White House report cites Iraq govt. shortfalls (Roundup)
Middle East News
Sep 14, 2007, 16:16 GMT
Other features coming soon.
Talkback
page: 1 2
www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6921752,00.html
'In a separate report, the State Department concluded Friday that religious freedom has sharply deteriorated in Iraq over the past year. The department's Annual Report on International Religious Freedom found violence is not confined to the well-known rivalry between Sunni and Shia Muslims, with worshippers of all faiths targeted for attacks.'
(The troop count is also open to question, as the support personnel tied to the surge are apparently remaining)
'Four more combat brigades would pull out of Iraq as currently scheduled by July. This could reverse the buildup of 21,500 extra combat troops that Bush ordered to Iraq in January. But the White House has given sketchy accounts of the math and refused to provide specific numbers of how far troop levels would drop by next summer. This year's escalation boosted U.S. troop strength to 168,000, the highest level of the war, from about 130,000.'
www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/article2962054.ece
(excerpt from long article)
Last week George Bush flew into Iraq to meet Abdul-Sattar Abu Risha, leader of Anbar province. This week General David Petraeus told the US Congress how Anbar was a model for Iraq. Yesterday Abu Risha was assassinated by bombers in Anbar.
On Monday General Petraeus told the US Congress that Anbar province was 'a model of what happens when local leaders and citizens decide to oppose al-Qa'ida and reject its Taliban-like ideology'.
But yesterday's assassination underlines that Iraqis in Anbar and elsewhere who closely ally themselves with the US are in danger of being killed. 'It shows al-Qa'ida in Iraq remains a very dangerous and barbaric enemy,' General Petraeus said in reaction to the killing. But Abu Risha might equally have been killed by the many non al-Qa'ida insurgent groups in Anbar who saw him as betraying them.
Abu Risha, 37, usually stayed inside a heavily fortified compound containing several houses where he lived with his extended family. A US tank guards the entrance to the compound, which is opposite the largest US base in Ramadi. Surprisingly, he is said to have recently reduced the number of his bodyguards because of improved security situation in Anbar, although he ought to have known that as leader of the anti al-Qai'da Anbar Salvation Council he was bound to be a target for assassins.
Abu Risha's death underlines the degree to which the White House and General Petraeus have cherry-picked evidence to prove that it is possible to turn the tide in Iraq. They have, for instance, given the impression that some Sunni tribal leaders turning against al-Qa'ida in Anbar and parts of Diyala and Baghdad is a turning point in the war.
In reality al-Qa'ida is only a small part of the insurgency, with its fighters numbering only 1,300 as against 103,000 in the other insurgent organisations according to one specialist on the insurgency. Al-Qa'ida has largely concentrated on horrific and cruel bomb attacks on Shia civilians and policemen and has targeted the US military only as secondary target.
The mass of the insurgents belong to groups that are nationalist and Islamic militants who have primarily fought the US occupation. They were never likely to sit back while the US declared victory in their main bastion in Anbar province.
''Why have the Democrats failed to stop this war?''
-Osama Bin Laden
A weakened bin Laden; an Iraq as decisive front
Previous goals and grievances were much more expansive.
By Jonathan Last
For The Inquirer
Osama bin Laden's latest tapes are instructive and, in their own way, encouraging.
Not to mention funny. Bin Laden has been leaning on left-wing tropes for a long time. Back in the late '90s, for instance, he subscribed to the progressive urban myth that U.S. sanctions had killed 600,000 Iraqi children. (The sanctions were the province of the United Nations, not the United States. Whatever. You can't wage a jihad without breaking a few eggs.)
But his latest video goes careening past normal leftist agitprop and into outer space. He says that John F. Kennedy was killed by corporate bigwigs who wanted to stop him from ending the Vietnam War. (It was Kennedy who escalated Vietnam into a serious conflict.) Bin Laden also embellishes familiar antiwar slogans, saying America should say no 'to spilling red blood for black oil.' He rails against globalization. He takes after Hollywood for misrepresenting Islam - you know, with all of those nasty, jingoistic anti-Muslim movies it has been churning out since 2001.
