Comment by BrianFL — February 1, 2008 @ 11:23 am

How right you are BrianFL, your comments remind me of the 14 points of Fascism, especially point #3:

“Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause – The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.”

And so, America will continue to suffer, as will innocent Iraqi women and children.

he surge wasn’t underway during that time, don’t you remember it didn’t really get going (even BUSH announced it) until Sept.

This demonstrates the fundamental lack of FACTS of GOP TARDS.

Comment by republicans hate facts — February 1, 2008 @ 3:40 pm

No, you have it completely and laughably wrong. Look at the chart provided by the McClatchy link that TP provides; it shows how the surge began in February and was at full strength in June. These are simple facts that even you should be able to acknowledge and wrap your head around (though I don’t expect you to admit you were wrong, knowing you). Furthermore, what, exactly, were General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker reporting on in September if the surge wasn’t underway?

In September 2006, the Christian Science Monitor reported, “It’s true that foreign fighters are in Iraq, such as the late Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. But they are a small minority of the insurgents, say administration critics. Most Iraqi mujahideen are Sunnis who fear their interests will be ignored under Iraq’s Shia-dominated government. They are fighting for concrete, local political goals – not the destruction of America.” The paper quoted University of Michigan history professor Juan Cole: “If the Iraqi Sunni nationalists could take over their own territory, they would not put up with the few hundred foreign volunteers blowing things up, and would send them away or slit their throats.”[25] In 2005, the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) concluded that foreign fighters accounted for less than 10% of the estimated 30,000 insurgents and argued that the US and Iraqi Governments were “feeding the myth” that they comprised the backbone of the insurgency.

Peter Grier, “Is war in Iraq a shield against attacks at home?” Christian Science Monitor (18 September 2006) p. 3.

Comment by Dr. Matt — February 1, 2008 @ 10:57 am

Dr. Matt, stop plagiarizing from Wikipedia, OK?

yet the US troop death number in 2007 was the highest yet. Why do you cheer the deaths of troops?

Comment by Lefty Patriot — February 1, 2008 @ 10:07 am

This demonstrates the fundamental misunderstanding that some people, like Lefty Patriot, have about this war. When you “surge” your troop numbers into areas like Anbar and Baghdad in order to reduce violence there, casualties are going to rise a lot. That’s what happened in the first half of 2007. Was it worth it? Well, if you consider how much violence has fallen in those two provinces, then, yes, I think it is worth it. The men and women who risked their lives to make Iraq more peaceful are true heroes, and I don’t want to see their efforts wasted by an early withdrawal. It’s not about cheering troop deaths; it’s about cheering the bravery of people who put security in Iraq before themselves, and who achieved something great as a result.

Now, if you read the report here, it indicates how much violence in Anbar and Baghdad are down. That’s great news. The violence in Iraq overall, however, while much less than it used to be, is up because we’re ratcheting up operations in Mosul. Yet, hopefully this will, in the long run, make that city a more stable and secure place.

You can attack me all you want, but I’m not going to back down from this belief. We have a sense of direction now in Iraq; no longer are we running in circles, clearing areas but failing to “hold” and “build” them, when Iraq was truly a whack-a-mole situation. We have stabilized Anbar and Baghdad relative to what they once were, and now we’re trying to do so in Mosul. To deny that is to ignore reality.

We’re creating “insurgents” by creating desperation in Iraq and then claiming it a victory when we’ve killed the monster WE created, while never ceasing the creation of more “insurgents”. Sounds a bit like giving yourself cancer by smoking cigarettes and claiming that chemotherapy is victorious, but all the while continuing to smoke.

the Big Lie is dragged out agin and again. begone, kilo, you havenothing to offer but to repeat the wingnut lies that have already killed thousands of US soldiers. 2.2 lbs. of crap is as accurate as anything you’ve made up.

“BREAKING THE SILENCE” A SPECIAL REPORT BY JOHN PILGER. YOUTUBE!

Oh, the intellectual rebuttal.

This was months before Powell went to the UN with his little vials. This was only a few months after anyone raised Saddam as an issue, let alone a threat.

Kilo, what about Rummy and other neocons raising Saddam’s name mere moments after 911 or I believe before 911? Guess that’s just too inconvenient for you.

Yeah why don’t YOU call ME intellectually cowardly. Can you think of any other dishonest arguments your intellect demands you take issue with here ? No ? All good on the progressive anti-war argument front eh.”

I take issue with you tendency to tell half-truths, and I see that you cannot post your previous stuff, so you’re a liar as well as an intellectual coward. And lick you own balls – that’s what dog’s do.

to premptively strike someone who he said was getting ready to hit us. Not to invade and occupy a nation.

Comment by Kilo — February 1, 2008 @ 12:22 pm

That’s a reason? Congress spontaneously decided to invade Iraq and forced Bush/Cheney to do so?

You’re certifiable, kilo.

this will be easy for you kilo, you won’t have to worry about it. You will be on the sidlines while a democratic president presides over a nation with a democratic House and Senate…..all you can do is watch all you cherish crumble and be stomped on……you know the greed and killing.

I can tell you this much. The way situations like this(Sudan) are handled in the future will be different than they way you and yours handled Iraq.