Let's talk about the "Surge". Here is everything you need to know:
The "Surge" is not working.
And the nasty little secret is this; the "Surge" was never designed to work - when the definition of "work" is understood as being a process that could eventually bring the American occupation of Iraq to some kind of successful conclusion.
The "Surge" was designed by a military mind to solve a political dilemma, and that is usually a recipe for a disaster. The "Surge" was never designed to provide any kind of real security in Iraq, and it wasn't designed to keep American soldiers alive, or even to minimize the risk to our troops; the net effect of the "Surge" is to make our troops even more vulnerable to harm. This is accepted by our military leadership as part of the cost of the strategy.
So why did the President authorize the "Surge"? Why did he and the generals think the "Surge" was worth the cost?
This is the second nasty little secret.
The "Surge" was designed to give Iraqi politicians time to talk to each other - and even before the "Surge" was finalized, the general consensus (shared by virtually everyone who doesn't reside in the White House) was plain: the Iraqi politicians never intended to talk. The Shiite majority plans to dominate the Sunni minority, and no amount of "talking" will change the reality in Iraq.
So in the end, the miltary plan known as the "Surge" was implemented to support a false assumption; there is no peace to be found in Iraq. There is no reason to give the Iraqi government time to work through the summer. They don't need time. They have already made their plans.
They are preparing for the new Iraq that will emerge after the American troops leave. That Iraq will be fought over, by all interested parties, and that Iraq will be dominated by the Shiite majority. The Iranians know this, and they know we can't stop it from happening. The "Surge" will not change this, and it will not affect the final outcome in Iraq.
The "Surge" is a lie built upon a foundation of deception. It isn't even the rotting Mackerel: it stinks, but there is no shine under the moonlight, and out troops are paying the price. Why are we allowing this to happen?
One of the qualities of leadership should be an ability to recognize a brewing disaster, and to take action to prevent that disaster from happening - or at least to lessen the effect to our troops who are caught in the vise.
If you wonder why we need leadership, then you should study our strategy in Iraq; a man made a decision, and people will end up dying for a lie. Why did it happen? Look to the White House in the moonlight and pick up the scent.
Jeff C
leikec@yahoo.com
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2127115,00.html
It appears Cheney is using what political capital he has left to get Bush to attack Iran. If anyone thinks that China and Russia will sit idly by and watch the US do to Iran what we have done to Iraq they are dreaming. Bush and Cheney need a diversion and they need it now. Mounting public outcry for impeachment of Cheney is growing as is the dissatisfaction with Bush. The fact that they are both guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors justifying impeachment is lost only on the Democrat majority in Congress. There is much specualtion that a false flag terror event in the US with Iran being framed as the culprit is highly likely now. The number of representatives that have signed on to Dennis Kucinich's H.Res.333 for the impeachment of Dick Cheney is now 15.
The dollar is tanking, crude oil prices are surging higher, home prices are dropping and sales are plummeting, foreigners are showing reluctance to accept our IOU's, monetary inflation is now over 12% yoy, jobs leaving our shores is on the uptick and food costs are soaring. Yeah, Bush and Cheney need a major diversion to replace all the above in the headlines.
If Iran stopped it's nuclear program today I doubt it would make any difference. They cast their die last week when they told Japan to start paying for their oil in yen and not dollars, the same thing Sadaam Hussein did when he switched from the dollar to the euro. Allowing the demonic duo to remain in office any longer puts the US in mortal danger as lessens the probability that there will even be an election 2024.
Unity08 got a good review on c-span yesterday morning by a guest on the show from National Review, sorry I can't recall her name but she was well informed on the prospects from both parties and believed U08 had a good chance depending on what candidates they come up with.
It never ceases to amaze me how powerless Americans believe they are.....
Its not because they are stupid.....If thier kids lie to them about where they are going or why they are going there....they watch them closer....they know what a lie is......but if they happen to be lied to by the president and vice president....then they have to debate whether or not they were lied to....DUH????
WELL>>>>
Weapons of Mass destruction....NOT
Mushroom clouds................NOT
Al Queda ......................NOT....well not then...now theres lots of them
So was that lieing???