Bin Laden also hops on the global-warming bandwagon. 'The life of all mankind is in danger' because of climate change, he warns. Environmentalists must be thrilled to have him on their side. Whom would you be more embarrassed to count as a supporter, bin Laden or Whitley Strieber, the climate-change alarmist who has made a career writing about his alien abduction(s)? Just asking.
It's not totally fair to hold people responsible for their fans, but if I were Noam Chomsky or Michael Scheuer, the two writers bin Laden points to as wise Western intellectuals, I might take a couple weeks off to rethink, say, my entire world view.
The Democratic Party has a slightly larger version of this bin Laden problem: He seems to view Democrats as allies who aren't quite holding up their end of the bargain. Bin Laden wants America out of Iraq. Democrats want America out of Iraq. Bin Laden says that in the 2006 midterm elections, Democrats were elected to force a U.S. retreat, but 'haven't made a move worth mentioning.'
'Why,' he asks petulantly, 'have the Democrats failed to stop this war?'
From the Democratic point of view, it can't be good to have America's Numero Uno Evildoer moaning over how the Democratic National Committee has let him down. People might get the idea that the DNC's goals overlap a wee bit too much with al-Qaeda's. Shouldn't Democrats be crafting policies that make bin Laden curse Nancy Pelosi's rotten, infidel soul? Sure would make me feel a lot more comfortable voting for them.
But all of that's just icing: For those worried that the war on terror has been prosecuted, shall we say, sub-optimally, the new tape suggests that Osama bin Laden is now operating from a position of weakness.
To understand the change, you have to go back to bin Laden's two fatwas declaring war on America. His goals and grievances back then were much more expansive.
In 1996, bin Laden was primarily concerned with getting every American out of Saudi Arabia. '[T]o push the enemy - the greatest Kufr [unbelieving ingrate] - out of [Saudi Arabia is] a prime duty. No other duty after Belief is more important,' he said.
In 1998, in his second fatwa, bin Laden was still torqued about Americans - not just in Saudi Arabia, but anywhere on the Arabian Peninsula - writing about 'the crusader armies spreading in it like locusts, eating its riches and wiping out its plantations.' The reason the dim-witted crusaders were there, of course, was 'to serve the Jews' petty state.'
He concluded that fatwa by claiming that 'the ruling to kill the Americans and their allies - civilians and military - is an individual duty for every Muslim . . . in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam.' Which is tricky because, technically speaking, all lands belong to Allah.
Remember, this was during the Clinton years, when bin Laden wanted, for starters: (1) all infidels banished from the Arabian Peninsula; (2) the Saudi ruling class replaced with 'true Muslims'; and (3) the Zionist Entity gone from Jerusalem. To get this, he called for a battle royal, us-against-them, end-times conflict with the forces of paganism, secularism and sin (you and me) on one side and the forces of the Prophet (peace be upon him!) on the other.
Fast-forward to last week: Bin Laden now says we can all make nice if America will just pull out of Iraq.
The other big change is in bin Laden's description of his enemies. A decade ago, it was the 'Zionist-Crusader alliance' that traced back to those grubby, rootless, cosmopolitan folks. Now, he says it's just the rich capitalists who are manipulating Americans into fighting the Muslim world. That sounds like something you say when you pick a fight at a bar before you notice the other guy's linebacker buddy. 'Hey, pal, my beef's not with you - it's with the filthy capitalist.'
Other than advertising bin Laden's weakness, his missive makes one other important point: For the bad guys, Iraq has become the definitive battle. From our perspective, the war may have been a mistake, it may have been unwise, and it may have been foolishly prosecuted. But if the bad guys now see it as the central front, then none of that matters anymore. One of the great failures of the Bush administration is that in an attempt to use the war for political gain, the president associated the fight with himself. To be pro-war, you had to be pro-Bush. To be antiwar, you had to be anti-Bush.
