Despair stalks Baghdad as plan falters

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Heading off the expected spin...I take absolutely zero pleasure in reading and posting this, no revelry here...disgust and frustration would be the accurate moods to accuse me of.

-----------------------------------------------

Despair stalks Baghdad as plan falters
By Andrew North
BBC News, Baghdad

Trying to get into the centre of Baghdad earlier this week offered one view of how far away the Americans and Iraqi authorities are from gaining control here.

We were at the airport. Just before we were due to leave, the entrance car park was hit by a car bomb.

US troops and private security forces who guard the perimeter locked the whole area down for the next four hours. No traffic was allowed in or out.

While we waited with scores of other vehicles, mortars were fired at the airport. Fortunately for us they landed on the other side of the runway, plumes of smoke shooting into the air.

You won't have heard about any of this because at the same time a series of other far more serious attacks was taking place.

One was at the Sadriya market in the city centre, where a massive car bomb killed more than 140 people.

It was placed at the entrance to a set of barriers put up around another part of the market where a previous single bomb, in February, claimed more than 130 lives.

The market blast "did not penetrate the emplaced barriers" a later US military press release helpfully pointed out, ignoring the fact that the bombers had yet again adapted their tactics with vicious perfection - setting off their device at the point where crowds congregated outside and at the very moment when they were busiest.

Bombers 'organised'

As we drove into the city, we counted six blast holes left by recent roadside bombs along just one 100-metre stretch or road.

A large patch of damaged, blackened Tarmac on a bridge spoke of another attempt to destroy a key crossing.

The Sunni extremists held to be responsible for these attacks seem to be making a mockery of the US and Iraqi security plan, which is now into its third month.

So far, their surge seems to be having more effect than the American one.

Last month alone there were more than 100 car bombings, and the number of attacks has continued at a similar rate so far this month. This indicates a high level of organisation.

This despite the fact that there are many extra US and Iraqi troops in the city now. There are more raids and patrols.


On our drive into the city, we encountered several Iraqi army checkpoints. But almost every vehicle - including ours - was being waved through.

Many new checkpoints have been set up across Baghdad.

But what is their purpose, many Iraqis ask, when they seem to stop so few people?

It is not always encouraging when they do - a couple of times we have been pulled over by Iraqi soldiers who ask us if we have any bullets to give them.

Optimism fading

Just a month ago there was a cautious - very cautious, but still real - sense of optimism among many Baghdadis that the plan was starting to work.

The daily count of bodies found around the city - mostly Sunni victims of targeted sectarian killings - had dropped off significantly.

The Shia militia of Moqtada Sadr, which was blamed for most of these murders, was largely obeying orders to put away its weapons and co-operate with the security plan.

But there is a deadly and familiar equation here.

With official security forces apparently unable to protect Shia communities, pressure is growing on the militias to do so again.

And there are signs their death squads have returned to work. The body count is creeping up again. Twenty were found yesterday.

Dealing with the car bomb is "our top priority", says US military spokesman Lt Col Chris Garver.

But as ever it is a game of cat and mouse, played with insurgents who are "very adaptive", and very well-funded.

A man arrested by US soldiers after placing a truck bomb which failed to go off told interrogators he had been paid $30,000 (?15,000) for the task.

Lt Col Garver says the US believes it is up against several "car bombing networks".

"If there was just one, we might be able to pull the string and unravel it," he says.

People still have to be patient, he warns, adding a note of optimism.

"We are still not fully staffed," he says - there are another two months to go until all the extra US troops are in Baghdad.

Exhaustion

But there is frustration too among the Americans at the Iraqi government's lack of progress on reconciliation - ultimately the only solution to the conflict, most believe.

Key issues include the need to implement a new law on sharing oil revenues, an amnesty programme and limiting the scope of the de-Baathification process. All of these are crucial to winning over Sunnis.

The idea was that the security drive in Baghdad would create "space" for such efforts to get going. But although new laws have been drafted they are a long way from being approved.

