TIMELINE: Four Years Of War In Iraq
TIMELINE: Four Years Of War In Iraq
Next Monday marks four years since the invasion of Iraq. ThinkProgress has created a detailed timeline that captures the story of the Iraq war over the past 48 months.
As the war has intensified and escalated, some of the critical details have faded from our memories. Some notable events from the timeline:
APRIL 28, 2004: Images of torture at Abu Ghraib are revealed
SEPTEMBER 23, 2004: Bush: “I saw a poll that said the right track/wrong track in Iraq was better than here in America.”
NOVEMBER 18, 2005: Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) calls for U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq
NOVEMBER 30, 2005: National Strategy for Victory In Iraq unveiled by White House
DECEMBER 17, 2005: Lieberman: Bush has turned corner on Iraq
AUGUST 21, 2006: Bush: “We’re not leaving [Iraq] so long as I’m the president.”
MARCH 19, 2006: Time Magazine reveals that U.S. Marines killed at least 15 unarmed Iraqi civilians in Haditha the previous November
NOVEMBER 1, 2006: Classified military briefing reports Iraq “edging toward chaos.”
JANUARY 3, 2007: Death toll of U.S. soldiers in Iraq reaches 3,000
The timeline catalogues the key events, quotes, and pictures of the war. Check it out and spread the word. And make sure to tell us what we missed in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Thanks, for the memories…
March 15th, 2007 at 1:28 pm“And it’s one, two, three,
March 15th, 2007 at 1:31 pmwhat are we fighting for?
don’t ask me I don’t give a damn,
our next stop is Khazakstan…”
The Hundred Years war took a long time as well. No one ever said defeating the terrorists would be quick or easy.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:33 pmAUGUST 21, 2006: Bush: “We’re not leaving [Iraq] so long as I’m the president.â€
What should have happened next:
AUGUST 22, 2006: Proceedings for the impeachment of Cheney and Bush have begun.
Ah, wishful thinking.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:35 pm“… now c’mon Wall Street,
March 15th, 2007 at 1:35 pmdon’t be slow,
let’s man this war a-go-go,
there’s plenty good money to be made, supplying the army
with the tools of the trade…”
(from the “Fixin’ to Die Rag”
Country Joe McDonald, circa 1968)
Through just the one simple lie filled act, America has lost ALL of it’s moral standing in the world.
But there is so much more that BushCo has done (as if Iraq wasn’t enough).
March 15th, 2007 at 1:36 pmHappy Occupation Day!
March 15th, 2007 at 1:37 pm“The Hundred Years war took a long time as well. No one ever said defeating the terrorists would be quick or easy.”
worst parallel ever. unless feudalism’s making a comeback.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:39 pmPlease add:
“we do not torture” – President Bush. lying in the Oval Office.
12/6/2005
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051206-1.html
Unless the “we” he is referring to his he and Barney.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:40 pmCheer up! At least world terrorism has tripled.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:43 pmAnd Hillary Clinton still can’t find a reason to withdraw her support.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:44 pmThanks for the timeline, TP. But what a disgusting chain of events for this country! Phew! Such stink hasn’t been smelled since Watergate and this trumps Watergate a zillion-fold! It makes Watergate seem like child’s play….it so trivializes Watergate and Monicagate combined as to make them inane and ridiculous reasons for the dismissal of a president. Just look how low we’ve stooped since then? Wow!
Just see how far we’ve descended as a country, on all fronts, since then! Amazing descent into destruction which this country is experiencing piece by piece, day by day……the “slow bleed” of the lifeblood of this democracy is what’s occurring before our eyes.
How sad! How utterly disgusting and sad that a group of overzealous, mentally compromised, twisted neocons could destroy something which has taken 200 years to establish and bring it down in 6 short years! Incredible as it may seem, this is precisely what they’ve done and continue to do, day by day, piece by piece unless the american people outcry for it to stop.
Each alcoholic has his/her nadir or “hitting bottom”…..although it would seem that we’ve already hit it, I suspect that this will be proven wrong over the course of the next two years as this administration rips the heart out of our constitution, our democracy and the spirit of the american people.
Anything not build on a solid foundation (election corruption with the wrong man in office) will crumble commensurate to the degree of corruption utilized to enable the fraud – and we’re seeing prima facie evidence of this karmic law each day.
What will tomorrow bring? Although no one knows for certain, you can bet that it will be the airing of more disgusting corruption inside of this administration.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:50 pmhttp://www.usatoday.com/educate/war28-article.htm
* Feb. 7, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, to U.S. troops in Aviano, Italy: “It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.”
* March 4, Air Force Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a breakfast with reporters: “What you’d like to do is have it be a short, short conflict. . . . Iraq is much weaker than they were back in the ’90s,” when its forces were routed from Kuwait.
* March 11, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, in a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars: “The Iraqi people understand what this crisis is about. Like the people of France in the 1940s, they view us as their hoped-for liberator.”
* March 16, Vice President Cheney, on NBC’s Meet the Press: “I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq, from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. . . . I think it will go relatively quickly, . . . (in) weeks rather than months.” He predicted that regular Iraqi soldiers would not “put up such a struggle” and that even “significant elements of the Republican Guard . . . are likely to step aside.”
