Thoughts on the Iraq Situation
April 9th, 2008 at 09:23am Mark Noonan
Yesterday morning I happened to catch Senator Levin’s mendacious and defeatist opening remarks at the Petraeus-Crocker hearings. I was very much saddened by his remarks - saddened that while our best and bravest and Iraq’s best and bravest are shedding their blood for victory, a US Senator could say this:
Even the few small political steps that have been taken by the Iraqis are in jeopardy because of the incompetence and excessively sectarian leadership of Mr. Maliki. Last week, this incompetence was dramatized in the military operation in Basra. Far from being the “defining moment” President Bush described, it was a haphazardly planned operation, carried out apparently without meaningful consultation with the U.S. military or even key Iraqi leaders, while Maliki made unrealistic claims, promises and threats.
Outside of being entirely divorced from reality, I additionally fail to see how insulting the Iraqi government and its military is going to help us prevail in Iraq. But that, of course, is the actual point for the Democrats - they don’t want us to prevail in Iraq because their entire political narrative for 2008 hangs on Iraq being a failure…if Iraq is other than a failure, then Democrats have no rationale for being elected in November. As has become all too common amongst Democrats, the power of the Democratic party trumps all other considerations, including those of basic decency. Fortunately, in General Petraeus we have a man who will tell us the truth:
Underpinning the advances of the past year has been improvements in Iraq’s security institutions.
An increasingly robust Iraqi-run training base enabled the Iraqi security forces to grow by over 133,000 soldiers and police over the past 16 months. And the still-expanding training base is expected to generate an additional 50,000 Iraqi soldiers and 16 army and special operations battalions through the rest of 2008, along with 23,000 police and eight national police battalions.
Additionally, Iraq’s security ministries are steadily improving their ability to execute their budgets. As this chart shows, in 2007, as in 2006, Iraq’s security ministries spent more on their forces than the United States provided through the Iraqi Security Forces Fund.
We anticipate that Iraq will spend over $8 billion on security this year and $11 billion next year. And this projection enabled us recently to reduce significantly our Iraqi Security Forces Fund request for fiscal year 2009 from $5.1 billion to $2.8 billion.
While improved Iraqi security forces are not yet ready to defend Iraq or maintain security throughout the country on their own, recent operations in Basra highlight improvements in the ability of the Iraqi security forces to deploy substantial numbers of units, supplies and replacements on very short notice. They certainly could not have deployed a division’s worth of army and police units on such short notice a year ago. On the other hand, the recent operations also underscored the considerable work still to be done in the area of logistics, force enablers, staff development, and command and control.
No, the Iraqi forces in Basra didn’t fight like Green Berets, Marines or Army Rangers - but they fought, and they won. In spite of Levin’s slander of the Iraqi army, it was Sadr and his goons who called off the battle, not the Iraqi army. We’re moving our troops out, we’re spending less of our money on the Iraqi army, and when Basra exploded into battle it was Iraqi soldiers who bore the brunt of the battle as Iraq’s political class united behind the Iraqi armed forces - in other words, everything the surge was supposed to accomplish was on bold display in Basra…and yet Democrats continue to denigrate the whole effort, and cast insult upon our Iraqi allies.
I’m heartsick over this whole thing, and I worry greatly for our nation - a great nation and little minds go ill together, and Democrats are ever more proving that they have the smallest minds possible; and they add to it a weak heart and cowardly desire to kowtow to our enemies, rather than fight them. They could win in November, and undo all that we as a nation have accomplished at immense expenditure of blood and treasure. All that has been fought for will be thrown away if Democrats emerge in control in January - Iraq will be passed on to Iran and the terrorists, Lebanon will revert to a Syrian colony and around the world nations confronting terrorism will seek to make the best deal they can, because they will rest assured that for all of America’s talk, we lack the will to stick it out until victory. We’ve only just now recovered that reliability as an ally we threw away in Vietnam, and Democrats are bent on throwing it away again - and this time for good.