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates stepped up the pressure over these issues on his visit to Baghdad. In the meantime, the young men and women sent out here to implement President Bush's plan are paying a heavy price.

An average of 80-90 Americans die each month. And US personnel have just had their tours extended by another three months.

But, as it has always been since the 2003 invasion, it is the Iraqis who suffer most.

No-one knows the exact figures, but at the end of another week of unspeakable, random carnage, hundreds more Iraqi families are grieving.

Exhaustion and despair hang over the country.

And there are no signs of change.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
petraues said that sunni/shia violnece is down by 2/3`s........


here`s an idea...why stop at surrendering in iraq?...why not go all the way and surrender to iran before they nuke us?.....avoid the hassle of burying lots of bodies and clearing rubble...

he can be the first "secretary of peace" under that nutbar "department of peace" plan of kucinich's.....

run that by harry....give him a woody...,
 

Happy Hippo

Registered
Forum Member
Mar 2, 2006
4,794
120
0
avoid the hassle of burying lots of bodies and clearing rubble...


I think there is a lot more "hassle" than just burying bodies and clearing rubble. Perhaps having a bit of empathy would help - imagine if the war was over here instead of there - that our infrastructure was being destroyed, innocent people being killed, millions of refugees displaced.

It's not a matter of "surrendering" - who exactly would we be surrendering to? Our own cause to be the world's "police"?

I recently received an email with a letter from an Iraqi - here are a few of his thoughts....



I want to introduce myself, and tell you a story, but i don't know how to start, and where to stop.

My name is Khalid, i am an environmental engineering student and i am 24, but this is the least important to know about me, what's really important for me to tell, and for you to know, is that I am Iraqi, and that I have a deep, deep wound in my soul, that has been bleeding for over four years now.

Iraq, my soul, is bleeding. And i had to leave it against my will, because of the incredibly bad security situation that led to me getting kidnapped and my family paying a huge ransom, which made me leave immediately after i was released in fear that i would be kidnapped again. I left Iraq one month before my graduation and had to come to Jordan, which made me lose two years of my university time and life, but even worse, made me lose the company of the Tigris and the Euphrates.

I had to travel, leaving Iraq behind me, to live like a refugee, one of a million other refuges, in a country of less than five millions people, that already has its own financial problems without needing our additional burden to add to it. I am an Iraqi refuge in Jordan.

Since I left in July 2005, things have exponentially deteriorated in every possible aspect, now people hardly get 1 hours of electricity a day, they have water problems, regular lack of gas that its prices multiplied about 20 times since the war. Let alone the main and real problems of the actual presence of an occupation that is leaching on the country and causing the destruction to its people, unity, sovereignty, infrastructure and economy.

Iraq is the loving mother, that gave birth to thinkers and builders, people that enriched humanity with their contributions in all aspects of life, people that their civilization accumulated for over 7000 years till now.

Iraq, the noble wisdom, the land of the two flowing rivers, the land of the mosques and churches, is in crises...




I think a lot of times we forget about all the individual injustices that war renders - when can we justify these atrocities for some "greater good"? Certainly not in this war.
 

Jabberwocky

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 3, 2006
3,491
29
0
Jacksonville, FL
"why stop at surrendering in iraq?"


Hippo made the point but it worth making again. THE WAR IS OVER. Saddam's army has been defeated, he has been executed. Mission accomplished. Now what? GW, do you really think that we can wait these people out and put an end to the sectarian violence? If we just send 20,000 more troups, then they will all come to their senses, sing kumbaya, put a coke in one hand and a hammer in the other to get to work on building a McDonald's on every corner?

