Despite Failure To Meet Bush’s Original Goals, McCain And Lieberman Declare ‘The Surge Worked’
Despite Failure To Meet Bush’s Original Goals, McCain And Lieberman Declare ‘The Surge Worked’
One year ago today, in an address to the nation, President Bush announced his new “surge” strategy for Iraq. In his speech, Bush said that the goal of the “surge” was to improve security in order to give the Iraqi government “the breathing space it needs” to “make reconciliation possible.”
Though violence in Iraq has diminished in the tail end of 2007, these “fragile” security gains have not been accompanied by sufficient “progress on any of the key political benchmarks so critical to bringing Iraq together.” In fact, as we enter 2008, Iraq is “even more bitterly divided along ethnic and sectarian lines than it was at the start of 2007.”
Despite the failure of the surge to meet its political goals, war hawks are rushing to declare victory. Writing in the Wall Street Journal today, Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) declare that “the surge worked.”
Here are a few examples of how their claims of “victory” do not correspond with the reality in Iraq:
CLAIM: “The surge worked.”
FACT: In October, the Government Accountability Office assessed that of the eight political benchmarks set forth by President Bush and Congress, the Iraqi government had only “met one legislative benchmark and partially met another.” Since then, progress has stalled on key areas laid out by Bush: an oil law, de-Baathification reform, a process for amending the Constitution and provincial elections.
CLAIM: “Conditions in that country have been utterly transformed from those of a year ago, as a consequence of the surge.”
FACT: Though the “surge” has helped Sunni Arabs in Anbar province push al Qaeda in Iraq to the sidelines, the decision to turn on al Qaeda was not caused by the “surge.” U.S. commanders wisely “took advantage of these changing dynamics,” but they did not cause them. Additionally, as al Qaeda’s presence has decreased, sectarian strife has increased.
CLAIM: “We have at last begun to see the contours of what must remain our objective in this long, hard and absolutely necessary war — victory.”
FACT: Only politicians and pundits are speaking of victory. At the end of last year, Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, cautioned that “recent security gains are fragile and still reversible.” “We are trying to be cautious as we describe the progress that is taking place in Iraq,” Petraeus told Foreign Affairs. “There are a number of concerns that we do have.”
For the one year anniversary of Bush’s surge speech, the Center for American Progress’s Brian Katulis and Peter Juul have laid out “four ticking time bombs” in Iraq that must be addressed. Instead of pre-maturely declaring victory as they so often do, McCain and Lieberman should take note and exercise the caution that Gen. Petraeus advises.
UPDATE: clammyc at Daily Kos has more.
UDPATE II: On Tuesday, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Middle Eastern Affairs Mark Kimmitt said that there’s “maybe” a “three in 10″ chance “the surge will be a success.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
71 Responses to “Despite Failure To Meet Bush’s Original Goals, McCain And Lieberman Declare ‘The Surge Worked’”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Of course the surge worked…for McCain’s polling numbers.
January 10th, 2008 at 11:50 amWhy, yes!
Of course it worked.
And I’m the freakin’ Tooth Fairy.
January 10th, 2008 at 11:50 amCaption:
“We better hurry if we’re going to make the early bird special.”
January 10th, 2008 at 11:53 amWasn’t the surge supposed to last 6 months?
January 10th, 2008 at 11:53 amI’ll believe that the surge worked when our troops start coming home.
January 10th, 2008 at 11:54 amso, is there any reason WHY TP has yet to post anything about Kerry endorsing Obama?
January 10th, 2008 at 12:02 pmI dont give a sh!t if it worked or not!
It was and is an illegal invasion that has cost hundereds of thousands of lives, trillions of dollars, international credibility - ALL FOR NOTHING!!!!
January 10th, 2008 at 12:02 pmis it ThinkProgress or HillaryProgress????
January 10th, 2008 at 12:02 pmI see they both got the “gold tie” memo…
January 10th, 2008 at 12:03 pmThe Surge is not an end by itself. The end happens when we bring our troops back and end this conflict in Iraq and Afghanstan,and the war spending tap is shut off completely.
That did not happen…it is not happening before or after the Surge,although we have been in this conflict over 5 years, which started over the threat of Saddam’s WMDS aimed at us.
The same people who are claiming the Surge is working are the same people who are advocating an endless US presence in Iraq, like McCain.
