Defeatocrats acknowledge surge is working, but...

They never can admit anything good can they? First the acknowledge that the surge is working, then they call for a vote of no confidence in the Iraqi govt....when will they stop with their "doom and gloom"???

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293815,00.html

 

You call it doom and gloom.

I call it keeping them honest.... Or should we just believe everything the administration says. Like we were led to believe Gen Petraeus was actually going to give the brief in September that we now find out is going to be generated by the same people who got us into the war in the first place... Don't be a lemming dude.

The surge is only having a tiny affect. ESPECIALLY compared to the fact that soldiers are giving their LIVES for it. The big reasons violence is down are:

• Millions of people have fled Iraq. Which = less people to blow up.
• And the diplomatic work where we are actually gaining cease fires in certain areas accounting hugely for the numbers.

 

Muslims can't live in peace, apparently. We should just leave and let al qaida take over. That seems to be what most want.

 

Yah just let them do their own thing - we stuck our noses where it shouldnt be and now there´s poop on it. Smells kind of like Vietnam....

 

I disagree. While it may be popular and fashionable to self-loathe on behalf of one's country these days, THEY stuck their noses where they didn't belong.

Vietnam was a pending victory for the US. The only thing that precluded that were anti-war liberals who worked on behalf of the enemy (not unlike today). The General in charge of North Vietnam mentioned this fact in his memoirs. Had it not been for those people, the US could have done something great and 4 million South Vietnamese wouldn't have been slaughtered as the result of our pullout.

I often wonder if anyone ever thinks about the repercussions of calling for defeat.

 

LMFAO @ "Pending Victory."

Dude, you are insane.

 

Translation...I have facts on my side. Otherwise you'd attempt to discredit what I wrote. That would take too much work though, huh?

 

Wow, have you ever talked to a Vietnam veteran? You should make that statement to a few of them and see what happens

 

I've talked to many, including my own family. Would you like to take exception?

 

I've covered it many times.

See above. Of course, some don't really care about facts. Those will be the ones to dismiss such. I have a huge archive of info on Kerry, including how he met with our enemies in Paris to negotiate terms of surrender, while still an officer in the Navy. Literature found that shows Kerry was working directly for operatives of the NVA.

Not unlike today. Same democrats/liberals selling out America.

 

The surge is going well peeps, Bush said so so we can all relax now.

 

Right.

 

you never read my original post did you? Even the defeatocrats, including shrillary this morning, have said that the surge is working....now that something is working, they are going to try and take credit for it...but as long as it is not, they will always want to through in the towel.

 

Two examples of juvenile word-play in one post. You make good points sometimes but stuff like that just takes away from the meat of your post. Just being real with you.

 

Whoa! Before I start trying to guess who you're referring to... Are you saying that Iraq attacked the US?

I'm sure there are some that think this way, but I've talked a quite a few 'nam vets myself, and most would not make that claim... I don't know how you can state that as a fact, instead of leading into the line with "I believe" or something... You're stating it as a fact, and that's wrong...

Yes, I've pondered it, quite a bit... have you put much thought into it? I'll explain... Let's say there's a bully, a weightlifter, and a crowd of other people... The bully's a jerk, so the weightlifter starts a fight... Even though he thought it would be easy, the weightlifter is taking a lot more hits then anticipated...

1) Should the weightlifter say "it's not worth it" and walk away...
2) Should the weightlifter continue the fight and take the hits again and again, and let the crowd watch as he gets slowly worn down...

My suggestion, walk away and prepare for a fight on another day... Don't let the crowd see you continue to unsuccessfully win a conflict... Walk away...

PS:
The bully = Iraq
The weightlifter = US

 

No. I would have stated such if it were true. My comment was in reference to muslims from the the middle east that attacked our country (uh, for those who don't let alex jones do their thinking for them).

Actually, you are stating personal opinion here. Shall we pretend I didn't post this link as a reference?

Yes, I have. Apparently I don't spend as much time at the gym as you do, though

 

These posts about the so called surge working or not working and getting comments from visiting politicians about the so-called surge working or not working are such incredible bs that it almost isn't worth commenting upon...except that some highly partisan crazies take every little comment to drive partisanship into every discussion.

1.) The real evaluation of the impact of adding 30,000 troops to an existing 130,000 troops would and should take an incredibly long time to ascertain.

While some areas are "doing better" other areas aren't. The largest terrorist bombing and killing in years just occurred in Northwest Iraq. Similarly, while attacks are down in some areas they are up in other areas where the troops aren't located.

What does all that tell you about the overall conditions in Iraq. Nothing. It is a known fact that shiite militia in Baghdad "went into hiding or quiet as the US announced the surge and announced it was focusing on Baghdad. What does that tell you about levels of violence or potential violence in Iraq--nothing.

Grasping at political commentary is like grasping at the absurd show McCain made when he visited Baghdad, had his walk through parts of Baghdad filmed while he was surrounded by soldiers on the ground and helicoptors in the air.

That was staged....and commentating on the few day visits of short term politicians is absurd.

2.) Even as politicians comment on levels of violence they all acknowledge and comment upon the hopeless conditions politically within the country. They all recognize that removing US troops immediately is tantamount to their not being a nation called Iraq....but a free for all combination of civil war and chaos as unrestricted Sunnis and Shiites go after one another.

3) There will be no "victory" or results unless and until all elements of Iraq are disarmed in a way that they can't be killing Americans and one another.

4) Hence the proclamations from Bush about "victory" or "complete victory" or all those rallying cries to his fringe deepest right wing supporters is a bold faced lie. He is full of big talk and small actions.

