Engel: There Have Been Five Wars In Iraq And The U.S. Record In Them Is Just 1-4
Engel: There Have Been Five Wars In Iraq And The U.S. Record In Them Is Just 1-4
The Bush administration and its allies have repeatedly tried to claim that because of the surge, the United States is winning the war in Iraq. In February, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said on The Tonight Show, “And by golly, they are winning, my friends. They are winning. They are winning.” Just this week, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) claimed that Iraqi opposition to a long-term security agreement with the United States is a sign of “success.”
McCain has visited Iraq eight times since the U.S. invasion in 2003, a fact that he likes to tout as evidence of his national security credentials. NBC correspondent Richard Engel, however, has logged more time there than almost every other tv correspondent over the past few years, surviving bombings and kidnapping attempts.
Yesterday on the Daily Show, he sharply disputed the right-wing claim that the United States is winning in Iraq:
STEWART: What’s our record in these five wars? […]
ENGEL: Maybe we’re 1-4.
STEWART: We’re 1-4 now. What are the five wars?
ENGEL: The shock and awe — the invasion. Then the nation-building phase, which had mixed results, dissolving the Iraqi army. Then an insurgency, then a civil war, then the surge, where violence has gone down dramatically. We’re about to face a sixth war — the exit strategy — and we have to figure out how to make that one a success.
This morning on MSNBC, Engel said that while, tactically, the surge has had some success, “the larger strategic question of stability in Iraq is one that is still unresolved.” Watch his Daily Show and MSNBC appearances:
Part of the right wing’s arguments about why the United States should stay in Iraq is that if troops redeploy, Iran will gain influence. But as Engel said on MSNBC, Iran’s influence in Iraq is already “huge” because of the U.S. invasion, a point that has been underlined by Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen as well.
Transcript:
STEWART: How can you explain then that so few people have done what you have done? American correspondents, staying there throughout, really dedicating themselves.
ENGEL: It’s been very difficult. It’s gone on for a long time, and really, there have been five different wars in Iraq, and some people have been present for a few of them.
STEWART: What’s our record in these five wars?
ENGEL: It’s mixed, mixed.
STEWART: What are we, 3-2? 4-1?
ENGEL: Maybe we’re 1-4.
STEWART: We’re 1-4 now. What are the five wars?
ENGEL: The shock and awe — the invasion. Then the nation-building phase, which had mixed results, dissolving the Iraqi army. Then an insurgency, then a civil war, then the surge, where violence has gone down dramatically. We’re about to face a sixth war — the exit strategy — and we have to figure out how to make that one a success.
—-
HOST: What do you think the extent of the Iranian influence is?
ENGEL: Huge. Huge. Right now, the U.S. policy is to engage the Iraqis. To do a hearts and mind policy. Iran has been doing that since ‘03, and they’ve been doing that very effectively.
FORD: The tactical success of this surge, versus the strategic. How do you gage it? We’ve heard politicians say there’s been incredible tactical advantages made, but if we pull back — there’s not been much made on the political reconciliation front. I’ve heard you explain, eloquently, the difference between Sunni and Shi’a and really the long-term challenge in Iraq. Combine those two and give us —
ENGEL: Tactically, yes. It has been a very — Our tactics in Iraq, or the U.S. military’s tactics in Iraq, have never been a real problem. U.S. forces wanted to topple Saddam Hussein’s government; within 21 days, they reached Baghdad and toppled Saddam Hussein’s government.
Now U.S. forces went in to try to reduce violence. They did. So what are we going to do? And the larger strategic question of stability in Iraq is one that is still unresolved.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
My friends, the war is a failure, herr dubyah is a failure, and by golly, my friends, the GOPigs will be a permanent minority, my friends.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:13 pmCorrespondent Engel has lived in Iraq for most of the past five years, but what could he possibly know that McCain hasn’t learned in his visits with our own military?
June 13th, 2008 at 1:18 pmIndeed, like Michael Ware, who also has lived among the populace for most of the time, and journalists Lara Logan and Christianne Amanpour — there is a common thread that runs through the reports from all of them, and it is not what we hear from Buch&CO.
In February, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said on The Tonight Show, “And by golly, they are winning, my friends. They are winning. They are winning.”
_______________________________________________
McCain obviously believes that if he just says something often enough, it MUST be true.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:22 pmMy friends: What “war” is this incompetent talking about? What does “winning” mean?
June 13th, 2008 at 1:24 pmIs it just me or has anyone from BushCo/McCain defined what “winning” is? How does an invading country claim victory within a multi-faceted civil and religious conflict?
June 13th, 2008 at 1:26 pmEvergreen2U,
Sorry about the same post, didn’t see your til mine was sent.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:27 pmThe occupation is a smashing success (from the point of view of those profiting from it).
Perpetual war for perpetual profit.