March 15th, 2007 at 1:52 pm#11 Hillary Clinton will become a “non issue” soon. For starters, the Vince Foster “suicide” will be enough to tank her campaign and there’s plenty more which the GOP has on her at this point – Whitewater will be the second scandal. She will not survive the scandals once they begin so it’s irrelevant whether she withdraws her support or not. Hillary’s “closet of horrors” is so immense that I’m surprised that she lives in such denial as to not be concerned about the airing of her dirty laundry. I guess it’s the same degree of “denial” which will not allow her to withdraw support from something she so avidly supported and still does. Of course, her ego disallows her to “admit a mistake” (same disease as Dubya has) so we know that Hillary’s level of denial is probably as deen as The Nile! She’s wasting her time and money on a campaign. She’s definitely not the woman to be the “first woman president” of this country!
March 15th, 2007 at 1:54 pmInteresting how Jake will defend anything and everything this administration does. Everything? Isn’t there just one little thing Jake would like to criticize about his employer?
I find it implausible that anyone but a paid political operative would so vigorously defend everything this administration does, all day, every day.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:54 pmJust stumbled across this. Truly a worthwhile read, especially given the news of the day.
Was I a good American in the time of George Bush?
March 15th, 2007 at 1:55 pm#15 It’s called “troll brainwashing” and this one is a specimen case! hahaha!
March 15th, 2007 at 1:56 pmJake, shouldn’t you be defending yourself at the other thread where you falsely claimed that 17 U.S. soldiers had died when the true number is 67?
March 15th, 2007 at 1:56 pm1047 attacks per week
March 15th, 2007 at 2:03 pmVerbalKint sez:
There’s one other possibility…a social misfit who desperately needs attention of any sort, and who has learned that posting pro-administration screeds on a progressive blog will guarantee him the validation he so desperately requires.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:03 pm#18 he’ll just claim it was a “typo”. (heh-heh) Just like Gonzo when he says that “he didn’t read the report” or “he didn’t know what his #2 man was doing”….right!
March 15th, 2007 at 2:04 pmNobody said it was even possible either.
Do you really believe that more than 28% of the people in this country signed on for a war that will last for 100 years?
March 15th, 2007 at 2:04 pmT.P.,you forgot March 19,2003
The beginning of this illegal and immoral war with SHOCK AND AWE
March 15th, 2007 at 2:05 pmI was quoting a NEWS article, so if it is wrong, that’s not my fault. Just like when Bush mentioned that the British government learned Saddam had sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. As for my disagreements with this Administration, I have voiced several so far — letting Condi Rice testify under subpoena was one — I vehemently disagreed with Bush signing Campaign Finance Reform.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:08 pmT.P.,you forgot March 19,2003
The beginning of this illegal and immoral war with SHOCK AND AWE
Comment by ∞Ω
D’oh!!
March 15th, 2007 at 2:10 pm“1047 attacks per week” x 52 weeks/year x (100 years – 4 years) =
March 15th, 2007 at 2:12 pm5,226,624 attacks
TripMaster Monkey:
Also a possibility is that I don’t agree with EITHER the Republicans or Democrats 100% of the time.
Spudge_Boy:
Bush has said, and I believe, it is possible. That being said, I don’t think more than 28% of the people in this country signed on for a war that will last for 100 years. Unfortunately, we will probably surrender again if it even gets as long as Vietnam.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:12 pmThanks…, for the memories…, again. No, I mean it…, thanks…, again.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:13 pmRe the “slam dunk”. You give Woodward’s version. It would be a good idea to also give the Susskind’s different version (form his book on the One Percent Doctrine). In particular, Tenet and his deputy had no recollection of this alleged comment. Also, the meeting was not about the substantive case for war (as Woodward implied), but about the PR case for war.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:14 pmUnfortunately, we will probably surrender again if it even gets as long as Vietnam.
Comment by Jake — March 15, 2007 @ 2:12 pm
Who would we surrender to? We don’t know who the enemy is. Are we going to surrender to “the concept of terrorism in general”?
March 15th, 2007 at 2:15 pm100 years x $280 million/day = how o.b.l. said he was going to bankrupt the u.s.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:15 pmI would also add the Lancet report that estimated 600,000 excess Iraqi violent deaths over a Saddam era baseline.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:15 pmHere’s a timeline I helped put together:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=us_occupation_of_iraq
Be sure to include the disbanding of the Iraqi army.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:16 pmBush has said, and I believe, it is possible.
Comment by Jake
Translation:
March 15th, 2007 at 2:17 pmI am cattle.
We are, if you will, in the last throes of the insurgency. We will henceforth refer to the liberation of Iraq not as an insurgency or even a civil war. We will henceforth refer to our presence in Iraq as an illegal occupation and a royal, top-notch f*-up of indeterminate proportions, from which we cannot escape. Truth serum made me say that.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:21 pmWe don’t need to surrender. We have met our military objective. That objective was to depose Saddam Hussein. We have not only got him out of power, we have killed him. We are only occupiers now. You can’t surrender an occupation.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:21 pmJake sez:
It’s what you are agreeing with that’s the issue, jake.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:22 pmApril 9,2003. The fall of Saddam’s statue.
What a great moment in history/not.Just like when we were kids playing Capture the Flag;yea,that’ll do it-VICTORY.
And what a great one it was;In a city of six million people,in the busiest intersection in Baghdad,we managed to assemble 250 people who were mostly press and people who didn’t speak with a Baghdad accent.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:22 pmTP, what about Qana and Fallujah?
