Surge success "beyond our wildest dreams?"
By Cernig Friday Sep 05, 2008 2:30pm
John McCain has made much of how he was correct about the Surge in Iraq when his opponent was saying it wouldn't work. Barack Obama has been moving gradually further towards McCain's position, propelled there by a narrative that questions his original judgement in the face of drastic cuts in Iraqi violence which have popularly been ascribed to the Surge. He's now at the point of saying it "succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.”
But how close to reality are McCain and Obama's positions? Well, for a start it's unclear that it's actually the Surge that has been instrumental in lowering Iraqi violence (to parity with some of the world's bloodiest conflicts instead of being in a class of its own). The Sunni Awakening and a ceasefire by the Shiite Sadrist movement must also take a large part of the credit and, despite McCain's attempt at rewriting history, both pre-dated the Surge. Indeed, even General Petraeus admits the possibility that, due to these entirely local developments, violence in Iraq might have fallen just as much even without the Surge.
Paying the Awakening movement some $30 million a month to not attack US troops wasn't originally a part of the Surge plan that McCain backed and it's unlikely he would have supported such a move in any case. John McCain has made much of Barack Obama's supposed wish for "appeasement" of terrorists in negotiating with Iran or Hamas - how much worse is it then to bring terrorists onto the payroll? Many of the Awakening's so-called Sons of Iraq were previously members of the insurgency.
Now that both Maliki and the established Sunni political elite feel they are becoming a threat to their Green Zone based power, while the US is stopping bribing them not to attack US forces, the Awakening is in danger of being dropped like a hot potato - and at least a portion of the 100,000 strong movement will return to violence.
Likewise, the Sadrist movement has been described as a terrorist outfit by American hawks yet General Petraeus was generous in his praise of Sadr when he needed the ceasefire renewed. Is Petraeus an appeaser too?
Then there's the purpose of the Surge - which wasn't just to reduce violence but also to give a window of opportunity for Iraqi reconcilliation. That simply hasn't happened. No oil law has yet been passed and if the Kurds get their way it never will be. No law on provincial elections has yet been passed and it's now unlikely it will be before the end of the year. The Powers That be intend using that haitus to make sure the Powers That Aren't stay that way and this is another possible flashpoint for renewed violence. De'baathification is stalled and fairly much window dressing in any case- and the head of the committee that oversees it has been arrested on suspicion of involvement with Shiite terror groups. (Which, if true, puts McCain and his top foreign policy adviser just one degree of separation away from murderers of US troops.) The Sadrists are reorganising and probably biding their time. Goodly portions of the Awakening, as we've seen, are threatening a return to insurgency.
The latest news is that even the ruling powers in Iraq are in an armed face-off. Iraqi troops and Kurdish peshmerga forces are bracing for conflict in the disputed city of Khanaqin, in Diyala province. "The Iraqi army still wants to enter, and the peshmerga is present," said Ibrahim Bajelani, a Kurd who heads the provincial council. "Everyone is on edge. If the Iraqi army tries to enter without prior agreement, we can't be held responsible for the consequences."
This isn't reconciliation. Iraq is looking more and more like a bad spaghetti western, everyone in a circle, hands twitching, waiting for someone to blink - and Maliki seems to think he's Clint Eastwood. Developing tensions between Iraq's religious and ethnic groups are actually being fuelled by Maliki, who seems to relish his new-found perception of himself as a "strongman" figure. As a consequence, the White House is ready to accept military recommendation that significant troop withdrawals be paused until early 2009, despite the possibility of this hurting Republicans at the polls, as a hedge against the very real threat of Iraq exploding again.
So, to recap - the Surge didn't succeed in reducing violence alone, not even by half; it didn't help one iota in repairing the divisions between Iraqis and instead various Iraqis including the Prime Minister took the opportunity to widen those divisions (and by the way, allegations that the US spied on Maliki are unlikely to put him in a mood to listen to the White House) ... now it looks increasingly likely that violence will explode again.