McCain can talk all day about success of Surge; unless soldiers are coming home,and not going the other way to Iraq and Afghanstan ,people then begin to believe him and his buddy Lieberman,which is not what is happening now.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:06 pmUnless he shows us a measuring stick,his story about the Surge will remain a story.
Yup, McCave and Lickerman are two peas in a pod. McCain delivered the koolaid and Joe Six Pack drank it.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:06 pmThe end of “major combat operations” when?
http://hosted.ap.org/ dynamic/ stories/ I/ IRAQ?SITE=NCKIN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
January 10th, 2008 at 12:09 pmCaption:
Like Statler and Waldorf, but with 100% less humor.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:11 pm14 — Oh, that was about 1751 days ago. :o/
January 10th, 2008 at 12:11 pmLooks like a movie trailer for Dumb and Dumbest. And can’t wait til Johnnie Boy names JoeL his running mate. They will really have all the Israeli Primary delegates wrapped up then.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:15 pmThey should talk to the 9 troops who died yesterday and ask them how well the surge is working.
∞
January 10th, 2008 at 12:16 pmis it ThinkProgress or HillaryProgress????
Comment by whiteyfresh — January 10, 2008 @ 12:02 pm
Huh??? What does Hillary have to do with the topic?
January 10th, 2008 at 12:17 pmCaption; Tweedledee and Tweedledum
January 10th, 2008 at 12:18 pmMore like Tweedledumb and Tweedledumber
January 10th, 2008 at 12:25 pmTweedledee & Tweedledum, indeed! Dumb and Dumber would be good, too. Their credibility is shot by the sheer failure of the surge to meet the benchmarks. The truth speaks for itself and this will surely tank McCain’s campaign - at least among Indy’s who pride themselves with being above the fray and more intelligent than the average partisan.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:26 pmAnd, if McCain doesn’t get the support of the I’s, then he’s down to something like 24% with just the GOP. 24% will never win an election so the handwriting is now on the wall of his campaign….his new theme song will soon be “sha na na na, hey hey hey, good-bye”.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:28 pmBartlebee: ewww….comment #1 - but so apropos!
January 10th, 2008 at 12:29 pmWhy spend all this time and energy deconstructing Lie-berman and McCain’s falsehoods, TP? Isn’t it all academic at this point? My recommendation: “Joe Lieberman and/or John McCain spoke.” You’ll save considerable effort, and we’ll all understand the meaning.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:29 pmBlah blah blah blah surge blah blah blah blah al qaeda blah blah blah blah surge blah blah blah blah 9/11 blah blah blah blah surge blah blah blah blah al qaeda blah blah blah blah surge blah blah blah blah 9/11 blah blah blah blah surge blah blah blah blah al qaeda blah blah blah blah surge blah blah blah blah 9/11 blah blah blah blah surge blah blah blah blah al qaeda blah blah blah blah surge blah blah blah blah 9/11 blah blah blah blah surge blah blah blah blah al qaeda blah blah blah blah surge blah blah blah blah 9/11…
It’s time we started a surge right here in America… where the REAL terrorist are hiding out.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:30 pmIraq will always be regarded as a failure.
If we leave now, we’re not finishing the job.
If we pull out entirely, any resulting instability will be blamed on our departure.
If we maintain a long-lasting presence, we’ll continue to be targets of extremists both in Iraq and here at home.
It’s a “no-win”, just like Darth Dick predicted some 7 years ago?!
January 10th, 2008 at 12:31 pmCaption contest: “Ooooh, when I think of you, Joe, I get a little flutter …right *here*!!”
January 10th, 2008 at 12:38 pmTimes Hill’reh DIDN’T cry:
9/11/2001 - 3,000+ civilians die
January 10th, 2008 at 12:39 pmHurricane Katrina - 1,000+ civilians die, mostly black, mostly children
Oklahoma City Bombing - 170+ civilians die, including infants and children at a daycare center
Funeral for Rosa Parks
Funeral for Ron Brown
Multiple times Bubba Clinton cheated and got caught
3900 of our friends and family killed
more than 200,000 Iraqi civilians killed
unstable Iraq
unstable Kurdish region
unstable Turkey
unstable Pakistan
Gas prices ~ $3.15
National Debt > 9,200,000,000
Hammas in charge of Palestine
Taliban regaining strength and power
Best Heroin crop ever
Al Qaeda growing and branching out
more enemies
Lost support of our Allies
Our NIE’s indicating that we are more at risk
USA has no credibility
Torture
[….]