What about the mission accomplished banner? What was accomplished at the time? The toppling of Saddam? Uh huh, that really was a step forward into democracy, right? We are seeing that.
Most important: What about the 14 military permanent bases and the huge embassy of US in Baghdad?
March 15th, 2007 at 2:23 pmMemories, may be beautiful and yet,
March 15th, 2007 at 2:25 pmWhat too painful to remember,
We simply choose to forget.
So it’s the laughter,
We will remember,
Whenever we remember,
The way we were.
Bush has said, and I believe, it is possible.
Comment by Jake
Translation:
I am cattle.
Comment by Juan C
Wow. Just, wow. That’s a stunning statement by Jake.
Juan, you hit the nail on the head.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:26 pmAnd make sure to tell us what we missed in the comments section.
April 9, 2004 Keith Matthew Maupin’s convoy attacked and was taken prisoner.
To date unaccounted for.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:26 pmWant the real story of the Saddam Statue Farce?
Look here and you will see that the people that were cheering the toppling of the statue were with Ahmed Chalabi.
You can’t dispute some good old fashion photographic evidence.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:29 pmNa, na, na, na na, na…
March 15th, 2007 at 2:32 pmYou can’t catch me! … OOOPS!
I think you should also add that obscene glory grabbing stunt on the carrier deck, where aWol flew the plane, won the war and created his doll.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:32 pmDOH!
March 15th, 2007 at 2:32 pmThe Hundred Years war took a long time as well. No one ever said defeating the terrorists would be quick or easy.
Comment by Jake — March 15, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
Can’t believe no one else called him on this one.
Remeber Rummy’s “6 days, 6 weeks, I doubt 6 months” statement, Jake?
March 15th, 2007 at 2:34 pmAnd finally, let’s not forget good ‘ole Donnie “My, My, Good Golly” Rumsfeld. He really knows how to put the “Ho” into a*hole!
March 15th, 2007 at 2:39 pm“Remeber Rummy’s “6 days, 6 weeks, I doubt 6 months†statement”
but that wasn’t about defeating terrorists, it was about defeating the iraqi army.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:39 pmbobcat_grad sez:
Add to that Cheney’s “I believe we will be greeted as liberators”.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:40 pmbut that wasn’t about defeating terrorists, it was about defeating the iraqi army.
Comment by pgw — March 15, 2007 @ 2:39 pm
My bad. I forgot that there have been ever shifting reasons for the war in Iraq. You are correct, that statement was about the Iraqi army and our iminent need to find and destroy all the WMDs.
What is the current reason we went to war? Is it to fight terrorists, find WMDS, spread democracy, protect America, or collect sand?
I just can’t seem to keep track anymore.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:43 pm“We don’t go to war with the army we want. We go to war with the army we have”. Famous last, f*ing words from the war criminal, Rummy the Dummy.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:43 pm#50- I thought that was: “I believe we will be greeted as masterbaters”.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:44 pmI was quoting a NEWS article, so if it is wrong, that’s not my fault.
Comment by Jake — March 15, 2007 @ 2:08 pm
Are you going to claim that Kuwait Daily is your usual source of news? You must have searched far and wide to find a source dishonest enough to publish such a bold and easily refuted lie. Are you going to claim that you credulously accepted the ridiculously low figure of 17 deaths in four weeks? Even a casual follower of the news should realize that number can’t be right. So yes, it is your fault, Jake.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:46 pmChris (and Spudge_Boy):
If we withdraw all troops, and just wait for the next 9/11, that is indeed surrendering to the terrorists. Maybe not on a battleship, but just as effective.
Juan C:
I am actually registered Independent.
TripMaster Monkey:
We’ll have to agree to disagree then.
bobcat:
I think pgw is right — wasn’t Rummy speaking about the invasion? That ended May 1, 2003. We WERE greeted as liberators by the smart Iraqis.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:50 pm“Is it to fight terrorists, find WMDS, spread democracy, protect America, or collect sand?”
i don’t know, but it’s quite easy to fall into a troll’s rhetorical “if it takes 100 years to defeat terror then we should stay in iraq for 100 years” pit.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:51 pmVerbalKint:
Are you going to claim that Kuwait Daily is your usual source of news?
No.
Are you going to claim that you credulously accepted the ridiculously low figure of 17 deaths in four weeks?
As I said, I am trying to confirm the number of actual casualties as we type. I’m kinda busy here.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:52 pmAs I said, I am trying to confirm the number of actual casualties as we type. I’m kinda busy here.
Comment by Jake — March 15, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
I bet you are. Check icasualties.org.
Pretty much blows away your bogus claim that the surge is working. Looks like Reality just scored another point against you, Jake. That’s the way it works in the world of Karl Rove and his followers: it’s a neverending battle to square the lies with the truth. Can’t be done, Jake.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:55 pmJake:
Here are Rummy’s exact words.
“And it is not knowable if force will be used, but if it is to be used, it is not knowable how long that conflict would last. It could last, you know, six days, six weeks. I doubt six months. ”
Almost four years and counting, Jake.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:55 pm(Repeated from other thread)
You are not an Independent or you would uphold the Constitution and call for George W Bush’s Impeachment for High Crimes and Misdemeanors.
You are a Bush bot, nothing more. Everything that is said about him you blame on Clinton. “Clinton did it too†is not an excuse for Bush to break the law. But you can’t see that.
