Things going well in Iraq?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

According to this story the U.S. and Iraq are about to pull forces into Baghdad to try and secure the capital.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060725/...r_wh/bush_iraq

If the capital can't be secured, how secure is the rest of the country where the sects are fighting for control of regions? Not a good sign.

[Looger]

hey it's going exactly to plan.

the number of people dying daily is as high as ever, and the country is slipping into civil war.

israeli and british special forces have been caught RED ****ING HANDED shooting at checkpoints and mercenaries make home videos of shooting at civilians.

the plan here is to incite civil war and justify permanent military presence.

[North East Goon]

We all know it's George W's personal Vietnam. I dont think you will see the U.S. backing out until Bush's term is up.

[Vulcan]

One big cluster****.
Put up your hands all those who thought it was a good idea to invade Iraq.
Nobody? Come on now where are you?
Have you all runoff with your tails between your legs until another 20 or30 years comes around and people have forgotten how ****ty your ideas are and you can lead the next generation down the garden path.

[Jayems]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

One big cluster****.
Put up your hands all those who thought it was a good idea to invade Iraq.
Nobody? Come on now where are you?
Have you all runoff with your tails between your legs until another 20 or30 years comes around and people have forgotten how ****ty your ideas are and you can lead the next generation down the garden path.

Are we talking now, or at the time?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

If the capital can't be secured, how secure is the rest of the country where the sects are fighting for control of regions? Not a good sign.

I recently read an article with an account from a soldier who described having to make make dashes from community to community in Iraq. They would be shot at, targeted with bombs, and mobbed by angry crowds.

When you can't travel in between towns without cheating death, then you really aren't controlling the country at all.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

One big cluster****.
Put up your hands all those who thought it was a good idea to invade Iraq.
Nobody? Come on now where are you?
Have you all runoff with your tails between your legs until another 20 or30 years comes around and people have forgotten how ****ty your ideas are and you can lead the next generation down the garden path.

They were the same people pointing out all the false stories about WMDs and then plugging their ears and la-la-ing.

[Jayems]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I recently read an article with an account from a soldier who described having to make make dashes from community to community in Iraq. They would be shot at, targeted with bombs, and mobbed by angry crowds.

When you can't travel in between towns without cheating death, then you really aren't controlling the country at all.

I don't think they can really ever controll the insurgency. Which is sad.

Despite what major media outlets are reporting (all the daily bombings, killings etc) they really don't compare to reading any of the books published by the soliders or imbedded journalists. There are great steps being taken over there that is making life for the Iraqi people better every day.

But the problem is obvious. Different factions or religious groups want control, or fundamentalists have a jihad against the coalition. Unfortunately, this war will be another vietnam.

All the bad press for the very very few dumbass mentally insane soldiers over there doing equally stupid things (rape, murder etc.) are making it hard for the general public to see the fantastic improvements in Iraq, mostly due to outlets not reporting it, or very small stories.

The insurgency won't go away unless the U.S. does. But if the U.S. leaves, the insurgency could take over, and then there is the risk of having to re-invade the country.

I would highly reccomend people read Michael Yon's "dispatches/blog" from Iraq. Highly entertaining, well written, and accurate.

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/

[Azure]

Lanny, you do realize for every anti-Iraq article you post, someone could post a pro-Iraqi article?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Jayems

All the bad press for the very very few dumbass mentally insane soldiers over there doing equally stupid things (rape, murder etc.) are making it hard for the general public to see the fantastic improvements in Iraq, mostly due to outlets not reporting it, or very small stories.

So what you are saying is that there are fantastic improvements in Iraq (compared to what, BTW) but George is still sending more troops to make it safer?

That seems a little odd to me.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

So what you are saying is that there are fantastic improvements in Iraq (compared to what, BTW) but George is still sending more troops to make it safer?

That seems a little odd to me.

I thought most people said the problem in Iraq was the lack of troops?

There are many bloggers reporting the positive side of Iraq. You just have to look for them.

Seems like the media of today only likes to focus on the negative of "everything." Read the paper, 90% of the news is made up of stuff that would be considered "terrible" to most people.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Jayems

I don't think they can really ever controll the insurgency. Which is sad.

Despite what major media outlets are reporting (all the daily bombings, killings etc) they really don't compare to reading any of the books published by the soliders or imbedded journalists. There are great steps being taken over there that is making life for the Iraqi people better every day.

But the problem is obvious. Different factions or religious groups want control, or fundamentalists have a jihad against the coalition. Unfortunately, this war will be another vietnam.

All the bad press for the very very few dumbass mentally insane soldiers over there doing equally stupid things (rape, murder etc.) are making it hard for the general public to see the fantastic improvements in Iraq, mostly due to outlets not reporting it, or very small stories.

The insurgency won't go away unless the U.S. does. But if the U.S. leaves, the insurgency could take over, and then there is the risk of having to re-invade the country.

