O’Hanlon: ‘I Could Easily See Myself Changing Camps’ On Iraq ‘In The Next Six To Nine Months’
O’Hanlon: ‘I Could Easily See Myself Changing Camps’ On Iraq ‘In The Next Six To Nine Months’
At a Brookings Institution event today, Iraq war proponent Michael O’Hanlon expressed his support for President Bush’s call to extend the escalation, but he claimed he could only support the strategy “for another six to nine months”:
If you think there’s hope [in Iraq], there’s a very powerful argument in favor of trying to see what we can build on, what battle field successes at least we may have had this summer or this year so far. … But I think this is a very complex subject and could easily see myself changing camps in the next six to nine months.
Watch it:
Isolated within his own community due to his obsessive flacking for Bush, O’Hanlon has no credibility in making predictions. Some lowlights:
March 2003: “Here’s why things are going well and why they will soon go even better.”
May 2004: “Set a date to pull out.”
November 2005: “[T]he military appears as confident as ever of ultimate victory.”
December 2006: “Give it six more months or so, maybe nine more months.”
March 2007: “There are good reasons to give the war effort, now almost four years old, another six to nine months before concluding that the current strategy should be discarded.”
O’Hanlon’s moment of accountability is always six months away.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Remind me again who it is that cares about this clown’s opinion.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:37 pmIt’s alway “six more months”.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:38 pmWhen he talks about changing camps TO Iraq in the next couple of weeks, THEN I’ll be satisfied.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:39 pmWell la de frickin da, O’Hanlon.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:40 pmO’Clownlon.
Nice Richard Simmons hair do.
Go back to the Brookings Institute and do a study on Uranus.
-GSD
September 13th, 2007 at 2:40 pmYeah, right….because you (allegedly) “switched camps” once already, right, you hack?
September 13th, 2007 at 2:40 pmThey are going to stall and delay until they can dump this mess on the next admin.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:41 pmThe NeoCon Song
“All we are saying is…. Give Six More Months a Chance…”
September 13th, 2007 at 2:42 pmwhich internment camp are you talking about?
September 13th, 2007 at 2:42 pm“But I… could easily see myself changing camps in the next six to nine months.’
he’s going to become gay?
September 13th, 2007 at 2:45 pmBut, he’s an administration critic, right??? So he’s gonna be switching to being a supporter??
/sarc off
September 13th, 2007 at 2:45 pmThe drawback to continually changing camps is that eventually both will turn out the lights on ya, Mikey, and then you’re in the dark.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:46 pmWe’re being “six more months”ed to death….
actually, its not our deaths, but our troops deaths.. but that’s okay… the deaths are a small price to pay according to the GOP leadership…
September 13th, 2007 at 2:47 pmThe man speaks in Friedmans and O’Hanlons.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:48 pmO’Hanlon: “Give my opinion six more months. If my opinion continues to be wrong in six months, I’ll consider changing my mind”
September 13th, 2007 at 2:48 pmHey O’Hanlon…STFU! I’ve inquired in several posts and never received an answer: this neocon was supposedly at some time critical of this Administration can someone offer ANY proof to this? The MSM constantly prefaces anything this cloistered douchebag says with the same catchphrase about him being a Bush critic but I’ve never heard ANYONE offer an example of this. Was it simply that statement from May ‘04 mentioned above. If so I hardly feel that that one brief moment of sanity justifies calling this or anyone from the Brokkings Institute of all places to suffer lightly anyone critical of their boytoy George. Examples anyone?
September 13th, 2007 at 2:48 pmYet another Friedman unit, or an FU and a half.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:49 pmOh, this is rich! Little Baby Boo Boo has plenty of time to train, they’re fast-tracking that too, right?
Pick up a gun, and get your C S ass over there and YOU do the fighting, bleeding, and dying. What a waste of ink.
Have they become so desperate they don’t even realize WHEN they become irrelevant?
September 13th, 2007 at 2:49 pm360 American lives equal a Friedman Unit. Avg 60 per month x 6 months.
“I may ‘consider’ a change but need to see another 360 American lives extinguished before I consider it.”
September 13th, 2007 at 2:51 pmRighttards say – Give it 6 more months –
September 13th, 2007 at 2:51 pm6 months later – Give it 6 more months
6 months later – Give it 6 more months
6 months later – Give it 6 more months
6 months later – Give it 6 more months
and on and on and on into infinity.
Why not go to boot camp? Sorry, that would take courage to stand by what you’ve been saying. And it would take running something besides your mouth.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:52 pmFlip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!Flip-flop!
September 13th, 2007 at 2:53 pmMay I make a toast?
To the Party of Life.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:54 pmIf he could easily see himself opposing his current view then what good is his view at any time? He hasn’t thought any through except where he can make more money.
O’Hanlon, you disgust me.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:55 pmI’m going to get all these right-wingers “six to nine months” for Christmas. They just seem to love it so much. I am sure they would just go bananas.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:00 pmI wish there were a way for these guys, who influence public opinion, to be held to account for how lightly they treat the subject of life and death.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:00 pmWell, he was right about the surge being a success (whereas TP was completely wrong)…So, his views are entitled to some deference.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:03 pmIf he didn’t look so much like Lyle Lovett I would hate him more…..not that I enjoy Lyle that much, I just can’t hate Lyle Lovett.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:04 pmJust one more FU, uh Michael? Well here’s a big FU to you!
