GAO Report: Daily Attacks Against Iraqis ‘Have Remained Unchanged’
GAO Report: Daily Attacks Against Iraqis ‘Have Remained Unchanged’
The Government Accountability Office has released its congressionally mandated report on Iraq’s progress towards meeting 18 separate security and political benchmarks. The Iraqi government met 3, partially met 4, and did not meet 11 of its 18 benchmarks.
Contrary to claims made by Gen. David Petraeus that sectarian violence has decreased dramatically, the GAO report is unable to report any progress on this front. Moreover, it notes that “average daily attacks against civilians” has remained unchanged:
It is unclear whether sectarian violence in Iraq has decreased–a key security benchmark–since it is difficult to measure perpetrators’ intents, and various other measures of population security from different sources show differing trends. As displayed in figure 4 (see above), average daily attacks against civilians have remained unchanged from February to July 2007.
Read a summary of the report here.
When the Washington Post reported on a leaked version of the GAO report last week, the Bush administration quickly tried to water down the report’s findings. Administration officials said the draft report was “unrealistically harsh because it assigned pass-or-fail grades to each benchmark.” White House press spokeswoman Dana Perino complained, “A bar was set so high, that it was almost not to be able to be met.”
But a look at the GAO report demonstrates that the office took careful efforts to detail the status of each benchmark, rather than simply assigning a grade. The report also used a “partially met” grade to offer a more complete picture of the status of each benchmark.
An internal White House memo reported by the AP last week went as far as to claim the GAO report’s standards would “lock in failure“:
The memo argues that the GAO will not present a “true picture” of the situation in Iraq because the standards were “designed to lock in failure,” according to portions of the document read to the AP by an official who has seen it.
Here’s the “true picture” the White House was so concerned that the public would see:
UPDATE: See the full GAO report here.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Shrub doesn’t give a rat’s A$$ about our troops, much less the Iraqi’s.
We’re there for the OIL (operation iraqi liberation, remember?), NOTHING ELSE.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:04 pmDoes it really matter anymore? This country is divided into two groups of people. A large majority no longer believe anything the Bush administration says. A minority will continue to believe Bush, no matter what.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:05 pmQuit sticking that GD piece of paper in my face, and that GD GAO paper as well, I dont need no stinking GD pieces of paper!!
September 4th, 2007 at 1:07 pmWow.
What a success.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:08 pmNot a very good report card, is it?
The three (only three) benchmarks met are very telling in themselves.
Commitees, command posts, and the rights of legislators.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:09 pmSounds like the neo-con dream.
Never gonna obtain #3 on the report.
They’re going to divide the nat. resources among rival groups, AFTER the big oil Companies control the pipes. No wonder the Iraqi’s won’t sign off.
Iraqi’s own their natural resources, NOT US.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:11 pmI reapeat- SO WHAT! you post, maybe more sphere folks post, BUT the major media sources aren’t touching it.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:13 pmIt was released today-Right?
MSNBC – full day of political news- So far-1:10 PM – NOT A WORD!
Like I said– SO WHAT!
If you Yahoo it, you will read the headline that attacks are down. The spin is on.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:16 pmI don’t want to see failed benchmarks, I’d like to know how the hell they propose to “ensure the rights of minority political parties”.
After all, Dumbya thought they were all just “Muslims”.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:19 pmIraqi’s own their natural resources, NOT US.
Comment by Not Canadian — September 4, 2007 @ 1:11 pm
Between the bribe and the bullet, the U.S. has been successfully able to convince many governments of many other countries that this is not true.
Let’s see how it plays out in Iraq.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:20 pmLet’s see how it plays out in Iraq.
Comment by toasterhead
I see it as part of the PNAC/ Neocon agenda:
Take their oil forcefully, thereby guaranteeing us continued attacks from terrorists FOREVER.
mission accomplished, TRAITORS.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:23 pmDoes it really matter anymore? This country is divided into two groups of people. A large majority no longer believe anything the Bush administration says. A minority will continue to believe Bush, no matter what.
Comment by VerbalKint
Exactly correct! The last 28%er’s don’t care what the facts are, and they don’t care to learn what the facts are. Lots of us simply want impeachment proceedings to start ASAP. I don’t want to ‘wait the last months out’, I want them prosecuted NOW. Remember Nixon was hanging on also, then decided to resign once impeachment proceedings started. I believe that strategy will work with these criminals, too. What do you think?
September 4th, 2007 at 1:24 pmtoasterhead,
IF we were able to secure the country (never gonna happen with such low troop numbers), I could see the bribe working.
Since that ain’t the case, force will continue to be the method for “negotiations”.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:25 pmThe Iraq ‘government’ remind me sooooo much of the government of South Vietnam, Inept to the point of disbelief and corrupt to the core.
Is this REALLY worth fighting for? I don’t think so. Let it collapse, we will be far better off in the long run.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:26 pmWhat do you think?
Comment by Tom — September 4, 2007 @ 1:24 pm
I think it’s never going to happen.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:31 pmThis report is meaningless. The real report will be from Gen. Patreous. And as Katie Couric already pointed out, there is going to be huge progress reported from Iraq.
Comment by Nick — September 4, 2007 @ 1:31 pm
Thanks, bro, that’s what I was going to say! You been getting a little something off Georgie too? He’s a tender little morsel; I love fake cowboys.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:34 pmThis is what a republican calls a success, but those with brains call a suCKcess.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:35 pm7 of the 18 benchmarks have already been met, in only 2 months of surge.
Comment by Nick
You do know they already have a replacement for Tony Snow, right?
September 4th, 2007 at 1:36 pm7 of the 18 benchmarks have already been met, in only 2 months of surge. That is very good progress. Actually, this GAO report is very good news for America.
Comment by Nick — September 4, 2007 @ 1:32 pm
Is that worth a gentleman’s C-? In my country, that would rate an F. Georgie has certainly lowered the bar for his party. I think the report is very good news for Al Qaeda!
September 4th, 2007 at 1:38 pmYes, we will bring peace and democracy to Iraq, its just too bad there won’t be any Iraqis left alive to enjoy the fruits of our gift to them.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:39 pm7 of the 18 benchmarks have already been met, in only 2 months of surge. That is very good progress. Actually, this GAO report is very good news for America.
Comment by Nick — September 4, 2007 @ 1:32 pm
You people are seriously deluded. What’s sad is that you don’t even bother to spin anymore. You just say that up is down and black is white and 27% of America nods their heads in agreement.
It’s so damn pathetic.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:40 pmOne more photo-op “mission accomplished,” moment for awol bushie. It is all about him and his legacy, not what is good for our country. Maybe his surprise visit to Iraq, will spawn another action figure doll of him winning the war one more time.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:41 pmI spoke to George about Petraeus, he said no worries, the General is a good, loyal ally of Al Qaeda like George and Dick. I’m sure the spin will be very favorable for the Republicans, and we will move a little closer to owning the USA.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:42 pm“Does it really matter anymore? This country is divided into two groups of people. A large majority no longer believe anything the Bush administration says. A minority will continue to believe Bush, no matter what.
Comment by VerbalKint “
And the sad thing about it is that the minority always seems to get its way, leaving a large portion of this country feeling disenfranchised. There is something seriously wrong with this picture.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:42 pmWow, those 18 goals are lame. This is the first time I’ve read them. I’d highly advise that read them if you haven’t…
Some are a lot more important than others. The ones that we have “met” are almost inconsequential or hide the real issue.