But presidents don't go to war, nations do. This is America's war, and as lousy a commander as President Bush has been, if Osama bin Laden thinks it's the decisive battle, then we have a duty to make sure he loses.
Mourners Vow Revenge at Sheik's Funeral
Friday September 14, 2007 11:16 PM
By DAVID RISING
BAGHDAD (AP) - Some 1,500 mourners called for revenge Friday as they buried the leader of the Sunni revolt against al-Qaida, who was assassinated by a bomb after meeting with President Bush earlier this month.
An al-Qaida front in Iraq claimed responsibility for the blast that killed Adbul-Sattar Abu Risha, 37, and three companions. A statement posted on the Internet by the Islamic State of Iraq called Abu Risha ``one of the dogs of Bush'' and described Thursday's killing as a ``heroic operation that took over a month to prepare.''
The statement could not be independently verified, but it appeared on Web sites commonly used by the insurgents. Al-Qaida earlier killed four of Abu Risha's brothers and six other relatives for working with the U.S. military.
``We will take our revenge,'' the mourners chanted. ``We will continue the march of Abu Risha.''
The sheik was buried one year to the day after he organized Sunni Arab clans into an alliance to drive al-Qaida in Iraq from sanctuaries in Anbar province where the terror movement had flourished since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.
Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, the second-highest ranking U.S. officer in Iraq, and several high-ranking government officials attended the funeral, including Iraq's interior and defense ministers and National Security Adviser Mouwaffak al-Rubaie.
``We condemn the killing of Abu Risha, but this will not deter us from helping the people of Anbar - we will support them more than before,'' al-Rubaie declared.
Saudi Arabia or Iran is going to gain control of Iraq, It is only a matter of when unless we stay there for a long time.
They are both salivating over the oil reserves just as much as Bush and Cheney. I am amazed that he was able to push this problem onto the next President so easily without anyone rearing up and saying hell no you need to fix this mess and quick.
The agenda on the table at present, is when America withdraws,' the Iraqis are allowed to keep 12%
YES TWELVE PER CENT
of their Oil revenues.
........WMD's my ass.
....so I suggest you all get your fingers on the keyboards and find out who gets the other 88% of the Iraq Oil?.
Interesting
.....Very Interesting.
, or as they say nowadays 'the slice of the pie'
When America momemtarily lost its will to win in the 1970's,
the anti-American defeatist-oriented democrats forced the United
States to cut n run from the former French colony in Vietnam.
As a result, commies took over Vietnam, and ever since, commie
controlled Vietmam has become a huge threat to the free world.
This is why we can not let the anti-American defeatocrats destroy
our will to win today. Total victory against the forces of evil
in the same Iraq who brought 9/11 to the US, is possible only if
we do not let liberal extremists who want us to lose get there way.
The defeatist demonrats want to destroy our will to win, and force
us out of Iraq before we kill enough enemy so we can achieve a just
and glorious victory against the evil perpetrators of 9/11.
AH? GI Jojo
Still got verbal diarrhea?
Over the weekend, Douglas Hagmann, Director of the Northeast Intelligence Network, reported on an incident, Delta Airlines Flight 1824, involving a large group of Middle Eastern passengers, male and female, who were flying from Orlando, Florida to Atlanta, Georgia. Sources told Hagmann the passengers' bags tested positive for SEMTEX explosives at a TSA security checkpoint and were taken away by the FBI. Over the weekend, I spoke to Hagmann, as well as with one of his sources.
Just now, I had a lengthy conversation with TSA Spokesman Christopher White who confirmed the incident. Here's what White told me about Delta Airlines Flight 1824:
TAMPA - A judge revoked bail for two Saudi men arrested Friday for boarding a school bus and riding to Wharton High.
Initially, Mana Saleh Almanajam, 23, and Shaker Mohsen Alsidran, 20, were held in Orient Road Jail on bails of $250 each on misdemeanor trespassing charges. Circuit Judge Monica Sierra decided to hold them at a court appearance Saturday so investigators could dig deeper into their pasts.