Aside from the wonderful effects above, anyone know what we gained from invading Iraq? Anyone know how the world is a better place?
Yeah…I am so glad we invaded Iraq…Why did we do that again?
January 10th, 2008 at 12:42 pmAmerica’s illegal invasion of a country cannot be won. We have never been presented a plan for victory or even defined what victory means.
Is it (X) # of Al Queda?
Is it (X) # of Iraqis?
Is it (X) # of months or years?
Is it until Afghanistan or Pakistan explode and/or implode?
Is it until the next President takes office?
Man without a Plan = G.W. Bush
January 10th, 2008 at 12:42 pm.
Dementia jokes aside…
If it worked, what have they to show for it?
.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:44 pmActually he predicted it in 1992, 1994, AND 1996. Must have slipped his mind in his old age…oh well, no harm done.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:44 pmCaption:
January 10th, 2008 at 12:44 pm‘Did you know if I get elected Mrs. Kucinich will be my First Lady?’
One more, Zim!
“Man without a Brain=G.W. Bush”
January 10th, 2008 at 12:45 pm…AND THE MISSION WAS ACOMPLISSHED! YOUTUBE HAS AN EXCELLENT DOCUMENTARY FROM JOHN PILGER: WAR ON DEMOCRACY, WORTH HAVING A LOOK!
January 10th, 2008 at 12:50 pmNothing good. I suppose if you ARE demented, you would consider ONLY 17 military personnel killed this month “good news”. I mean we are really well below the 5 year monthly average for killed and maimed service members.
Interestingly enought, we are looking at averages very similar to July - October 2003. We obviously won then too.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:54 pmWhy spend all this time and energy deconstructing Lie-berman and McCain’s falsehoods, TP? Isn’t it all academic at this point?
Comment by Red Pill — January 10, 2008 @ 12:29 pm
I have been thinking the same thing, Red Pill. Since everyone at TP knows nothing good will ever happen in Iraq so long as a single American is there and no one to the right of Dennis Kucinich will ever have any valid opinions on the subject, why bother talking about it?
January 10th, 2008 at 1:01 pmThe surge was a success, insofar as its “real” goal of ensuring that Iraq wasn’t the lead news story every day.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:06 pmBusiness as usual.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:16 pmWhat ever happened is what we secretly planned and therefor a success.
Business as usual.
What ever happened is what we secretly planned and therefor a success.
Comment by Clumberfeet — January 10, 2008 @ 1:16 pm
I think it is more a case of “if you don’t know where you’re going, it doesn’t matter how you get there”.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:20 pmWorth a repeat, IMO. From TP’s archives:
In 1999, George W. Bush criticized President Clinton for not setting a timetable for exiting Kosovo, and yet he refuses to apply the same standard to his war.
George W. Bush, 4/9/99:
“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is.â€
And on the specific need for a timetable, here’s what Bush said then and what he says now:
George W. Bush, 6/5/99
“I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.â€
[ed. note: article originally ran in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer on 6/5/99]
Source.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:25 pmI have been thinking the same thing, Red Pill. Since everyone at TP knows nothing good will ever happen in Iraq so long as a single American is there and no one to the right of Dennis Kucinich will ever have any valid opinions on the subject, why bother talking about it?
Comment by Keltoi — January 10, 2008 @ 1:01 pm
I think I like the other Keltoi better; he’s definitely more honest than this one.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:26 pmHere’s another one, courtesy of Mr. McCain, 1998:
Congress has mandated an exit strategy for any new Bosnia deployment. The extent to which the concept has become conventional wisdom was underlined when Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) rebuked the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Henry Shelton, for what he saw as the Bosnia policy’s missing ingredient: “Usually, we don’t go into things without an exit strategy, as you know, General.”
Source.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:27 pmI think I like the other Keltoi better; he’s definitely more honest than this one.
Comment by gummitch — January 10, 2008 @ 1:26 pm
Unfair, gummitch. Am I not speaking the truth? Ever since McCain started his comeback, there has been an increasing number of TP threads about him, every last one negative. But what is the point? It is not like anyone here would vote for him on pain of death - why talk about him?
January 10th, 2008 at 1:30 pmfrom Rep Robert Wexler:
http://www.truthout.org/ docs_2006/ printer_010908S.shtml
January 10th, 2008 at 1:31 pmIt’s time we started a surge right here in America… where the REAL terrorist are hiding out.