Obama should have stuck to his guns and media pressure be damned.
Login or Register to post comments.
Senate GOP Sets Filibuster Record
If I recall correctly when he was on BillO's show the other night, Obama said the surge had worked so far as the violence was concerned but the purpose for the surge was to give the Iraqis time for political differences to be repaired and some sort of uniting, and that hasn't happened.
I'm sure the surge worked to tamp down some of the violence, but it sure as hell wasn't the end all for the invasion of Iraq.
If Obama didn't give the surge some credit, he would be accused of saying the soldiers couldn't get their job done and you can imagine how much more shit McCain would have stacked on him for that. I think Obama picks his battles wisely.
This Guardian documentary shows the 12 foot concrete walls that have been erected to separate neighborhoods in Baghdad, and attirbutes much of the "success of the surge" to these walls.
Success?
YouTube: Baghdad, 5 years on (part 1 of 3): City of walls
C&L: The surge is working? Hardly.
He should have said "what does McCain care what I think? Neither he nor Bush asked the american people permission to get us into this endless war, and they didn't ask our permission for the surge, and they aren't asking us to sacrifice for the war, or to pay for the wounded troops properly. So I'm calling McCain's bluff. If the surge is the be all and end all of the whole strategy--we went into Iraq so we could destroy the government they had and replace that with anarchy and now we are staying in Iraq to stabilize anarchy so we can get out then I'll say the surge worked and can we get our troops out of harms way? I've got no ego involved in this at all. I said the war was a bad idea, badly fought, for the wrong reasons and with great harm to our country's standing. I think the surge wasn't the success that mccain and his fans have to pretend it is but so what? They think it worked so lets give them the applause they seem to want and get the heck out of there." That's having your cake and eating it to. But the *&^% dems never figure this out until afterwards.
aimai
Once and for all, the "surge" and a combination of other well known factors; can be considered Bush's "force hand" success.The GOP can take some credit for this "change" in the political and military status of Iraq.
Lets talk "change". The Democrats forced the hand of Bush and the Republicans and instilled conditions that "changed" the failed, up to that point, Iraq tactics.
Bush didn't get the "give me the money and hands off on conditions" that he wanted. The Democrats didn't get a timeline ( NOTE- withdrawl time tables are now daily policy consideration in the media; so we kinda did get it).
In other words until the Democrats interjected their "change" did we see any results.
Lastly, that's called a bipartisan success.
I know Congress or the President haven't heard this in a while;but, good work.
dummest statement he has made to date
mc war will use this in negative ads again and again
obama is turning out to just another politician
anything to get votes
vote for some one that cares for you
ie nader
good link here with joe biden but one mistake in it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=955Y3NJTRIE
can you find the misstatement?
ie health care by mc war he did mention it
we imperialists americans deserve mc war big time
Even the generals know they're sitting on a tinderbox. No cover for Rove in Iraq.
During the O'Really interview Obama said it was a success beyond our wildest dreams, and in a sense he is correct, far beyond, and he went on to say that the political end has not been reached and that it was only the violence that had ebbed for now. I think he may have been carefully wording his answer and in many respects he did get it right. He said "the surge was just more of the same" before the surge began and he was correct, and he said that the only way to handle it with any lasting effect was politically and he is/was correct there, too.
here's the best short video revealing the truth about the
mcSurge and the linguistic game they are trying to play
in order to dilute obama's judgement about the war
if you can't watch it now save it...it's very good
http://www.veracifier.com/episode/TPM_20080723
Anthony Look @ 5:
Excellent points!
If the surge doesn't end working out as well as it looks, we could always send Muffins over on a helicopter to kill some people.
Why does everyone buy into the Bush whitehouse term "surge?" Call it what it is, war escalation.
researcher @ 6:
Either you are a troll or you are seriously deluded. Obama will do what he deems necessary to get elected, thank goodness. At this point, in this country with the MSM wholly owned by corporate interests if he says what we want to hear he will be DEFEATED. Get that through your possibly progressive mind, he can not say what we want to hear and win this November. Sad but true.