A friend of the two University of South Florida students tried to post their bail Friday night, said Ahmed Bedier, Tampa director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, but a jail clerk told the friend that they couldn't be released because they were under an immigration hold until a hearing Saturday morning.
At the hearing, Sierra agreed with a prosecutor that she needed to know more about them before she could feel comfortable releasing them.
The prosecutor said neither man carried identification when they were arrested at Wharton High School, and authorities haven't had an opportunity to gather background information beyond a check of state records.
Almanajam and Alsidran appeared confused by the proceedings and smiled nervously as they stood behind a public defender's table.
Investigators say the men boarded a school bus at Fletcher Avenue and 42nd Street, sat down and began speaking in Arabic. Their behavior concerned the driver, a substitute, who alerted the school district.
The bus was met at Wharton High School by a swarm of officers from the sheriff's Homeland Security Division, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement's Regional Domestic Security Task Force, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the FBI.
Almanajam and Alsidran appeared confused by the proceedings and smiled nervously as they stood behind a public defender's table.
Investigators say the men boarded a school bus at Fletcher Avenue and 42nd Street, sat down and began speaking in Arabic. Their behavior concerned the driver, a substitute, who alerted the school district.
The bus was met at Wharton High School by a swarm of officers from the sheriff's Homeland Security Division, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement's Regional Domestic Security Task Force, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the FBI.
Bedier called the court's decision to revoke bond an overreaction and tied to the men being Arabic and Muslim.
'The only reason [this happened] is because of who they are, and that's wrong,' he said. 'How is it that they can say they can't find out who these kids are when they've searched their homes and found nothing? ... Thus far, it doesn't seem like they've been afforded their full rights for something as simple as getting on the wrong bus.'
He questioned why the driver didn't tell them not to board if their appearance was suspicious.
Officials who questioned the men Friday said they at first said they were from Morocco but later admitted being from Saudi Arabia. Both arrived in the country six months ago and are enrolled at the English Language Institute at USF. Their reasons for getting on the bus ranged from wanting to enroll in easier English classes to having some fun.
Bedier said the men got on the bus out of a cultural misunderstanding.
'They don't have yellow school buses just for children in their home country,' he said.
The judge scheduled a bond review hearing for Tuesday and asked that an Arabic interpreter be present. There was no interpreter Saturday.
Although Yousef Megahed and Ahmed Mohamed have appeared in court together in the past, Mohamed waived his rights to a bond hearing and only Megahed appeared before Magistrate Elizabeth Jenkins.
While Jenkins says Megahed could pose a danger to the community, the government revealed the men had PVC filled with the explosive potassium nitrate and other bomb making ingredients. They also had fuses and a drill.
Are you a patriotic terrorist?
If you are intensely critical of the US, while tolerating homicidal enemies who condemn everything you previously claimed you are for - human rights, voting rights, gay rights, women's rights, porn - then you're a patriotic terrorist.
If you talk about tolerance constantly - and hilariously tolerate genocide and suicide bombers because those actions undermine your more intimate opposition, the American right - then you're a patriotic terrorist.
The only difference between a patriotic terrorist and a real one? Real terrorists are simply patriotic terrorists who've taken the extra step - choosing to actually die for their beliefs - rather than simply talking about them at Spago. If Tim Robbins, Sean Penn, Michael Moore, and their ilk had real cojones, they'd all be wearing cute black vests - but stuffed with more than dog-eared copies of Deterring Democracy.
RE: BAGHDAD (AP) - Some 1,500 mourners called for revenge Friday as they buried the leader of the Sunni revolt against al-Qaida, who was assassinated by a bomb after meeting with President Bush earlier this month.
==================
I did say 'excerpts', and the Sunnis seeking revenge is a perfectly obvious outcome to ANYONE with a brain. The question is what good that will do. The assassinated sheik was unique, as he also insured safety on the roads to Syria, where Shia and Sunni alike could drive their trucks in relative safety. Based on your (lack of) posting style where you regurgitate entire articles as though somehow that proves something above and beyond the key points, I can understand your lack of comprehension.
afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5g-adW38jtGDGJ-KNfSLoGutWdK-g
BAGHDAD (AFP) — War-weary Iraqis on Saturday feared that death could return to the long, winding desert roads stretching to Syria and Jordan in the wake of the killing claimed by Al-Qaeda of a top Sunni sheikh.