If anyone out there thinks that a President Obama will be respected by our enemies and that our enemies will delightedly negotiate a fair deal with us, then you’ve got rocks in your head. Anyone who believes that is a purblind idiot - our enemies will rejoice that an ignorant tool of the kook left is in charge of America, and the only thing the varied tyrants out there will fear is that some other tyrant might gain a larger surrender from Obama than they will. Iraq is, indeed, the defining moment of our time - we either win this in Iraq, or suffer a crushing, global defeat. And the only way we can win this, dear friends, is for John McCain to be sworn in on January 20th. Remember that! McCain means victory; Democrats mean defeat - and not just defeat for the GOP, but defeat for America.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Republicans, War on Terror
116 Comments
1. OhioOrrin | April 9th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Ear bama (handing Petraeus a map): “Gen Betray us, you just concentrate on loading those boats I drew on that map.”
Gen: “What about that suicide camel jockey Croker just drew-in coming over from Iran?”
Hill (coughing): “That jockey aint coming over for another 28 months when we’ll be O-U-T”
Gen: “Who’s giving the orders here anyway?”
tEdDy: “SOmE UmM OnIOn dRIVe OfF BrIDgE?”
day 2 coming up…
2. maryjane | April 9th, 2008 at 10:10 am
You don’t know what you are talking about. Over 1000 Iraqi “Army” soliders refused to fight or deserted alltogether. Maliki ignored Petraeus’ advise not to challenge Al Sadr. The Iraqi Army is a militia just as the Sadr loyalists are. There is no difference. Al Sadr made his concessions from a position of strength, not weakness. The president of Iran can go to Iraq and be welcomed with open arms and brass bands and Bush has to sneak in in the dead of night. Our presence there is the problem, not the solution and there is no end in sight. We have spent close to a trillion dollars already and we have serious problems here at home and you Mark have the uninformed gall to try to spin the testimony of these hearings? It is people like you with your zealotry who if allowed to continue would most assuredly bring about total failure in Iraq and increase our cultural and economic maladies here at home.
You are 100% wrong on this topic. The general himself has said that there is no military solution to the problems of Iraq. That is a fact. And Crocker has suggested that the congress of our country, a country you claim to love and defend is inconsequential when it comes to deciding the direction we go from here but that the Iraqi congress has more authority!! Whose side are you on?
3. bagni | April 9th, 2008 at 10:24 am
mark-raq
you helped the green goombahs think of a jovian joke
what do obama and bush have in common?
neither are respected by our enemies and will be ever able to negotiate a fair deal.
get it?
don’t worry we won’t quit our day job…..
4. kimberly4victory | April 9th, 2008 at 10:53 am
maryjane: You are the one who is spinning. Patraeus said “military force alone will not be enough to quell the country’s violent insurgency … military action was necessary to improve security in Iraq but “not sufficient” to end violence altogether.”
And, he was correct in stating so.
Since September, the Awakening movement has continued to root out al Qaeda and establish local security. General Petraeus said in yesterday’s testimony: “Awakenings have prompted tens of thousands of Iraqis–some, former insurgents–to contribute to local security as so-called ‘Sons of Iraq.’” Currently, more than 91,000 Sons of Iraq (both Sunni and Shia) are actively working to build security at a local level. While there are significant question marks about some U.S. allies who fall under the Sons of Iraq program, such as Hajji Abu Abed, the program has on the whole bolstered stability and helped Coalition forces attain valuable intelligence on weapons caches and terrorist activity. “We have already found more caches in 2008 than we found in all of 2006,” General Petraeus said yesterday, placing the number of caches found and cleared at 2,837 countrywide.
General Petraeus also noted improvements in the Iraqi security forces, stating that “Iraq has also conducted a surge, adding well over 100,000 additional soldiers and police to the ranks of its security forces in 2007.” Today over 100 Iraqi combat battalions are “capable of taking the lead in operations.”
I have faith in the Iraqi people, those that desire a peaceful and prosperous Iraq. They must continue to fight against AQ and insurgents for their country so our troops can come home.
5. NeoClown | April 9th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Mark sez:
“Our enemies will rejoice that an ignorant tool of the kook left is in charge of America.”