September 13th, 2007 at 3:04 pmthat translates to 1 – 1.5 friedmans.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:06 pmyet Dumbass and Betrayus want to give it 3 friedmans!
what gives?
how old is this guy?
September 13th, 2007 at 3:06 pmand why is he still sitting around at the brookings institute?
eh?
WHY is this guy’s opinion important? Does he think that he carries enough weight that threatening to change his mind about Iraq might influence anything? Gimme a break!
September 13th, 2007 at 3:07 pmcomment by exlax
YAWN!!!
September 13th, 2007 at 3:07 pmIt’s not just 6 months away, it’s 6-9 months away. O’Hanlon just wants to be sure about the accuracy – eg, if success ends up being 7 months away, he is making sure that his detractors cannot say “Aha! He predicted victory in 6 months, but it turned out to be 7!”
September 13th, 2007 at 3:08 pmO’Annie then broke into a loud chorus, “Tomorrow! Tomorrow! I love ya! Tomorrow! You’re always a daaaay a-waaaaay!”
September 13th, 2007 at 3:08 pmWell, he was right about the surge being a success (whereas TP was completely wrong)…So, his views are entitled to some deference.
Comment by Exley — September 13, 2007 @ 3:03 pm
Thought you’d slide that one through? Bullsh!t.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:09 pm“Thought you’d slide that one through?”
Umm, no. I posted it. It is correct. Why would you think I would post something in the hopes it would “slide through?” You are being nonsensical.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:11 pmAnd this is news because?…….
September 13th, 2007 at 3:12 pmO’Hanlon is such an idiot. Oh, and Trolls, he is NOT a Liberal or a Progressive. Don’t insult my intelligence with that piece of crap. He shills for the Broken Institution. As they say If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck…..
Hey Exley-
September 13th, 2007 at 3:14 pmNow that KKKarl has left the building does he simply send you guys the powdered version of the Kool-Ade in the mail? Just say NO, kid
This guy needs to be dragged behind a truck, lynched, shot, buried in a swamp, dug up, lynched again and then burned to ashes.
Personal opinion needs to be stamped out.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:14 pmNot all birds that sound like song birds and look like song birds are song birds. That analogy is false.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:14 pmThe surge is a success for al-Qaeda. They’ve never had such an easy time recruiting.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:15 pmExley,
Would you like to expand on your assertion that the surge is a success? We’d really like to see your reasoning on this one.
Don’t forget to post links to facts supporting your position.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:16 pm#40-So I guess you would support censorship?
September 13th, 2007 at 3:17 pmCaption:
September 13th, 2007 at 3:17 pm“I could easily see myself, flopping around like a hooker in heat on a vibrating bed, for the right rice”
You see? He is an opponent of the war!!
September 13th, 2007 at 3:17 pmLet’s see, in Dec ‘06 he said to give it (up to) nine more months, and three months later, he said to give it six more months. Well, it’s now nine months after Dec ‘06 and six months after Mar ‘07, so why is he changing his mind again? Has he become so marginalized that he has to say nonsense like this to get his name back in the media?
And, Exley (M#11), are you just saying that because the administration says it? Because, you know, they have lied to us on numerous occasions before. Why believe them now, when they are talking about sending probably a thousand more soldiers to their deaths, and to accomplish what? Why are we still there?
September 13th, 2007 at 3:17 pmThe problem with statements like this is that he will get more “air-time” from the media because he seems to be a critical thinker and a centrist on the issue.
It is a false image, surely, but how many of the talking heads really care?
They want to look like real journalists and O’Hanlon wants to look like a real expert.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:19 pmTPM, I will let members of your own party speak for me:
Democratic members of Congress who have determined the surge may be working:
SEN. CARL LEVIN (D-MI):“…The Military Aspects Of President Bush’s New Strategy In Iraq, As Articulated By Him On January 10, 2007, Appear To Have Produced Some Credible And Positive Results. (Sen. Levin And Sen. Warner, “Sens. Warner, Levin Issue Statement On Their Trip To Iraq, Jordan,†Press Release, 08/20/07)
SEN. HILLARY CLINTON (D-NY): “We’ve Begun To Change Tactics Iraq, And In Some Areas, Particularly In Al Anbar Province, It’s Working.â€
Sen, Clinton, acknowledged this week that the surge is paying military dividends:
‘Clinton said new tactics have brought some success against insurgents, particularly in Iraq’s Anbar province.