You are NOT and Independent anymore than my right wing, Christian, Pro-Life, Republican mother and father. They make all of the same EXACT excuses you do for Bush. Everything is Clinton’s fault.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:59 pmi don’t know, but it’s quite easy to fall into a troll’s rhetorical “if it takes 100 years to defeat terror then we should stay in iraq for 100 years†pit.
Comment by pgw — March 15, 2007 @ 2:51 pm
Fair enough. And I see your point. People that still support the War in Iraq (and Bush, in general) like to have everything in nice, neat little categories. For them Iraq = terror. Perhaps on their atlases, Iraq is Terrorland, Iran is Boogymanstan, and Syria is Deathtoameicaburg.
It’s impossible for them to understand that fighting terrorism with brute force is akin to Hercules fighting the Hydra. As soon as you cut one head off, two more sprout.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:00 pmMaybe your leader should have done something to stop 9/11 instead of being complicate in the attack. Instead of planning a press conference ahead of time to talk about the evil enemy. Maybe you shouldn’t be such a chicken sh!t and push for every American to lose their civil rights because you are such a scaredy cat. Whimp. Go build a bomb shelter and hide from the evil terrorists. You are the only one terrified. Chicken Hawk.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:02 pmJake, if you want to know how many deaths there are in Iraq in a given period, just go to http://icasualties.org/oif/ No need to search. Of course all of March hasn’t been tallied yet.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:04 pm“akin to Hercules fighting the Hydra.”
an apt description, although i’m picturing hercules as bill murray on s.n.l.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:07 pmDemocrat’s war strategy:
Chris Britt
March 15th, 2007 at 3:13 pmFlaco sez:
It’s amusing how neocon trolls yammer on and on how Dems aren’t doing enough to end the war, but whenever they look as if they actually might do something, those selfsame trolls bleat about how it’s not the place of the Dems to ‘micromanage the war’.
Make up your minds, trolls.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:22 pmWe don’t need a war strategy. We need a strategy to end the illegal occupation of a sovereign country. Stuper fu*k.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:24 pmSpudge_Boy Ur guys are in power now – end the occupation dipshit!
March 15th, 2007 at 3:31 pmOtherwise innocent blood is on ur hands.
Spudge_Boy Ur guys are in power now – end the occupation dipshit!
Otherwise innocent blood is on ur hands.
Comment by Flaco — March 15, 2007 @ 3:31 pm
Translated:
“We royally screwed the pooch for 6 years. Now you fix it.”
My bad, I’ll translate it again into incorrect internet english:
“we royly scrwd da pooch 4 6 yrs now u fix”
March 15th, 2007 at 3:34 pm“Spudge_Boy Ur guys are in power now”
according to you, the executive branch is all-powerful; how is it “we” are in charge then?
March 15th, 2007 at 3:38 pmYou assume that I am a Democrat. Stupid fu*k. The Democrats for the most part are just as bad as the Republicans. Some Republicans aren’t too bad, but most of them are in bed with the Democrats. Until you figure this out, you will always be a stupid fu*k.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:39 pm“We” = Senate
March 15th, 2007 at 3:40 pmSpudge_Boy it is time to sign u up for a little anger management.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:45 pmI ASSume you were an ass not a Democrat.
Fu*k you and your anger management b!tch. I am tired of being nice to twits like you. You are my enemy. You are not somebody I want to debate with. You are not somebody I am trying to convince that I am right. I am not trying to get you to see things my way. You are an operative of my enemy. I swore an oath to this country to protect it from enemies both foreign and domestic. You just happen to be the domestic type. Idiot.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:49 pm““We†= Senate”
you’re forgetting your unitary executive talking points:
March 15th, 2007 at 3:50 pmSenate
““We†= Senateâ€
you’re forgetting your unitary executive talking points:
March 15th, 2007 at 3:58 pmSenate is less than the Pres.
I kind of miss the illusion from when I was a kid. It seemed so much simpler. Good guys and bad guys. Cops and robbers. Us and them. Three years ago, I went to Iraq. The illusion faded. The dream sunk low and transformed into a nightmare.
I miss the dream. I’d like to not have the need for another timeline next year, though sadly, I suspect we will. I suspect war is an endless cycle.
http://deeperthanwars.blogspot.com/2007/03/common-thread-found-burning-in-midnight.html
March 15th, 2007 at 3:59 pmGrudge_Boy are u unemployed?
March 15th, 2007 at 4:08 pmNope, I have a great job, family and home.
Fu*ko are you unemployed?
March 15th, 2007 at 4:12 pmNot at the moment, I still live at home.
March 15th, 2007 at 4:29 pmFuklo’s war strategy:
Send thousands of troops to a country that didn’t attack us while the countries who did get off scott free.
Send other people’s kids when our leadership warhawks never served (well, except when Bush protected the skies in Alabama from the Vietcong.
Bungle the Operation in Afghanistan in the process.
Bring in a surge of troops with no real goal and have them stand around in the middle of Bagdad and get shot at.