That's not the point anyway. If we think that Obama saying what we want to hear and doing what we want him to do will save us then we ARE truly fucked. Meaningful change in this country is only going to come from the bottom up. "When the people lead, the leaders will follow."
Our only chance is that Obama will be receptive to the People’s issues when he takes office. We know what McSame’s about, chances are Obama won’t be worse but is he going to save us? No way boys and girls, we are the only ones who can save us. Buy less, get out of debt, voluntarily lower your “standard of living”, support local networks of merchants and services……if all of us do a little and set a positive example it WILL add up to a lot. Make sure your own house is in order and support those who you have influence with to help them do the same. It is the only way and the only hope for real and meaningful change.
Remember a vote for Nader is a vote for McSame. Spin anyway you want, you will not change that fact.
constituent @ 9:
Excellent video! Thank you.
I read somewhere recently that out of 155,000 families, only 7,000 have moved back to Baghdad because it's so dangerous and the violence is still out-of-control. That's less than 5%. Beyond our wildest dreams? Maybe so.
Why hasn't any Democratic politician -- Obama, Feingold, anybody -- simply come out and declared that Bush and Cheney and their minions and enablers brazenly and criminally lied us into a totally unnecessary conflict? That it isn't a "war," but an illegal and immoral invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation? That it has bled us dry both in terms of lives lost, bodies ruined, psyches damaged and money wasted?
WHY?
I've asked this before -- a voice in the wilderness. I just don't get it.
WTF? Even if the 'surge" worked, which isn't clear, it was an illegal aggression which was based upon pure fiction.
It's like bragging that you got more money than you'd thought you would when you robbed that bank - it's wrong from day one and it does not matter how "well" "we" are doing. It is just wrong, evilly wrong.
The "Surge" reduced levels of violence from ghastly to something less than horrific.
Much of this is attributed to using CASH to PAY for an end to fighting. Pay and BRIBE both Al Sadr and the Sunni "Awakening", in fact, in the battle of Shia militias, we have taken sides with the branch closely aligned with Iran (not Sadr's group)
And no matter which of these groups one were to ask, ALL hate the U.S. occupiers and one of them will ever trust U.S. forces, nor should they, considering our track record in Iraq.
In the first Gulf war George H. Bush encouraged an uprising, and then stood idly by while Shia were shot down. In this war we stood idly by why the looters and militias carved up their fiefdoms as the military was stripped of its ranks and the governmental backbone was sacked of all its employees, all to be made in the image of the neoconservatives.
5 years later it is a house of cards.
The "surge" was just a cover. As the post pointed out, those payoffs to the Sunnis as well as other tangible tradeoffs with the Shia groups was the real kicker. Not to mention the fact that several backdoor dealings were done between Iran and the Bush Administration. None of this would be possible without the Iranians help.
There are now rumors that due to the the Russian conflict, Cheney will be meeting intelligence officials in Italy later on. Also in attendance are reported to be Iranian officials who may meet with Cheney. The U.S. has little to bargain with at this point and must cut other deals to reduce troop levels in order to maintain their so called deterance. One such deal recently done was the expulsion of the anti-Iranian, U.S. backed MEK terrorist group from Iraq. This was a main sticking point and Iran wanted them out. Iran got what they wanted.
BigIslandDave @ 16:
They can't raise the ire of the enablers during the campaigns.
Regarding the Awakening: Sure, paying the former Iraqi Army is a good thing. Dissolving the army was a shit-for-brains idea.
In general, invading and occupying a hostile nation will not work in the 21st century. Hell, the Chinese with their massive army can barely hold down Tibet, and there are cultural and language similarities involved there.
.
A sign held up Adam Kokesh at the RNC during McCain's speech...
McCAIN VOTES AGAINST VETS
For the record...
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm...
.
.
How does one win an occupation?