The three we have met:
“8. Establishing supporting political, economic, media, and services committees in support of the Baghdad security plan.”
Wow, they set up some committees. Mission accomplished. I wonder if these are government committees – committees of the government that the major Sunni blocks have walked out on. And wtf, set up a media committee in support of the Baghdad security plan? Really, that was a goal? Did we subcontract Fox for that? It sounds a lot like push out propoganda to me…
“14. Establishing all of the planned joint security stations in neighborhoods across Baghdad.”
So they built 32 of 34 police stations they were planning to build? Big deal. The police are still heavily infiltrated by sectarian militias and insurgents. Furthermore, violence isn’t down, so maybe these planned security stations didn’t accomplish what was invisioned when they were planned in the first place.
“16. Ensuring that the rights of political minority parties in the Iraqi legislature are protected.” And the comments on this one “Legislators’ rights protected; minority citizens’ rights unprotected.”
Ha ha ha. /cry Really? Legislators’ rights are protected, but not citizens. I wonder if this has anything to do with minority legislators walking out on the government. Easy to protect minority legislators’ rights when there are no more minority legislators. I know some are still there, but the big minority players have left the government. What about majority legislators? IIRC, two provential governors were assassinated recently. Even if this one was met, the fact that minority citizens’ rights are unprotected is a big big sticking point.
By the way, a couple of my favorite unmet goals that paint a much more bleak picture:
#3 (pass an oil law for distributing oil profits) There’s backward progress on that one. We’re trying to ram a bill through their government that allows US oil companies to get most of those profits – virtually ensuring that Iraq will have minimal profits to work with to rebuild it’s infrastructure and that the Iraqis will resent us for it and start up a new gulf war sometime inthe future to drive us out.
#7 (disarm the militias) Again, backward progress. We actually armed the Sunni militias to help fight AQI! WTF!?
#11 (even handed law enforcement) Nada. Sectarian based abuses going on.
It’s a quagmire. No real sustainable progress is being made. This war has to end. Yes, Iraq will likely fall apart, but there’s no saving that now, anyway. Let us withdraw and let let things fall where they fall.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:42 pmI’m sure the spin will be very favorable for the Republicans, and we will move a little closer to owning the USA.
Comment by Osama Bin Laden (R-Crawford)
Okay, but when we’re “owned”, will Bush roll out the “Mission Accomplished” banner again?
September 4th, 2007 at 1:43 pm4 of 18 benchmarks have been met, after only 5 years of war, over half a million deaths, and 2 trillion dollars down the drain. This is very good news for the GOP, and their buddies in Al Qaeda.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:44 pmComment by Nick
I do not think you know what this word means:
PARTIALLY.
But that’s what we’ve come to expect from you traitors, lies disguised as “mis-information”.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:45 pmOkay, but when we’re “ownedâ€, will Bush roll out the “Mission Accomplished†banner again?
Comment by Not Canadian — September 4, 2007 @ 1:43 pm
I have ordered on in Arabic and Farsi for the occasion.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:46 pmYou can’t expect every benchmark to be achieved in only 2 months. But even with this report, 7 of the 18 were achieved in only 2 months of the surge. This is real progress.
Comment by Nick — September 4, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
The Titanic continued to move in the direction of New York for a while after it hit the iceberg. That, too, was real progress.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:46 pm7 of the 18 benchmarks have already been met, in only 2 months of surge. That is very good progress. Actually, this GAO report is very good news for America.
Comment by Nick
You know Nick, you need to go back to school since your reading comprehension skills are seriously lacking. What the article says is:
That means that they have met 3 of the 18 benchmarks. “Partially met” could be anything from a tiny bit to a lot. My bet is on a tiny bit because that’s how Bush operates.
Plus, the escalation has been in affect a lot longer than two months.
So what else can you disassemble about?
September 4th, 2007 at 1:46 pmComment by Nick — September 4, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
I suggest seeing an eye doctor as soon as possible. I heard that seeing half filled circles as full circles is a sure sign of impending brain malfunction.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:47 pmbecause the Proglibs want America, nay, HUMANITY, to fail.
Hell, anything to make you cry, coward.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:50 pmBush has his Surge™ “progress” in a small box, right next to the rock that keeps the tigers away.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:50 pm.
This report is meaningless. The real report will be from Gen. Patreous. And as Katie Couric already pointed out, there is going to be huge progress reported from Iraq.
Comment by Nick
Boy, your comprehension skills are next to none. Katie Couric pointed out that she was saying what the Bush Administration wanted her to say by only showing her what they wanted her to see.
General Betrayus can tell us the escalation is a great success until the cows come home. The people who really pay attention (i.e. get their news from sources other than the corporate controlled media) know that it is all another con job by the Bush Crime Family. I will believe the GAO report before I would believe anything Bush has to say. For some reason that is one government department that seems to have been able to retain it’s neutrality.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:51 pmIn two more months 14 of the 18 will have been met. In only 2 months 7 benchmarks met is amazing. This is the government we are talking about here. This is amazing success.
Comment by Nick — September 4, 2007 @ 1:47 pm
And in two more months, a brand-new Hilton will open in downtown Bagdad, and then 21 of the 18 benchmarks will be achieved, and then Ronnie Reagan will rise from the dead to preside over the opening ceremonies, and then Dick Cheney will tell the truth about something, and then 21 of the 18 benchmarks will be achieved.
You know we Arabs invented teh concept of zero, just because we needed something to describe people like you, Nick.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:51 pmIS MORE THAN ENOUGH TO PROVE THE AMERICA HAS WON!!!
Yea, we “won” when we killed Saddam.
Now we’ve “won” again.
Now bring the troops home.
What’s that? Oh, then we haven’t “won” anything yet, wingturds.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:52 pmThey ought pay a monthly tribute to their saviours, The UNITED STATES of AMERICA!!!!!
Alas, you still won’t get laid.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:53 pmThe Proglibs don’t want to admit that there are definite signs of progress in Iraq because the Proglibs want America, nay, HUMANITY, to fail.
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS
GICO believes that if we leave and the Iraqis get their country back then humanity has failed….Why doesn’t he think Iraqis are human? Sad little man.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:54 pmI say the Iraqis owe America BIG TIME for what we have done!
They ought pay a monthly tribute to their saviours, The UNITED STATES of AMERICA!!!!!
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS — September 4, 2007 @ 1:52 pm
What we’ve done? You mean invade their nation, destroy their security and day to day lives, produce a mass quantity of refugees, torture, bomb and murder their people in the name of ’security’? Dear boy, they are paying us back right now with a monthly tribute of violence, which was begetten by violence – biblical – eh?
September 4th, 2007 at 1:54 pmDefeatist.
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS — September 4, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
Says the brat that can only whine ‘defeat’.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:54 pmIn two more months 14 of the 18 will have been met.
And then you can take the stick out of your butt that holds the pixies in. Any work on the unicorn herds? Do you have any spare Rainbow Stew ration tickets?
September 4th, 2007 at 1:55 pm.
They ought pay a monthly tribute to their saviours, The UNITED STATES of AMERICA!!!!!
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS — September 4, 2007 @ 1:52 pm
Perhaps they should turn all their oil over to the USA! How would that be? Georgie and I discussed it, but I have forbidden it. And George does exactly what I tell him. That’s why I haven’t called for another attack like 9/11; that worked so well, we haven’t felt the need. i was a little upset that George carried out those anthrax atacks and tried to blame me, but nobody bought it.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:55 pmI say the Iraqis owe America BIG TIME for what we have done!
