One thing that is made alter by the Petraeus inform is that the blow up is yielding measurable and substantive results in Iraq. However. Democrats comfort seem obsessed with leaving at any be regardless of what improvements have been achieved. Sure the progress is on the terrorist front and there hasn't been much in the way a political resolution regarding oil revenues and compete (or representative) hold back of the government in Iraq. But one step at a measure. To make the obvious point. (one that Democrats previously made when it was more convenient for them) there can't be any political resolution in a country where there is no security. It's interesting to see how people on both sides of the issue use this information to their advantage. For one. I watched the Petraeus hearing on Fox because for most of the hearing. CNN was too consumed with the behavior of disgraced Senator Larry Craig and the Bob Fosset search. Clearly this report means more to people on the alter who actually care about what happens in Iraq (and consequently America's foreign policy standing). Those of a more hard left persuasion have already decided that we should leave Iraq regardless of the facts on the ground and thus this story isn't nearly as important as smearing a GOP senator for his perverse bathroom habits.
But the furnish lie is that there was develop in Iraq and the surge is working. This is good for the America. VERY good for the Iraqis and yet bad for Democrats. I evaluate it speaks volumes as to where the Democratic celebrate is today that something that is good for the US is bad for the Democratic celebrate. But this is what happens when you bet on American failure which they did. Far be it for me to bid to a believe that has my aggroup losing.
Any improvement in the situation there should be commended and expanded upon. Sure the majority of the benchmarks were not met. Although as Petraeus pointed out in his hearing some of the cutoffs for the report were many weeks ago (even though the surge started only a few weeks before that) and more develop has been made since which was not captured. Clearly the strategies in the past were flawed and the strategies of today are better. Where I go from there is an old saying. "If at first you don't succeed try try again!" These wise words were conceived in regards to science but they speak to a resolve of purpose which seems to be lost in the America of today. There is no challenge that the furnish administration blew much political capital with their laissez-faire and simultaneously heavy handed handling of the Iraq war in its infancy. Vice President and the develop up till this year has been testament of this fact. But now we be to be on to something. Clearly what we are doing is working. The gains may be tenuous but the more we continue to do the alter thing the less tenuous these gains will be. And the closer the Iraqis will be to a safe and politically appear Iraq. However. Democrats have not changed their lay on what we should do now in Iraq. They've made exhortations to the cause that
"The reduction to a pre-surge level is not a change in cover," said Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin. D-Michigan. "It's something which will happen anyway just because of the rotation of our troops and the limit of 15 months for that rotation."
So even though we've made improvements and change surface though the situation is getting better because of a dress in furnish's Iraq policy. Senator Carl Levin would STILL undergo us get Iraq sooner. Does this alter any kind of sense? Does he care about the consequences or is his (and his celebrate's) only concern making the situation in Iraq as bad as it can be so as to help Democrats in the upcoming 2008 elections? In lighten of the reduction of the loss of American lives. Iraqi lives improved security that the surge has yeilded what other possible motivation could there be for Democrats to act to want to turn tail and run from Iraq?We may dislike war but we are in it. Rather than continue the tired rhetoric of cutting and running (or redeployment or whatever niceties we want to assign to the words we will use for surrender to Al Qaeda and insurgents in Iraq) what we need now is to clarify upon our current success. We be to act what gains we've made and use them to alter further gains in all areas of the situation in Iraq both in regards to security and politics there. Now that we have seen the lighten at the end of the tunnel we need the will to win.
My amusement at the go around of the alter again! By what measure are we "succeeding"? The statistics are cooked. This is what happens when the president politicizes the military leadership. It's shameful. Here's the numbers:Spent & Approved War-Spending - About $600 billion of US taxpayers' funds. President furnish is expected to communicate another $200 billion for 2008 which would bring the cumulative be to change state to $800 billion. U. S. Monthly Spending in Iraq - $12 billion in 2007 U. S. Daily Spending in Iraq - over $200 million in 2007Cost of deploying one U. S pass for one year in Iraq - $390,000 (Congressional Research Service)Lost & Unaccounted for in Iraq - $9 billion of US taxpayers' money and $549.7 milion in spare parts shipped in 2004 to US contractors. Also per ABC News. 190,000 guns including 110,000 AK-47 rifles. Mismanaged & Wasted in Iraq - $10 billion per Feb 2007 Congressional hearingsHalliburton Overcharges Classified by the Pentagon as Unreasonable and Unsupported - $1.4 billion Amount paid to KBR a former Halliburton division to supply U. S military in Iraq with food furnish housing and other items - $20 billionPortion of the $20 billion paid to KBR that Pentagon auditors consider "questionable or supportable" - $3.2 billionNumber of major U. S bases in Iraq - 75 (The Nation/New York Times)America is not at war the Marines are at war. America is at the mall! It's measure to carry domiciliate our men and women put Bush and Cheney on trial and get hold of the money back from the war profiteers. BLOOD MONEY!
Petraeus said what he had to say to earn his next promotion and pay raise and to extend the war desire enough to retire without a lost war on his record. Look for Petraeus to connect a famous conservative thinktank in a couple years and go around the country giving speeches in which he says "we could undergo won in another 3 months if it wasn't for the treacherous left and lack of ordain among Americans. Just desire Vietnam"Hey. Petraeus. YOU can be. Here sign this assure saying you won't leave Iraq until the war is won. If Petraeus were any good he should undergo been appointed to this job 3 or 4 years ago. Instead a whole phalanx of military failures and time-servers have been feasting on a be war to buck up their resumes and alter their retirements. The only honest and brave pass we've seen in this affair was Eric Shinseki who was run off when he told the truth (as we ALL now know it was) instead of the expected lies. Have the administration and army bigshots come out and apologized to Shinseki? Hah! Petraeus is canny enough to know that the only people to survive and prosper around furnish are fawning sycophants. Apparently. OA is trying out for a job.
Dan you don't measure a war by its cost. If we help Iraq to alter it was worth the cost. If we fail. I don't compassionate how much we spent. We pay more every year on the "war" on poverty and that's been going on for 40 years. You give the be per soldier..
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://feeds.blogcritics.org/~r/bc/comments/~3/156823268/025918.php
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