Wait, the "last" suicide bomber just blew themselves up. Thank god. Now we can send our troops home and say we won the "war."
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
petraues said that sunni/shia violnece is down by 2/3`s........


here`s an idea...why stop at surrendering in iraq?...why not go all the way and surrender to iran before they nuke us?.....avoid the hassle of burying lots of bodies and clearing rubble...

he can be the first "secretary of peace" under that nutbar "department of peace" plan of kucinich's.....

run that by harry....give him a woody...,

Oh, ok, so Petraues says the violence between Sunni's and Shia's is down by 2/3. I have no way of knowing what that means, but fine. Evidently, that is not good enough for others in command there that have said that things need to improve or there is no justification for keeping this "surge" or whatever the heck it is going. Maybe Petraues is not communicating with his people, I don't know. Maybe he is saying what his Commander in Chief and Pentagon officials are letting him know what he should say, I don't know. Maybe the extended curfew that was trumpeted just prior to McCain proclaiming that anyone with their own personal military surrounding them can go to the market is causing the recent increase in reported attacks by many sources, I don't know. Or maybe you and Wayne just hand pick certain media reports that suit your cause to hold up as being the way it is, I don't know.

What I do know is that I have asked you at what point would this surge be deemable as a failure or withdrawel of troops would be ok with you, since you say just give the surge a chance and then you'll be cool with a change in strategy? If we've learned nothing in the past few years, please tell me you can't expect anyone to just put faith in the words of this administration. I'd really like to hear what your suggestion is in this situation. When is the surge deemed a failure? Or a success, if that line is easier for you to explain? And why do you incessantly say that if we draw down and redeploy troops that we will have lost the war, and what we've done their will be a failure? I think we accomplished some good in eliminating Saddam and his henchmen, and trying to establish a democratic foothold in the Middle East. I get that, I truly do. I don't agree in any way it has been worth it, and I doubt I ever will, but at least I understood the logic. Remaining in that country indefinitely - which is exactly what this administration suggests is necessary is just plain stupid (IMO), and there comes a point when you just have to draw a line in the proverbial sand.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,489
168
63
Bowling Green Ky
"Optimism fading"--

The majority of peoples whose optomism is fading--never had any to begin with--fortunately those doing the fightings isn't fading despite media bias and certain elements trying to cut off their funding.

From listening to media-blogs-and liberal supporters you'd think they have to install draft to fight what they tag as a "losers war"--don't let fanny packers fool you--
There are plenty that let their infernal carp and whining-- roll off like water off a ducks back --

From page 2-- on enistments 12-06
http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/wars/a/draft.htm

Regardless of what you may read in the press, recruit quality remains high. 60 percent of all new recruits score in the top-half of the mental category (a score of 50 or better on the Armed Forces Vocational Aptitude Battery, or ASVAB). Less than 4 percent score in the lowest category (30 or below), and those few must already have a civilian job, education or experience, which directly translates to an Army job in order to qualify. 90 percent of all new recruits have a high school diploma, at least 15 college credits, or have graduated from an accredited homeschool program. Only 10 percent were enlisted with GEDs (without a high school diploma, college credits, accredited homeschool program, or GED, forget it -- you're not getting in).

Reenlistment rates (for all the services) continue to be the highest ever. The services are certainly not having any problems keeping people.

While the active duty Army (and Marine Corps) are trying to increase in size, the Air Force and Navy have too many folks. Both services are still trying to cut thousands of troops from their ranks. In fact, the Air Force recently announced they are planning to cut an additional 50,000 (enlisted, officer, civilian) from active duty, Air Force Reserves, and Air National Guard) between FY 2007 and FY 2010. The "reduction in force" for the Air Force and Navy has resulted in long waits (up to one year) for those wishing to join up, and the services are encouraging people to separate early, or transfer to the Army.

Last year (2005) the Marine Corps, for the first time in two decades missed their recruiting goal (for two months), but the primary reason was because (like the Army), they were trying to fill their size increase (9,000 new Marines), all in a single year (they almost made it).