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS
I suggest you go over there and demand the payment in person….I’ll bet you aren’t going to like what they will give you.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:55 pmthe Proglibs want America, nay, HUMANITY, to fail.
Yep. We killed tinkerbell.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:55 pm.
The Proglibs don’t want to admit that there are definite signs of progress in Iraq because the Proglibs want America, nay, HUMANITY, to fail.
F— you, Proglibs.
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS — September 4, 2007 @ 1:47 pm
Yeah, just like we don’t want to admit the earth is flat to spite you! Screw reality, you have a delusion to uphold!!!! Take some more meds, murdering gurty.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:56 pm#44,
The GAO has not retained it’s neutrality. It’s just not 100% corrupt. They did make up a “Partially Met” option to try to make the report look better. Still, even their report makes the situation seem more pretty than it actually is. (See my post #29) You can only spin so far before it becomes outright lying. They’re willing to spin, just not lie, like much of the rest of the government…
September 4th, 2007 at 1:56 pmThese trolls are really hysterical today. I’m getting a big kick of how hysterical they have become lately. They are literally coming unglued. Up is down, black is white, 3 = 7. Simply amazing.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:57 pmThat means that they have met 3 of the 18 benchmarks. “Partially met†could be anything from a tiny bit to a lot. My bet is on a tiny bit because that’s how Bush operates.
Plus, the escalation has been in affect a lot longer than two months.
So what else can you disassemble about?
Comment by bilbobaggins — September 4, 2007 @ 1:46 pm
Of the four partially met benchmarks, one is the formation of regions law that was enacted in October 2006 – well before the surge. The $10 billion in reconstruction funds benchmark doesn’t look like it will ever be allocated and spent with half of the government having walked out. The three trained and ready brigades to support Baghdad operations are either untrained or unready, and the police forces are still havens for death squads. There’s really no “partial credit” for only having a few death squads in your police force – your force is either infiltrated and corrupt, or it’s trustworthy and effective.
Any assertion that the “partially met” benchmarks are even remotely close to success is delusional.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:58 pmThey did make up a “Partially Met†option to try to make the report look better. Still, even their report makes the situation seem more pretty than it actually is. (See my post #29) You can only spin so far before it becomes outright lying. They’re willing to spin, just not lie, like much of the rest of the government…
Comment by Ben B
That is the Bush Administration’s watered down version of the report you are reading today. The report that was leaked to the media (their real report) did not have a “partially met” option and it painted a very bleak picture. I’ll believe that original report before I believe any report that the Bush Crime Family has touched.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:59 pmUnfortunately,
Dumbya’s report cards weren’t much better, so to him, this failed report is ‘normal’.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:00 pmWhat they have achieved in only 2 months is breathtaking.
Comment by Nick — September 4, 2007 @ 1:55 pm
Well, it has taken the breaths of several of your military personnel, and several hundred Iraqi innocents, but George and I don’t much care about any of them. Petraeus will do as I say, and you, Nick, will swallow it whole, as I planned all along. You are my puppet now, and although you represent a mere quarter of the USA citizenry, it is enough to continue with my plan to weaken and neuter the United States. I couldn’t do it without you, so thanks!
September 4th, 2007 at 2:00 pmWhy does the GAO hate The Surge?
September 4th, 2007 at 2:03 pmGeorge W. Bush succeeded in having the American people elect him President TWICE!!!
So who cares about his high school report cards?!?!
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS — September 4, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
Actually, he failed at that, too.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:05 pmDelusional…the trolls are particularly delusional today. What do you supposed is causing it? Did the RNC up their kool-aid portions? If so, I think they need to cut back a bit. Delusional trolls are not going to help them at all.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:06 pmYou’re gross, dude. Those are dirty Muslims!!!
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS
I see your “gross” and raise you one:
“Dude, it’s all pink on the inside.”
September 4th, 2007 at 2:06 pmGeorge W. Bush succeeded in having the American people elect him President TWICE!!!
So who cares about his high school report cards?!?!
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS — September 4, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
Well, I can’t take credit for the stolen election of ‘00, but I did allow him to use my name and image as much as he needed to for ‘04, because we weren’t quite done rebuilding Al Qaeda, and we needed his help. He pulled out a squeaker, we were worried until he told us that Diebold was a close buddy amd republican stooge, so we relaxed, and, sure enough, he stole it fair and square! We’re really proud of little george, he’s one of us! Did you see him holding hands with my major source of funding? That was precious! i carry that picture everywhere; it impresses my several thousand new Al Qaeda recruits.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:07 pmJohn Kerry will never be president because, among other things, late last year he called our troops stupid. That is unforgivable.
Comment by Nick — September 4, 2007 @ 2:07 pm
What’s sad is that you probably believe each and every one of the lies you spout. You are completely pathetic.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:09 pmSo who cares about his high school report cards?!?!
When you’re used to Daddy fixin’ everything in your life, no wonder the Dumbya doesn’t comprehend what “expectations” are!
HE’S NEVER HAD ANY.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:10 pmCh’all are the delusional ones!!! You don’t even realize the George W. Bush is the President of The UNITED STATES of AMERICA!!!
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS — September 4, 2007 @ 2:07 pm
He was never elected.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:10 pmJohn Kerry’s IQ is lower than Bush’s.
Comment by Nick — September 4, 2007 @ 2:04 pm
But your IQ is lower than Bush’s shoe size.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:11 pmhey, Nick, I’m wandering around the Middle East, in the wild, and even I know the surge started in March. Bush told me so, so what’s with the 2 months thing? Are you that uneducated that you can’t fathom a calendar? so you have the 3 easiest benchmarks more-or-less achieved in 9 months, which means at the current rate of progress, which you won’t be able to keep, you’ll have all those circles filled in in, say, about 14 years? Very good, son, we’ll wait.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:11 pmnick=stupid rovot. No doubt about it. When are you enlisting, Nick the chick?
September 4th, 2007 at 2:13 pmSo… ARE the Saudis muslims, Mister P? I mean, since you claimed that they weren’t and all…
September 4th, 2007 at 2:14 pmSeek help, leftonian!!! You’ve lost touch with reality!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS — September 4, 2007 @ 2:12 pm
well, at least he had touch with reality at one time. Not you, though. Early meltdown today, p? Too much meth all night? How’s that lone remaining tooth?
September 4th, 2007 at 2:15 pmNick, do you even know what the benchmarks are? The first one is completing the Constitutional review. That means they still don’t have a Constitution. One benchmark they did meet was making sure the politicians covered their own a$$es (#16 in the GAO report). Another benchmark met (#8) just shows committees established and we all know how much the righttards don’t like committees so you are touting the success of the same things you despise in your own country.
Schools in this country that don’t meet the benchmarks lose funding. Benchmarks in Iraq don’t have to be met and $200 billion more will be thrown at it.
The only consistency within the righttards are their inconsistency.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:16 pmPoor, crack-whore Mr. P.
Need some chapstick, punk?
September 4th, 2007 at 2:17 pmGoing back to my grammar-school days report cards, when A thru F grades were considered inappropriate for my particular grade level, we received three marks: “Satisfactory”, “Improving”, and “Unsatisfactory; Needs Improvement”.