They had the best intelligence services in the world....We have spy satelites that can read a license plate from outer space....We had our own aircraft enforcing the no-fly zone over the bottom 1/3 and top 1/3 or Iraq from bush vs sadam I.....We had just been there en force....OUR inspectors had been there..
BUT WE HAD BAD INTELLIGENCE??????
The only "bad intelligence" associated with this would be the moron who still believes it..
So I don't know about your house....but in my house....LIEING IS A B A D THING
And it is wwwwaaaaayyyyyy past time for Americans to start DEMANDING that something be done about it......
jeff the surge is working very good, even two left wing writers for the New York Times said recently that the surge seems to be working and to their surprise they said we may even win this thing.
the liberals want Iraq to fail, they want us to lose but we are gonna win and boy are the gonna look dumb.
I want to bring HC's post back up again - there is more talk now that Bush will attack Iran before he leaves the White House. How do we stop this?
I agree with HC's post, and it's still true. There are more and more voices being raised that say Bush is intent on attacking Iran!
Reminds me of Hitler in 1945, ordering divisions he didn't have into battle...
I had felt that impeachment would be divisive, and seen as getting even for the Clinton episode, but somehow these lunatics - Bush/Cheney - have to be stopped before they do more damage to the US. The crap I'm hearing is the same as the run-up to invading Iraq!
Stop the crazies!
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
The GOP primary is boiling down to a race between Ron Paul and the other guys. All the other GOP candidates are neocon war mongers to one degree or another which makes Dr. Paul the only GOP anti-war candidate. This fact alone will garner Dr. Paul many supporters and those who do not know Dr. Paul or support the illegal, immoral war will split their votes among the other guys since none of the others have emerged as a clear favorite. If the GOP hopes to defeat Ron Paul they had better narrow the field in a hurry to no more than two or three candidates. The addition of Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich will only make the odds more favorable for Dr. Paul as it will divide even further the pro-war vote.
If Dr. Paul wins the GOP nomination it sets up imo, a Ron Paul vs. a Clinton/Obama ticket. Almost any U08 ticket is sure to siphon more votes from a Clinton/Obama ticket than it will from a Paul/? ticket. Another thing favoring Dr. Paul is the fact that five small states where Dr. Paul has a sizable army working for him will either hold straw polls or primaries before Super Tuesday. Victories in Iowa and New Hampshire will force the MSM to give Dr. Paul more air time and thus increase his populatity.
At this stage of their respective camapigns Jimmy Carter showed only 1% support and Bill Clinton showed only 2%. Ron Paul bumper stickers are starting to show up here in North Carolina and Tennessee already as well as Ron Paul signs in yards. Some friends and I are checking into renting some billboards in the Aheville, NC area along the I-40 and I-26 corridors.
will not win, ron paul is a fense rider like john kerry, he claims to be Republican then talks like a liberal. i wouldnt vote for that guy if you paid me a huge amount of money.
by Charley Reese
Idiots in Israel, along with those American idiots in the punditocracy who can't see where they are going because their vision is blocked by Israeli backsides, are trying to pressure our idiots in the White House to commit an act of insanity.
That act of insanity is launching a military attack against Iran because the idiots and their followers believe, despite a total lack of evidence, that Iran is pursuing a nuclear bomb. If you think the Middle East is in turmoil now, just watch what happens if idiocy prevails.
Let's review a few facts. There is no evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon. Of course the Iranians put a lot of their nuclear facilities underground. After all, they saw the Israelis – in clear violation of international law and without any evidence that Iraq was building a bomb – attack and destroy a nuclear reactor in Baghdad without a peep from the U.S.
Given how the Israelis constantly rant against Iran, Iranians would have been fools not to put as much of it as possible underground.
Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel refuses to sign it. Iran allowed international inspectors. Israel never has. Israel has nuclear weapons – and apparently a lot of them. Iran doesn't have any, not one. If you are worried about an Islamic nuke, I remind you that Pakistan already has them. A Hindu nuke? India has them.