Comment by JPV
Better watch out, they may be at your door soon to take you away. When the Democrats are in charge, they may throw traitors like you in one of the jails that Halliburton built.
The problem with allowing a President unlimited power is that the opposition party President will get the same power and might use it on you the way you have used it on us.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:35 pmUnfair, gummitch. Am I not speaking the truth? Ever since McCain started his comeback, there has been an increasing number of TP threads about him, every last one negative. But what is the point? It is not like anyone here would vote for him on pain of death - why talk about him?
Comment by Keltoi
You know troll Keltoi, if you don’t like the subjects discussed here, you are free to leave at any time. You won’t be missed. Perhaps you should go to Redstate.com where they discuss topics more to your liking.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:37 pmUnfair, gummitch. Am I not speaking the truth? Ever since McCain started his comeback, there has been an increasing number of TP threads about him, every last one negative. But what is the point? It is not like anyone here would vote for him on pain of death - why talk about him?
Comment by Keltoi — January 10, 2008 @ 1:30 pm
I was referring to your crack about “no one to the right of Kucinich”.
And, seriously, on a progressive blog would you really not expect to read any discussion of a likely Republican presidential candidate? Really? Are you thinking that redstate and other blogs never mention Hillary Clinton? Really?
January 10th, 2008 at 1:37 pmFACT: In October, the Government Accountability Office assessed that of the eight political benchmarks set forth by President Bush and Congress, the Iraqi government had only “met one legislative benchmark and partially met another.†Since then, progress has stalled on key areas laid out by Bush: an oil law, de-Baathification reform, a process for amending the Constitution and provincial elections.
In reich-wing world, 1 out of 8 is a “success”.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:48 pmAnd, seriously, on a progressive blog would you really not expect to read any discussion of a likely Republican presidential candidate? Really? Are you thinking that redstate and other blogs never mention Hillary Clinton? Really?
Comment by gummitch — January 10, 2008 @ 1:37 pm
Well, I am being completely sincere here (and bilbo, stuff it, I wasn’t talking to you), what IS the good of you guys ripping McCain day in and day out? Is the point of this blog to advance your agenda or just to have an intellectual circle jerk to vent spleen? I mean, maybe the latter IS the purpose, in which case have fun, but it does seem a bit pointless.
I never go to redstate despite bilbos helpful and friendly suggestions, precisely because I don’t need an echo chamber or a pile on party on Hillary.
Don’t you think, gummitch and other honest libs out there, that a thread topic which closely dissected the Democratic candidates positons on various issues would be more constructive? Y’know, candidates that any of you might vote for this side of hell? Sometimes this happens, but almost never because TP starts such a thread, and it has got to be 10 to 1 attacking Rs instead of discussing the relative merits of the D candidates.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:50 pmKeltoi is a typical reich-winger: Attack the messenger and avoid the ugly truth about the message.
You keep whining about TP, yet continue to post here. Are you really that obtuse?
January 10th, 2008 at 1:53 pmSometimes this happens, but almost never because TP starts such a thread, and it has got to be 10 to 1 attacking Rs instead of discussing the relative merits of the D candidates.
Comment by Keltoi — January 10, 2008 @ 1:50 pm
You can leave any time you wish if you don’t like the content and format of TP.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:54 pmYou can leave any time you wish if you don’t like the content and format of TP.
Comment by Dr. Matt — January 10, 2008 @ 1:54 pm
Thanks. God forbid anyone not be in lock step around here.
January 10th, 2008 at 2:02 pmI am sorry for not paying attention to the good FACTS, FIGURES, and LOGICAL ARGUMENTS you have presented in this thread. Let me go back read them real quick so I can analyze them…
Hmmm….That is funny. I didn’t find any except for the one I quoted complaining how unfair I am.
Well, I believe most of my posts have some facts you can pull out of them. Let me do a quick review:
1.) Weapons inspectors did not agree that their were WMDs
2.) Iraq did not attack us on 9/11.
3.) General Eric Shinseki gave testimony that we would need “something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers” - he was retired 2 months after that.
4.) 12 out of 15 UN security council members were against using force to disarm Saddam. The did not agree with our justification of usingresolution 1441 (passed unanimously). We did it anyway.