So it seems to me those terms could be substituted in the GAO benchmarks “Met”, “Partially Met”, and “Not Met”, but the rub is that “Improving” implies any improvement above Unsatisfactory, however slight. For example, if the subject at hand was learning my times tables and the best I had achieved was to learn only up to my “twos” from my “ones”, I would be “Improving”, yes, but it sure would be a rather insignificant improvement if my goal had been to get to my “tens” by the end of the reporting period.
Regardless, the White House’s spin on the GAO benchmarks as “Pass-Fail” is duplicitous at best. There was plenty of room to agree to in-between terms such as “Piss-poor improvement”, “Nominal Improvement”, “Substantial Improvement”, and so forth, but the GAO report didn’t say what the White House wanted to hear, so naturally the Bush response was a pre-emptive strike on the GAO report.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:19 pmWhy doesnt Congress pull a NCLB on Bush. You dont make the grades your funding gets pulled end of story.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:20 pmWaiting with a boner for Petraues’ report is so pathetic,i.e. nick. What kind of progress is 2 million refugees? What kind of progress is nearly 3800 dead Americans? Attacks on civilians remain unchanged. Some of the benchmarks themselves are a joke. We armed the Sunnis to fight AQ, what do you think they’re going to do after AQ is gone? Give back the guns, yeah right, they will go back to killing Americans. Keep your head in your ass and pretend the view looks good.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:21 pmBUSH IS IN FACT A MASS MURDERER
“Bush has discarded habeas corpus and the Geneva Conventions, justified torture and secret trials, damned critics as anti-American, and is responsible, according to Information Clearing House, for over one million deaths of Iraqi civilians, which puts Bush high on the list of mass murderers of all time. The vast majority of “kills” by the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan are civilians.
http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=11533
30/8/07
===
Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered Since The U.S. Invaded Iraq 1,028,360
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html
===
Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In America’sWar On Iraq 3735
icasualties.org/oif/
Cost of U.S. War and Occupation of Iraq
$447,304,180,745
A report last month found that US and NATO troops killed more Afghan civilians in the first half of this year than the Taliban.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:21 pmhttp://rawstory.com/news/2007/Report_US_NATO_troops_kill_more_0706.html
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-civilian6jul06,0,2604638,full.story?coll=la-home-center
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2007/afghanistan0407/5.htm#_Toc163022674
Ah, the Al Qaeda supporters Nick and pee are sleuthing away, patting each other on the back (or elsewhere) while desperately trying to figure out why I am free and unmolested. It’s easy, girls, Georgie is my buddy, and we all stick together here in oil-land. Watch him kiss another sheik, as I have commanded, and see him hold hands with my largest contributors. In my country, that would be treason, but in the land of the GOP, nothing is beneath the conservative mind. Sex with boys and cops? Excellent! Sex with animals? Elect a Republican! Destroying your military? Let George Do It! 85% profits for hurricane cleanup? Only if you have an (R) after your name! See, only the republican party can make us look not so bad to the rest of the world. Inspite of thousands of years of indoctrination, we can’t possibly match the unspeakable evil and chicanery of the bush family, or the crime syndicate around them. That’s why we are so happy they’re on our side; they are doing all of our work for us, and we don’t even have to pay them. They just gave us $20 billion, for nothing! They are most excellent in the eyes of Al Qaeda and Allah.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:22 pmBenchmarks 1 and 18 tells you how well it’s going.
Benchmark #1
Forming a Constitutional Review Committee and complete the constitutional review.
Status
Committee formed but amendments not approved by the Iraqi legislature and no referendum scheduled.
Benchmark #18
Ensuring that Iraq’s political authorities are not undermining or making false accusations against members of the Iraqi security forces.
Status
Unsubstantiated accusations continue to be made.
Their own govt. is content in not finalizing a constitution and undermining the military. This is Civil War and we get to fund it.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:22 pmThose ungrateful Iraqis better realize how much we helped them…
for their sake.
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS — September 4, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
yes, or else we’ll pull out.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:24 pmBig words with nothing to prove it GAIVS.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:25 pmNumber Of Iraqis Slaughtered Since The U.S. Invaded Iraq 1,028,360
Comment by osage — September 4, 2007 @ 2:21 pm
Bullshit.
Those “civilians†were terrorists and alkaida.
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS — September 4, 2007 @ 2:23 pm
Are you claiming that there were 1 million Terrorists in Iraq? Are you really, honestly (if you know what the word means) claiming that?
September 4th, 2007 at 2:28 pmThe Iraq ‘government’ remind me sooooo much of the government of South Vietnam, Inept to the point of disbelief and corrupt to the core.
Comment by Uncle Ho — September 4, 2007 @ 1:26 pm
Exactly right! And remember how many puppets we paraded up to “run” their government? Looked like a Kukla, Fran and Ollie USO show!
And they didn’t have near the factions in their country as Iraq. I remember being out in the vills and talking to the real people, and some didn;t even know who was in office, because it didn’t make any difference to them.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:28 pmThose “civilians†were terrorists and alkaida.
You are a lying piece of shit, fukhead.
Comment by GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR OCTAVIANVS — September 4, 2007 @ 2:23 pm
Well, when you put it that way, who can resist? No civilians killed by accident or on purpose, most excellent. No wonder it’s going so smoothly, no iraqi would ever blow up and American humvee or try to shoot down a senator’s flight. We’ve been on target in every way, taking out 650,000 terrorists and Al Qaeda members. And the 2 million or more wandering the desert? Merely sightseers.
p, your meltdown is the best one yet, leaving you drooling and delusional, now your “normal” state of being.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:29 pmIf you Yahoo it, you will read the headline that attacks are down. The spin is on.
Comment by theswan — September 4, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
Heh, heh, heh. Actually you don’t even have to leave TP for that. Just yesterday TP said, “Yeah deaths are down, but it’s only because so many people have left or been killed that there is no one left to kill. Now with a report that deaths haven’t declined, it’s “See, we knew the number of deaths wouldn’t decline.” Maybe TP shouldn’t be quite so quick to try to downplay everything happening in Iraq. Seems there is enough bad news without them trying to squelch any glimmer of hope. Ah, that must be the goal. Bombard people with rapid fire bad news to keep them reeling. ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 2:32 pmTold ya so, mr. p.
So long, puke!
September 4th, 2007 at 2:33 pmi would like to get in touch with this OCTAVI-ANUS, he seems to be a good candidate for our suicide campaign. It looks like he’s already quite close, so if anyone can get me his cell number, we just need to strap a vest to him and send him out into the market. usually we have to train our people for many months before they get this crazy, but he’s ready to go right now!
September 4th, 2007 at 2:34 pmBombard people with rapid fire bad news to keep them reeling. ;)
Comment by upright left — September 4, 2007 @ 2:32 pm
Admittedly a chancy method. We like to direct your republican oilman presidents to bombard people with actual bombs, or even jetliners full of fuel, that works pretty good. We have found that relying on truth will get us confused with liberal lefties, so we try to avoid that.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:37 pmp, your meltdown is the best one yet, leaving you drooling and delusional, now your “normal†state of being.
Comment by ronjazz
I know, this one is really amusing. Between “Nick” and Mr. P, I’ve been laughing my head off. Just when I thought they couldn’t get any more inane, they have to go and prove me wrong.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:39 pmYou know we Arabs invented teh concept of zero, just because we needed something to describe people like you, Nick.
