The Facts in Iraq Are Changing

The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

celticlord2112 -> The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/21/2008 6:05:31 PM)
The Facts in Iraq Are Changing quote: If George W. Bush was wrong about the surge from summer 2003 to January 2007, Barack Obama has been wrong about it from January 2007 to today. John McCain seems to have been right on it all along. When asked why he changed his position on an issue, John Maynard Keynes said: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" What say you, Sen. Obama?

kdsub -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/21/2008 6:30:25 PM)
I say hasty decisions got us in this mess... I hope he does not change his mind until he has the power to do something about it.

jlf1961 -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/21/2008 7:53:56 PM)
One fact remains, we never had the troop strength to actually make the invasion and reorganization of Iraq feasable as long as we had troops in Afghanistan.

kdsub -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/21/2008 8:03:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 One fact remains, we never had the troop strength to actually make the invasion and reorganization of Iraq feasable as long as we had troops in Afghanistan. I think we did and do...for some reason we never fight a war all out...always worried about what some other country or the UN would say. We may have had to reinstate the draft but we could easily do it with a lot fewer deaths on both sides. If we were going to do it at all we should have gone all out from the beginning...or not at all. We would have needed to go into Pakistan, Iran and Syria but no one could have stopped us. Butch

DomKen -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/21/2008 8:21:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 The Facts in Iraq Are Changing That article would be funny if it wasn't tragic. iraq isn't spiraling into civil war. The wars been over for about a year. Baghdad has been cleansed of all the sunni. The government is firmly in al Sadr's hands. The sunni lack a clear leader and the money to effectively fight back so they've retreated to their towns further up the rivers from Baghdad. This is now the same sort of breeding ground for extremists that the palestinian refugee camps became. Eventually the al Sadr government will need to do something about that and the violence will resume.

Owner59 -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/21/2008 8:32:35 PM)
The surge and continuation of this war was sold to us as a way to allow the Iraqis time and space to form a functioning government and ministries. So far,that hasn`t happened. Can you point out the successes or the progress that`s been accomplished that will justify lives lost and money spent since the "surge" started two + years ago? I hear people call the "surge" a success b/c supposedly the violence is down. But the purpose of the surge,the reason we stayed(the forming of a government)hasn`t happened yet and may never. Have those facts changed?

FirmhandKY -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/21/2008 8:56:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 The surge and continuation of this war was sold to us as a way to allow the Iraqis time and space to form a functioning government and ministries. So far,that hasn`t happened. Can you point out the successes or the progress that`s been accomplished that will justify lives lost and money spent since the "surge" started two + years ago? I hear people call the "surge" a success b/c supposedly the violence is down. But the purpose of the surge,the reason we stayed(the forming of a government)hasn`t happened yet and may never. Have those facts changed? You wouldn't recognize a fact if it bit you, Owner. [:D] Last time I gave you some facts. Firm

jlf1961 -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/21/2008 9:57:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 One fact remains, we never had the troop strength to actually make the invasion and reorganization of Iraq feasable as long as we had troops in Afghanistan. I think we did and do...for some reason we never fight a war all out...always worried about what some other country or the UN would say. We may have had to reinstate the draft but we could easily do it with a lot fewer deaths on both sides. If we were going to do it at all we should have gone all out from the beginning...or not at all. We would have needed to go into Pakistan, Iran and Syria but no one could have stopped us. Butch Actually, america by it self did not have the troop strength to invade and pacify Iraq. Five different Generals told Bush that fact when he began his plans. It breaks down this way: 1) We had more than enough troops to invade, counting the troop assist from the other coalition members. 2) The number of troops required to pacify a region after invasion is 2 to 3 times the original number of troops deployed. When we invaded, we had to pull units from other duties, including Korea to provide the troops needed to pull off the operation. After the invasion, most of those troops were sent back to korea to patrol the DMZ. (There has been no Peace agreed to in Korea, all that is presently in place is a cease fire.) In order to provide enough troops to control the country after invasion, reserve and national guard units have been deployed. Combat rotation is 1 year in country, 6 months out, this is to maintain top training and efficiency. In Iraq, deployments have been 18months to 2 years, depending on the MOS, rotate home, 3 months out and then redeploy. The end result is troops that have been on the sharp end way to long, which leads to unauthorized shootings, i.e killing of civilians. It also contributes to the increased number of combat fatigue cases, depression, suicide, insubordination, assault, and other crimes.