5.) General Batiste (lifetime Republican) wrote an Op-Ed about the failed policies of this administration - he retired to speak out.
6.) General Newbold retired partly in protest and wrote “Why Iraq was a mistake”
7.) There has been no significant reconstruction
8.) Iraq has less electricity than before the invasion
9.) Iraq has less oil than before the invasion
10.) Iraq has less security than before the invasion
11.) Iraq has less freedom than before the invasion
[….]
Again, I can go on and on, but I am sorry to hear that you great and valuable arguments are getting ignored.
January 10th, 2008 at 2:05 pmDon’t you think, gummitch and other honest libs out there, that a thread topic which closely dissected the Democratic candidates positons on various issues would be more constructive? Y’know, candidates that any of you might vote for this side of hell? Sometimes this happens, but almost never because TP starts such a thread, and it has got to be 10 to 1 attacking Rs instead of discussing the relative merits of the D candidates.
Comment by Keltoi — January 10, 2008 @ 1:50 pm
I know that such discussions have taken place here, but they seem to degenerate quickly. Lefties are notoriously fractious and people at TP tend to be more lefty and more fractious than most. But, you know, it’s not my blog and TP is what it is. They regularly get accused (from the Right) of being Clinton propagandists, which strikes me as absurd. So perhaps they have a policy of not running threads that would appear to support any of the Democratic candidates.
There are, of course, plenty of places to have that discussion if you’re interested. I’m partial to Washington Monthly and Crooks & Liars, but even the latter has been accused of being owned by the Clintons (this time from the Left).
I think there is a fair amount of discussion of the Democratic candidates, it’s just not particularly organized. Lots of Clinton bashing, some Obama bashing, Kucinich support, some Edwards support. Since you’re unlikely to vote for any of them, why would you care?
January 10th, 2008 at 2:11 pmOkay, so it worked and we won. Bush should put on his codpiece and shout ‘Mission Accomplished Again’ and bring ALL of the troops home.
January 10th, 2008 at 2:16 pmComment by Keltoi — January 10, 2008 @ 1:50 pm
What’s that, you say? Dissect the positions of the Dem candidates so the likes of you can drop in and tear them down, and mumble something about socialism while you exit the forum as you head for dinner?
Anyone who has the know-how to get to this site can go visit any candidate’s web site and get any info straight from the campaign. Just last night I visited the sites of 4 candidates — 1 Dem and 3 Repubs — to get caught up on what plans they have in store for the health care crisis.
As for TP’s contribution to the election, on March 22nd of last year they posted a thread regarding a presidential forum on health care, attended by Dem candidates, and it included the opportunity for TP readers to participate by submitting any questions they may have.
January 10th, 2008 at 2:31 pmI think there is a fair amount of discussion of the Democratic candidates, it’s just not particularly organized. Lots of Clinton bashing, some Obama bashing, Kucinich support, some Edwards support. Since you’re unlikely to vote for any of them, why would you care?
Comment by gummitch — January 10, 2008 @ 2:11 pm
Actually, I would happily vote for Obama.
And perhaps I will check out the sites you mention, it will make Matt and Bilbos day to not have to talk to someone who doesn’t agree with their every thought.
January 10th, 2008 at 2:32 pmWell I for one do not want our troops to be in Iraq for hundreds of years (=McCain, although he has also said that if they were there for thousands of years that’d be okay with him too).
Nor do I want to see Lieberman as Secretary of Defense (”I would definitely want Joe Lieberman to play a part — particularly in national security issues — in my administration.”=McCain)
So I personally have no problem with TP ridiculing both of these putzes.
January 10th, 2008 at 2:37 pmplunger - I certainly hope you’re wrong. This is going to be one tough year to get through!
January 10th, 2008 at 2:39 pm44 - Because he’s a senile old fart, Keltoi, and it’s FUN.
Duh. We shouldn’t have to explain that to you, sparky.
January 10th, 2008 at 2:49 pm53- OK, Keltoi, tell ya what - why don’t you go to the nearest gay bar and yell, “YOU FAGS ARE GOING TO GO TO HELL!!!” and see what happens to you.
In other words, dear, WE are all progressives here. YOU are not, therefore you are the odd man out here at TP - so you really oughtn’t complain about the tone and content of the posts.
January 10th, 2008 at 2:52 pmWe have never been presented a plan for victory or even defined what victory means.