Create a few million more terrorists
Give our troops shoddy armor
Give the returning wounded troops some real shitty medical facilities
Blame the whole affair on Clinton
March 15th, 2007 at 4:29 pmWe’re lucky we’re all employed but don’t count your cards too much yet since jobs are moving out of our borders by the thousands while we take a hell of a pay cut. But nice attempt at an ad hom Falco. Don’t turn around (uh-oh-oh)
March 15th, 2007 at 4:31 pmCHIMPya TELLING THE TRUTH FOR ONCE: “We’re stuck in Iraq because of my and my administration’s STUPIDITY and LACK OF FORESIGHT…I hereby ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY by RESIGNING FROM MY OFFICE EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, ALONG WITH THE Vice-President, Secretary of State, Attorney General, and the rest of my cabinet–YOU TOO, Turd Blossom!” THE DAY CHIMPya UTTERS THESE WORDS, HE WILL PROBABLY DROP DEAD, ALONG WITH THE OTHERS HE MENTIONED, FROM THE SHEER SHOCK OF HAVING TOLD THE TRUTH FOR ONCE–NOW THAT’S WHAT I CALL SERVICE–YOU GIVE THE AUDIENCE WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE AND THEY’LL ALL COME OUT FOR IT!!!!!
March 15th, 2007 at 4:31 pmYou live at home and you think you are a republican? Ha, they would throw you out of the party if they knew that.
And you people talk about welfare state. You live at home. That is welfare. Get a real fu*king job and get out of your mommy and daddy’s house.
Jebus friggin’ H Christ
March 15th, 2007 at 4:36 pmThe Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, fears the Americans will torpedo his government if his parliament does not pass Iraq’s controversial oil law.
In what could be construed as diplomatic blackmail, American support for the al-Maliki administration is dependent on passage of the Oil Law which essentially gives control of Iraq’s oil wealth to foreign oil companies.
al-Maliki associates said that U.S. officials have told the prime minister that President Bush was committed to the current government but continued White House support depended on positive action on the oil law by the close of this parliamentary session June 30. “Al-Maliki is committed to meeting the deadline because he is convinced he would not survive in power without U.S. support,†one of the associates said.
So Mr al-Maliki is caught is a classic Catch-22. If he wants to survive politically he has to pass an oil law that robs his people of their oil wealth. If he doesn’t pass the oil law, he is out of a job…
March 15th, 2007 at 4:47 pmI gotta say it again. We can’t simply leave Iraq folks. We currently have remaining vital national security interests in Iraq. The United States security would be undermined if parts of iraq turned into a Failed state. Failed states turn into a test dish for insurgents and Al Qaeda. Afterall, this place is right in the heart of the oil region. It is also directly in opposition to the interests of Israel to leave Iraq. It is vital that we keep force levels, resources and operations level as it is an essential stabilizing element in Iraq. Honestly, who wouldn’t agree with me here?
March 15th, 2007 at 5:31 pmI was gong to ask what those were, but then got my answer:
Who cares? What is so important about Israel?
Me for one. Honestly.
March 15th, 2007 at 5:42 pmRoger_Rhetoric sez:
Of course you do. We understand.
Yes, of course. All that oil…
“If” they turned?
Case in point: Iraq since March of 2003.
Imagine that. One could be forgiven for thinking that there was some sort of casual relationship there.
Yes, of course. We musn’t disobey Israel…
…because Iraq is so stable now, isn’t it?
Only those capable of independent, critical, rational thought, RR. Only us.
March 15th, 2007 at 5:42 pm#87 and #88
Lets see what Hillary Clinton has to say:
Hillary: “There are remaining vital national security interests in Iraq that would require a continuing deployment of American troops.â€
What I posted: We currently have remaining vital national security interests in Iraq.
Hillary: “The United States’ security would be undermined if parts of Iraq turned into a failed state that serves as a petri dish for insurgents and Al Qaeda. It is right in the heart of the oil region and it is directly in opposition to our interests, to Israel’s interests.â€
ME: The United States security would be undermined if parts of iraq turned into a Failed state. Failed states turn into a test dish for insurgents and Al Qaeda. Afterall, this place is right in the heart of the oil region. It is also directly in opposition to the interests of Israel to leave Iraq.
HIllary: “Coalition capabilities, including keeping force levels stable, keeping resources and operations stable, remain an essential stabilizing element in Iraq.â€
ME: It is vital that we keep force levels, resources and operations level as it is an essential stabilizing element in Iraq.
Another Hillary quote for fun:
“It would be far fewer troops, but what we can do is to almost take a line sort of north of — between Baghdad and Kirkuk, and basically put our troops into that region, the 75,000 troops that I would leave in Iraq are for our antiterrorism mission, for our northern support mission, for our ability to respond to the Iranians in a military way, and to continue to provide support, if called for, for the Iraqis.â€
Ok, lets see the defense and backstepping now that you realize what I said was actually Hillary. Give it your best TP!!
March 15th, 2007 at 5:52 pmFaiz – Nice of you to ask for input – How about some positive achievements in Iraq? I know it will be difficult for you to locate such stories, but you CAN do it!!
March 15th, 2007 at 6:11 pmRoger_Rhetoric sez:
Let’s see how many damns I give about what Hillary has to say:
Answer: Zero, as in none, as in “I don’t give a damn”. Not a one.
I’d understand your confusion regarding Hillary’s views as they relate to my own, RR…that is, if I hadn’t already set you straight dozens of times.
RR, if you want to respond to my post, you’re welcome to. What you’re not welcome to do is conflate Hillary’s views with my own. I’m sick of having to debunk your pathetic straw men.