Easy to pull off because republican supporters are so easily frightened, being so ignorant and weak.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:29 pmWe need bumper stickers:
“I’M NOT SCARED ENOUGH TO VOTE MCCAIN!”
June 13th, 2008 at 1:30 pmAnd it’s such a bargain:
http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home
June 13th, 2008 at 1:32 pmThe illegal criminal war on the Iraqi people should be ended immediately. It is just Bush imperialism and Cheney colonialism in the 21st century. “Winning” a hostile occupation can only be accomplished by genocide. We have murdered over one million Iraqis: isn’t that enough to satisfy our bloodlust?
June 13th, 2008 at 1:36 pmWow 6 wars! It looks like correspondent Engel doesn’t know the difference between a battle and a war.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:39 pmRightOfAttila Says:
Wow 6 wars! It looks like correspondent Engel doesn’t know the difference between a battle and a war.
Actually, it is just one large illegal occupation.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:41 pmIt’s ok Attila, I know you’re accustomed to being protected by the little former male cheerleader playing dress-up as a cowboy, but you can relax, the Democrats will protect you and keep you safe so you don’t have to worry about the brown man in the cave on the other side of the world that frightens you soooo much.
Man you right-wingers are a bunch of sissies.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:44 pmBush needs to be punished for his war crime. see video: Tell Conyers to Do His Job, Start the Impeachment Hearings! http://tinyurl.com/4kt5ag
June 13th, 2008 at 1:48 pmyes, the surge has resulted in our locking down of major communities in Baghdad, creating walled enclaves by religious sect.
And Sadr has called for a lull in the anti-occupation effort.
But how does that ‘win’ anything.
Our troops HAVE to stay in place to keep the sectarian cleansing in check.
So to win, we have to be there indefinitely.
Sounds like a f’cking quagmire to me.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:49 pmThere are two questions, really. One is whether the USA is winning in Iraq. The second, more important question is, what do we win? If the current strategy plays out the way the Bush administration wants it to, Iraq will have a U.S.-backed government closely allied with Iran.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:49 pmRepublicans and Conservatives are always baselessly asserting that Democrats and Liberals are “weak on national security” because we don’t go around “talking tough”. We don’t use the divisive and hate-filled rhetoric of the right in denouncing those who don’t love our country one hundred percent. In short, they think we’re weak on national security because we aren’t “man enough” for them. If that’s the case, do they really want to vote for a man who says, “By golly!”?
June 13th, 2008 at 1:54 pmthe REAL definition of ‘winning’ (for Republicans):
#1 - Prevent the Iraqi oil from making it to market, that keeps the price high for us and the profits high for the oil companies
#2 - Continue fighting (not winning) the “war on terror”, in order to keep funneling $ into the MIC
#3 - Use the inevitable dissent when the lies are discovered to paint the “left” as unpatriotic
In other words, winning = staying (for them). Ending the occupation is the end of the gravy train.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:54 pmrmwarnick Says:
And don’t forget the 58 bases from which we can launch against any country in the ME and much of Africa.
Who said Imperialism was dead!
June 13th, 2008 at 1:56 pmEvergreen2U Says
June 13th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
What does “winning” mean?
___________________________________________
Well, winning means winning, as everybody knows. And my friends, we’re winning. We’re definitely winning. And we’ll keep on winning. For years to come.
/snark off
June 13th, 2008 at 1:57 pmShorter McCain:
“Just ignore the scoreboard! We’re WINNING!”
June 13th, 2008 at 1:59 pmThe war criminal idiot’s frivolous war is designed to bankrupt this nation. It is a war fueled by lies and deceit. A war built on false pretenses is a lost war, no matter what the idiot says. Just look at the price of gas at the pump, it says loud and clear that this whole ordeal is a COLOSSAL FAILURE!!! And, as the rich get richer, the dollar is worth less and less! It is all so obvious : the idiot stealing the elections, misleading this country into a criminal occupation, 9/11, Katrina, the price of gas at the pump, the entire Bush nightmare makes the idiot freak so deserving of the full penalty : EXECUTION!
June 13th, 2008 at 1:59 pmThere is no such thing as “winning” this illegal occupation…well, unless Chimpy forces the Iraqis to hand over their country to us via his illegal treaty:
Chimpy sez:
Give us your country - and we won’t kill you.
Of course, we’ll flood the place with Blackwater mercenaries who won’t be accountable to anyone for anything they do or anyone they kill, but you hajjis don’t mind that, right? We’re keeping you safe!!
Of course, our oil companies will come in and suck out every drop of oil you have, for which they might pay you a few cents a barrel - but hey, that’s a good deal for you third world towelheads, right? Think of all the cheap rugs you can buy!!
Of course, you ragheads won’t be allowed to fly or drive anywhere, because we control your airspace and your borders, but hey, we’re keeping you safe!
What? You don’t like that idea?