Having an ignorant tool of the kook right in charge of America didn’t help us much on 9/11 did it?
As a matter of fact, I would say that bin Laden chose to attack the US because Dubya was President. Face it, Dubya is magnet for bad stuff. He attracts terrorists, hurricanes, and bad economic times.
Personally, I don’t care who we replace Dubya with, as long as we replace him, and quick.
6. majoriot | April 9th, 2008 at 11:07 am
Wow, Dems are the problem, huh?
You don’t even consider, or criticize, those who created the situation in the first place.
Iran in Iraq? Ask yourself why this is possible?
Nothing says Mission accomplished like this:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3713702.ece
7. Tractatus | April 9th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Remember: Pointing out how weak Maliki’s leadership is is now slander! Don’t talk about the truth, for it is slanderous! (”Slander,” obviously, being one of those words Noonan likes to throw around for effect without actually knowing what it means.)
And it never gets old when somebody who can’t seem to get anything right about Iraq insists that it’s everybody else who is divorced from reality.
8. John Mccain » Thoug&hellip | April 9th, 2008 at 11:36 am
[…] This ainât Hell, but you can see it from here wrote an interesting post today on Thoughts on the Iraq SituationHere’s a quick excerpt…their entire political narrative for 2008 hangs … dear friends, is for John McCain to be sworn in on January 20th. Remember that! McCain… […]
9. maryjane | April 9th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Given a choice, Mark would make it a criminal offense to critcize GWB, his administration, his decisions (such as they are) or anything even remotely skeptical of their problem solving skills. Which are, by the way, binary and ineffective. Our presense in Iraq is perpetuating the problem. Our treasury is drained. We borrow money from other countries while Iraq has billions of dollars in surplus. The American public has not been asked to sacrafice one dime to fund this misbegotten debacle. At no other time in our history has there been a tax cut during a time of war. 80% of Americans think the country is on the wrong track and McCain STILL doesn’t know the difference between Suni and Shia, AQ and insurgents. It is the duty of a patriot to question the government. Mark is no patriot. He has so much invested (emotionally, idealogically) that he just can’t quit now! He is like an unrepentant addict. There is no reasoning with people like Mark. Facts are conspiracy and Mark shuns them like a vampire on a day pass.
10. keefer | April 9th, 2008 at 11:46 am
kimberly,
These nuts, especially maryjane, do not understand what the Middle East is, and for how long it has been a cauldron of violence. Those who foment the terror are living in the 8th Century; they don’t want the freedom and liberty that comes with change.
maryjane–if that’s your real name, you should understand that these animals have no respect for you whatsoever, if you are in fact a woman. However, one would suspect that your name is derived from your choice of smoking material…
11. David B. Schmidt | April 9th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Let’s see. America and more specifically the Republicans are now responsible for everything wrong in the world. Iraq’s Council of Representatives seats at least 15 different sects of 200 active political groups (unlike our 2 major & 1 minor) and have done more since they came together than our congress has done in the same time frame.
Others claim that our General and Ambassador have only returned from the ground in Iraq to lie to the American people or that we twist the words to mean something they don’t.
Next claim is that we, conservatives, are the ones with our heads in the sand. In that case–why not actually read something from the people that are there–I guess they are all lying also–that vast right wing conspiracy again.
Look at vetsforfreedom.org, or Iraq the Model, or even Michael Yon. Look at the in-country re-enlistment rates which are phenomenal.
And before anyone chimes in with the old talking point about why don’t I sign up and go fight–I have done my time (9 years) leaving the Marines with an honorable discharge and the rank of Sgt. from an infantry battalion.
12. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 11:57 am
keefer:
These nuts, especially maryjane, do not understand what the Middle East is, and for how long it has been a cauldron of violence. Those who foment the terror are living in the 8th Century; they don’t want the freedom and liberty that comes with change.
So what the hell are we wasting money, time and most importantly putting our soldiers in danger for something that you claim will never happen?
If, as you say, they don’t want to change, how will we know exactly when we have “won”?