“It’s working. We’re just years too late in changing our tactics,†she said. “We can’t ever let that happen again. We can’t be fighting the last war. We have to keep preparing to fight the new war.â€â€˜
(Sen. Hillary Clinton, Remarks At The Veterans Of Foreign Wars Convention, Kansas City, MO, 08/20/07)
SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL): “More American Troops Have Brought More Peace To More Parts Of Iraq. I Think That’s A Fact.†(Philip Dine, “Durbin Cites Promising Military Progress In Iraq,†St. Louis Post-Dispatch [IL], 08/09/07)
SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL): “The Surge Has Resulted In A Reduction Of Violence In Many Parts Of Iraq … And It Is, I Think, A Product Of More American Soldiers Bringing Peace To Areas Of Iraq That Have Been Ignored In The Past.†(Bernard Schoenburg, “Durbin: Surge Helping, But Iraqi Government Must Do More,†The State Journal-Register [IL], 08/09/07)
SEN. JACK REED (D-RI): “There Has Been Increased Tactical Momentum With The Increase In Forces. … In [Anbar Province], There’s Been Tangible Success In Terms Of The Security Situation.†“There has been increased tactical momentum with the increase in forces. As I’ve suggested, it’s been focused on trying to disrupt the movement of insurgents in and out of Baghdad. It’s also been aimed at displacing insurgents in areas like Baqubah and other cities where they are presence was becoming more not only noticeable, but more decisive. We have seen also, complementary to the augmentation of our forces, a positive development in Anbar. And that’s principally the result of a political shift by the Sunni tribal leaders, who have recognized that al Qaeda is a threat to them as much as it is to the Shi’a majority. They have been very effective in working with our military personnel. And in that area, there’s been tangible success in terms of the security situation.†(Sen. Jack Reed, Press Conference, 07/09/07)
SEN. JOE BIDEN (D-DE): “My Take Is Parts Of The Surge Are Working.†(CNBC’s “Kudlow & Company,†08/08/07)
Democratic Rep. Brian Baird “saw enough progress on the ground that he will no longer vote for binding withdrawal timelines.â€
Democratic Rep. Jerry McNerney “suggested that his trip to Iraq made him more flexible in his search for a bipartisan accord on the war.â€
Also changing his tune is Democratic Rep. Tim Mahoney of Florida, who says the troop increase ‘has really made a difference and really has gotten al-Qaida on their heels.’â€
September 13th, 2007 at 3:20 pmUmm, no. I posted it. It is correct. Why would you think I would post something in the hopes it would “slide through?†You are being nonsensical.
Comment by Exley — September 13, 2007 @ 3:11 pm
You’re confused. The nonsensical claim is the “surge has been a success” claim. And the “it is correct” claim.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:20 pmComment by Caring Liberal — September 13, 2007
I think I smell a parody, I dont, think people should be lynched for their opinion, ignored when need be, yes, and this cat deserves to be ignored, but this causes me to question the post: is that you, again, M.N.P.?
September 13th, 2007 at 3:21 pmI read where the leader of the Anbar Brigade, the guy who helped secure the Anbar province, where Bush spoke 10 days ago, was assasinated by a bomb.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:23 pmI think the Friedman Unit thing was funny at first, but now it’s almost scarey in its accuracy. When was the last time you heard anybody use a term longer than two FUs? It’s usually one FU, occasionally 1.5 FUs, and sometimes 2 FUs. Never more than that! So if back in, say, 2004, they said it’d take three to four more years, would anybody have supported it? No way! 6 to 8 FUs is a long damn time!
They are exploiting human nature to always think “well, that’s not much more” when they KNOW in REALITY, they mean five to ten years when they say 6 to 12 months. This happens on Ebay all the time. A person sets their max bid to, say $50, thinking that’s my max! Then somebody outbids them at $51 and they think, well $52 isn’t much more, then they bid $52. They get outbid again, put in 54, then 56, then 58, and before you know it, the price is like $70 and they realize, oh crap I’m getting ripped off. I’m over $20 more than I thought I would max bid!
That’s where the public finally is now on Iraq. FUs won’t work anymore. The public is finally realizing they’ve been ripped off.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:23 pmThis guy needs to be dragged behind a truck, lynched, shot, buried in a swamp, dug up, lynched again and then burned to ashes.
Personal opinion needs to be stamped out.
Comment by Caring Liberal — September 13, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
Is that you, Mr P?
September 13th, 2007 at 3:23 pmHow stupid is O’Hanlon that he has not already shunned the war, Bush, the GOP and the neocons? Apparently the money stream is drying up; what else would cause him to disgrace himself.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:26 pmComment by Exley — September 13, 2007
I notice they all say SOME Exley. Meanwhile Maliki has not shown any real progress.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:27 pmtrolls; consider this, and just scratch out Vietnam and substitute Iraq. It still applies today
“How do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to die for a mistake?”-John Kerry, 1971
September 13th, 2007 at 3:27 pmOh, one more thing; who gives a shit what O’Hanlon would do one way or the other. If it wasn’t for the curly hair who would even see this guy?
September 13th, 2007 at 3:27 pmTPM, I will let members of your own party speak for me:
Comment by Exley — September 13, 2007 @ 3:20 pm
There’s your first mistake.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:29 pmFor being so “liberal”, there sure is a lot of censorship around here.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:29 pmO’Hanlon is just another “”bush poodle”. No credibility left whatsoever.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:29 pmExley sez:
First of all, Exley, those people you quoted are not “members of my party”, thanks.
Second, I’m seeing a lot of opinions, but no facts…certainly no facts supported by links, as I requested.
If you just want to sling opinion around, why don’t we ask those whose opinion actually matters…the opinions of the people whose country we have invaded and occupied:
About 70% of Iraqis believe security has deteriorated in the area covered by the US military “surge” of the past six months, an opinion poll suggests.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:31 pmComment by Exley — September 13, 2007 @ 3:20 pm
Well, it was kind of you to take the trouble to find all those quotes (and so quickly, too, as if they were handy on some site, or in your notebook), but I’ll tell you why they should be ignored. Either they are relying on administration reports (which can’t be trusted, as we all know, because they have a documented history of altering reports to fit their ideology), or they were relying on DoD-sponsored tours of Iraq, where they get to see a small picture of the whole story.
Notice that many of them qualify their remarks with the idea that the surge is working “in parts” of Iraq. People are still dying throughout the country in large numbers, and the DoD is not even counting some of them beause of the way they died (bullet to the back of the head as opposed to the front counts differently.) Quoting a bunch of people who were led on a heavily-guarded tour of a small segment of Iraq does not constitute “evidence”. Just saying.
