammo, fuel, rations, repair parts, and specific unit supplies they need for their mission plans call for. Any thing over 3 days battle you are usually two echalons deep into the supply train for support and that is why since Desert Storm they double up on supply troops to be able to push supplies to the front to keep the tempo of the battle running according to our plans not supply issues. That also does not address the other support troops like the “MASH” type units that also make up a significant part of the reserves, very necesssary for battle where many more troops need medical attention than peace time. Also Engineer assests where the construction for the theater of operations is necessary but no need in peace time. TYhis description is limited but you might get the point.
March 13th, 2006 at 7:42 pm[...] A deeper understanding of what s going on in Iraq.Think Progress, DC - 20 hours agoJoe Biden: When I got back from Iraq a little while ago, I went … And I said, Mr. President, if every single al-Qaeda personality, every single al-Qaeda … [...]
March 13th, 2006 at 8:00 pmAin’t that a trip, that link is not available any more.
March 14th, 2006 at 2:31 amSo it sounds like to me that our current force structure it intended to move “quick and decisively”, i.e. like they did in the inital invasion in 2003, but wasn’t able to switch to a more “police like” force when the insurgency picked up. Those I know in the military say that the U.S. forces aren’t trained to be police which is why they think it was a probably a mistake to completely dismantle the Iraqi military/police force, although no one really knew what might have happened if those still loyal to Sadamm could have been trusted to help with law and order after he was captured.
March 14th, 2006 at 9:24 amThree things would have happened if W had allowed the existing law enforcement and civilian structures to remain in place after Bagdad had fallen:
March 14th, 2006 at 10:10 am1) Saddam would have been captured in short order.
2) About 2000 Americans who are now dead would be alive.
3) Iraq would be normalized.
This is the first war in our nation’s history where the initial action was to dismantle all civil structures and let the people run rampant. In simple terms, this administration managed to grasp defeat from the jaws of victory. It is far easier to control a civilian authority of about 400,000 than a population of 25,000,000.
Even though that law enforcement and civilian structures were part of Sadamm’s Baath party? You and I don’t know for sure what would have happened if his regime elements were allowed to remain in place. Your three things are unknowns.
March 14th, 2006 at 11:37 amAbout 90% of those civilian authorities are minor leaguers. They are clerks, accountants, filers, traffic controllers and guards. They are actually very pliant when faced with a choice between a paying job and raising Cain. The remaining 10% can be handled with more ease if they are held together as opposed to dispersed.
March 14th, 2006 at 12:30 pmEven North Viet Nam allowed civil structures to remain in place after taking Saigon.
The United States did as well in Germany, Italy and Japan after WWII.
AdSense Money Maker
Do you know how to make money from AdSense automatically? You don’t!? I’ll teach you how!
April 5th, 2008 at 7:38 amJim Crow Laws Employment Law Us Supreme Court
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 14th, 2008 at 4:06 pmMontgomery, Al Job Listings
If I am to be shot at, I want no man to be in the way of the bullet. ~ Andrew Johnson
April 14th, 2008 at 6:21 pmFrontline Retire
Please keep these excellent posts coming.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:35 pmMoney Magazine New Construction Associated Press
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
June 17th, 2008 at 12:20 pmgolf grips
A thinking person’s site; this one gets an enthusiastic bookmark for future visits!
June 17th, 2008 at 12:31 pmGay Incest Old Gay Men Gay Male Galleries
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
June 18th, 2008 at 6:29 amJobs Welding Jobs Tug Job
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
June 21st, 2008 at 1:28 amgolearn
You have got to be kidding!
June 21st, 2008 at 5:59 pmHealth Insurance Health Care Waste Management Small Business Health Insurance Florida
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
June 22nd, 2008 at 8:16 pmGay Sex Gay Ass Gay Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
June 25th, 2008 at 10:25 amOnline Dating First Date Can You Feel The Love Tonight
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
June 27th, 2008 at 12:26 amHealth Insurance Florida Individual Health Insurance Patient Safety
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
June 28th, 2008 at 12:09 amworld population to 2300
Thanks for the information, love it.
June 29th, 2008 at 8:05 amGay Incest Gay Male Sex Gay Brothers
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
June 30th, 2008 at 12:26 amWeather Forecast Air Supply Cloud
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
June 30th, 2008 at 5:54 amamoxicillin
amoxicillin chlamydia
June 30th, 2008 at 9:06 pmfeed
July 21st, 2008 at 5:39 ampills
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:15 am