13. JD | April 9th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
We “won” in 2003 when we toppled the evil Saddam dictatorship. The current Iraq civil war is not our to win or lose. We just need to end our occupation of Iraq. Regardless of who occupies the White House, our next president needs to end Bush’s Iraq debacle and get our military forces out of there.
14. Sunny | April 9th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
‘I’m heartsick over this whole thing, and I worry greatly for our nation - a great nation and little minds go ill together, and Democrats are ever more proving that they have the smallest minds possible; and they add to it a weak heart and cowardly desire to kowtow to our enemies, rather than fight them. They could win in November, and undo all that we as a nation have accomplished at immense expenditure of blood and treasure. All that has been fought for will be thrown away if Democrats emerge in control in January - Iraq will be passed on to Iran and the terrorists . . . ” Mark
Mark, you have become such a drama queen with your constant ‘everything will be gloom and doom’ if a Democrat becomes president. I agree there has been a tremendous expenditure of blood and treasure for this country thanks to the Bush administration and its total ineptness. Yet, you continue to support the complete mismanagement and incompetence of this administration. Exactly what has been accomplished by the invasion of Iraq? And just when do you think it time for the Iraqi govenment to start acting like one and doing its job? If you are heartsick over the questioning of those in charge of the war, then you need to get a grip. That is the job of congress - oversight. For too long there was no oversight by the Republican lead congress and look where it go us. I am heartsick that there are still those in our country that believe that anything George Bush decides to do is wonderful and anyone who disagrees with this administration hates American and is not patrioitic. What a pile of garbage! I really wish that you and Matt had the courage to put your money where your mouths are - and join the military and help fight this War on Terror. Otherwise, please grow up. Wouldn’t it just burn you up if Obama became president and actually accomplished some great things? Like peace and honoring our troops by allowing them time to come home to be with their families, providing them with the best health care possible, offering them the opportunity for a college education, restoring our economy, restoring the good name of our country and maybe creating GOOD jobs for Americans. You couldn’t stand it. I am pretty heartsick at the neocon/consertative blather these days.
15. kimberly4victory | April 9th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Exactly, Keefer. It’s like talking to someone who keeps their ears plugged when “good news” about Iraq is reported, and ears wide open when “bad news” about Iraq is reported. Who cares if Iraqis are banding together to fight AQ and the insurgents?
maryjane: First, calling Mark unpatriotic for supporting the war is just as ignorant as calling you unpatriotic for your anti-war stance. Wouldn’t you agree?
Secondly, the MSM continuously rams bad news about the war down our throats. If they also reported the good news - Iraq is now taking over reconstruction costs and security costs, Iraqis are fighting against the insurgency, the good things our troops are doing for the Iraqi people - the polls would tell a different story.
Thank you, JD, for your left-wing talking points, which have been posted over and over and over again on this blog.
Thank you for your service to our country, David, and your excellent post!
16. OperationChaos | April 9th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Joe, we are there, as we should’ve been there during Carter’s dismal presidency. Carter gave these thugs a pass after they took our folks hostage for 444 days. The rubber-legged stance continued, even during the Reagan, Bush41, and SlickyBlueDress administrations. Sure, Bush41 liberated Kuwait, but he didn’t finish the job, and was roundly criticized for this, from both sides of the aisle. Now we have an administration that wants to finish the job, and what’s the reaction from jerks such as yourself? More leftist talking points, blaming Bush for everything in the world.
You people are tiresome, Joe–predictable, but tiresome. Why don’t you go smoke some more maryjane?
17. kimberly4victory | April 9th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Sunny: Do you know how much it is going to cost to provide all those goodies Obama is proposing? Who is going to pay for it? What happens when the money runs out (like in Canada)? Why do Canadians come to the US for their surgeries? Do you really want our government running our healthcare system?
You do realize politicians promise the world while campaigning and then don’t live up to their promises?
Obama is very similar to Jimmy Carter - and we all know what happened during his presidency.
18. NeoClown | April 9th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
Sunny,
Mark a drama queen? Pleese.
NeoClown:
“Hey Mark, you hungry? You want me to pick up some KFC?”