I would highly reccomend people read Michael Yon's "dispatches/blog" from Iraq. Highly entertaining, well written, and accurate.

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/

I'm glad you're starting to figure it out.

These different factions and religious groups were there and ready to erupt. Lots of people pointed this out before the invasion.

For an insider look at Baghdad, check out this blogger. Sad to say but I think I or any civilian would have been a lot safer under Saddam than with the USA.

http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/

I don't know of any fantastic improvements, show me.

I agree with you here, the USA has painted themseves into a corner. Time to start praying for those who believe in such.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

I thought most people said the problem in Iraq was the lack of troops?

There are many bloggers reporting the positive side of Iraq. You just have to look for them.

Seems like the media of today only likes to focus on the negative of "everything." Read the paper, 90% of the news is made up of stuff that would be considered "terrible" to most people.

What you, I, a newspaper or some blogger have to say is irrelevant.

George and his advisors see fit to bring in more troops to Baghdad to make it a safer place, and they aren't doing it based on negative media reports.

You can't blame the dastardly media for this.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

Lanny, you do realize for every anti-Iraq article you post, someone could post a pro-Iraqi article?

Sure thing Azure, bring them on. There are just soooooo many of them that immediately aren't sniffed out as blatant propaganda.

Come on, you're the military genius who seems to know all about strategy and operations, so please feel free to comment on this strategy. Pulling troops from all over the country to try and keep the peace in the city that you have been touting as being secured? And things are going well are they? Go a head and try to spin that one into something other than a ****ing debacle that it is. When you're done spinning, we'll get a really big screw driver to try and extracate you from the ground.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

You can't blame the dastardly media for this.

Dastardly media? Please! The amount of propaganda that the media fully cooperates in putting out on the airwaves is criminal. The amount of news they completely ignore that makes the administration look good is embarassing. All you have to do is compare the last two administartions. Jesus, when Clinton was in office it was a freakin' circus, 24x7, because the president blew a load in Lewinsky's mouth and she couldn't swallow it all. The only crime committed there was not paying the dry cleaning bill. The Bushies have been lying their asses off from the minute they started campaigning, and those lies have leads to tens of thousands of deaths, including 3,000 American soldiers. And is the media outraged? Is the media on a witch hunt like they were with Clinton? Nope. They idly sit back and report his talking points like they were the words of God himself. It's pathetic. I wish they would treat the village idiot like they did Clinton and Nixon. THAT would be refreshing to see.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

What you, I, a newspaper or some blogger have to say is irrelevant.

George and his advisors see fit to bring in more troops to Baghdad to make it a safer place, and they aren't doing it based on negative media reports.

You can't blame the dastardly media for this.

Just saying that many people have said that more troops will, or would have solved the problem.

Bush has screwed up the situation in Iraq in every possible way he possibly could, but that still does not mean you can't find anything positive out of the whole deal.

[Azure]

Sure thing Azure, bring them on. There are just soooooo many of them that immediately aren't sniffed out as blatant propaganda.

I could have posted a couple links....

Come on, you're the military genius who seems to know all about strategy and operations, so please feel free to comment on this strategy. Pulling troops from all over the country to try and keep the peace in the city that you have been touting as being secured? And things are going well are they? Go a head and try to spin that one into something other than a ****ing debacle that it is. When you're done spinning, we'll get a really big screw driver to try and extracate you from the ground.

But why would I after that mindless rant?

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Azure

Just saying that many people have said that more troops will, or would have solved the problem.

Bush has screwed up the situation in Iraq in every possible way he possibly could have, but thats still does not mean you can't find anything positive out of the whole situation.

Name a couple.

It looks to me like the USA has jumped out of the frying pan into the fire. They need Dr. Who to get them out of this one.

I''ll even spot you:
1. They got rid of Saddam
2. Arms dealers everywhere are getting rich
3. Oil companies are getting rich
4.Halliburton and everyone associated with them are getting rich.
5. Terrorists have new breeding grounds
6.Democrats look good to win

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Name a couple.

It looks to me like the USA has jumped out of the frying pan into the fire. They need Dr. Who to get them out of this one.

Are you serious?

I recall a certain thread a while back here on CP, where one of the posters was talking about Powell, and his caution of not enough troops, or something along that line.

Many, many other forums I've involved with have people that have said more troops would have gone a long way to create a bit more stability. Its an on-going discussion.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Azure

Are you serious?

I recall a certain thread a while back here on CP, where one of the posters was talking about Powell, and his caution of not enough troops, or something along that line.

Many, many other forums I've involved with have people that have said more troops would have gone a long way to create a bit more stability. Its an on-going discussion.

They needed those troops when they first invaded. I wish them luck but it's kind of hard to put all of the feathers back in a pillow after they've been scattered.