So Israel, Pakistan, and India all have nuclear weapons, all refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and all are warmly held allies of the idiots in Washington.
Here's another fact to stack against the clear evidence of insanity on the Potomac. Suppose Iran is lying about peaceful uses and does build a bomb (even the Israelis say it will take until 2024). So what? The world is full of nuclear weapons. My whole life, since the 1950s, has been lived 30 minutes away from nuclear annihilation.
People, especially in the press, tend to get hysterical about nuclear weapons. A nuclear bomb is, after all, a bomb. It has, whatever its size, a limited burst radius. Fallout is a captive of the wind. There have been lots of nuclear detonations on the ground and in the atmosphere, counting the two we dropped on Japan, plus all the nuclear tests conducted by us, the Russians, the French, and whoever else. So far as I know, the people around the world are still producing normal babies, and no giant spiders or ants have appeared over the horizon.
Furthermore, having five or six nuclear weapons does not make you a threat against a country with 200 nukes (Israel), much less the U.S., which has more than 3,000 nukes.
So let these facts settle into your head. Iran says it seeks to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, as it is legally entitled to do under the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. There is no evidence to contradict that. Iran has said repeatedly that it has no desire to acquire a nuclear weapon. It has never – despite the propaganda based on a misquotation – ever threatened Israel or the United States, or, for that matter, anyone else.
So what's afoot? I'll tell you what I think. The neocons in the U.S. and their pet bully, Israel, intend to dominate the Middle East and its oil. That means any country not run by a servile suck-up (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc.) must be weakened or destroyed.
We've pretty much destroyed Iraq and Lebanon, so that leaves Syria and Iran. I imagine the neocons plan on Israel taking out Syria while the U.S. carpet-bombs Iran. The neocons are not only idiots, they are evil. They show a complete disdain for peace, a callous disregard for human life, and utter contempt for the rule of law. If that ain't evil, the devil had better retire.
With people dying, its understandable that anyone might be upset.
For thinking about the 2024 election, count on there being a withdrawal plan in place late this year. (Bush will ultimately make it his war.)
The surge is prep for Iraqis positioning for US pullout. The pullout will be ugly.
For better, mostly for worse, the war wont be a presidential election issue, but Middle East politics will be paramount.
Lieberman & Bloomberg are interesting candidates but I dont think we will be able to have a Jewish American president in '09 if we want to work toward peace.
The ancient people called Magog are commonly believed to have been the ancestors of the Russian nation. The prophet Ezekiel spoke of an invasion of Israel by Russia, which has not yet been fulfilled. What could cause Russia to come against the tiny nation of Israel -- which has no oil and no real strategic value? This question has puzzled Bible scholars for centuries.
However, recent developments in the Middle East have for the first time in history lent credence to this long-awaited prophecy.
The prophecy you speak of calls for God to bring the destroyer Gog from the recesses of the North to attack God's country of ungated cities (all old world cities including JerUSAlem were gated cities) that are peopled by many peoples that has survived the sword. It says they come for cattle and goods. According to the prophecy God allows this or brings it about because of the numerous sins of his country to be invaded.
The inheritance of each of the tribes of Israel are listed in Genisis and Deuteronomy. For the tribes of Ephriam and Manassah the inheritance is the best of sky, the best of grain, the ancient mountains, the timeless hills and the abyss that crouches beneath. The banners for the tribes of Ephriam and Manassah (Joseph's sons who were born in Egypt, Joseph was the favorite son of Jacob the father of the twelve tribes of Israel who's name was changed to Israel by God) were an olive branch and a cluster of arrows. The banner for Israel was the eagle. Now look at the great seal of the United States on a dollar bill. When Jacob (Israel) was about to die Joseph brought his two sons before him that they might receive his blessing. He put the eldest in front of Jacob's right hand and the younger in front of his left but when Jacob reached out to bless them he crossed his arms and thus put his right hand (the greater blessing) on the younger son. Jacob's arms crossed is the bars on the stars and bars on the Confederate Flag.
Zebulon's inheritance said he would be a haven for ships and suck the riches from the sea. The Netherlands were the biggest ship builders in the world for a long time and when they pumped the sand out of the ocean to add more land they also pumped out diamonds. I guess you could say they "sucked the riches from the sea."