March 15th, 2007 at 6:15 pm#91 Oh please don’t get confused. My post wasn’t simply intended for you. It was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of TP and many Hillary supporters here. You see, many are very trigger happy to rip into a post like my initial one UNTIL they realize it is a HIllary post. The hypocrisy on the left right now is staggering. Polling has shown that Hillary has more support then any other Dem canidate from her lib base. The hypocrisy comes from the fact that the base is antiwar yet supports and defends a pro war canidate. It baffles my mind that here support is still so high seeing as though she is advocating to extend the war and keep 75k worth of troops in Iraq indefinetly. You watch how TP continues to support and post about the great Hillary. THe best is when TP throws up an antiwar post right before or after a pro Hillary post. It effectively says “I am pro Iraq war and Anti Iraq war”. HAHAHA
March 15th, 2007 at 6:35 pmFaiz – Nice of you to ask for input – How about some positive achievements in Iraq? I know it will be difficult for you to locate such stories, but you CAN do it!! Comment by valiant venus — March 15, 2007 @ 6:11 pm
If there were so many positive achievements in Iraq – you would have listed them. St*pid c*nt.
It would be difficult to *locate* them, because you have to go on propaganda right wing websites to find them. And when you do, you suddenly realize most of them are fabricated, isolated, or have since turned sour.
So what again are you contributing to this debate with your *negative-nancy* critique of the truth? Sometimes the truth is just *bad*, princess. You know, like the reason you have an eating disorder is because you’re mentally defective. Or the reason you have your political opinions, is because you’re mentally st*pid.
So dear dum bass – why don’t you do yourself, and the great state of California a favor and STFU you st*pid little c*nt?
March 15th, 2007 at 6:37 pmBut Roger_Roger, most *liberals* know that Hillary is more rational and reasonable than you are. She actually listens to the will of the voters, and shapes policies based on the *democratic-will*.
You also miss the clueless point that Edwards is a far more popular candidate among *progressives* – as opposed to the DLC wing of the Democratic party.
That’s why you’re confused, because a st*pid old dum bass like you doesn’t understand *democracy*. You think the future is a corporate run (fascist) system of *stockholders*.
It must be hard for you to breathe with your head shoved so far up your st*pid *ss!
March 15th, 2007 at 6:39 pm#94 So Hillary says and does what she does only because of what “we” want? Basically, your saying Hillary stands for nothing expect the poltical wind of the day. YA! Furthermore, if Edwards is more popular with Dems why is he trailing in the polls to Hillary AND Obama? Are you just referring to the fringe left and not your standard bread and butter lefty? That could be true and I actually hope so. Of course it still begs the question as to why TP is one of Hillary’s biggest fans? At this point after those Hillary quotes, anyone a fan of Hillary is a fan of the Iraq war or a hypocrit. Either way, everytime TP tries to promote Hillary, I’ll make sure to post all those quotes. It isn’t fair to the voting public not to know what someones real intentions are. I mean, TP props Hillary up as their canidate and then puts an anti war post right next to it. One can only assume that TP is in fact pro Iraq war deep down inside. How could they support Hillary if they weren’t?
March 15th, 2007 at 7:25 pmJust my opinion:
I find a president who feels it aok to deliberately invade a soverign nation that posed absolutely no threat to the United States, resulting in the deaths of over 3000 American servicemembers, unknown numbers of coalition forces, and who knows how many hundereds of thousands of Iraqi citizens, a far greater impeachable offense than a president with a bad marriage, receiving oral sex from an intern, than trying to hide it to save his marriage.
Again, just my opinion. Sorry for making that comment one long sentence!!!
March 15th, 2007 at 10:15 pm#94 So Hillary says and does what she does only because of what “we†want? Basically, your saying Hillary stands for nothing expect the poltical wind of the day. YA! Comment by Roger_Roger — March 15, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
Yeah, it’s called a *democracy* you fascist fcuk. Doing what the people want is the *job* of our political *servants*.
Fcuking Authoritarian FOOLS like yourself confuse our *servants* with some Imperial leader.
Furthermore, if Edwards is more popular with Dems why is he trailing in the polls to Hillary AND Obama? Comment by Roger_Roger — March 15, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
Uh, because the mainstream media only push Hillary and Obama stories on a daily basis? Bill Clinton wasn’t ahead this stage of the game either – what’s you’re point dum bass?
Are you just referring to the fringe left and not your standard bread and butter lefty? Comment by Roger_Roger — March 15, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
The *fringe* left vote for Nader, you st*pid old pansie c*nt!
That could be true and I actually hope so. Of course it still begs the question as to why TP is one of Hillary’s biggest fans? Comment by Roger_Roger — March 15, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
Uh, maybe because much of TP came from the Clinton administration?
Duhhh… You really are as dum as a bag sh*t you st*pid fool.
At this point after those Hillary quotes, anyone a fan of Hillary is a fan of the Iraq war or a hypocrit. Comment by Roger_Roger — March 15, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
Do you still fcuk your daughter, or do you only fcuk your son now? See, that’s the equivalent of what you just asked. Moron.
Either way, everytime TP tries to promote Hillary, I’ll make sure to post all those quotes. Comment by Roger_Roger — March 15, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
Wow, aren’t you the self righteous little pr*ck with delusions of grandeur? Do you really think anyone gives a flying fcuk what you post or think? You’re a big joke here! Everyone laughs at you as the mentally deranged moron preaching aliens are coming on the street corner!
It isn’t fair to the voting public not to know what someones real intentions are. Comment by Roger_Roger — March 15, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
You’re the arbiter of *fair*? Yeah, sure! You’re a moron.