He can't get a victory that would be able to root out all the bad guys without probably adding hundreds of thousands of American troops. And we simply don't have that capacity....nor are any "allies" rushing to our aid to help us.

Its not happening.

If instead of complaining about Shiite armor piercing weapons supposedly supplied by Iran....Bush had the military numbers to completely block all pts of access from Iran and elsewhere that would end the problem....but again we don't have the level of troops.

The ultimate "success of a "so called surge" would be when Iraqi's in large masses are working with the US and banding together to develop a unified country....not one where the government is close to collapsing and where it is difficult to know if armed Iraqi's (in their military or police) are for us, for a unified Iraq or for some tribe or religeous sect.

American politics and the act of war in Iraq are in conflict. Political pressures are requiring decisive changes that want answers faster than can be both militarily and politically effected in Iraq. And that is only IF they can be effected in Iraq. The fooked up history of the middle east is that these conflicts last forever (see Israel and the Arabs).

So these short term histrionics of claiming...."da surge is working" are incredibly misleading.

And then branding people who are in disagreement with the administration as defeatocrats is the typical comment of partisan no-nothing troublemakers.

Where are comments of people with even an ounce of brain power?


Now as to the incredibly misleading comments comparing these reactions to the history twisting comments about Vietnam and first in particular to this reference....

That is an incredible absurd twisting of history.

1.) If there was some shred of evidence to the US military that the North Vietnamese were on the verge of collapse at any point....the US would have jumped on it.

Unlike Iraq, with a draft in existence and far far larger American forces, the US military would have and could have pounced on that.

But the US had no...that is ZERO...that is not a shred of evidence that North Vietnam may or may not have been close to collapse during the bombing of Hanoi...or at any other point of time. We never had guys sitting in the North Vietnamese positions of power reporting anything of this type. EVER EVER.

2). I was around at that time....The group that Kerry was a part of was such a tiny, small, part of a much larger wider more widespread element of an American population that became increasingly against the war....that it is absurd.

3). What that document is an outrageous example of TWISTING OF HISTORY and branding one guy...Kerry....as the worst of worst criminals.

In fact Kerry was a teeny bit player whose time in the public spotlight was incredibly brief and ultimately so marginally important relative to about 8 years of rising disagreement with the role of the American administrations (Johnson and Nixon).

In fact that Giap/Kerry piece is so distorted and weird for anyone who lived through that period that is nothing more than a distorted hatchet piece.

(There is a reason the term "swift boating" has gained popularity. It is a term now seen as creating a wild "big lie" to completely discredit someone.) Even McCain acknowledges a version of this "big lie" was used against him in the South Carolina primary in 2000 when the rumor was spread that he had fathered an illegitimate child. By the way, this was done after McCain beat Bush in the New Hampshire primary...and Bush's efforts at the White House were in serious doubt.

The outcome for America in Vietnam turned out positive over the long term.

Over 50,000 American soldiers died in Vietnam. Americans grew to thoroughly distrust much of what the Johnson and Nixon administrations declared about the war.

After the end of American involvement in Vietnamese....I don't recall any North Vietnamese running the American government. The language didn't turn from English to Vietnamese. Last I looked no American cities got renamed Ho Chi Minh city.

Once America left Vietnam it was able to refocus on confronting communism on a broader scale. Ultimately communism was destroyed....and there is no grand communist anti-west enemy....that existed for so many decades.

The middle east is one big horrendous dangerous place for the entire world. It is a hotbed for dangerous terrorist extremism. It is a place where the spread of nuclear weapons could fall into dangerous hands for the world.

It is also the center point in the world for the single most important raw material--oil.

But to make whacked partisan comments wrapping an incredibly short-term view of an increase of 30,000 troops and to tie it to some stupid name blaming comment like defeatocrats is ultimately the kind of thing that has the worst impact internally within America and prevents smart thinking, truth, and rationality from being used when it is desperately needed.

 

I didn't see the link; the fact remains, you claimed Vietnam was a "pending victory"... And not only can that not be verified as fact, there are plenty of BTDT's that would beg to differ...

I'm not sure how you would come to a different conclusion... The world is seeing us take casualty after casualty... The longer we stay, the more the world is going to realize that we're "giving this all we have", and cannot quell the violence, even in a 3rd world country... If we walk away, we can save our reputation as the world's superpower by preparing for our next fight...

Hell, maybe even get our superpower perception back by invading an easy target, like grenada (again), just to prove that we still got it...

PS, that last line was a joke

 

Fantastic post earlpearl.

"The surge" is the military equivalent of an "all-in". We're stretched thin at home, and the war is slowly bankrupting us either through foreign debt, the growing threat of hyperinflation or both.

What GTech is confused about is the concept of defeat. We are not engaged in a constitutionally sanctioned war. We're fighting to contain the damage created by our ill-advised decision to enforce UN resolutions, that were never voted upon or agreed to by the American people.

You can't lose a war or claim defeat if you are not fighting a war. This is a police action, misguidedly on behalf of the (sic) international community, the same folks who are now watching on the sidelines.

We went to get WMDs, now we're involved in a war most of the population wants no part of, and the rest are too afraid to withdraw from.

Were our leaders so obtuse as to think that removing Saddam would not create a power vacuum? Isn't there a video of Cheney in this forum, basically admitting this during the 90s, likely when it was a great partisan argument against the democrats. Damned if the Dems do (and I am not a democrat) but a fantastic idea in the hands of the neo-cons.

Blaming John Kerry for the Vietnam war is the most asinine thing I have read today, and there was a lot of competition for that honor. Nothing like indicting your own citizens with the war memoirs of your enemy.