But Jack, Exley asked for examples of attacks on HIGH RANKING military people.. apprently in his book only high ranking soldiers deserve not to be slandered.

And he’s delusional about iraq not being in a civil war. I can promise you, he’s going to come up with some arbitrary definition of the word that makes him right. What exactly constitutes a civil war is a matter of debate, but I promise you that in his mind, a civil war is something that can only occur after we leave.

No statistical evidence of a drop in violence. The violence has only moved.

I’m still waiting to hear his explanation of how we determine which terrorists in iraq are ok to arm and make deals with.

Apparently, in Exleys mind, its ok to for us to arm people who were fighting side by side with al-queda a few months ago. I’m just curious as to how one knows whose in Al-Queda in Iraq and whose just “fighting side by side with them”… do they keep a list of members somewhere? is there an application they have to fill out? Has anyone ever mapped out a formal command structure?

The fact we’re now arming and bribing Saddams former goons, who constitute over 50 percent of the insurgency, to go after 5 percent of the insurgency, doesnt strike him as short sighted at all… especially since that 50 percent remains hostile to the central government.

I’d love to find out how exactly one gets inducted into the mythical “Al-Queda in iraq”, and how we determine whose in it or not. Any formal organization is going to have control over whose a member of that group, and yet exley, like most al-queda obsessed flaghumpers, cannot show us any methodolgy by which al-queda in iraq decides whose cool enough to be in their group and whose not. He can’t understand the concept of an “idealogical franchise”. He doesnt understand that these days, anyone who wants to hate america and be cool says “im in al-queda”. He thinks that prospective Jihadis fill out applications, fax them to afghanistan, and wait enxiously to see if they have been accepted in the group. He thinks Al-Queda has a recruiting hut in every village in Iraq.

Also, I’m wondering if he considers it “Victory” if Iraqis democratically choose to become an islamic republic, ally themselves with Iran, and support Hamas and Hezbollah with their tax dollars.

How did “freedom” in palestine turn out Exley? Are you glad Hamas is running the government there?

The Swiftboat organization was a deliberate, well-thought out and planned attack on a war hero and you loved it.

I think you put your finger on what might be the source of your incorrect memory. “I saw the morphing commercial with my own eyes twice – once when they replayed in on CNN and once when they made fun of it on The Daily Show.”

Sounds to me like you might remember seeing a Daily Show parody of the commercial. But as I have shown, the real ad was not as you described. You are more than welcome to put up a video of the commercial you claim to have seen if you can find it. I, however, sincerely doubt you will be able to do so since the ad never existed.

As for Boehner, oh please….Come on….You can’t seriously be trying to compare the deliberative posting of a well-thought out, carefully put-together newspaper advertisement by MoveOn.org that likely took days if not weeks to write and format with the immediate albeit clumsy answering of a multi-part and even more clumsy question — that mentioned both money and “blood” asked on live TV….That is pretty weak, Ripper. I will give credit to some TP posters here who have said that it is pretty obvious that Boehner’s “small price” language was pertaining to the interviewer’s referencing of billions of dollars and not the blood of the soldiers.

Not even close, Ripper. One is a deliberate, well-thought out and planned attack. The other was a clumsey answer to a clumsier question during a live TV interview.

The despicable slander on Gen. Petraeus was made by a staunch ally of the Democratic Party. The Democratic leadership regularly meets and strategizes with MoveOn.org. When the Democratic leadership was called on to condemn the ad, they demurred, fearing the loss of campaign dollars. I do applaud the Democrats today who did show a sense of decency and honor and voted to condemn the reprehensible ad. You will note, however, that no one in the Democratic Senate leadership or Democratic senators running for president voted to condemn the ad. They were to afraid of offending their masters at MoveOn.org.

But I am happy to see that Democrats like Tester and Webb and 23 others do have a sense of decency and some political courage.

Now, as to your three questions. While I am not sure they are completely on-topic, you have always been a good person with whom to discuss these things, so I will say:

1) Is it true that car bomb deaths are not counted in Petraeus’s assessment? And for that matter, exactly which are of his assessments are we talking about? I know I have read some accounts — mostly from bloggers that car bomb deaths don’t count — but I am not sure what that means? Doesn’t count towards what? And if it is even true….I simply don’t have enough information on that particular topic to give an answer…I would seriously appreciate any type of links or articles (from CREDIBLE sources on this issue);

2) I know therewas a report by anti-war reporter Kim Sengupta that the US military counts victims of gunshots to the back of the head as victims of sectarian violence and victims of gunshot wounds to the front as crime victims…..Honestly, I am going to need more than Kim Sengupta’s word before I agree that this is an accurate portrayal of US military policy.