The slaying of Sheikh Abdul Sattar Abu Reesha who fought the Islamist group has renewed the fears of thousands of truck drivers and other Iraqis who travel to Syria and Jordan through the western province of Anbar.
'Shiite and Sunni drivers drove on these roads side by side like brothers, thanks to Abu Reesha,' said Mohammed Salem, a taxi driver at the end of a tiring 600 kilometre (375 mile) drive from the Syrian border to Baghdad via Ramadi, the capital of Anbar and a one-time insurgent stronghold.
The New York Times asked a group of experts on Iraq to provide questions that SHOULD have been asked to Petraeus and Crocker. The link will 'go private' in a few days, but the very valuable content is presented in its entirety, as well as the names of those posing the questions.
By THE NEW YORK TIMES - Published: September 10, 2007
Today and tomorrow, the United States ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, and the top American general there, David Petraeus, will appear before Congress to offer a progress report on the war. The Op-Ed page asked six experts on the Iraq conflict to come up with three questions they would pose to the two men.
Beyond the Surge
1. General Petraeus, has the surge bought us anything more enduring than fleeting tactical victories?
2. You and Adm. Michael Mullen, the incoming chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have both said the surge will end in April 2008. What options do we have then?
3. If the United States reduces its forces in Iraq over the next 12 to 24 months, is there a way to pursue our strategic goals of no genocide, no safe haven for Al Qaeda, and no regional war? — Nathaniel Fick, a Marine infantry officer in Iraq and Afghanistan and the author of “One Bullet Away.”
Starving the Troops
1. General Petraeus, why have the White House and State Department failed you by neglecting a diplomatic and economic surge to complement the military one?
2. Based on the counterinsurgency calculus in the new Army manual you helped write, you don’t have sufficient manpower in Iraq, even with the surge. Why has the administration not given you enough troops?
3. Americans are well aware of the shortages of matériel, from rifle scopes to armored Humvees, our troops have suffered from. Why, for example, have you not been given a sufficient number of the effective mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles called “MRAPs”?
— Paul D. Eaton, a retired Army major general who was in charge of training the Iraqi military from 2003 to 2004.
Wrong Way to Vote?
1. Ambassador Crocker, in Iraqi elections, voters pick national party lists, not individuals to represent specific district constituencies. Has this system made it harder for Iraqi leaders to achieve legislative progress? If so, can it be changed?
2. What changes in United States law could help you succeed in your work in Iraq?
3. Should the United States create a civilian reserve corps to train, equip and deploy volunteer civilians for civilian reconstruction tasks, just as we do military reservists for military tasks?
— Douglas J. Feith, under secretary of defense for policy from July 2001 to August 2005.
Our 9-Year Plan
1. General Petraeus, with Gen. George Casey, the Army chief of staff, having declared that the current level of American military commitments is “not sustainable,” what are your plans for preserving your recent gains while also achieving security in the rest of Iraq?
2. In an interview with the BBC, you recently observed that “the average counterinsurgency is somewhere around a 9- or a 10-year endeavor.” With the Iraq war now approaching the four-and-a-half year mark, are we halfway to our goal? Or did the nine-year clock begin ticking only with the initiation of the surge?
3. You have described your mission as “buying time for Iraqis to reconcile.” How will we know when reconciliation is occurring? Please explain how American collaboration with Sunni insurgents lends itself to this larger process of reconciliation. — Andrew J. Bacevich, a professor of history and international relations at Boston University.