One again we have event in senate sponsered by dems today that have the terrorist :00hour

and or allies---

BAGHDAD (AP) - An Iraqi government spokesman criticized the U.S. Senate vote to begin withdrawing U.S. troops by Oct. 1.
"We see some negative signs in the decision because it sends wrong signals to some sides that might think of alternatives to the political process," Ali al-Dabbagh told The Associated Press.

He spoke after the Senate passed legislation Thursday that would require the start of troop withdrawals from Iraq by Oct. 1. The House passed the same bill a day earlier, and President Bush has promised a veto.

The legislation is the first binding challenge on the war that Democrats have managed to send to Bush since they reclaimed control of both houses of Congress in January.

"Coalition forces gave lots of sacrifices and they should continue their mission, which is building Iraqi security forces to take over," al-Dabbagh said. "We see (it) as a loss of four years of sacrifices."

---and back to the troops

Fathom if you would for a minute--what attitude our allies-troops--and miltary leaders ect
would have knowing they had Clinton-Obama-Pelosi and Reid as commanders in chief and next in line--would sure strike fear in hearts of any adversary :)

by the way did anyone see Obama's answer to fighting terror--

Obama pledges to double U.S. foreign aid

09:48 PM CDT on Monday, April 23, 2007
McClatchy Newspapers

CHICAGO ? Sen. Barack Obama accused President Bush Monday of weakening America's global leadership with a "squandered" response to terrorism as the Democratic presidential candidate committed himself to repair relations with allies and the nation's standing around the world.

The Illinois senator pledged to double U.S. foreign aid if elected president, arguing that improvements in stability and living conditions in poor nations would reduce the appeal of terrorism abroad and bolster the security of Americans at home

--isn't that same approach Clinton took on NK

Lets see--universal health care--doubling foreign
aid= balanced budget --if they say so:shrug:
 
Last edited:

hammer1

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 17, 2002
7,791
127
63
Wisconsin and Dorado Puerto Rico
Elaboration on our "Agent Orange" affliicted poster's post!

Elaboration on our "Agent Orange" affliicted poster's post!

petraues said that sunni/shia violnece is down by 2/3`s........


here`s an idea...why stop at surrendering in iraq?...why not go all the way and surrender to iran before they nuke us?.....avoid the hassle of burying lots of bodies and clearing rubble...

he can be the first "secretary of peace" under that nutbar "department of peace" plan of kucinich's.....

run that by harry....give him a woody...,

Speaking as the Senate was passing legislation to start bringing home U.S. forces in October, Gen. David Petraeus said the war will require "an enormous commitment" by the United States.

And he said that while some sectarian killings have dropped by two-thirds in recent months, the overall level of violence in Iraq has remained largely the same.

Since our misguided poster "Weasel" evidently has difficulty reading 2 sentences in a row..i come to his aid and post what he could not.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,489
168
63
Bowling Green Ky
add one of our biggest allies to the list--

Australian PM says US Congress vote on Iraq aids Al-Qaeda

Apr 26 10:44 PM US/Eastern





View larger image

The US Congress' vote to push for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq was wrong and will bring comfort to Al-Qaeda insurgents, Australian Prime Minister John Howard said Friday.
The Democrat-dominated US Senate on Thursday passed legislation which set a timeline for the recall of US troops from Iraq, where the US has been engaged in a bloody war since March 2003.

US President George W Bush has vowed to veto the law.

Howard, a staunch Bush supporter who has also committed troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, said the vote by the US Congress was "probably not helpful to the general situation in Iraq."

"I think it is wrong, and I don't think it is doing anything other than giving great comfort and encouragement to Al-Qaeda and the insurgency in Iraq," Howard said.

"They are looking at all this, they read newspapers, they see it on television and they say, 'The American domestic resolve is weakening, therefore we should maintain our resolve.'

"If there is a perception of an America defeat in Iraq, that will leave the whole of the Middle East in great turmoil and will be an enormous victory for terrorism."