3) As for Iraq being in a civil war–This is actually the easiest and hardest question to answer. My answer is, “No, but.” No, I do not think Iraq is in the midst of a full-scale civil war. I know there is civil and sectarian violence and that the country is divided in large part. But I also don’t see large military forces arrayed against eachother. Plus, much of the violence in Iraq is being stoked by outside agitators from Al Qaeda and Iran.

Hey, I didn’t see you or anybody expressing outrage when the conservative New York Post, an unwaivering Bush supporter, referred to the Iraq Study Group as “surrender monkeys.” I heard no outrage when Robertson referred to Wesley Clark as a “baby killer.” You guys didn’t pop a vein when that religious fanatic in Ohio called Murtha a coward. There was no outrage when disgraced traitor Duke Cunningham called John Kerry a “coward and a traitor.” You guys even sat there and stared into space while people accused a sitting president of being a “rapist and murderer.”

So take your phony situational outrage and cram it!

Okay, well, on that note, DRxJ, NOW it is Happy Hour time…Later, all.

Why do you think this ad is a Democratic attack. You did see the most recent vote in the Senate rebuking the ad didn’t you?

Funny how the content isn’t discussed by the chest thumping gets louder.

Now, please answer my 3 questions.

Why aren’t car bomb deaths counted in the General’s assessment?

Why is being shot in the front of the head different than being shot in the back of the head?

Do you believe there is a civil war currently going on in Iraq?

Okay, a lot of messages addressed to me here…I will answer as many as quickly as I can:

1) Ripper…The proof is in the video I supplied of the Chamblis commercial. It quite clearly shows that you were and continue to be wrong. The ad does not show Cleland “morphing” into Bin Laden or Saddam, nor does it compare Cleland with OBL…The fact that you would repeat these falsehoods in the face of the video being right here for all to see is baffling.

I did not ask you to apolozie. I asked that you admit you were wrong when you described the commericial. Now that I have posted the video, everyone sees you were wrong. Your credibility will be well served if you simply acknowledged it.

2) HiB (and TripMaster) , “These points are some of what Moveon is questioning the General about.” And that is fine…It is perfectly acceptable and even honroable to question the general and ask him to explain his testimony and statistics.

What is NOT acceptable and what is dishonorable to use a term like “betray” to smear this man’s honor, decency, and integrity. As they say, dissent is patriotic. However, slander, libel, and name-calling or not. Question Petraeus and ask him to explain his statistics all you want. Calling him a traitor is beyond the pale….Even liberals like Tom Harkin and Elizabeth Edwards said the MoveOn.org ad was reprehensible.

3) Still waiting for anyone to point to a sustained effort by the Republican party leadersip and their political allies to attack the honesty, decency, and patriotism of a high-ranking member of the military serving in a combat zone that is comparable to the current such sleaze campaign by the Democratic party and its allies (such as ThinkProgress) against Gen. Petraeus.

Comment by hellinabucket — September 20, 2007 @ 3:45 pm

Or he cut out early to get a head start on happy hour, which he has been known to do. :-)

It would seem that Exley has “bailed”…again.

Imagine that…

Exley, your silence speaks volumes.

Exley, is there or is there not a civil war going on in Iraq? Why aren’t deaths by car bombs counted and why is there a difference between getting shot in the front of the head or the back of the head? Still dead.

All valid questions raised in the Moveon ad that does leave doubt on the Generals’ loyalty and ability to give us truthful answers.

Will you answer these questions? I will continue to ask on all threads until you acknowledge them.

And, the swiftboat liars didn’t spend “one day” smearing Kerry. They spent months.

So here’s my suggestion to you: hold your breath until I apologize.

Now, do I have to search for the many, many republican smears which have been leveled at various military officers who have had the courage to question Bush’s Iraq war. They’ve been called losers, out of touch, no longer relevant, etc. etc.

You’re simply full of crap, man. Again, you have absolutely no standing to criticize anyone for questioning the veracity of a military officer.