Keep an Eye on Iran
1. Ambassador Crocker, President Bush and others have made reference to bottom-up conciliation and the tribal uprising against insurgents in Anbar Province. Would Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki and other Iraqi officials have taken any action to work with Sunni tribal leaders without pressure from the United States? Aren’t you getting constant complaints from tribal leaders, and local and provincial Sunni officials, about the lack of central government cooperation and response?
2. What is the level of Iranian influence over the central government and in Shiite-majority areas in the south? Is it growing or weakening? How does Iran affect the size and actions of the various Shiite militias?
3. What Iraqi ministries are now effective and fully functioning in serving the needs of all Iraqis, rather than influenced by various religious and political factions? — Anthony H. Cordesman, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Bye to the Brits
1. General Petraeus, even if we accept evidence that the “surge” is indeed delivering real tactical results, how great is the value of these when the Iraqi national government and its institutions still seem so ill fitted to exploit them?
2. What do you think might be the consequences for the security situation in Iraq if the United States undertook military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities?
3. How serious are the consequences for allied strategy of the British Army’s withdrawal from Basra? Are the British justified in their assertion that the security situation in the city is now sufficiently stable to allow the Iraqi National Army to manage it? — Max Hastings, British military historian and author of “Warriors: Portraits From the Battlefield.”
(The part of the earlier link that got glossed over - al Qaeda knows how to get the headlines, but bin Laden is simply a recruiting poster for fanatics at this point. If al Qaeda could magically be plucked out of Iraq, they'd be left with the native factions as the problem. al Qaeda's presence gives Bush an enemy to rant about; as otherwise the essential sectarian problem would be more prominent, as well as al-Maliki's failure to commit to Iraq's own proposed benchmarks, which somehow have been relegated to the same perspective as were the Iraq Study Group findings after they were hyped as something we should pay attention to).
www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/article2962054.ece
Abu Risha's death underlines the degree to which the White House and General Petraeus have cherry-picked evidence to prove that it is possible to turn the tide in Iraq. They have, for instance, given the impression that some Sunni tribal leaders turning against al-Qa'ida in Anbar and parts of Diyala and Baghdad is a turning point in the war.
In reality al-Qa'ida is only a small part of the insurgency, with its fighters numbering only 1,300 as against 103,000 in the other insurgent organisations according to one specialist on the insurgency. Al-Qa'ida has largely concentrated on horrific and cruel bomb attacks on Shia civilians and policemen and has targeted the US military only as secondary target.
The mass of the insurgents belong to groups that are nationalist and Islamic militants who have primarily fought the US occupation. They were never likely to sit back while the US declared victory in their main bastion in Anbar province.
news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/news/article_1356101.php/Sadrists_qu it_parliament_Sunni_minister_sacked__Roundup_
Baghdad - The Sadr bloc, a political force loyal to Iraq's feared Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, on Saturday quit Premier Nuri al-Maliki's governing Shiite alliance, Arab broadcaster al-Arabiya reported citing Sadr leaders.
The move followed repeated threats from the Sadrists. The Shiite leaders had said that they would walk out on the United Iraqi Alliance if their views on political matters were not considered. Sadr members of parliament have decried the coalition's 'incompetence,' according to the independent Voices of Iraq news agency. The leaders also claim that some parties within the parliamentary coalition control all the Shiite alliance's decisions.
======
(To make the situation worse politically, the Sunnis booted their minister who returned to the government after their earlier walkout in August)
In other news, Sunni Planning Minister Ali Baban was reportedly sacked from the Iraqi Islamic Party, headed by Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashimi. His dismissal reportedly came after he returned to the government and resumed his duties.
The Iraqi Islamic Party forms the bulk of the Iraqi Accord Front, the Sunni coalition that occupies 44 seats in parliament.
The party, in a statement published on the internet, said Baban was sacked for opposing its decision to ban Sunni ministers from resuming government duties and participating in cabinet meetings.
'I did say 'excerpts', and the Sunnis seeking revenge is a perfectly obvious outcome to ANYONE with a brain.'
No wonder it escaped you.
'The question is what good that will do.'
Idiot, Killing al Qaeda = always good.