I mean, TP props Hillary up as their canidate and then puts an anti war post right next to it. Comment by Roger_Roger — March 15, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
You should get some better medication for you Clinton Derangement Syndrome – *sshole.
One can only assume that TP is in fact pro Iraq war deep down inside. How could they support Hillary if they weren’t? Comment by Roger_Roger — March 15, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
You mean her endorsing the plan of the ISG, that says that we should reduce troop size, and only go after any suspicious and possible Al Qaeda elements that have taken foothold in Iraq – and avoid the civil war?
There are many Dems that are just as willing to give that a try, as get out of Iraq. What we progressives are all sick of us Bush bashing the skull of our soldiers against the wall doing the same *failed* thing over again. Somehow hoping it will be different the next time we surge!
You’re a fcuking idiot. Pull your head out of your fat st*pid *ss you pedantic little pansie pr*ck!
March 15th, 2007 at 10:19 pmRe: #16 Our friend, TripeMasterMonkey references an “enlightening” article by a self-absorbed, self-important enemy sympathizer, Rebecca Solnit. Feeling terribly sorry for the Guantanamo prisoners, Rebecca daydreams how she can be a heroine in the anti-Bush anti-war movement. I have a suggestion. Rebecca and ALL her comrades with similar sentiments can “ADOPT a PRISONER”……
“Periodically, I would speculate on what was the most extreme and radical thing I could do to stop the illegal prison camp at Guantánamo; picture chaining myself to the gates of the Senate, becoming one of those activists who takes up residence outside the White House or takes over a TV station to get a message out. I wanted to do something so epic that it would turn the tide, stop the crime. Then I would consider that the best approaches were probably already being taken, by the heroic lawyers at the Centre for Constitutional Rights and other human rights organisations, and I would write another cheque and some more letters and feel a little futile and a little corrupt.”
Rebecca dwells on her inner angst, so think of the positive possibilities of the ADOPT a PRISONER program would have. Multiculturalists would get first hand awareness of an ancient culture. Foodies could add new ideas to their recipe boxes. Interior Designers could learn the art of prayer rug placement and chemists and engineers could assist improving the intricacies of IED, car bombs and suicide belts. Budding filmmakers could offer tips to improve the cinematic quality of suicide bomvers final testimonials. Think of the “good” progressives could achieve with the ADOPT a PRISONER program….
March 15th, 2007 at 10:27 pmFor an excellent article by David Michael Green on who “supports the troops”—-the Bush administration or his critics, go here:
http://www.regressiveantidote.net/Articles/The_Sport_of_King_George.html
March 15th, 2007 at 10:35 pmRoger – Take a look who is the honcho at TP’s parent – the Center for American Progress. Having worked for the co-President’s husband it is only natural that Hillary would be a sentimental favourite. I think it’s great – I HOPE she is nominated hands down…..A conservative could not ask for a more polarizing opponent.
March 15th, 2007 at 10:39 pm#101 It just boggles the mind that the Clintons allow TP to post anti war posts when Hillary Clinton is so very Pro Iraq war. Seems like TP is a bit off messege. I guess we may see a change in TP policy as they start pushing for an extension of the war. At least that would get them in line with Hillary. Afterall, Hillary is now calling for at least 75,000 troops to stay in Iraq indefinetly. Her quotes make it very clear that we need to defend the Oil and Israel interests.
March 15th, 2007 at 11:12 pmI agree, Roger, Hillary has been trying to fashion herself as the female counterpart to Tony Blair – tough on terrorists (in front of the “right” audience) and liberal on domestic policies. Unfortunately for her, she will never be confused with Margaret Thatcher.
I think TP and their co-horts are hoping to swing Hillary from her newly adopted Centrist position to the bonafides of the Left (which she will undoubtedly have to do to please the vocal extremist coalitions of the Left apparatchik – if she hopes to capture the nomination….)
March 15th, 2007 at 11:32 pmOh Roger you’re so short-sighted. We’re not planning on “leaving” Iraq completely – you really don’t understand how to deal with any problem other than with military force do you?
Democratic leadership “seems” to want to try a different approach to the region, using some diplomacy and talking with Iraq’s neighbors, getting their input and support. I think, if anyone is capable of getting things in the right direction, it will have to be with the help of their neighbors, you know, the ones who actually understand the culture very well.
Use your brain for a moment, christ.
March 16th, 2007 at 8:18 amWell Roger that’s because we don’t blindly follow HRC just because she’s the front running Democrat in the race for the White House.
See, that’s the difference between us and your folks; we police our own and hold them to task. You need to start whipping your boys and girls into shape.
March 16th, 2007 at 8:46 amGreat timeline but I missed two things: 1. The over 100,000 Iraqi Civilians killed in the war and hundreds of thousands displaced. 2. Michael Moore’s brilliant Fahrenheit 9/11 release in 2004 before the election and the right wing’s angry response to it.
March 16th, 2007 at 9:13 am[...] monday marks the fourth anniversary of the invasion of iraq, and the helpful folks over at thinkprogress have put together a timeline of all the events that have occurred since [...]