And besides, what is the surge accomplishing that it was supposed to?
September 13th, 2007 at 3:31 pmWhy so much desperation on the left when some progress is made in Iraq? We see it time and time again. I know you don’t hate America. Is it that you just can’t stand to see anything happen that might improve Bush’s approval ratings or America’s overall support of the war? That’s pretty small of you if it’s true.
Off topic, I’d still like to see a little something here on TP on the Hsu/Clinton scandal that’s brewing. It’s getting coverage in the MSM. Or are scandal that would hurt libs off grounds (i.e. we’re all for purity in politics unless we can get away with it and it helps our cause)?
September 13th, 2007 at 3:32 pmWow- he almost has me convinced that maybe in 6-9 months I should start supporting the war. He has been wrong for so long, perhaps if he flips, it is a sign that the occupation is suddenly magically a good thing. Rainbows and unicorns on the streets of Baghdad in only 6-9 months! I can’t wait.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:33 pm“How do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to die for a mistake?â€-John Kerry, 1971
Comment by Uncle Ho
I’ve got a question too!
“How do you ask a vet to come back from the war and sell out his fellow vets by lying about war crimes that never happened and then throw someone else’s medals over a fence pretending they were his own?”
September 13th, 2007 at 3:35 pmYou won’t see any left wing sites cover that and of course the right wing MSM would cover it. Don’t be an idiot.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:39 pm“what is the surge accomplishing that it was supposed to?”
Killing Al Qaeda….I thought that was obvious.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:41 pmIts not desperation Cynicon, its called reality. And that reality is that Iraq has turned into a disaster of epic proportion, worse than Vietnam ever was. Petraus is the 21st Century Gen. Westmorland and Crocker is the equivelent of the US Ambassador to Vietnam (who’s name escapes me at the moment).
September 13th, 2007 at 3:42 pmYou won’t see any left wing sites cover that and of course the right wing MSM would cover it.
Comment by Spudge_Boy
But why won’t the left wing sites cover it? I thought the left-wing was morally superior. There goes that claim if they won’t cover their own scandals.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:43 pmWrong again Exley. Try again.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:43 pmcynicon; you are going waaaay off on a tangent. just answer the question, or are you too afraid of the answer?
September 13th, 2007 at 3:44 pm“How do you ask a vet to come back from the war and sell out his fellow vets by lying about war crimes that never happened and then throw someone else’s medals over a fence pretending they were his own?â€
Cynicon Implant — September 13, 2007 @ 3:35 pm
Heh! Good question. In any case, it is irrelevant at this point. Kerry’s betrayal of his comrades-in-arms and his lies led, in part, to him becoming the political has-been he is today. Nobody cares what John Kerry has to say anymore.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:44 pmmr woof; I think the ambassador you’re referring to was Ellsworth Bunker.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:46 pmexlax; regardless of Kerry’s status today, the questions quoted are STILL VALID TODAY.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:47 pmOff topic, I’d still like to see a little something here on TP on the Hsu/Clinton scandal that’s brewing. It’s getting coverage in the MSM. Or are scandal that would hurt libs off grounds (i.e. we’re all for purity in politics unless we can get away with it and it helps our cause)?
We don’t like to talk about that sort of thing here. If we don’t discuss it, it isn’t happening. Anyway, Clinton didn’t do anything wrong. It’s just a smear campaign by the right wing propaganda machine.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:47 pmExley sez:
BZZZT! Nice try, Exley, but no dice.
The goal of the surge, in Chimpy’s own words, was to give Iraq’s central government “breathing room†to make progress on political reconciliation. It’s now September, and zero progress has been made on that front.
I thought it was obvious…thanks again for reminding us how desperate the right is to dismiss facts they don’t like.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:47 pmThanks Uncle Ho. Thats the one!
September 13th, 2007 at 3:47 pmWhat the fu*k does a left leaning blog have to do with how the “left-wing is morally superior?” Your argument is completely empty.
See, I would never ask a stupid question like yours as I don’t like looking stupid.
Here is the stupid question I won’t ask.
“How come Hannity, O’Rielly and Matthews talk about Craig wanting to suck a d!ck and Vitter wearing diapers?”
See, I already know answer. Because they are right wingers.
Don’t be a fu*king idiot and stop asking stupid questions.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:48 pmBut why won’t the left wing sites cover it? I thought the left-wing was morally superior. There goes that claim if they won’t cover their own scandals.
Oh, we totally are. But uh, stop talking about it.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:50 pmYeah, he’s going to set a date for turning tail. It occurs about the same time as indictment or publication of his new book.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:50 pmHo hum.
Comment by exit strategy! — September 13, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
See, TP admins? This is what I was talking about back in the “wash-times-walsh” thread. A rational discussion of the topic on a thread here would serve to stop all the trolls yammering about it on other threads…we could tell them to take it to the thread dedicated to the topic, and stop trying to derail non-related threads with the issue. Unfortunately, since TP is mysteriously silent on the issue, this isn’t an option, and the trolls’ complaints of “why is TP ducking this story†are legitimized.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:51 pmWhoa, getting a little defensive there spudgey. Careful, your immaturity is showing. I thought you were morally superior, being a lefty and all.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:52 pmNice try, Trip Master. But the only way Iraq’s government is going to obtain “breathing room” for a political settlement is for the Al Qaeda in Iraq to be destroyed. That is why the surge was initiated — to destroy Al Qaeda in Iraq, which is responsible for most of the bloodshed there, and allow Iraqi government to establish control.