.
By the way, has anyone noticed that there have been little to no threats or hostile rhetoric directed towards Iran lately by the Bush Administration? That silence speaks volumes and also plays a role in Iraq.
The key word here that should be quesioned by anyone is "success" cause for me, how can we call it success if people are still being KILLED ??? sure there are less people being killed..but it is still happening..success to me would be NO ONE is being killed...that i could agree is a success...
Billo said that obama was right on voting against the war but wrong on the surge..so why the hell didn't obama jump all over that statement and say that if he was right about voting against the war...then Mcsame must be wrong about going into war...and for me..going into war is far more serious then the surge because without going to war..we wouldn't be talking about the surge right...
.
h/t TP
Appearing on MSNBC’s Countdown last night, Paul Riekhoff, director of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, slammed McCain for completely ignoring Iraq and Afghanistan veterans during his speech, saying the mistaken background was “about as close as Sen. McCain got to veterans issues”:
Watch the entire interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-i1SKl62cY
.
cheney/bush were very clever keeping the flag covered
coffins from the viewing public....there are many that are clueless about this war/occupation.
i listen to consevatives/evangelicals talk they don't want the guilt the blood is on their hands...some want to continue to be told they were correct about the invasion.
thousands of innocent iraqs have been killed...i have to admit i don't understand GOD's work/intentions.
Like greenspan said it was/is about oil. they didn't like
saddam NATIONALIZING the oil and they didn't like him
getting away from the u.s. dollar pegged oil.
another reality of interest many countries were planning on doing business in iraq there was a lot of international pressure to reduce sanctions on iraq because the affect was having on it's people and the strain it was putting on neighboring countries. this is one of the main reasons bush moved so fast on the invasion.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 23:
Now there you go MH, literally bringing up the "elephant" in the room. For years now I and others have been trying to get talk show hosts, columnists, bloggers and progressives on the street to quit calling this horror show a "war" and call it what it truly is, an "occupation." Had lots of luck with that.
Ya can't win one by definition. But since this has always been about turning Iraq into a Neocon display case of "free market" capitalism at its most imperialistic none of those freaks ever expected it to go this route. They TRULY believed that this would be all wrapped up in less than a year and they'd be happily filling their bloated guts with Iraqi resources. Now they just want to keep chowing down and then hand the disaster off to the next administration.
These people are not fit to be referred to as human beings.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 23:
And the RNC crowd chanted "USA USA USA" in response.
And all THAT did was draw attention to the "distraction" ..
And the camera briefly focussed on it.
Good Work Adam Kokesh !!
I would respectfully suggest that if after five years you have been unable to pacify the capitol city, much less the rest of the country, an effort that has failed slightly less abysmally than another effort can hardly be called a success.
Joe O. @ 24:
That's becuase Israel is doing the threatening via France...
Iran rejects French warning it risks Israeli strike Reuters
Published: Saturday September 6, 2008
Government spokesman Gholamhossein Elham accused Israel of threatening global peace but reiterated Tehran's publicly stated view that it was not in a position to attack Iran.
Separately, a senior commander of the elite Revolutionary Guards was quoted as saying that new long-range missiles had strengthened Iran's defensive capabilities.
"Today, the enemy does not dare to attack Iran, as it knows that it will receive fatal blows from Iran if it ventures into such a stupid act," Nour Ali Shoushtari said in the city of Qazvin, Iran's Press TV station reported.
Western powers accuse Iran, the world's fourth-largest oil exporter, of seeking the atom bomb under the cover of a civilian nuclear program. Iran denies the charge, saying it only wants to master atomic technology in order to generate electricity.
The United States and Israel have not ruled out military action if the dispute cannot be settled through diplomacy.
(continued)
.
Here's a number/serious issue to think about: last year
there were 115 soldier suicides. so far this year 62
soldier suicides.
think about the borderline soldiers. this is a problem
that doesn't get press.
pissed off patricia @ 2:
Incidentally, the first link in this post is to the Fox page where the “beyond our wildest dreams” headline appears, with link to the video.