March 16th, 2007 at 11:32 amDEATH TOLL IN IRAQ 1 MILLION READ SKY NEWS FRONT PAGE
TIME TO IMPEACH THAT DOG OF WAR BUSH,,,,,,,,,,,,,
March 18th, 2007 at 4:48 pmGreat Job. Will translate some of it into Spanish, whenever I’ve time at Mentiras en la Guerra de Irak
Thank you
March 19th, 2007 at 7:38 amWhen are we gonna talk about the geraniums bought in Africa by Irac??? this is the miss information that was a translation error to be able to have defense to start the war. Uranium=geraniums
March 19th, 2007 at 8:40 amPlease call your REPRESENTATIVES in Congress and ask them to stop funding this war: 1-866-340-9279. They are there to represent us—we are the deciders.
The Mission Accomplished picture makes me sick.
March 19th, 2007 at 4:31 pmhere’s my time line: Bush was put into the presidency to accomplish one thing: change the regime in Iraq to one that would work in the US interests. The Iraqi government put it’s agreement about how to manage it’s oil resources in place about 2 weeks ago. Mission accomplished, Bush went to Latin America. Halliburton announced it plans to move to Dubai. The violence merely justifies a continued US troop presence in the area to make sure all continues to go as planned.
March 19th, 2007 at 10:19 pmit is the ultimate in “governing” to special interests rather than the national one.
Four years? It’s more like 16 years of bombing campaigns, genocidal sanctions, massacring and terrorizing of a civilian population and other atrocities on the level of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. A modern Holocaust indeed…
March 20th, 2007 at 6:24 pmYou can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but how long is ’some of the time’?
It should be time NOW!
April 16th, 2007 at 3:40 pmThe timeline is great. It should be updated. A button to reverse the chronological order (most recent first/most distant first) back and forth would be handy. Here’s a few items of critical importance for the update: April 9, 2007—Following the call of Muktada Al-Sadr, ONE MILLION Iraqis march on Najaf under the banner of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi national flags. The march filled the main road leading to Najaf for EIGHT MILES. Demonstrators fervently called for an end to the American occupation while marching on, burning, and ripping up the American flag, which has become a hated symbol of neo-colonialist occupation. This mammoth demonstration was made up mainly of the largely heretofore Shia, but was also lead by and joined by clerics and members of other faiths and all anti-occupation political trends. Thousands of Iraqi soldiers and police in uniform were part of the march. No sectarian banners were flown—only the Iraqi flag. And there was not single incident of violence reported during this huge outpouring. Through a spokesman, Al-Sadr called upon all Iraqis to oppose the occupation and demand that American and other occupation troops leave Iraq immediately, demanded that the Maliki government insist that the US set a date for its withdrawal, and called on Iraqis to cease fratricidal, sectarian violence and concentrate their blows on the occupiers. This march and demonstration mark a new stage in the Iraqi resistance to US occupation. Lead by Iraqi nationalist and Shia leader Muktada Al-Sadr, it will usher in a stage in which the hertofore largely quiescient Shia take the lead in ending the US-British occupation. The Shia make up about 60% of Iraq’s population and are concentrated largely in Baghdad. the Shia holy lands in and around Najaf and Karbala, and the oil rich South including Iraq’s only port city of Basra, which together command the US supply corridor from Kuwait. The April 9 demonstration in Najaf is a prelude to a truly national uprising against the occupation which will eventually lead to the replacement of the puppet Maliki government with a government that demands that the US leave Iraq, whether by parliamentary manuvering after a no confidence vote, or by massive street demonstrations in Baghdad like those which ousted the Shah of Iran in 1979, or a combination of the two. This storm is gathering. When it will break, no one can know for certain. Perhaps it will break when and if the Maliki government dares to put the now drafted infamous oil agreement before Parliament, which allocates 3/4 of Iraq’s oil to Chevron, Exxon-Mobil, British Petroleum, and Royal Dutch Shell. This outrageous piece of neo-colonialist plunder is inimical to the interests of all of the Iraqi people save the few US puppets who hope to personally profit from it and has been denounced by leaders of all Iraqi religious and ethnic groups, including Al-Sadr. Perhaps it will be sparked by an American and/or Israeli adventure into Iran. Or perhaps by the American plan to cordon Baghdad into over 30 administrative zones to be guarded by occupation troops with the issuance of new identity cards which Iraqis are to be required to show at checkpoints to move about their own great capital city. No matter. The massive demonstration in Najaf shows that the elements of a great storm of national resistance has gathered and it is only a matter of time before it breaks. Then what will Bush do? Will he finally admit the folly of neo-colonialist invasion and occupation he has visited on Iraq, or try to drown it in a sea of blood in the name of the “war on terror” while medaciously and slanderously blaming this uprising of national resistance to occupation on Iran, Syria, Al-Quida, or Iraqi “extremists?”
April 16th, 2007 at 7:41 pmY don’t U all just go out to Arlington and spit on some Graves’s Thar the only re son that you can talk the shit you er puking out?
April 29th, 2007 at 5:19 pmBrendon
What we are today comes from our thoughts of yesterday, and our present thoughts build our life of tomorrow: Our life is the creation of our mind.
March 16th, 2008 at 4:24 amSex Girls Having Sex Rough Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 4th, 2008 at 4:25 amProm Dresses Hat Hollister Clothing
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 6th, 2008 at 8:46 pmBill
On guard, you rascal!
April 8th, 2008 at 8:08 amJessie
This is real good info. Thanks for sharing.
April 10th, 2008 at 8:49 amEric
Thanks for the post. I couldn’t agree with you more.
April 13th, 2008 at 3:36 amAss Tight Ass Ass Worship
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 13th, 2008 at 8:58 am