Comment by Osama Bin Laden (R-Crawford) — September 4, 2007 @ 1:51 pm
Dang, sammy, ya had a good thing going, but ya let Nick get to ya and blew it. It was fun while it lasted though, bud. ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 2:40 pmWhat they have achieved in only 2 months is breathtaking.
Comment by Nick
Two Months? Don’t you mean four years and 5 months? The war started in March 2003, not July 2007.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:47 pmIf you click on Nick, you get “Simple Minds”. How appropriate. You sound exactly like the citizens of “1984″ repeating Big Brother’s latest propaganda.
Like gdm said, it ain’t 2 months, it’s 53 months.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:51 pmHiya upside! I think the country would be best served if the White House were to be declared a ‘free-fire zone’. What do you think?
September 4th, 2007 at 2:57 pmThe vast majority of “kills†by the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan are civilians.
Comment by osage — September 4, 2007 @ 2:21 pm
Only when our military is after the terrorists hiding among the civilians. It is a shame that innocent people die because the terrorists are cowards. I’m sure you meant to place the blame on the terrorists and not our troops. ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 2:58 pm97. Hiya upside! I think the country would be best served if the White House were to be declared a ‘free-fire zone’. What do you think?
Comment by Uncle Ho — September 4, 2007 @ 2:57 pm
Hey Unc’, I’ll bring the M79 and you bring the WPwrounds and we can have a real Texas BBQ, …… In the Rose Garden! YEEE HAWW!!
September 4th, 2007 at 3:00 pmComment by upright left
Try and pry this into that tiny brain cavity:
When a sovereign nation is illegally occupied, the civilians BECOME the enemy.
September 4th, 2007 at 3:05 pmI agree with Not C. Does anyone opposing our illegal invasion, occupation, and selling-off of resources automatically become a “terrorist”?
It is simply a matter of fact that the majority of civilian deaths in Iraq come from the air: bombs, jet fire, and helicopter gunships. Only the US is attacking from the air.
When Iraqis are asked what they think of the 24 civilians killed at Haditha, they say “why do you mention only one? It happens everyday”.
September 4th, 2007 at 3:12 pmI ask Nick a serious question and he runs away.
September 4th, 2007 at 3:14 pmWhen a sovereign nation is illegally occupied, the civilians BECOME the enemy.
Comment by Not Canadian — September 4, 2007 @ 3:05 pm
Wow, now there’s novel approach. You might want to share that little bit of wisdom with our troops so they can start shooting at all the folks who were terrorized by Sadaam. Our troops think they are there to help those people, have befriended them, even saved their lives when terrorists have attacked. With that goal, the job could have been finished long ago and they’d all be home. So you hurry right out and inform each of our soldiers and their families. ;).
So what is your response to the fact that yesterday TP said the drop in number of deaths was because there are no longer any people around to kill, yet with this item, they say “See, no drop in deaths.” ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 3:14 pmTP said there was a drop in deaths ONLY IN CERTAIN SECTORS. They said this was due to ethnic cleansing. Once ethnics are cleansed from a certain sector, the numbers must drop.
September 4th, 2007 at 3:18 pm“I’m sure you meant to place the blame on the terrorists and not our troops. ;)
Comment by upright left”
No, we mean to place the blame on the Bush Administration and the poodle Generals they have hired to run this abomination. Nice try though. I’m sure you are trying to lure one of us into blaming the troops for the orders they get from their generals who are getting their orders from George Bush.
September 4th, 2007 at 3:18 pm“Partially met” = NOT MET.
September 4th, 2007 at 3:18 pmupright,
If the US was invaded and occupied, after 53 months would you be an insurgent, collaborator, or somewhere in between?
September 4th, 2007 at 3:21 pmWow, now there’s novel approach. You might want to share that little bit of wisdom with our troops so they can start shooting at all the folks who were terrorized by Sadaam. Our troops think they are there to help those people, have befriended them, even saved their lives when terrorists have attacked.
Comment by upright left — September 4, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
WOW, now that is a novel approach too; we are there to help the Iraqi people! What happened to WMD? What happened to the fact that Saddam caused 9/11? Which one do you really beleive? Oh, yea, The one that the rover emails to you each morning. Don’t miss a day, you might be on the wrong point.
You are taking your BushCo Kool-Aid from a firehose enema. That’s gotta HURT!
September 4th, 2007 at 3:23 pmBREAKING: IRAQ DOESNT MEET 11 of 18 benchmarks!
September 4th, 2007 at 3:27 pmWow, now there’s novel approach. You might want to share that little bit of wisdom with our troops so they can start shooting at all the folks who were terrorized by Sadaam. Comment by upright left — September 4, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
That’s what’s already happening. But who’s ‘Sadaam’? Was that one of your former terrorist buddy that Rumsfeld and Ronnie called his admirable ‘freedom fighter’?
Our troops think they are there to help those people, have befriended them, even saved their lives when terrorists have attacked. Comment by upright left — September 4, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
And killed, tortured and abused them. Maybe you missed the report out that showed the troops were poorly trained (thank you republican incompetence) and didn’t know how to engage the Iraqis properly?
With that goal, the job could have been finished long ago and they’d all be home. So you hurry right out and inform each of our soldiers and their families. ;). Comment by upright left — September 4, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
What, that you f*ckers mismanaged their training, the war, and the armor necessary to protect them from a civil war? They already know it, even if a few dumb rubes like you don’t! Bah!
So what is your response to the fact that yesterday TP said the drop in number of deaths was because there are no longer any people around to kill, yet with this item, they say “See, no drop in deaths.†;)
Comment by upright left — September 4, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
There was no drop in the number of deaths – that’s a lie. Just like everything you post, f*cking lunatic.
September 4th, 2007 at 3:34 pm“And killed, tortured and abused them. Maybe you missed the report out that showed the troops were poorly trained (thank you republican incompetence) and didn’t know how to engage the Iraqis properly?”
So you are another who believes that a few bad soldiers, or bad actions by poorly trained soldiers, taint our entire military and negates all the good they’ve done.
“There was no drop in the number of deaths – that’s a lie. Just like everything you post, f*cking lunatic.”
Comment by BobsYourUncle — September 4, 2007 @ 3:34 pm
TP said, yesterday, that there was a drop. Today, nope. I got the lie from them, bud. Whichever one is the lie. ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 3:43 pmTP said, yesterday, that there was a drop. Today, nope. I got the lie from them, bud. Whichever one is the lie. ;)
Comment by upright left — September 4, 2007 @ 3:43 pm
I explained that for you in #104.
September 4th, 2007 at 3:51 pmWOW, now that is a novel approach too; we are there to help the Iraqi people! What happened to WMD? What happened to the fact that Saddam caused 9/11? Which one do you really beleive? Oh, yea, The one that the rover emails to you each morning. Don’t miss a day, you might be on the wrong point.
You are taking your BushCo Kool-Aid from a firehose enema. That’s gotta HURT!
Comment by upside00 — September 4, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
Now, 00, is that the way you were taught to behave? What about Elizabeth Edward’s, “Let’s raise the level of discourse?”