'Based on your (lack of) posting style'
OOooh, you stylish thing you, taking snippets of someone else's ideas, divorcing them of their original context and presenting them to support conclusions not originally intended by the original author is 'stylish'? I guess 'lying attention whore' is the 'new gray' for this fall.
' I can understand your lack of comprehension.'
Funny, you then follow that with a passage that essentially signifies nothing, like most of your sound and fury: 'BAGHDAD (AFP) —Bad news for sunni truck drivers... Must be a Bush failure in there... hey, look at what I like to clog up the works with... Hope you like garbage everyone...'
'The New York Times asked a group of experts on Iraq to provide questions that SHOULD have been asked to Petraeus and Crocker.'
Gee, are these the same 'experts on Iraq' that the New York times gave a cut rate to in order to smear Petraeus? Admittedly, almost ANY questions would have been better then the brain dead ranting this gentleman was subjected to by such babbling idiot hags like Feinstein and Clinton... but the New York times is a little too close to it's latest disgrace to be quoting verbatim... Showing a complete lack of 'style'. It is irrelevant anyway, as is this discussion. As I have told you over and over...rubbed your nose in it actually, the crisis is over. The democrats tried to defeat our troops but they ended up defeating themselves.
'Al Qaeda a minimal part of Iraq's problems'
' al Qaeda knows how to get the headlines, but bin Laden is simply a recruiting poster for fanatics at this point.'
Oh yeah... they are only responsible for 20% of the attacks but 80% of the fatalities. You are just a moron. That is all.
'If al Qaeda could magically be plucked out of Iraq, they'd be left with the native factions as the problem.'
And??? If the people murdering 80% were removed you would still have 20% of the murderers left... If you were to eliminate all the rapists you would still have the armed robbers.. another Bush failure no doubt. Grasping at straws much?
'which somehow have been relegated to the same perspective as were the Iraq Study Group findings'
Yeah, stupid idea land, where you are king.
' Maliki has more problems; Sunni AND Shia'
Gee, maybe we need someone other then Maliki? You seemed to be enraged that some Americans were proposing that idea a while ago.
'The Sadr bloc, a political force loyal to Iraq's feared Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, on Saturday quit Premier Nuri al-Maliki's governing Shiite alliance...'
Oh well.
'The Shiite leaders had said that they would walk out on the United Iraqi Alliance if their views on political matters were not considered.
Should read: The Shiite leaders had said that they would walk out on the United Iraqi Alliance if Iran's demands are not met.
I am sick and tired of the defeatocrats trying to pin a losing strategy
on the glorious troop splurge. At worst, our move west of Bagdad, tempermerrilly abandoning Applomaxox, can be seen jist by somes
as strategic retyreat, jist befoe break-thu to triumphtical victory uber enemy.
The trianumphical of der will vill prevail udder stressful situatinals,
until we win. It is much imperativcal dat we employing all kink
of ex-terrorists ver payday to tell us they help us now since they be
ex-terroist/ . Ven I seen Chgristi de Armygeddgion begin, an even the
heabens not help uss.
'Gi Jojo You are a complete LUNATIC
Go see a zfacts.com/p/447.html'
Gi Jojo is trying to be 'satirical' and pointing out the stupidity of a certain mindset. Instead, someone who has the same mindset that she has doesn't get it... because they are stupid...
:-D
page: 1 2
Similar articles
- Two US pilots killed in helicopter crash in Iraq
- US soldiers kill Iraqi man in raid near Syrian border
- Obama urges al-Maliki to hold elections on time
- Al-Maliki in Washington seeking investment (Roundup)
- Al-Maliki in Washington seeking investment
Latest Headlines in Middle East
- 1. Obama, Netanyahu meet as Mideast peace talks flounder (Roundup)
- 2. Five years on, Palestinians still mourning Arafat (News Feature)
- 3. UN chief welcomes Lebanon's newly formed government
- 4. PROFILE: Lebanon's national unity cabinet
- 5. Netanyahu wants peace with Palestinians "soon"
USA
Your Talkback on this Story