President Bush’s November 30, 2005, National Strategy for Victory in Iraq defines victory as a “peaceful, united, stable, and secure” Iraq.
January 10th, 2008 at 3:40 pmWhat if this victory is mutually exclusive with our occupation? Uh oh, we may have a conundrum.
Many, including many in the Military, believe that we are instigating the problem. If we are making things worse, and we can’t leave until things are all better, then we have a paradox. Instead, what many progressives, liberals, peace activists, and critical thinkers are saying is that we can’t just choose a desired outcome and hope it happens. We have to evaluate our effect on the situation and see if we are making things better, or worse.
After five years, more destabilization of the middle east, alienation of our allies, inciting and uniting our enemies, robbing our national treasury, and throwing US military service members in harms way for too long with little rest - it is time to end the insanity.
January 10th, 2008 at 3:50 pmComment by kirkaracha — January 10, 2008 @ 3:40 pm –
Also, the point plunger was making, what defines peace?
— Is it (x) amount of US casualties?
— Is it (x) amount of Iraqi casualties?
What defines “united”?
— Sunni control of the region subverting the will of the Shia and Kurds?
— Shia control of the region subverting the will of the Sunni and Kurds?
— Kurdish control of the region subverting the will of Shia and Suni?
— A US installed dictator to ensure Iraq is friendly to the US?
What defines secure?
— (X) number of sectarian killings?
— (X) number of rapes and murders?
[….]
You see where we are going here. It is similar to the Miss America saying she hopes for World Peace. It is a vision, not a benchmark, plan, or something measurable. Since it is a “vision” it means something different to different people.
January 10th, 2008 at 4:02 pm67 - Excellent post, Dan. Well said.
January 10th, 2008 at 4:32 pmI think Democrats, should go back to discussing the war in Iraq.
The media and the White House are hoping American’s forget about it even though Iraq’s political environment is still as it was a year ago.
Don’t get me wrong. It’s great news to know we aren’t losing the number of soldiers that we ‘were’ losing. Even one soldier’s life was worth it.
American’s need to be reminded that it was the Democratic Party’s constant pressuring and threatening to stop the funding for the war and demanding a date for withdraw, that finally forced President Bush to change course.
President Bush and his Party’s failure to admit their strategy wasn’t working — allowed several hundreds of our soldiers to be killed or injured.
Read More I think Democrats, should go back to discussing the war in Iraq.
The media and the White House are hoping American’s forget about it even though Iraq’s political environment is still as it was a year ago.
Don’t get me wrong. It’s great news to know we aren’t losing the number of soldiers that we ‘were’ losing. Even one soldier’s life was worth it.
American’s need to be reminded that it was the Democratic Party’s constant pressuring and threatening to stop the funding for the war and demanding a date for withdraw, that finally forced President Bush to change course.
President Bush and his Party’s failure to admit their strategy wasn’t working — allowed several hundreds of our soldiers to be killed or injured.
Read More: http://www.freewebs.com/coonsey/
January 11th, 2008 at 9:53 amSorry, my last post got duplicated somehow…..
January 11th, 2008 at 9:54 amC’mon, let’s admit it. Let’s shout it from the rooftops. The surge IS a success — an unmitigated, rousing success. We’ve won. No WMDs. Saddam is deposed and dead. Iraq is pacified because of the WILDLY SUCCESSFUL surge. Republican hawks were right. Now . . . let’s get out. Hey, we won. It’s over. Let’s get out. Bring the troops home. If that’s what it takes to end this chapter of American Empire, admit it . . . Bush, Cheney and the Republicans were right, Democrats were wrong. Now let’s get out. NOW.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:23 amThe surge is not working and John McCain, George W. Bush and Joe Lieberman are blatantly lying through their teeth on this. Despite what right-wing blogs are saying, and despite what conservative observers are noting, the plunge in violence is actually the result of an Iraqi political decision made by and implemented by Iraqis, and the drop has little to do with the “surge,” an infusion of 30,000 troops (which wouldn’t fill a Major League stadium) into Baghdad, a city of six million people.
What’s happening is really simple and it’s happening in plain sight. But it just so happens that these two Kool-Aid drinking fools refuse to connect the dots. When someone tells you that the “surge” is working, “enlighten†them with the following facts:
In July, 2007, which was America’s bloodiest summer in Iraq, attacks on American-led forces using a lethal type of roadside bomb said to be supplied by Iran reached a new high, according to the American military.