I have long believed that the third war in George Washington's Vision is the same war prophesied in the 38th and 39th chapters of Ezekiel that you speak of.
The similarity most striking about them is the fact that once defeat seems assured it is God who destroys this army and restores the country. The survivors are the remnant.
HOCUS POCUS !!! MUMBO JUMBO !!! boogidy boogidy boogidy !!!
9/11 predicted in 1997, and the after effects in detail.
In the book "The Fourth Turning" subtitled An American Prophecy.
Copyrighted in 1997, we find disturbing descriptions of 9/11
The book's basic premis is that between 2024 and 2024 America enters "The Fourth Turning".
KEEP IN MIND THIS WAS WRITTEN IN 97' The book explains that after the turn of the century, in America a...
(Hardback copy)
PAGE 252: "group that senses it is losing the Culture Wars) will warn against, and show signs of welcoming, a catastrophe on the horizon."
(9/11)
PAGE 253: "Whether we realize it or not, we will be ready for a dramatic event to shock the nation"
(9/11)
PAGE 256: "The climax culminates in a resolution" "and establishes the new order."
("New World Order")
PAGE 257: "Instead of downplaying problems, leaders start exaggerating them."
(Anthrax, Bird Flu, etc.)
PAGE 273 is where it gets REALLY CREEPY!
"Opponents charge that the president concocted the emergency for political purposes."
At this point my jaw dropped, how could the author in 1997, predict this major event, AND PREDICT THE TRUTH MOVEMENT?! ...let's read on.
PAGE 273: "A nationwide strike is declared. Foreign capital flees the U.S." "The president declares emergency powers." "Dollar and bond prices plummet." "Wall Street panics."
It then describes the spread of a new virus. "Congress enacts mandatory quarantine meansures." "Urband gangs battle suburban militias. Calls mount for the president to declare martial law." "Iran declares its alliance with Russia."
Everyone needs to read "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" and get familiar with PRESSURE FROM ABOVE AND PRESSURE FROM BELOW
you have the blame America crowd, blame cheny and bush, blah blah blah, alex baldwin, michael moore group. then the holy rollers chime in with gog and magog. this thread is shot, common sense has left the room. no wonder this country is in trouble.
Indeed, after reading your comment, I read all the comments to date. What a howl if it were funny.
Here is an article that says the surge is working, from The New York Times (of all places). And written by members of the politically liberal Brookings Institution.
I think the "nasty little secret" is that we are sick and tired of the liberal media and the Democrats in Congress telling us that we are losing this war and that it is a quagmire.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/opinion/30pollack.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&oref=slogin
wrong
In reality, according to attorney and columnist Glenn Greenwald, O'Hanlon and Pollack "were not only among the biggest cheerleaders for the war, but repeatedly praised the Pentagon's strategy in Iraq and continuously assured Americans things were going well." O'Hanlon signed a letter and a statement on postwar Iraq published by the Project for the New American Century. project for new american century is a neoconservative think tank.
the surge is only working if you live in denial
And we're to believe him why? His writings consist of constant attacks on the Bush administration. He is also angry that he has to live in Brazil to have his gay union recognized. This I'm sure he also blames on Bush and his damn Christianity.
Wikipedia says of O'Hanlon:
"He is regarded as one of the most militaristic major national security experts in the United States Democratic Party."
That is, until he says anything that might be construed as pro-Bush administration. My how quick you Liberals are to turn on your own.
first off i am not a liberal. as usual some kook who doesn't agree with me has to resort to labels. did i label you? no i did not so keep what you want to think i am out of the conversation. lets speak to the issue at hand. i did not know who greenwald is but you arfe certainly aware that he is gay and where he lives. hmmmm. bottom line is talking heads on both sides of the issue agree that the article was written by 2 men who are pro iraq war. so if you want to debate that fine. but dont dare label me when you are clueless as to who i am and what i believe. that really pisses me off. people who have to name call and label are nothing but little punks.
First, I know who he is, that he is gay, and where he lives because I did a little research on him after you brought him up.