Like I said, good effort…Keep trying though.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:52 pm>But why won’t the left wing sites cover it? I thought the left-wing was morally superior. There goes that claim if they won’t cover their own scandals.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004174.php
Somehow I don’t think this will get you to STFU.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:52 pmThis O’Hanlon character DESPERATELY needs to get a new toupee.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:53 pmI know it’s like the only thing out there to harp on (especially since the name “Clinton” is embedded in the story) but the Clinton/Hsu thing is not really a big deal with the exception that her campaign vetting practices need to be scrutinized closer. Is there a conspiracy here? I highly doubt it and I’m not a Clinton supporter either (Edwards is my preference at the moment).
I’m glad the MSM reported about it. They should. Just as they should take a teensy bit closer look at the Liar Party – er – Republican Party candidates. I mean I know it’s par for the course for repubclians to take tons of money from huge companies and cut them great corrupt deals in law, but just because it’s common knowledge doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be scrutinized as much as the Democrats are.
Anyway, So Clinton is returning the money. End of story. Egg on face. Yes. Huge conspiracy. No. Not by a long shot. Now if a pattern develops, I might take issue. But I doubt it will. A pattern such as finding out that all the major oil companies donated a ton of money and Clinton starts talking about how “gas prices aint that bad.” Then I’ll take notice.
Man it’s such a non-comeback I’m ALMOST (read: almost) surprised at the trolls. I guess it beats digging into 10 years ago to drag up Bill Clinton falacies to defend the behavior of their corrupt Liar Party, but still… Come on. Can’t you argue facts instead of “Clinton did it too!” (in this case referring to Hill’ instead of Bill)
September 13th, 2007 at 3:54 pmWhy is everyone getting so defensive? Cynicon Implant has a legitimate issue. Your defensiveness shows that you know it too.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:54 pmBy the way, more good news out of Iraq today:
Al-Qaida in Iraq takes heavy losses
Sep 13 09:25 AM US/Eastern
BAGHDAD, Sept. 13 (UPI) — Al-Qaida militants in Iraq have taken heavy losses in two joint U.S.-Iraqi raids north of Baghdad, the U.S. military reported Thursday.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:56 pmExley, that is good news.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:57 pmExley sez:
First of all, that’s not what your Commander-in-Chimp said.
Second, unless you’re contending that Al Qaeda in Iraq is now destroyed, you’re admitting the surge is a failure, even by your ginned-up definition of success.
Either way, you lose. I’d say “nice try”, but this was just plain substandard, Exley. I expected better from you.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:58 pmWell, when one has no integrity and no reason for taking positions other than to ingratiate oneself with those in power, it is easy to change opinions with the wind’s direction!
September 13th, 2007 at 3:59 pmYay! Let’s see. Before Iraq War: no Al Qaeda (secular dictatos hate religious fanatics, you see — ask China). Yesterday, Al Qaeda gaining foothold. Today, they lost a few. Wow we are now not quite as bad off as yesterday w/ regard to Al Qaeda but still much worse than before the war! Good job, repubs! Keep it up and we might someday be able to give them a full three hours of power per day, a 35-year life span, and water that might not kill them as much as now. Mission Accomplished!
September 13th, 2007 at 3:59 pm#
Exley, that is good news.
Comment by hellinabucket — September 13, 2007 @ 3:57 pm
That’s good news??? I thought you were against this war? People dying is good news now.. huh.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:01 pm#87-That is if the US Military is being truthful about it and not overstating this success. Which wouldn’t surprise me.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:01 pmComment by exit strategy! — September 13, 2007
September 13th, 2007 at 4:01 pmIts in the LA time ES. Your Off topic with INTENT.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-hsu11sep11,1,7623157.story?coll=la-news-politics-national&track=crosspromo
to destroy Al Qaeda in Iraq, which is responsible for most of the bloodshed there, and allow Iraqi government to establish control.
Like I said, good effort…Keep trying though.
Comment by Exley — September 13, 2007 @ 3:52 pm
Exley, the us military puts the amount of violence caused by AQ in Iraq to about 5-8%. Claiming most of the violence is caused by AQ in Iraq is a bit farfetched.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:02 pmrec #84: O’Hanlon might take a quick trip to Iraq. I understand there’s lots of cheap rugs there, provided all the political trippers (and Katie, too) haven’t bought them all.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:03 pmParrottlover — I’m merely asking why TP is not covering it. You have to admit, given the chinese campaign donation scandal associated with B.Clinton in the 90s, that there might be something here.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:03 pmAl Qaeda in Iraq is not a large portion of the Sunni Insurgency. Most of the Insurgency is home grown.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:06 pmKrazny sez:
“A bit farfetched” is undeservedly generous, Krazny. “A goddamned lie” is more accurate.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:06 pm#89, TPM,
Please go back and read the President’s Jan. 10, 2007 Address to the Nation announcing the surge:
“As we make these changes, we will continue to pursue al Qaeda and foreign fighters. Al Qaeda is still active in Iraq. Its home base is Anbar Province. Al Qaeda has helped make Anbar the most violent area of Iraq outside the capital. A captured al Qaeda document describes the terrorists’ plan to infiltrate and seize control of the province. This would bring al Qaeda closer to its goals of taking down Iraq’s democracy, building a radical Islamic empire, and launching new attacks on the United States at home and abroad.
Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders, and they are protecting the local population. Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their willingness to take on al Qaeda. And as a result, our commanders believe we have an opportunity to deal a serious blow to the terrorists. So I have given orders to increase American forces in Anbar Province by 4,000 troops. These troops will work with Iraqi and tribal forces to keep up the pressure on the terrorists. America’s men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda’s safe haven in Afghanistan — and we will not allow them to re-establish it in Iraq.”
Now, as we see from the comments from the Democratic lawmakers posted above, including ThinkProgress’s candidate, Sen. Clinton, the surge is succeeding is fighting and defeating Al Qaeda.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:07 pmComment by Cynicon Implant — September 13, 2007
Fine, send an email to TP. ask them.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:08 pmhttp://thinkprogress.org/contact
Comment by Parrotlover77 — September 13, 2007 @ 3:59 pm
You see the bigger picture. It’s very frustrating.
Exley, the initial rationale for the “Surge” was to give the Iraqi govt some “breathing room” so a larger political and economic movement towards stability could take a foothold. That hasn’t come close to happening.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:08 pmBushy has a Bhoner for him.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:10 pm#100-Just more projection and fantasy and bullshit from the Chimp in Chief. Nothing new there.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:10 pmFlashback to seeing 5 year olds:
Mom, can I have 10 more minutes before going to bed ?
What about 10 more minutes ?
Just 10 more minutes !
September 13th, 2007 at 4:10 pmmy reaction upon reading this? LOUD hoots of derisive laughter.
He beat The Onion to the punchline, it seems.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:11 pmHiB,
As I said above, the “breathing room” cannot be achieved until the violence being waged by Al Qaeda in Iraq is significantly reduced. That is being done. The political reconciliation is up to the Iraqis. They are getting the “breathing room” now….They need to act on it.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:12 pmParrotlover77 sez:
Yes, PL, but you’re forgetting that neocons don’t consider the pre-invasion Iraq in their calculations, as they claim they are not responsible for the invasion, since they were able to trick several Democrats into approving the invasion by the use of fake intelligence.
Then, when you attempt to broach the subject of fake intelligence, they claim it’s the Democrats’ fault, since they didn’t spot the fake intelligence, and instead, accepted as accurate and valid what was presented to them by a trusted source…a trusted source that knew full well the intel was inaccurate.
Demented? Assuredly. Psychotic? Definitely. But that’s how the mind of a neocon works.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:12 pmExley,
Please refer to Krazny’s post at #95 to see exactly where your argument fell to pieces.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:14 pmWeren’t we told “just six more months” six months ago?
September 13th, 2007 at 4:15 pmOK, kids…gotta skate, but I’ll definitely be around for Chimpy’s address tonight. See you then!
September 13th, 2007 at 4:16 pmI can see myself changing hands for the appropriate stroking gesture in response to the drivel of insignificance coming from that over educated stooge’s lips.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:17 pm7-2007 Last fall, King Abdullah warned Vice President Dick Cheney that Saudi Arabia might provide financial backing to Iraqi Sunnis in any war against Iraq’s Shiites if the United States pulled its troops out of Iraq, American and Arab diplomats said.
This is like being blackmailed.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:20 pmKeith H. said “Remind me again who it is that cares about this clown’s opinion.”
I COMPLETLY agree….
September 13th, 2007 at 4:20 pmcaption contest:
Mr French wheres Sissy?
September 13th, 2007 at 4:21 pmExley, more from the president’s speech that night:
A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations. Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and communities. So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.
3 of the 18 have been met and yet the president doesn’t hold to his word and attempts to put any more pressure on the Iraqis to meet the remaining 15 benchmarks.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:23 pmAs I said above, the “breathing room†cannot be achieved until the violence being waged by Al Qaeda in Iraq is significantly reduced. -Exley
The surge troops primarily went to Baghdad not the Al-Anbar province. It was some 30 tribes that banded together that pushed out the insurgents and AQI and not so much the INF or the US.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:24 pmZep Tepi, exactly. Al-Anbar is more of an example that our presences isn’t as needed as being portrayed.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:33 pm“How do you ask a man to die for a mistake?”
How about it trolls? is the question way too over your heads? Or are you afraid of the answer?
exlax & cynicon avoids answering the question, but proceed to attack Kerry’s patriotism.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:39 pmExley, can you answer Uncle Ho’s question?
September 13th, 2007 at 4:40 pmAll soldiers in the army volunteered.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:42 pmbbb: volunteered? A cousin of mine is shipping out to Iraq in a few weeks, and the ONLY reason he enlisted is because of a lack of jobs around here. It’s an economic draft.
Regardless; it still does NOT address why they should die for a mistake.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:46 pmCome now, Exley, quoting Bush as if his comments were a reliable source for facts is like quoting the law as proof that you’re a lawyer.
And if the point of the surge was to give the Iraqi government “breathing room”, then why the hell did they take a whole month off? They could have used that time to work our their political differences. Meanwhile, while they were doing nothing, that is exactly what our troops were dying for. NOTHING!
September 13th, 2007 at 4:48 pmbig bad bush, the soldiers did volunteer. They signed a contract. Since then the US has gone back on that contract. Stop loss orders and changing the time out of theater has been the standard and not upholding their end of the contract.
What exactly is your point? Are you suggesting the soldiers knew what they were getting into so they get what they deserve? I’m really interested in hearing whare your thought process is coming from and going.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:51 pmNo, there’s no “economic draft”. He may have enlisted because he couldn’t find another job, but he wasn’t forced to join. My cousin enlisted to get the GI bill. It was war time when he enlisted, other than being lied to left and right about what he’d be doing after he joined, he knew what he was getting himself into.