The devices, known as explosively formed penetrators, were used to carry out 99 attacks in July and accounted for a third of the combat deaths suffered by the American-led forces, according to American military officials. Such bombs, which fire a semi-molten copper slug that can penetrate the armor on a Humvee and are among the deadliest weapons used against American forces, are used almost exclusively by Shiite militants.
These Shiite militants are members of Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mehdi Army. As seen this past summer, Muqtada’s fighters shredding American forces - like ducks in a shooting gallery - despite the troop increase which began earlier in the year. This was during a summer in which we were bombarded with news of Iranian/Shia efforts to kill Americans and destabilize the Iraqi government. Then, without warning, Muqtada al-Sadr announced that he had ordered his militia to suspend offensive operations for six months (i.e.: stand down). And no one saw this coming. When this news was reported on August 30th, no one really believed it, much less expected the implementation of an actual cease-fire on the part of Iraq’s Shia fighters.
On September 1st, even the U.S. military admitted that this could be an important — if not the important — development in the situation on the ground in Iraq. “A stand down of Mehdi Army operations would also be an important step in helping Iraqi authorities focus greater attention on achieving the political and economic solutions necessary for progress and less on dealing with criminal activity, sectarian violence, kidnappings, assassinations, and attacks on Iraqi and coalition forces,” the military said.
When that was said by the U.S. military on September 1st, the “surge” was never mentioned. It was all about an Iraqi decision that would succeed or fail on Iraqi actions. The U.S. military was only observing. And guess what happened? U.S. troop deaths began plummet. American deaths dropped from 84 in August, to 65 in September, to 38 in October, with only 23 deaths in December - the lowest tally for a single month in over a year and a half. Having argued for months that Iranian-supplied Shia fighters were the most serious threat to U.S. forces in Iraq, those same forces had suddenly stopped fighting. And it showed.
But rather than recognize this for what it is, John McCain, Joe Lieberman and other right-wingers continue to spin the story as if this was the result of the “surge.” McCain boldly informed students at Coastal Carolina University (SC) that the United States has had “astonishing success” in Iraq as a result of the Petreaus military strategy now in place. However, Senator McCain never mentions the fact that our greatest enemy in Iraq, the Mehdi Army, has suspended battle operations. To exacerbate the spin, our idiot-in-chief said that since the troop increase reached full strength in June, the number of roadside bombs had been cut by half. He said U.S. military deaths were at their lowest in 19 months. Again, no mention of Muqtada al-Sadr, the Mehdi Army or his decision to stand down from combat operations. Predictably, it was all about the “troop increase.”
Unfortunately, no one seems to be calling President Bush, John McCain, Joe Lieberman, or the mainstream media on this ridiculous premise that the “Petreaus strategy” should be credited with the reduction in American deaths. Additionally, no one seems to notice as with everything else in Iraq, that the Iraqis are going to do what they want; when they want. While al-Sadr suspends combat operations, there will be relative peace in Iraq. If he takes them back up, Americans will once gain die in droves.
Believe what you may, but the future of Iraq will only improve based on Iraqi decisions made in Baghdad; not in Washington, D.C. and the halls of Congress. As this situation shows, peace in Iraq solely lies in the hands of Iraqis. It cannot and will never be forced by Americans at the point of a gun. Somebody please drop a bug in McCain’s and Lieberman’s ear before they overdose on Kool-Aid.
January 11th, 2008 at 12:20 pmI accept your facts and I agree ‘the surge worked’ is b.s.
But politically, Repubs will say: (1) The surge worked. (2) Iran backed down on nukes out of fear of regime change. (3) Al Queada is afraid to attack because they think we’ll just invade another Muslim country. By November, voters may come full circle on on Iraq. So look for the Dems to flip-flop on the surge.
Obama has already hedged on the surge. Hillary will hedge also.
January 12th, 2008 at 1:23 amIt is certainly quite convenient for the CAP community to pick random metrics by which to gauge the (lack of) success of the surge; however, in doing so, you commit the same rhetorical error that you guys accuse the neocons of doing: you pick and choose indicators specifically to match your point. In the academic community, we call this pitfall “thesis-guided research.”
I know that you find it politically disadvantageous for the surge to work, but give our military a chance to win this war in Iraq. A man like McCain has experienced war and lead the military; his opinion should be trusted on this one.
January 23rd, 2008 at 4:05 pm