What I know is that Sadaam possesed and used WMD at one time. Are you old enough to remember the pictures of all those dead people on the covers of the news magazines? It was quite unpleasant. The bloated bodies of the children were especially disturbing. Later he invaded his neighbor and the U.N. decided that he couldn’t be trusted and would have to prove that he no longer had such weapons. Everyone thought that was a dandy idea. Unfortunately, Sadaam had no intention of actually doing that and the U.N. wimped out as usual and gave him extension after extension. Finally, Bush and Blair decided he had had enough time and stood up to him, knowing the U.N would never do it. I also know that all Sadaam had to do was to allow full access to inspectors and this could all have been avoided. That’s what I know, 00. ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 3:54 pmTP said, yesterday, that there was a drop. Today, nope. I got the lie from them, bud. Whichever one is the lie. ;)
Comment by upright left
No, TP did not say there was a drop. Several posters said that in certain areas there was a drop in violence due to the fact that Sunnis or Shias were pushed out of the area, so they were no longer fighting each other. But nowhere did TP or any poster say that there was a reduction in the overall violence in Iraq. That’s probably too subtle of a distinction for your pea brain to wrap itself around. All you need is “someone said there was less violence” and you extrapolate that to “there’s less violence in Iraq as a whole.
The lie is that the escalation is working. It is not working because there really is no change in the overall level of violence in Iraq and there is less chance of political reconciliation now than there was before the escalation started.
September 4th, 2007 at 3:54 pmUpside; You’re bring a blooper? What I had in mind was to call in an air strike. Lots of snake & nape. REAL BBQ. Crispy critters. Yum.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:00 pmI explained that for you in #104.
Comment by Keith — September 4, 2007 @ 3:51 pm
So there was a drop, then? Otherwise there would have to have been an equal rise in deaths somewhere else for the number to stay the same. Which is entirely possible and if it hasn’t it probably will. I just think it’s a little hypocritical to report one day that there was a drop, but it was not due to the efforts of the U.S. and the next day to say there was no drop without even acknowledging the difference.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:01 pmComment by upright left — September 4, 2007 @ 3:54 pm
So you are saying, you believe we should have gone in because he had WMDs? If so, why did we find NO trace?
Or do you believe we went into sprinkle the Holy Water of democracy on the Wretched in Iraq and save all those people? If so, why not a dozen other places in the world? And how is that working out for all you Nationbuilders, anyway?
Or do you believe we did it for Israel and for “Oil” the right reasons?
Please enlighten us as to your true beliefs?
September 4th, 2007 at 4:02 pm“Only when our military is after the terrorists hiding among the civilians. It is a shame that innocent people die because the terrorists are cowards.”
Comment by upright left
It’s like some just stumble through history, not remembering anything from the last major fubar. This all played out before, in Algeria, with the French in our role as occupier. It ended horribly for the French, and the same will happen again. Chimp-supporters will stand around scratching their collective coconuts in slack-jawed wonderment: “Gol, who’d a thunk it’d all turn out like this?”
September 4th, 2007 at 4:02 pmupright, And just who supplied those chemical weapons? Bonzo & Donald Rumhead in the 1980s.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:03 pmAll you need is “someone said there was less violence†and you extrapolate that to “there’s less violence in Iraq as a whole.
Comment by bilbobaggins — September 4, 2007 @ 3:54
C’mon, bud, keep up. I didn’t say anything about where the deaths occurred. Go back and read the posts or have a fellow lib explain. I have neither the time, nor the inclination to bring ya up to speed. ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 4:04 pmupright, And just who supplied those chemical weapons? Bonzo & Donald Rumhead in the 1980s.
Comment by Uncle Ho — September 4, 2007 @ 4:03 pm
Just more inconvenient truths to piss off the BushCo Chickenhawks here.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:04 pmupright, And just who supplied those chemical weapons? Bonzo & Donald Rumhead in the 1980s.
Comment by Uncle Ho — September 4, 2007 @ 4:03 pm
I do believe it was the U.S., Ho, but danged if those people wouldn’t be just as dead wherever he got ‘em. Unfortunately, the lesser of two evils is still evil. ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 4:07 pmThe UN resolution was that Saddam must allow the weapons inspectors in, not have any WMD, and account for past WMD. He complied with those three. He turned over about 20,000 pages that the White House dismissed in two seconds. The weapons inspectors said they had looked everywhere they could think of and could find nothing. They asked the White House where they thought they should look. The White House ordered out the inspectors.
We had their phones tapped, so we knew the vote in the Security Council would be 4 with the US and 11 opposed to invasion. Therefore we withdrew the proposal from the Security Council. Without the Security Council, the invasion is illegal. The UN charter says so.
Everyone knows about the gassing in 1988. But it was during a war with Iran in which that part of Iraq sided with Iran. It is always wrong to kill civilians. But the Reagan/Bush administration lied and said Iran did the gassing. The Red Cross said Iraq did.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:07 pm“And just who supplied those chemical weapons? Bonzo & Donald Rumhead in the 1980s.”
Comment by Uncle Ho
Republicans just luvvv terrorists, when it serves their “realpolitical” goals.
Ollie North used the same corrupt bank that the terrorist Abu Nidal used to funnel funds.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:08 pmThe weapons inspectors said they had looked everywhere they could think of and could find nothing. They asked the White House where they thought they should look. The White House ordered out the inspectors.
Comment by Keith — September 4, 2007 @ 4:07 pm
No problem with that “inconvenient truth” that the inspectors weren’t usually let in to sites when they first arrived. What about the time that passed between when they first arrived and when Sadaam finally let them in. Nothing untoward could have happened then, uh, bud? ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 4:12 pmOllie North used the same corrupt bank that the terrorist Abu Nidal used to funnel funds.
Comment by barfly — September 4, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
You probably mean BCCI, used by drug dealers, terrorists, and the CIA. BCCI funded W’s Harken Energy, even though Harken was a small West Texas startup that had nothing to do with the Middle East.
Kerry tried to prosecute BCCI and was hampered by Republicans.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:13 pmComment by Keith — September 4, 2007 @ 4:07 pm
Good points! And don’t forget, that our air superiority had virtually shut down/and monitored Saddam’s military movements. We could have maintained that for another 4-6 months and we would not have had to invade. Except to get Dubya his “War President” Merit Badge.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:14 pm“I do believe it was the U.S., Ho, but danged if those people wouldn’t be just as dead wherever he got ‘em. Unfortunately, the lesser of two evils is still evil. ;)
Comment by upright left
Notice the little wink? He thinks this topic is humorous.
Yup, those folk would be just as dead, and republicans would still use the deaths for their own cynical opportunism.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:15 pmComment by upright left — September 4, 2007 @ 4:12 pm
If you think Saddam had WMD in 2003, then where is it? Is it invisible?
September 4th, 2007 at 4:16 pmWhat about the time that passed between when they first arrived and when Sadaam finally let them in. Nothing untoward could have happened then, uh, bud? ;)
Comment by upright left
If it had, Bush would have trumpeted the satellite photos showing conclusive proof to the world. What we got instead were helium-generation units, drones of death, etc.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:18 pmKerry tried to prosecute BCCI and was hampered by Republicans.
Comment by Keith — September 4, 2007 @ 4:13 pm
Yea, look who the Bank owners were: Pakistan and Abu Dabai, and partnered with BNL, which had Skowcroft, Kissinger, James Baker and a host of other Repugs involved.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:23 pmIf there had been anything, we would have had 1,000 satellite PHOTOS—not a DRAWING.
The drones was a lie. The aluminum tubes was a lie. The shack in the North was a lie. The meeting in Prague was a lie. The ties to al Qaeda was a lie. The trying to acquire uranium from Africa was a lie. The ready to launch in 15 minutes was a lie.