I never said they should die, I doubt anyone would say they should die.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:54 pmThere is a “Stop Loss” order. Are you familiar with that big bad bush?
September 13th, 2007 at 4:56 pmYou are no longer a legitimate poster hellina.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:58 pmBut yeah, it’s too bad they can’t get out of the Army. Shouldn’t have signed on in the first place. My cousin got out.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:59 pmThat’s funny bbb. I’ll continue to post even if you object though. I’ll also continue to question you. What was your point when you said the soldiers volunteered?
September 13th, 2007 at 5:00 pmI think that’s the first example I’ve seen of a can actually kicking itself….
September 13th, 2007 at 5:04 pmOy….My last post seem not to have made it and I foolishly didn’t copy them before hitting the “send” button.
Okay, I will try to reconstruct a brief version as best I can:
#115, HiB:
I agree. There needs to be more pressure put on the Iraqi government to get their act together. If they can’t or won’t, we should dramatically reduce our presence in Iraq. But in the meantime, killing Al Qaeda in Iraq is a good thing and we should keep it up as long as possible.
I will be perfectly frank, I really don’t care in the Sunnis, Shias and Kurds in Iraq like eachother…I don’t care anymore if the Iraqis form a democratic government…I don’t even care if Iraq winds up in a civil war. I don’t care about the sectarian violence among Iraqis. It’s a tragedy, but there is nothing we can really do about that. As Lt. Schrank says in “West Side Story:” You wanna kill eachother? Kill eachother!
What I care about is killing Al Qaeda. Period. Whether they are in Iraq or Afghanistan or Pakistan or where ever. All I want is an many Al Qaeda religious fanatic terrorist killers dead so that they can’t kill any more innocent Americans here in the U.S. or innocent Iraqis and Afghanis in those countries.
My support for the surge is based on the fact that the evidence indicates that it is helping in the fight against Al Qaeda. Even the Democratic lawmakers referenced above acknowledge that the surge is helping in the fight against AQII. If the surge is helping us kill Al Qaeda, I support it. If it comes to a point where it appears the surge is hindering the fight against Al Qaeda, I will call for its end. But, as I said, the evidence now seems to be it is helping in that fight. So, for now I support it.
(Okay, let me copy this first….Done….Now post!)
September 13th, 2007 at 5:06 pmWho cares what O’Hanlon thinks? He’s a douchebag extraordinaire.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:07 pmbbb; In case yo haven’t noticed, the locals are not throwing candy & flowers at our troops. but grenades. i.e.- they are getting killed/maimed.
They are still dying for a mistake.
Don’t play word games here.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:07 pmpoint is, they knew they might die for this cause, whether or not they like the cause, they still signed on.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:08 pmI’m not playing word games.. what made you think I was? I didn’t say the locals welcomed them with open arms did I?
September 13th, 2007 at 5:14 pmExley, thanks for the response. You do realize that there were no AQ in Iraq prior to our invasion of Iraq don’t you? There were people who had trained in one capacity or another at AQ camps but weren’t considered AQ. They are now home grown because of our invasion.
Also, the surge was designed to give Iraq some room to get it’s politcal arm moving. So if that doesn’t happen and we still get to kill AQI but more of our soldiers die while waiting for the ulitmate goal of a stable Iraqi govt are you still going to support this? Are you going to say our soldiers can remain targets?
I do appreciate your answers. Honestly.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:17 pm“the locals welcomed them with open arms”
Big Bad Bush,
But remember they did greet them as liberators initially. They were overjoyed the Americans had liberated them from Saddam Hussein
September 13th, 2007 at 5:17 pmand then there was no plan after the initial liberation. Those same overjoyed Iraqis now see us as occupiers.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:19 pm#122
Wayne, You are missing the point. The Bush quote was not offered for the truth of its content. The discussion was not about the reliability of the statement, but whether the statement was ever made. The only way to resolve that question was to post the remarks to prove that Bush did indeed make the statement.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:20 pm#137, HiB,
Again, I don’t disagree with you. You’re (mostly) right.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:22 pmHe just needs a little more time for a few thousand more U.S. troops (which he supports) to be maimed and killed.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:24 pm#135, HiB:
“there were no AQ in Iraq prior to our invasion of Iraq don’t you? There were people who had trained in one capacity or another at AQ camps but weren’t considered AQ. They are now home grown because of our invasion.”
I think there is some room for debate on those points, but let’s set that aside for now. I will agree that Al Qaeda is a stronger presence in Iraq now than before the liberation. But they ARE there now. And accordingly we need to fight them there (as well as Afghanistan/Pakistan).
September 13th, 2007 at 5:27 pmThe Iraqi’s never welcomed the US. Maybe some of them did, but some of the Americans love bush.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:27 pmComment by Exley — September 13, 2007 @ 5:27 pm
I’m afraid you’re wrong there, Exley. There is no room for debate about the presence of al Qaeda in Iraq (AGII) before the invasion – they did not exist! And Bush’s lies in which he claims that they are the same people who attacked us on 9/11 has also been debunked repeatedly. They are NOT the same al Qeada that attacked us. They didn’t even pledge their loyalty until late 2004, well after we invaded Iraq. The fact of the matter is, Exley, that our invasion of Iraq and destruction of its government made the existence of the AQII group possible in the first place.