The US bill, passed by the House of Representatives on Wednesday, comes against the background of plunging public support for the war which has claimed the lives of more than 3,300 US servicemen and women.
-----------------------------------------------------
Hippo I was certainly impressed by your letter from Iraqi--

He should be teaching English at Havard with such mastery of english language--I doubt 10% of Americans could be so articulate with perfect spelling--but of course when you see an american activist--dressed like Muslim surrounded by other Muslims with english protest signs filmed by liberal media--you don't question it either--:yup

Maybe you should add some books on logic and probabilties to your reading ;)
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
Has that Australian PM been right about anything concerning the occupation of Iraq?
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,489
168
63
Bowling Green Ky
That would be debatable Stevie--one thing about it they've been beside us as well as Canada -UK-SK ect when needed.

--and liberals on the other hand have been there to fulfill UBL/terrorists propaganda needs and prophecy of some U.S. entities not having the guts for the fight.

Maybe I shouldn't make remarks so confrontational.

If we can agree that terrorist are and will be a threat now and in future--we must consider the worser of evils in fightening it.

I don't see how anyone can take Obama's solution of buying our way out by doubling foreign aid.

Don't think handling terrorist as civilians with attorneys is the answer.

Don't think limiting interrogations to name-rank-jihad # is answer

Don't think cutting back survailence is answer--

I'm hoping that Dem's are just using these complaints as talking points and if they get into power know how irresponsible they would be.

a small case in point--

CIA TENET BREAKS SILENCE ON '60 MINS'; BOOK SET FOR RELEASE
Wed Apr 25 2007 16:15:01 ET

Ex-CIA Director George Tenet says the intelligence extracted from terror suspects in the Agency?s ?High Value Detainee? program, which includes so-called ?enhanced interrogation techniques,? was more valuable than all the other terror intelligence gathered by the FBI, the National Security Agency and the CIA. In his first network television interview, the nation?s former top spy denied any torture took place, but tells Scott Pelley that the High Value Detainee program saved lives and allowed the U.S. government to foil terror plots. The interview will be broadcast on 60 MINUTES Sunday, April 29 (7:00-8:00 PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network.

MORE

The High Value Detainee program uses ?enhanced? techniques said to include sleep deprivation, exposure to extreme temperatures, and water boarding, in which suspects are reportedly restrained as a steady stream of water is poured over their faces, causing a severe gag reflex and a terrifying fear of drowning. In Sunday?s interview, Pelley challenges Tenet on the ?enhanced interrogations,? a topic that gets little play in his much-anticipated book, At the Center of the Storm. ?Here?s what I would say to you, to the Congress, to the American people, to the President of the United States: I know that this program has saved lives. I know we?ve disrupted plots,? he tells Pelley. ?I know this program alone is worth more than the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency put together, have been able to tell us.?

MORE

The new program for interrogation came after the 9/11 attacks. When pressed by Pelley about whether interrogations included water boarding, Tenet insists he does not talk about techniques, and that what he means by ?enhanced interrogation? is not torture. Whatever it is, it?s justified in his mind. ?We don?t torture people. I want you to listen to me. The context is it?s post-9/11. I've got reports of nuclear weapons in New York City, apartment buildings that are gonna be blown up, planes that are gonna fly into airports all over again, plot lines that I don't know. I don't know what's going on inside the United States, and I'm struggling to find out where the next disaster is going to occur. Everybody forgets one central context of what we lived through: the palpable fear that we felt on the basis of the fact that there was so much we did not know.?

When 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured in a raid in Pakistan, the ?enhanced interrogations? were apparently a surprise to him. According to Tenet, the captured terrorist told CIA interrogators, ?I?ll talk to you guys when you take me to New York and I can see my lawyer.? Instead, he was reportedly flown around the world, kept in secret prisons and water-boarded. Tenet repeated his denial again and again: ?Let me say that again to you. We don?t torture people. Okay??