meatcleaver -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 5:38:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 The Facts in Iraq Are Changing quote: If George W. Bush was wrong about the surge from summer 2003 to January 2007, Barack Obama has been wrong about it from January 2007 to today. John McCain seems to have been right on it all along. When asked why he changed his position on an issue, John Maynard Keynes said: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" What say you, Sen. Obama? Wrong enemy, wrong country, wrong war. When the facts are that bad, there is no putting them right. The changing facts are just the hot air of rationalizing and trying to rescue a totlaly fucked up policy. (Which incidently is a war crime, if you apply the criteria the allies applied to the NAZIs)

meatcleaver -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 5:55:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 The surge and continuation of this war was sold to us as a way to allow the Iraqis time and space to form a functioning government and ministries. So far,that hasn`t happened. Can you point out the successes or the progress that`s been accomplished that will justify lives lost and money spent since the "surge" started two + years ago? I hear people call the "surge" a success b/c supposedly the violence is down. But the purpose of the surge,the reason we stayed(the forming of a government)hasn`t happened yet and may never. Have those facts changed? You wouldn't recognize a fact if it bit you, Owner. [:D] Last time I gave you some facts. Firm The one important fact is that the USA commited a war crime to secure resources for itself. What you have linked are not facts but opinions. As for the Iraqi Parliament moving out of the green zone, it really doesn't matter since most of the members of parliament are members of one terrorist group, militia or an another and all are taking dollars in cash to give a modicum of support to their American occupiers. Bribery I think it is called or is it thirty pieces of silver? However, the US has built a house of cards that it has to physically support, not given a people their freedom. Such is the price of US addiction to oil.

bipolarber -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 6:05:43 AM)
The screw up came when we became occupiers, instead of liberators. (Ignoring the fact we went in looking for nonexistant WMD's as an excuse.) Because we stayed after the statue came down, after we killed his sons, after we drug him out of his spider hole and had him hung... that's why we're in this quagmire, and sinking. Facts? What facts? I'm beginning to think that the Bush administration is run by top level accountants. They seem to be trying, as hard as they can, to "massage the numbers" so that things sound all hunky dory over there. We've lost 4,300+ troops over there, and somewhere between 60,000 and a quarter of a million civilians have died. We've been there for longer than WWII. We've emptied the US treasury, and fought this thing with money borrowed from our Chinese "friends" which we'll be owing to them for the next three generations at least. But, hey, "victory" is just around the corner.... (again)

NumberSix -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 6:11:08 AM)
General; to the thread: An op ed piece characterized as fact. Rather smacks of the one true way. It is amusing, if nothing more. 6 Need a frame of reference.

Lordandmaster -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 6:17:14 AM)
I know one thing: McCain can't possibly "have been right all along" because he has changed his mind about the Iraq war about five times over. As I just wrote to someone earlier this morning, his statements about the war are vintage flip-flopping McCain: "It was a bad idea to go in, but I voted for it, but mistakes were made along the way, but I had nothing to do with them, and one of the mistakes was that there never were any victory conditions, so we don't know when we will have won, but now we have to stay there until we win, but actually I might withdraw the troops by the end of my presidency even if we haven't won." quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 John McCain seems to have been right on it all along.

bipolarber -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 6:20:40 AM)
Six, Exactly! How many times have we been presented with "facts" about this war that have turned out to be so much fart gas mixed with wishful thinking on the part of the administration? "The insurgency is in it's alast throes..." "We've turned the corner in Iraq..." "The surge is working..." "The actions at Abhu Ghraib were the result of just a few bad apples..." What the OP still fails to realize is, during a time of war, the first casualty is...the truth.

lronitulstahp -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 6:21:16 AM)
One thing that really kills me, is after it's all said and done, and with the contiual comaprisons to Vietnam...when the smoke clears, we'll have NONE of the really relevant music and prose and social consciousness that followed or was inspired by Vietnam. The dumbing down of America continues, and the numbing of the American social psyche is in full force. At least people should learn something from war. Ahh...the olden days! This is not your grandfather's war folks...sadly enough...it may be your grandchildren's war someday.

NumberSix -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 6:28:11 AM)
Well, I caught a 4th to 6th page chunk of news in my newspaper a few days ago, a Major General (no doubt retired) investigating abu and whatnot said that Bush, Cheney et al should be tried for warcrimes... That sort of thing has been ignored. I gotta laugh, you see these little anecdotal oneseys twoseys that would support the current regime (and they are always anecdotal) and big hoopla, big proof. And the vast majority of the bandwagoners jump on these cleverly written pieces (of the cleverly written, there are very few) and hammer it as a plank for the American people. I thought there was a conservative 'thought' but I have espied no evidence of it, as of late. We mimic, but we do not understand. Dan Akroyd (Spies Like Us)

DarkSteven -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 6:28:20 AM)
I don't understand the surge at all. Thr original purpose of it was to allow the Iraqi government time to get its act together. A drop in violence accompanies the surge and was attributed to it, but no progress occurred in the Iraqi government. The admin's PR machine then announced that the surge was a success because it resulted in a goal different than the originally stated one. The fact that Al-Sadr had specifically called on his forces to renounce violence at that point was likely a strong contributing factor, and it may well have been due to the extra troop strength. The surge has been claimed as a master stroke by the same ones that refuse to acknowledge the many errors throughout the invasion, including invading with too few troops to begin with and firing Shinseki for being truthful, as well as invading Iraq in the first place. The surge does nothing other than reduce deaths from a level that it should not have been to another level it should not be. Takne in the larger context of where we need to be and where we are now and how quickly we are moving there... do we have any clue?