Why? Read PNAC’s website.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:23 pmKerry tried to prosecute the illegal sale of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of weaponry to Iran and was hampered by Republicans.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:25 pmC’mon, bud, keep up. I didn’t say anything about where the deaths occurred. Go back and read the posts or have a fellow lib explain. I have neither the time, nor the inclination to bring ya up to speed. ;)
Comment by upright left
C’mon bud, I pointed out the fallacy of your argument and proved you wrong. I have neither the time, nor the inclination, to continue to communicate with someone with an IQ of maybe 70 who is seriously delusional. I can hardly wait until the 2008 election. The day after is the day that your head is going to explode because you can’t deal with the massive defeat that is coming your way.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:35 pmComment by upright left
As the mechanic in Vacation said:
“Boy, you got sh*t fer brains”.
Same thing happened in Vietnam. ‘Civilians’, otherwise known as indigineous people, get tired of seeing their neighborhoods destroyed, and friends and family killed for no reason. Iraqis know the US presence is aggrevating the situation, so they BECOME the enemy.
Now go play with you building blocks…
September 4th, 2007 at 4:56 pmJust wait another year, and we’ll have 91 out of the 18 benchmarks accomplished…Nick…WOW! George Bush would really be proud…506%…that’s like an A+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++…
September 4th, 2007 at 6:03 pmI’m sure you are trying to lure one of us into blaming the troops for the orders they get from their generals who are getting their orders from George Bush.
Comment by bilbobaggins — September 4, 2007 @ 3:18
Lure you in? Too late, bud, you did that all on your own. Ya’ll really need zoo around here. She is always good at reining folks in when they head that direction. ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 7:20 pmLure you in? Too late, bud, you did that all on your own. Ya’ll really need zoo around here. She is always good at reining folks in when they head that direction. ;) Comment by upright left — September 4, 2007 @ 7:20 pm
You’re a little b!tch, why do you hate our troops so much, downright stupid? ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 7:27 pmYou’re a little b!tch, why do you hate our troops so much, downright stupid? ;)
Comment by BobsYourUncle — September 4, 2007 @ 7:27 pm
Now, boob, please exercise a little self control. Why get angry with me when it was your fellow lib that accused our troops of murdering the Iraqi people based upon the actions of a few bad apples. ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 10:57 pmI can hardly wait until the 2008 election. The day after is the day that your head is going to explode because you can’t deal with the massive defeat that is coming your way.
Comment by bilbobaggins — September 4, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
I’m looking forward to that day, too, bobo. If Hill wins, will she feel the need to pay Bill back for his actions, or will she take the high road since she is female? If Obama wins, will he invade Pakistan? Or will we just see more of the same with little substantial difference beyond the war no matter who wins? One thing is for certain. Libs won’t have the excuse of Republicans standing in the way of their creation of Utopia. ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 11:03 pmNotice the little wink? He thinks this topic is humorous.
Yup, those folk would be just as dead, and republicans would still use the deaths for their own cynical opportunism.
Comment by barfly — September 4, 2007 @ 4:15 pm
What I find humorous is the fact that you think it matters where the weapons originated. Just forget about all those dead folks and who did it. They aren’t nearly as important as an opportunity to criticize your opponents. Now that is funny. ;)
September 4th, 2007 at 11:06 pm“What I find humorous is the fact that you think it matters where the weapons originated. Just forget about all those dead folks and who did it. They aren’t nearly as important as an opportunity to criticize your opponents. Now that is funny. ;)”
Actually, your desperation is quite predictable, give the fact those dead folks were sacrificed to Reagan’s delusional belief that arming terrorists and dictators furthered American interests. What it did, was reveal to terrorists how cowardly and opportunistic republicans were/are, and how willing traitors like Reagan were to sacrifice the safety of american citizens for his own personal gain. His actions spurred further hostage-taking, and all the blood spilled in the Iran/Iraq war stains his memory, making any victories ring hollow.
And then his ideological spawn (just like you) used the dead Reagan helped kill as justification for invasion, convieniently forgetting their own party’s role in the war.
It’s all just a game to you. The truly pathetic, and disgusting thing is soldiers are fighting the fight you’re too afraid, and too intellectually elitist to fight…
September 4th, 2007 at 11:43 pmComment by barfly — September 4, 2007 @ 11:43 pm
Like I said: “What I find humorous is the fact that you think it matters where the weapons originated. Just forget about all those dead folks and who did it. They aren’t nearly as important as an opportunity to criticize your opponents. Now that is funny.” ;)
September 5th, 2007 at 12:14 am“Just forget about all those dead folks and who did it. ”
And who armed them? Your logic is loopy. If someone arms a criminal (or dictator) they are culpable in the deaths. You don’t want to deal with the fact that Reagan not armed them.
Remember, “who did it” extends to who sold them weapons.
September 5th, 2007 at 12:31 amAnd thanks for ignoring my other points, it demonstrates how intellectually unserious you are better than I could have ever done.
September 5th, 2007 at 12:34 amAnd thanks for ignoring my other points, it demonstrates how intellectually unserious you are better than I could have ever done.
Comment by barfly — September 5, 2007 @ 12:34 am
I generally ignore foolishness. Your other points appeared to say that, if the weapons came from the U.S., we have no business dealing with the misuse of them. We were doing the Iraqi people and the world a service in getting rid of Sadaam and making sure there were no WMD’s, since he wanted to play games about it. Our mistake was in not leaving soon after.
September 5th, 2007 at 9:21 am>Unfortunately, the lesser of two evils is still evil. ;)
Uhhh huh. Iran and Iranian influence DOES still exist you know? So please explain what occured that caused Iran and Iranian influence to become a lesser evil than Saddam?
Another quick question… Let’s say Iraq democratically chooses to be run by Mullahs and have a government like Iran. They choose to support hamas and hezbollah with thier tax dollars. And they democratically choose to sell their oil only to Russia and CHina. Is that “victory” for us, or not?
September 5th, 2007 at 11:52 am>the weapons came from the U.S., we have no business
>dealing with the misuse of them.
they were GONE.. destroyed and/or inert. there was NO misuse…
your basically insisting invading iraq was a good thing because “we can’t proove he didnt currently have WMD”.
word to the wise smart cunt….you can’t proove a negative…
September 5th, 2007 at 11:55 amSo please explain what occured that caused Iran and Iranian influence to become a lesser evil than Saddam?
Comment by Chocolate Jesus — September 5, 2007 @ 11:52 am
Morning choco. Why the name change? ;)
Remeber a certain hostage situation involving Iran? Sadaam wasn’t attacking our people at that time, making him the lesser of two evils, at that time. Later, he proved to be a greater evil.
“Another quick question… Let’s say Iraq democratically chooses to be run by Mullahs and have a government like Iran. They choose to support hamas and hezbollah with thier tax dollars. And they democratically choose to sell their oil only to Russia and CHina. Is that “victory†for us, or not?”
Comment by Chocolate Jesus — September 5, 2007 @ 11:52 am
We went in to determine whether there were WMD’s since Sadaam refused to follow U.N. orders to give inspectors full and immediate access. Our troops made sure they are gone now, whether they were at the time or not. Since oil had nothing to do with our mission there, it has nothing to do with whether we’ve achieved victory. If Iraqi’s choose to be governed as you say and support terrorists, then we would just have to take whatever action we could to deal with it. Terrorist training camps make good targets for bombers. Hopefully, the camps wouldn’t be located in the middle of a school playground, but you never know with cowardly terrorists, eh choco? ;)
September 5th, 2007 at 12:48 pmyour basically insisting invading iraq was a good thing because “we can’t proove he didnt currently have WMDâ€.
word to the wise ….you can’t proove a negative…
Comment by Chocolate Jesus — September 5, 2007 @ 11:55 am
You kind of like that phrase , eh buddy? ;)
September 5th, 2007 at 12:54 pmWith that reasoning, the U.N. was awfully foolish for wasting all that time and money in the first place and all you libs are foolish for saying that the inspectors had determined that there were no WMD’s. That’s the loon’s main argument, bud. Don’t create trouble for your fellow lefties just because you can’t control your temper, choco. ;)
>Later, he proved to be a greater evil.