MORE

But when asked by Pelley why the ?enhanced interrogation? techniques were necessary, Tenet says, ?Because these are people who will never, ever, ever tell you a thing. These are people who know who?s responsible for the next terrorist attack?.[who] wouldn?t blink an eyelash about killing you, your family, me and my family and everybody in this town,? says Tenet. When Pelley presses, asking whether he lost sleep over the interrogations, Tenet says, ?Of course you lose sleep over it. You?re on new territory.?

Developing...
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
Has George Tenet said anything about Iraq that has been correct? Seems to me this guy should be exhiled in disgrace.
The problem with you pro war guys is that you have to find a spokesman who in the past has been right about something.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
"why stop at surrendering in iraq?"


Hippo made the point but it worth making again. THE WAR IS OVER. Saddam's army has been defeated, he has been executed. Mission accomplished. Now what? GW, do you really think that we can wait these people out and put an end to the sectarian violence? If we just send 20,000 more troups, then they will all come to their senses, sing kumbaya, put a coke in one hand and a hammer in the other to get to work on building a McDonald's on every corner?

Wait, the "last" suicide bomber just blew themselves up. Thank god. Now we can send our troops home and say we won the "war."

again...the man in charge...the man that said that there needs to be a "political solution"(but also said there would be kaos if we set a date certain to surrender)should be calling the shots...

not harry("this war will gain us seats") reid who refuses to even listen to,much less consider any information from petraues....

as our troops fight the worst of the worst, back home their "leaders" vote to ensure their defeat....

the real question now is,do the dems have the sac to keep sending the same bill back, effectively defunding the war?......funny that they`re trying to set the surrender date for just prior to the 08 election.....pathetic...

reid and murtha and kennedy are willing to fight bush to the very end....too bad they have no interest in fighting the enemy.....


it's all political theater to them...if they don`t have the balls to defund,all this does is play to their base......you guys....and into the hands of the enemy.....

funny how those two go together, huh ?
 
Last edited:

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
pelosi has the time to do a middle eastern tour with every hate america dictator in the region.....

but can`t clear her schedule for a face to face with petraues?.....

just playing games while the islamists laugh at us....
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Wondering if Wease is too busy to weigh in on my questions and points, made now in three different threads. You always have fairly good reasoning in responses, so I'll invite you again.

Something I was thinking about yesterday, with all the warmongers talking about Dems emboldening the terrorists by withdrawel talk. What kind of message would it have sent had we aggressively kept the man- and firepower in Afghanistan and Pakistan for five years and counting, maybe even added to it, asked for support from other countries as we did in the Iraq decision, to once and for all root out Bin Laden and let terrorists know we were really serious about DIRECTLY addressing the threat to our country - and the world. In my estimation, that would have been the single most severe blow to terrorism, and would have prevented such an upswing in terror-related support worldwide.

Whether he is alive or not - nobody seems to know for sure - that simple fact is still motivating terror against both us and our allies. His deputy merely makes a comment that Bin Laden is directing operations, and there is a natural groundswell of excitement in the terror ranks.

What kind of message did it send to the terrorists when we aggressively pulled away from Bin Laden with the majority of our firepower and Republicans and the administration made it a battle cry about how hard it was to locate him and keep that up? Talk about empowering an enemy. This is NEVER talked about in this discussion, and I submit is the single biggest failure in the war on terrorism - and it's layed DIRECTLY at the foot of George Bush. Whether he is pulling the strings or not, it's his responsibility. And he has absolutely failed our troops, and our country.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,489
168
63
Bowling Green Ky
One thing about it--we are getting smarter--the top alduada figure reported catured today--has been in custody since late 06 and they just now are reporting taking him to gitmo--They were smart enough to interrogate him--or have some else do it before the media went into their terrorist protection mode.
I think people would be amazed at what goes on behind the scenes--and what has been averted so far by these methods--again consider what info we'd havemissed had we given them their right to remain silent--I shudder at the thought.

back on tenet issue--both sides can pick issues they like and discard those they don't--and always hard to seperate fact from fiction on those with books to sell--but saw this in interview where he said the big fish taken so far -- Khalid Shaikh Mohammed,who we got tons of info from via water boarding--was confused when captered as he expected to be taken to U.S. when captured and given attorney--as was standard procedure in previous admin.