And you're absolutely correct. Obama did give a measured response (but a very - ahem - quotable headline).
Can you not see the awesome results of "democracy"?
They just want us OUT OF THEIR COUNTRY!
It's THEIR country, their LAND, NOT ours.
It's their ...."right here" scenario.
It's their "Red Dawn".
Our problem, which is "right here", wants to control it ALL,...EVERYWHERE.
It's so "KRISTOL" clear to everybody, everywhere, but our so-called NWO Nazi-like rich, powerfull, leaders in our homeland. NOBODY WANTS IT!
Their greed, their sucess, will be the end of any peacefull civilization as we once knew it. You disagree with them, YOU DIE! Your not "with them", YOU DIE!
It's as simple as that.
.
O.K. then,
Let me make it more palatable...
How does one make an occupation successful?
.
DUH, A HAPPEND THEN B HAPEND THEREFOER A CAUSED B.
Get out of Iraq.
Chicken "Hussein" Little - Not! @ 28:
Couldn't agree more. Less than human, less than zero.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 31:
.
True and that always is the case. However, since the Russian/Georgian conflict the U.S. has kept its mouth shut on Iran. The U.S. has never did that before and its very apparent as to why.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 35:
You enslave the people and take over their resources. Still no guarantee obviously.
thats one problem I have with Obama.. he listens far too much to the right wing corporate media.
.
In all of Johnny's McPOW jubilation celibrations during the RNC...
... Why didn't he mention the VETS?
.
In Baghdad it wasn't any surge that stopped any violence, the city is a prison for Baghdadi's with meters high walls to seperate the warring sects. Instead of dying from bomb blasts, Baghdadi's are dying for a bit of bread, and are driven into despair with nowhere to go. At most, the surge has shifted the dead into another bar in the statistics.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 35:
When oil hits $200/barrel. Doing just fine in Texas and Alaska, thank you very much low information voters.
Obama got punk. He should of stuck to his guns and stayed away from faux news. Did it really matter if he went on Faux news or not? This quote could be potentially devastating to his campaign.
War profits have gone through the stratosphere.
The surge successfully reinstated the iron-fisted rule over the Iraqi people we condemned Saddam Husein for.
why the long occupation
attack....disarm good guys.....set up puppet government
....have huge exodus of civilians by using fear/cut off foods/electricity.....have tribes battle each other
.....set up scenario for oil companies to 'return'....in the meantime....cause friction with surrounding countries
causing a prolonged war/occupation....develop the need
for permanent occupation...the prize oil/u.s. oil pegged system.
Teh suerg wroked!! That's why the "coalition of the willing" is still there! Because the surge worked, so the... forces, er... stay?
.
Cernig,
Thank you for the great article.
.
The much touted Surge must be seen as a success if America is to wage Holy War against...wait for it...Iran.
Coming to a theater near you,SOON.
Chris from Maine @ 40:
that's what smart people do........there get to know there opposition.....listening and following are different.
sometimes i'll read/listen about republicans so i can make an informed/educated response. sometimes it seems like obama is new maverick....we will nothing done if we don't get some republicans involved in the
future policies.
Strange map.
It shows lakes and rivers as colored but doesn't show the ocean as colored.
thepoetryman @ 14:
if you didn't see this post please view the video on the
mcSurge it's very good if you don't have time save it
it's short and reveals the linguistic game the (R) is playing.
Alice X - (Chomsky Nader) - status quObama - change you can pretend in - @ 45:
Think how quickly this would have ended if our country had demanded a law making war profiteering illegal. It was done during WWII, in fact anyone profiting from the war was considered a traitor. What a difference 60 years has made. We the people have to accept our responsibility for this. We could have voted in candidates during the 2004 and 2006 elections who could have passed legislation like that. We didn't and that is a collective stain on our society.