Nice conclusory statement. Why? explain? You know he didnt attack us, right? He invaded kuwait.
“Us” is not kuwait. We had no mutual defense treaties with them. We attacked Iraq.
Explain why saddam attacking Kuwait was “evil” and attacking Iran wasn’t?
>We went in to determine whether there
>were WMD’s since Sadaam refused to
>follow U.N. orders to give inspectors full
> and immediate access.
Wow. Cite please? I’m pretty sure he was cooperating 100 percent with the UN. Did the UN weapons inspectors have complaints? Did the U.N. authorize the resolution the Us wanted just before the war? If they had prior authorization, why did they insist on trying to pass an aborted resolution through the U.N?
If we went it to “inspect” for WMD, why did bush suddently change the ultimatum to “saddam must leave the country”… if we came to look for WMD, why change the subject?
> it has nothing to do with whether we’ve achieved victory.
so what does define victory?
> all you libs are foolish for saying that the inspectors had
>determined that there were no WMD’s.
this is a minor distiction… inspectors, after much inspection, had found there was no PROOF of WMD’s… now.. basically… they were performing an investigation. they found no proof on which to act, so they didnt act.
basically, what you are asserting is that not acting because you beleive there is a 99 certainty something isnt occuring (U.N) is the logical equivalent of acting because there is a 1 percent chance something IS occuring.
basically, I’m saying “wait for proof to act”.. what your saying is “unless you can proove with 100 percent certaintly that something is not occuring, you should act on it”. Basically, I think being 99 percent sure something isnt occuring is enough to assume its not. You claim that without 100 percent certainty its not happened, we should act as if the event isnt occuring. Basically, my threshold for action is much much higher than yours… 99 percent vs, 1 percent.
the justification to invade need only be as strong as the justification not to invade, right?
>If Iraqi’s choose to be governed as you say
> and support terrorists,
> then we would just have to take
>whatever action we could to deal with it.
> Terrorist training camps make good targets for bombers.
Ah ok.. so we give them democracy, and then if we dont like what they do with it, we leave and bomb, right? is that what your saying?
>Hopefully, the camps wouldn’t be located in the middle of a school >playground, but you never know with cowardly terrorists, eh choco?
Right, how rude of them to not line up neatly in rows with bright red hats, to let us know who they are.
They are massively outgunned. Please name one massively outgunned group of fighters that has lined neatly up for a superior force to slaughter them in history?
Its guerrila warfare dude, stop whining.. you dont want to fight guerillas, dont climb in the cage with them.. very simple…
September 5th, 2007 at 1:15 pm>
Seriously.. this should be our Iraq policy, right Upright Cleft?
Let me just get this point straight….
“Give them democracy, then bomb them if we dont like what they do with it?”
Do you think we should warn them about that first? Its only fair right?
So basically, what we tell them is… “use your freedom how you want, but if you use it in a way we dont like, we will kill you”
And this differs from what Saddam said to them how exactly?
Its funny, because frighteningly enough, I think something similar to this is really and truly what the 20 percenters beleive…
September 5th, 2007 at 1:21 pm> then we would just have to take
>whatever action we could to deal with it.
> Terrorist training camps make good targets for bombers.
Ok,.,,, so after we’ve bombed them for not doing what we want with their “freedom”.. what do we do then? We keep bombing them until they choose a government we like? Right? We keep killing them until they do what we want? And this differs from Saddam, how, exactly? Oh wait, Saddam isnt the point, its the oh so dangerous anthrax that could kill several, perphaps even dozens in one strike.
September 5th, 2007 at 1:28 pmI’ve been up all night, im going to bed. If you want to dazzle me with your brilliant logic about how you determine under what circumstances we should act in the abscense of proof, or how exactly your plan to “bomb em till they do what we want them to with their freedom” would work, find me on another thread.
September 5th, 2007 at 1:37 pmComment by Chocolate Jesus — September 5, 2007 @ 1:15 pm
Dang, choco, did you just wake up from a coma? You have glaring gaps in your understanding.
Gassing Kurds was evil. Invading Kuwait was evil also, but not what I was addressing. Iran? Would we risk lives of our soldiers to protect a nation that kidnaps our people? Not your best suggestion.
——-
“I’m pretty sure he was cooperating 100 percent with the UN. Did the UN weapons inspectors have complaints?”
You’re pretty wrong. He put off the inspectors at almost every turn. Yes, the inspectors had complaints. I will only provide one link because you need to learn on your own.
“Iraq has not cooperated sufficiently with the United Nations weapons inspectors, and we will impress the seriousness of the situation to them”
Chief U.N. arms inspector Hans Blix to reporters in Cyprus
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/04/world/main527977.shtml
——
“If we went it to “inspect†for WMD, why did bush suddently change the ultimatum to “saddam must leave the countryâ€â€¦ if we came to look for WMD, why change the subject?”
Odd definition of “suddenly” you have there, bud. Saddam had ample opportunity and was playing the world for a fool knowing that the wimpish U.N. would do nothing.
——
so what does define victory?
Saddam is gone and the search for WMD’s was completed, which was the original goal. The fact that Bush didn’t choose to leave when we should have doesn’t change the fact that the goal was achieved.
——
basically, I’m saying “wait for proof to actâ€.. what your saying is “unless you can proove with 100 percent certaintly that something is not occuring, you should act on itâ€.
I’m saying Saddam should have been made to do what the U.N told him to do since he was being sanctioned and refused to comply.
——
“Ah ok.. so we give them democracy, and then if we dont like what they do with it, we leave and bomb, right? is that what your saying?”
You know as well as I that that isn’t what I’m saying, but I’ll spell it out for you again. We leave them to themselves as we should have long ago. If they choose, in the future, to support terrorists who attack us or our allies, we bomb any terrorist targets we can find. After all, I keep hearing libs saying if we leave them alone, they’ll leave us alone. ;)
——
>Hopefully, the camps wouldn’t be located in the middle of a school playground, but you never know with cowardly terrorists, eh choco?
They are massively outgunned. Please name one massively outgunned group of fighters that has lined neatly up for a superior force to slaughter them in history?
Comment by Chocolate Jesus — September 5, 2007 @ 1:15 pm
That’s the best response you have for terrorists hiding among civilians? Got anything better for the ones who put kids in cars to get by check points with car bombs? That almost sounds like you are saying what the terrorists are doing is ok. I must be mistaken, though. ;)
Here’s an idea. How about not engaging in guerilla warfare at all. How about working with their fellow citizens to rebuild their country. How about letting all their citizens share in the wealth of their oil profits instead of just the folks who kept the minority in power and terrorized the rest of the populace. Or did you think that the average Iraqi had a fine standard of living before the war as long as they weren’t one of the ones chosen for torture and or murder. ;)
September 5th, 2007 at 2:07 pm