Owner59 -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 6:30:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bipolarber The screw up came when we became occupiers, instead of liberators. (Ignoring the fact we went in looking for nonexistant WMD's as an excuse.) Because we stayed after the statue came down, after we killed his sons, after we drug him out of his spider hole and had him hung... that's why we're in this quagmire, and sinking. Facts? What facts? I'm beginning to think that the Bush administration is run by top level accountants. They seem to be trying, as hard as they can, to "massage the numbers" so that things sound all hunky dory over there. We've lost 4,300+ troops over there, and somewhere between 60,000 and a quarter of a million civilians have died. We've been there for longer than WWII. We've emptied the US treasury, and fought this thing with money borrowed from our Chinese "friends" which we'll be owing to them for the next three generations at least. But, hey, "victory" is just around the corner.... (again) "The screw up came when we became occupiers, instead of liberators. " Exactly... As well,the constant shifting of the goal posts,the talking points that would change completely,contradicting what was said before, as if the previous day`s talking points didn`t exist,fibbing to us about the number of Iraqi troops/police that completed training and the constant attempt to link Hussein to the 9/11 attackers. Facts shmacts,the war was illegal,immoral,ill-conceived and sold to us with lie after lie,misrepresentation after misrepresentation, a constant stream of insults to and questioning the patriotism of the war`s critics. I think it`s safe to say that Americans don`t believe anything coming from the white house or Bush anymore.After being caught in so many lies,deadly lies,no one believes him anymore. Even if he`s telling the truth,he`s pretty much ruined his credibility and won`t be believed.When that guy tells you the time,you instinctively check your watch.Not because the guy gets the time wrong,but b/c he lies about what time it is. Bush has earned and completely owns his place as the worst president in American history.This guy makes Nixon look good.If only Bush had the integrity of Nixon,he would have resigned 10 scandals ago. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lastly,it doesn`t fucking matter if the "facts change in Iraq",whatever the fuck that means.The fuck`n facts I want to know,are why and how we got into this mess and who knew what,when.Those are the facts I want to find out. The facts that truly need to be found out,make any "changing facts in Iraq" ,pale in comparison.How the fuck this disaster happened and how we can avoid this in the future, are what`s relevant. I think the occupation`s supporters are hoping that if things improve in Iraq or can be made to appear better,that they`ll be vindicated and all will be forgiven. Not a fucking chance!

ferriemistie -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 6:32:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 One fact remains, we never had the troop strength to actually make the invasion and reorganization of Iraq feasable as long as we had troops in Afghanistan. I think we did and do...for some reason we never fight a war all out...always worried about what some other country or the UN would say. We may have had to reinstate the draft but we could easily do it with a lot fewer deaths on both sides. If we were going to do it at all we should have gone all out from the beginning...or not at all. We would have needed to go into Pakistan, Iran and Syria but no one could have stopped us. Butch Actually, america by it self did not have the troop strength to invade and pacify Iraq. Five different Generals told Bush that fact when he began his plans. It breaks down this way: 1) We had more than enough troops to invade, counting the troop assist from the other coalition members. 2) The number of troops required to pacify a region after invasion is 2 to 3 times the original number of troops deployed. When we invaded, we had to pull units from other duties, including Korea to provide the troops needed to pull off the operation. After the invasion, most of those troops were sent back to korea to patrol the DMZ. (There has been no Peace agreed to in Korea, all that is presently in place is a cease fire.) In order to provide enough troops to control the country after invasion, reserve and national guard units have been deployed. Combat rotation is 1 year in country, 6 months out, this is to maintain top training and efficiency. In Iraq, deployments have been 18months to 2 years, depending on the MOS, rotate home, 3 months out and then redeploy. The end result is troops that have been on the sharp end way to long, which leads to unauthorized shootings, i.e killing of civilians. It also contributes to the increased number of combat fatigue cases, depression, suicide, insubordination, assault, and other crimes. Actually now for the Army (not sure about other branches) it's 1 year total including the 2 weeks R&R when they return.. But i do agree that we didn't have enough troop strength, and the sad fact is just because we have more people in now doesn't mean they have the gear and training they need to go over.. -sigh-

farglebargle -> RE: The Facts in Iraq Are Changing (6/22/2008 6:33:53 AM)
Keep "Moving the Goalposts" you Loyal Bushies, and you can appear to be making progress, too. But you ain't. You're just moving the goalposts to give your losing team the appearance of progress. Remember the TIMETABLE imposed on the Iraqi Government as a condition of the additional resources to "The Surge". There were dates on that TIMETABLE. How'd that work out? 18%? Fail. OBJECTIVE MEASURES, not moving the goalposts, say you had your chance, and it didn't work. So... You keep reaching for that Rainbow. If you sell your horseshit right, maybe you can get 30% of people to actually believe it.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875