Sheesh - after all we’ve done for you?? We LIBERATED YOU, you ungrateful sand ni**ers!!
June 13th, 2008 at 2:00 pmSadr Extends Truce In Iraq
U.S. Officials Hail Cleric’s Decision
By Sudarsan Raghavan and Amit R. Paley
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, February 23, 2008; Page A01
BAGHDAD, Feb. 22 — Anti-American Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr ordered his Mahdi Army militia on Friday to extend a cease-fire for six months, a decision designed to bolster his stature and power but one that U.S. and Iraqi officials hope will also increase stability in Iraq.
rogers(e),
You don’t think this had anything to so with the level of violence going down? What’s going to happen come late August when the ceasefire ends and Bush is on vacation in Crawford?
June 13th, 2008 at 2:12 pmRogers…yeah? So? What’s your point?
If things are so great now in Iraq - WE NEED TO GET OUT.
June 13th, 2008 at 2:13 pmRogers,
tell us what winning is?
How do we measure it?
How many lives is it worth?
How much debt?
What does the US get for it?
Inquiring minds want to know.
June 13th, 2008 at 2:18 pmrogerse is so used to being ignored, he apparently figured he could edit the article and no one would notice.
He started by leaving out the goals:
GOALS FOR THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT:
–Take responsibility for security in all of Iraq’s provinces by November 2007
–Give U.S. and coalition forces authority to pursue all extremists
–Pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis and promote investment
–Reform de-Baathification laws
–Hold provincial elections in 2007
And then he edited out the parts that didn’t support his opinion.
Attacks in Iraq declined 60 percent during the surge, according to the U.S. military. Deaths from sectarian violence dropped 90 percent after the last additional U.S. combat brigade arrived in Iraq in June 2007….But violence has climbed in 2008 due to al Qaeda activity in the north and intra-Shi’ite violence in the south.
…Iraq enacted the “Accountability and Justice Law” in January, which became law in February, to allow the majority of former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath party to return to former posts in government…
…Iraq has taken security responsibility for half of its 18 provinces. A Pentagon report to the U.S. Congress in September said the handover of security responsibility for all provinces could be complete by July 2008…past the November 2007 target.
…Iraq enacted the “Provincial Powers Law” in March to pave the way for provincial elections. It will define the relationship between Iraq’s 18 provinces and the central government and is seen by Iraqi officials as a first step toward provincial elections, due by October…
–Legislation to share Iraq’s oil revenue equitably among Iraqis and to clear the way for investment in its oil fields has been deadlocked by a battle for control of the reserves.
In other words, Roger2 is completely dishonest.
June 13th, 2008 at 2:21 pmThose who support the war-criminal idiot resort to “COPY AND PASTE” posting procedure since they have no words of their own!
June 13th, 2008 at 2:22 pmAgain, asswhole - WHAT’S YER POINT?
June 13th, 2008 at 2:33 pmrogerse makes me correct his creative editing yet again:
U.S. troop deaths in Iraq fell to their lowest level last month since the 2003 invasion and officials said on Sunday improved security also helped the country boost oil production in May to a post-war high…
American generals have stressed that the security gains are both fragile and reversible. That was shown in March, when an Iraqi government offensive against Shi’ite militias in southern Basra sparked a surge in violence in the capital and other cities, catching U.S. and Iraqi officials off guard.
June 13th, 2008 at 2:39 pmGummitch. Rog is quite good at introducing arguments or links which, upon careful examination, make cases against his premise.
June 13th, 2008 at 2:41 pmLike I said in the lead up to the illegal invasion and occupation:
This is the part of the world that has given us the word “assasin”. After WW II the areas was divided to suit the English occupiers and they were run out. The general area has a history back through the Romans to the Greeks as being resistant to occupiers.
How come I saw it and Shrub didn’t ?
June 13th, 2008 at 2:53 pmYes rog. We all know that May had low casualty figures. In fact, more U.S. troops were killed in Afghanistan than Iraq. And? 15 have been killed in Iraq in the first 12 days of June. I don’t know about Afghanistan.
What’s your point?
June 13th, 2008 at 2:54 pm“In May we have exceeded for the first time a 2 million barrels per day export rate. In production we have exceeded 2.5 million bpd,” Shahristani said.
Before we invaded, Iraq was producing over 4 million barrels per day of oil. The sharp decline in production is one of several reasons why current prices are so high (short supply, high demand). What was your idiotic point again?
June 13th, 2008 at 3:00 pmTrue Wayne. And even that 4 million wouldn’t pay for a few hundred thousand American troops/mercenaries.
June 13th, 2008 at 3:06 pmWayne,
June 13th, 2008 at 3:54 pmAs rueful as I am to admit that rogers can right on this your special day, it’s in the charts. As you all know, I am impartial!
‘can’ s/b ‘can be’
June 13th, 2008 at 3:55 pm