That's why all of us MUST do our part to end this insanity in Nov. Our only chance is electing Obama and enough democrats to override the veto and filibuster and then HOLDING OUR ADMINISTRATION AND LEGISLATORS FEET TO THE FREAKIN' FIRE.
Anything else and hard times like only the eldest among us have seen are upon us.
I don't really see this as a difficulty for Obama's position. True, the violence has dropped but the political goals remain undetermined. Obama can easily argue that much of Iraq is geographically split now along sectarian lines. The Sunnis dominate the west, the Shia the south and south east, and the Kurds the north. Each faction my have some representatives in the Iraqi Government but the Government along with the Army and Police forces are Shia lead and heavily Shia dominated. The Bush Administration gives the appearance that Iraq is "one happy family" but that is far from the case. For example, the Kurds have already stated that if any Iraqi Government forces enters their territory they will be attacked.
If the Surge is "beyond our wildest dreams," and Iraq still sucks, doesn't that say something about our dreams?
Surge, schmurge.
The invasion of Iraq was illegal.
As was the overthrow of the Iraqi government.
As is the continuing U.S. military occupation.
Any U.S. military action ("success" or otherwise) in Iraq is illegality.
The talk here should not be of success. It should be of fucking war crimes.
My heart sank when I heard Obama make that statement on Billo. I thought -- we are so dead. I mean, they are going to move in on that like sharks around blood, and Obama is potentially going to be forced on the defensive in the worst way for the rest of the campaign. And the Republicon master narrative machine will win again. Why did he have to say that?
I remember January 1973, the "end" of the Vietnam war. 2 years later, it all became unraveled and South Vietnam fell in the summer of 1975.
I think McCain had it right when he described it as "whack a mole". I think that there are a whole bunch of moles waiting for us to leave so that old scores can be settled, and the whole situation unravels. The real winner of the Iraq war - Iran, because a Sunni foe has been converted into a Shiite ally.
Iraq reminds me of Vietnam - a tenuous "success" (if you want to call a war priced at $20B, but costing over $500 already a success), but a situation waiting to become unwound.
Republican response to the invasion: Saddam was an evil dictator who killed many of his own people. So, we go invade, kill and maim 100s of thousands of Iraqis and have millions more seek refuge in other countries to hang one man.
VietVet8666 @ 57:
Darn you VV, leave it to you to cut directly to the meat of the matter.
Next you'll be telling us that Bush didn't pursue all available diplomatic options, that the arms inspectors weren't listened to, that there were no WMDs, that we were lied into this illegal action. In other words you're going to undercut all my faith in my beloved government and GODLY administration.
Shame on you, bad enough I tossed my back out yesterday and have been relegated to fruit canning duty but now you've just ruined my whole day!!!
Carry on trooper, carry on. I'm going to go put another ice pack on my back. Anything to get out of the kitchen, my fingers look like prunes.
Ron @ 60:
I forgot to mention over $500 billion cost at $10 billion a month still adding up.
Elizabeth @ 58:
I'm not to worried about that. There are many other points that Obama can make to easily deflect it. One, Obama can state that due to the Republican fixation on Iraq the U.S. now lacks a deterrence. Furthermore, he can also point out that the Republican fixation on Iraq has left Afganistan at a point where that conflict is lost. Besides, the one who needs to worry about how Iraq appears is McCain. The problem he has, is that Iraq is based on the illusion that the U.S. is in total control of the situation. That couldn't be further from the true. All the Iranians have to do for example is mix it up again in Iraq as they see fit. All they have to is send word to their Shia allies that they fight is back on and the U.S. back to square one.
VietVet8666 @ 57:
See my posts HERE, HERE, and HERE from the open thread.
It will happen if we keep talking facts!
Correct. The invasion and subsequent occupation WAS a war crime and the planners MUST be held accountable.
It's just a sad shame that the American Congress happens to think that ANYONE in the Office of the President of the USA CAN commit/order crimes of war with impunity.
.