Some how I am a little sceptical on the Dems candidates on their soap stands saying they are speaking for the people--in latest polls congress is given lower approval than GW--why is that?

--and speaking of polls and politicians--on the humorous side Harry puts foot in mouth--AGAIN

Tough Talk

Tuesday's exchange of insults between Vice President Cheney and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid over congressional funding of U.S. troops included a memorable line by the senator: "I'm not going to get into a name calling match with someone who has a nine percent approval rating."

But it turns out that not only is Cheney's rating much higher than nine percent in the latest Harris Interactive poll ? it's actually higher than Reid's.

The vice president got a 25 percent approval mark, while the senator came in at 22 percent in the online survey.
:)
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
The thing that surprised me was. There are now over 30000 payed guards many old soldiers getting great pay from these companies. Or still some very rich families. These companies state we can never have enough troops to guard this country. And that we are so concern trying to watch green zone we are even put in worse position. This civil war needs just that more private guards. Less of our troops. That is what makes it different then Nam. Hold Iraq to standards and bench marks as Bush wanted. And if they keep failing Bush should stop crying about it. Bush can Join the 67% of Americans that want some action other then same -o chit. Start to bring them
home by end of year.
 

Spytheweb

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 27, 2005
1,171
14
0
winning in Iraq means pumping that oil to the US

winning in Iraq means pumping that oil to the US

Haliburton and Blackwater won't be too happy when Bush vetos their money. But Bush is in it for the long haul no matter how many US soldiers are killed. The contractors will make their money, and more with American security forces guarding those pipelines.
 

Spytheweb

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 27, 2005
1,171
14
0
The thing that surprised me was. There are now over 30000 payed guards many old soldiers getting great pay from these companies. Or still some very rich families. These companies state we can never have enough troops to guard this country. And that we are so concern trying to watch green zone we are even put in worse position. This civil war needs just that more private guards. Less of our troops. That is what makes it different then Nam. Hold Iraq to standards and bench marks as Bush wanted. And if they keep failing Bush should stop crying about it. Bush can Join the 67% of Americans that want some action other then same -o chit. Start to bring them
home by end of year.

I have seen the number as 100,000 Blackwater. There has been over 800 killed in Iraq. Also a US soldier said while in Iraq they had a run in with Blackwater security and they looked Asian and didn't speak english.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,489
168
63
Bowling Green Ky
Ok someone one else has finally come on board with the Dems and terrorist on pullout
---appears they have another cheerleader


Al-Sadr: President Bush Is 'Greatest Evil' for Not Withdrawing Troops
Saturday, April 28, 2007

BAGHDAD ? Radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr launched a strong attack Saturday on President George W. Bush, calling him the "greatest evil" for refusing to withdraw American troops from Iraq.

Al-Sadr's statement was read during a parliament session by his cousin, Liqaa al-Yassin, after the U.S. Congress ordered U.S. troops to begin leaving Iraq by Oct. 1. Bush pledged to veto the measure and neither the House nor the Senate passed the measure with enough votes to override him.

"Here are the Democrats calling you to withdraw or even set a timetable and you are not responding," al-Sadr's statement said.
"It is not only them who are calling for this but also Republicans, to whom you belong."
_______________________
Got news for Al-Sadr we didn't pull out when UBL and Zarchawi demanded it --I doubt we do when he and liberals do so either.

Your all going to have to :grouphug: --and hope things go your way in 08.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Forum Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
Dogs, don't you think a person can simply feel it's a good idea to withdraw (timetable or not) based purely on strategy? Why do you always accuse those people of siding with terrorism? Aren't you being childish when you do that?
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top