And breathing room for the Iraqi government was one of the excuses for why the surge was necessary.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:36 pmExley, It has been confirmed by several reports just recently that the AQI is a splinter group with no regional or international capabilities. I’m all for tactical hits against anyone that aligns themselves with OBL. I don’t agree we should have vast qty’s of soldiers as targets for all others with an axe to grind.
As for AQ in Afghanistan/Pakistan I like what Barak Obama had to say. It was something Bush had originally said when we would hold those who harbor AQ responsible as well. Remember that? Funny how the right attempted to chastize Obama for stating what Bush had already vowed to do.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:38 pmI think there is some room for debate on those points, but let’s set that aside for now. I will agree that Al Qaeda is a stronger presence in Iraq now than before the liberation. But they ARE there now. And accordingly we need to fight them there (as well as Afghanistan/Pakistan).
Comment by Exley — September 13, 2007 @ 5:27 pm
Al Qaeda is not in Iraq at all. Al Qaeda In Iraq is how one local Sunni group, with an Islamic slant, characterizes themselves, but it is not the same Al Qaeda currently active in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
If the surge is only about fighting Al Qaeda, it’s either in the wrong damn country, or it’s directed at what is a tiny (if virulent) minority of the Sunni insurgency, which is itself a fraction of the militants fighting either the US occupation or some other Iraqi militants.
September 13th, 2007 at 5:39 pmENOUGH WITH THE O’HANLON QUOTES ALREADY!!!!!!!
September 13th, 2007 at 6:31 pmI will care for this twit’s opinion in about, uh, six months…
September 13th, 2007 at 6:35 pmYou liberals confound me. Al Qaeda in a Iraq, who are they? Well, who we gonna believe the president or some anonymous poster named “gummitch”? Gimme a break! Obviously the left want to deny but the fact is your fundamentalist religious extremist friends are the ones our soldiers are fighting against and WINNING!! we are killing more of them than they are of us. Deal with it cut-and-runners!
September 13th, 2007 at 7:39 pmHanky sez:
gummitch, hands down.
gummitch has consistently shown himself to be accurate, honest, and reliable. Chimpy, on the other hand, has consistently shown himself to be the exact opposite.
That much is obvious.
September 13th, 2007 at 8:08 pmO’Hanlon can’t join the military because we need his wisdom and advice at home.
/sarc off
September 13th, 2007 at 8:25 pmCan someone explain to me exactly what O’Hanlon’s capacity is at the Brookings Institute? What exactly does he do? Or is he just a guy version of Paris Hilton? You know, gets on the tube but doesn’t have a real job.
September 13th, 2007 at 8:47 pmHow old is O’Hanlon? He certainly doesn’t look old enough to be a seasoned observer of anything whatsoever. “Who is this that darkeneth counsel without wisdom?”
September 14th, 2007 at 5:29 amWhat the clown means is that he will be re-adjusting his pronouncements in 9 months to maximize his chances of a government position after the next presidential election. Sadly, I can see him as prime Poo-Bah material for a future Clinton administration.
September 14th, 2007 at 10:12 am#143,
Sorry, Wayne. But you are again incorrect…From a March 2002 (That is a year before the invasion) article in The Christian Science Monitor:
Taliban-style group grows in Iraq
In the Kurdish north, a new Islamist group with ties to Al Qaeda has killed women without burqas, seized villages.
March 15, 2002
By Catherine Taylor | Special to The Christian Science Monitor
HALABJA, NORTHERN IRAQ – A radical Islamist group – with possible links to Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein – is growing and threatening the stability of the Kurdish region in northern Iraq.
The group – Ansar al-Islam – emerged just days before the Sept. 11 attacks on the US. It delivered a fatwa, or manifesto, to the citizens in mountain villages against “the blasphemous secularist, political, social, and cultural” society there, according to Kurdish party leaders.
Since, Ansar al-Islam has nearly doubled in size to 700, including Iraqis, Jordanians, Moroccans, Palestinians, and Afghans – a composition similar to the multinational Al Qaeda network. Villagers here claim it has ransacked and razed beauty salons, burned schools for girls, and murdered women in the streets for refusing to wear the burqa. It has seized a Taliban-style enclave of 4,000 civilians and several villages near the Iran border.
With the US dedicated to rooting out Al Qaeda’s influence wherever it surfaces in the world, a group of Islamic extremists in northern Iraq with even loose ties to Al Qaeda could complicate further any Iraq intervention.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:58 amI’m giving the milk in my fridge one more week before I pull it out. Actually, it’s been there for seven weeks already.
September 14th, 2007 at 12:15 pm“another six to nine months”
OK everybody, listen up! From this moment forward whenever we hear anyone use these words, or words like these, in relation to Iraq policy we are to burst into song!
“Tomorrow, Tomorrow, I love ‘ya Tomorrow, ‘yer always a day away”
No matter if the person saying it is on TV or right in front of you. And get everyone you can to sing along with you.
The Alice’s Resturant Anti-masacree Movement Lives!
September 14th, 2007 at 12:30 pmcan you stop saying “O’Hanlon you disgust me” etc, O’Hanlon is my sirname and it aint particually nice seeing all that o.O (not related to that person as far as i no tho)
September 14th, 2007 at 4:10 pmWant to hear a dirty little secret ? Come here…..oil. Yea, oil. That’s right. Until the need for it is eradicated, at least the reason to seek it out in the middle east, we are going to have Al Qaeda.
September 14th, 2007 at 9:09 pm