Ron @ 60:
Yeah, I mean what, were they all like "Saddam, ya got potential, but you just need to go that extra mile. Watch:"
Finally! Someone mentions al-Sadr's cease fire as part of the reason behind the lowered casualty numbers. The ceasefire went into effect in Aug, 2007. Go back and look at the trends around that point in time and note that the "Surge" had started months beforehand.
The true cost of the surge/escalation was the loss of Afghanistan. Until we pull out of Iraq we have no chance of securing Afghanistan or catching OBL and his minions , the real perpetrators of 911.
Loonie (36) calls attention the the post hoc, propter hoc fallacy taught to all freshmen (and should be known to law professors).
Secondly, military folks such as Gen. Petraeus use "the surge" to refer to everything that went on in that period: the Awakening, Sadr's truce, the increase in troops. Most of us mean just the increase in troops. (See interview with Coll.)
Ron @ 60:
That would be OK if the AUMF of 2002 was about lynching Saddam...
... but it wasn't, was it.
That wasn't a vile of Freedom Agenda Powell held up to the UN, was it?
No, in fact, the resolution was about FORCING Saddam to comply with the UN.
Which, funny enough, the UN never sanctioned the aggression the USA took.
There were no WMD's in Iraq.
There were no ties to Al-CIA-DUH in Iraq.
There was no reconstituted nuclear program in Iraq.
There was no biochemical weapons plants, mobile or not, in Iraq.
There was no imminent threat from Iraq.
Sure Saddam was a bad guy... all Deciders are... NO?
.
I wonder what Palin thinks about Iraq or any other issue for that matter? Oh that is right, she has effectively been gagged to give any interviews and we all know why that is:
Sarah Palin will be missing from action Sunday a.m.
"Three of the four now-official candidates on the major-party presidential tickets are scheduled to sit down for questions: Democrat Barack Obama on ABC's "This Week," his running mate, Joe Biden, on NBC's "Meet the Press" and Republican John McCain on CBS' "Face the Nation."
Absent from this list, of course, is the GOP's star of the moment, the not-so-long-ago obscure governor of Alaska who is McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin."
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09/sarah-palin-w-1.html
Every move bama has made toward the right has been a mistake. I agree with above posters who correctly label the invasion as a war crime. The occuption oly compounds the crime.
The "surge" isn't working. It's just lull while the various factions rearm, rest and juggle for advantage.
Obama's plan should be to be completely out by the end of February and to bring the instigators and executors of this travesty to justice.
Anthony Look @ 5:
Bull SHIT!
The only reason that Iraq violence has gone down at all is because the military has sectioned off every individual neighborhood in the larger Iraq cities with 12 ft concrete walls - literally turning Iraqi neighborhoods into their own individual Guantanamo Bays.
Part 1 of the Surge Lie
Part 2
Part 3
I'm sick and tired of hearing about how the surge worked. Putting every American in a cell would definitely win the war on crime, drugs and poverty, but it doesn't mean that it wont come right back once the Americans are free again.
This isn’t reconciliation. Iraq is looking more and more like a bad spaghetti western, everyone in a circle, hands twitching, waiting for someone to blink - and Maliki seems to think he’s Clint Eastwood.
The difference is, this time EVERYONE'S guns are loaded.
Ron @ 60:
you know as well as i do the u.s. government and corporations
have been eye balling this for many years. the u.s./u.k. played
iraq and iran for years.
israel's biggest threat is arab oil. NOT saying is the only button
pusher but they are certainly involved.
I suppose Stalin would look at the surge, shrug, and say,"Yeah, sorta succeeded."
Joe O. @ 70:
yeah.........she's NOT ready to be a heart beat away she will be in a couple weeks........but obama never will....wow i don't
get it.
aimai @ 4:
Aimai is absolutely correct. The sad reality is that it is in all the oil company's interest to continue this war for as long as possible. Surge or no surge, awakening or not, Sadr Army cease fire or no cease fire, everybody is being