Second, I didn't know that calling someone a liberal was derogotory, I don't mind when someone calls me conservative. But I would say that Kook and Little Punk do amount to derogotory name calling so I would suggest that you take some of your own advise. It was an assumption that seems to have touched a nerve, I appologise.
Third, talking heads on both sides do not agree that these gentlemen are pro Iraq war. On the contrary, it seems that, other than this Greenwald gent, both sides find it interesting that both of these LIBERAL groups, the New York Times and the Brookings Institution would allow any information to sound even remotely like support for or a possitive outcome due to a Bush Administration action.
By the way, didn't you bring up Greenwald in the first place? But you do not know who he is? Did you make it up and just happen to get lucky? Something is a bit off here.
wikipedia o hanlon and you will find greenwald. and the point i was making about labeling me a liberal is thats what all conservatives do when anyone disagrees with them. and yes it touched a nerve because you don't know me or my views. also you called the brookings institute liberal. that however is highly debated and something i disagree with. does that make me a conservative? no it means i am an individual who has independent thoughts who doesn't feel like i have to label myself. as if any opinion has to be liberal or conservative, how ludicrous, there are a million shades in between.
It is well known that the Brookings Institution is, as Time Magazine put it, "the nation's pre-eminent liberal think tank", this is not my label. We will have to agree to disagree on this point.
I personally don't give a damn if these two guys are Dutch Girlscout Troop leaders. Their observations of the changes that have taken place since the surge began are very interesting and promising.
You were not disagreeing with me, I was merely stating that these gentlemen disagree with the subject of this thread. You were disagreeing with them and my liberal assumption was because I've read many of your posts and if I was asked to guess, that would be my guess.
Have you been to Iraq? Have you been there both before and after the surge as these men have? I have not, but I will read and learn from their observations. Why do you feel you must disregard what they have seen?
Quote - "Have you been to Iraq? Have you been there both before and after the surge as these men have? I have not, but I will read and learn from their observations. Why do you feel you must disregard what they have seen?"
Autobob,
I have two family members serving in Iraq, and one friend working as a journalist over there. All of them are more conservative politically (they all voted for Bush in 2024)than me, and initially (back when this started) they were for the war. I base my opinion on their impressions, and on my own research.
I do respect and value your opinion, even when I disagree with you - I've read enough of your posts to gain that respect for your judgement.
Jeff C
leikec@yahoo.com
I appreciate that, and I have also come to respect your opinions. My nephew was in the 1st/5th Expeditionary unit (if I put that right, it always confuses me) and they took Bagdad and stayed a few days in the remains of the royal palace. He said it was amazing how the people there treated his group like heros. They would bring them food and drink while on patrol, they would inform them of any trouble.
He has since left the service, but says, as you stated, that after a while it got tiring. Moral gets low and you wonder if it's worth it. That's why it is such a boost to morale when you hear that a tribal group has stopped a bunch of insurgents, or that the surge is helping.
These men and women are doing an incredibly hard job and to make it a thankless job is something that I will not allow. I thank members of the military for their service whenever I see them. My two oldest brothers came back from Vietnam and were spit on and called baby killers. I will do everything in my power, until the end, to let these men and women know that I support them and thank them with every bit of my being.
~ if you want me to support staying in iraq (ugh) then ask your senators & representative to:
1) fund the conflict out in the open ~ identify / institute / deduct for the "iraq conflict tax" on every paycheck in the USA.
2) reinstate the draft with "no" deferments (except for "real" medical needs)
3) impeach bush & cheney.
4) ask your senators & representative @ congress.org: lnk ~ email your request to congress’
or
lnk ~ my preferences
Jeff, the bottom line is President Bush's surge was not designed to get us out of Iraq. It's a plan to keep us there. And both parties have now signed on to it, I think. The plan is to rule the Middle East from Iraq, and have a permanent U.S. military presence there, like in Korea and Japan 62 years after the end of WW II.
I suspect the Candidates of Unity08 won't be much different in policy if they get elected, either. They may use different descriptions.
RPhillips
rphillips@windstream.net