Mark:
As God is my witness, as God is my witness they’re not going to lick me. I’m going to live through this and when it’s all over, I’ll never be hungry again. No, nor any of my folk. If I have to lie, steal, cheat or kill. As God is my witness, I’ll never be hungry again.
NeoClown:
“So I’ll take that as a yes…. You want Original, or Extra Crispy?”
Mark:
“I can’t think about that right now. If I do, I’ll go crazy. I’ll think about that tomorrow.”
NeoClown:
“Yeah, okay dude, whatever.”
19. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
OperactionChaos,
we are there, as we should’ve been there during Carter’s dismal presidency. Carter gave these thugs a pass after they took our folks hostage for 444 days
You do know that was IRAN that took the hostages and not IRAQ, right?
…and SlickyBlueDress administrations.
Classy comment. Way to stay above the name calling.
20. felix the cat | April 9th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/09/opinion/09dowd.html?ref=opinion
21. OperationChaos | April 9th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
NeoKook,
WTF???
22. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Great line in that link Felix…
They arrived on the heels of the Maliki debacle in Basra, which made it stunningly clear — after a cease-fire was brokered in Iran — that we’re spending $3 trillion as our own economy goes off a cliff so that Iran can have a dysfunctional little friend.
23. OperationChaos | April 9th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Classy comment. Way to stay above the name calling.
I am the attack dog, Joke.
And yes, I know it was Iran; Iran is still in the Middle East, no?
I was serving my country, in the USAF, during the Iran hostage crisis. Jimmuh botched that one completely. What were you doing back then, Joey?
24. Sunny | April 9th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Kimberly, I don’t recall that I suggested a National Health Care program, although I do wonder what would happen if we had a better system where the insurance companies were not making a killing on insurance premiums and we did not have to beg them for medical treatment. Something about this system just doesn’t smell right - some dingbat sitting in an office somewhere questioning my doctor’s recommendations for treatment. To me, that is practicing medicine without a license. However, that aside, what I did suggest is that we provide the best medical care available for our veterans. If you disagree with this, then I suggest that you do not care as much about the troops as you profess.
As to the costs of other programs, if we can swing $12 billion a month to Iraq, it would seem that maybe we could assist the returning vets with a college education. I am not suggesting that this be done for the general public, as I do believe that a college education is not a right but that we each have the responsibility of working for that goal if it is something we believe is necessary. However, I do believe that our government should have low interest loans available for those who are willing to work and pay them back. I have never advocated that the government should take care of us.
And let me assure you that Barack Obama is not Jimmy Carter. And thankfully, he is nothing like George Bush. Obama is an intelligent man with the ability to think on his own, has actually had the ability to make it to where he is today on his own without a famous last name or a parent standing in the background getting him into the finest schools and finding him business partners willing to take the losses from bad business decisions.
And this just might surprise you - I am a John McCain supporter. I just get sick and tired of people like you that refuse to acknowledge that only Republicans have the right to serve as the president of this country and every bad thing that has happened is because of a Democrat. Did you know that every recession for the past 30 or so years has happened under a Republican president?
25. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
kimberly4victory bemoans the lack of “good news” from Iraq so why don’t we ask the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction about how our tax dollars are being spent?
Oh, yes, and about those Iraqis “banding together”, it’s easy to see their motivation. Mr. Inspector General, if you please, “Perhaps the most significant security development in 2007 was the creation of the U.S.-supported Concerned Local Citizen groups (CLCs). The CLCs are predominantly Sunni security elements operating in areas previously plagued by sectarian violence. Approximately 70,000 persons have joined the CLC effort, greatly enhancing the pacifying effects of the surge. CERP has funded the CLCs, but this quarter, the U.S. Agency for International Development determined that Community Stabilization Program funds also could be used to support them.” It’s called buying friends.
26. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
keefer (aka OperationChaos)… you could have at least called yourself Operation Iraqi Liberation so you get the good acronym.
ok… so you were in the USAF during the Iran hostage crisis (thank you for serving by the way), but what does that have to do with us in Iraq right now?
You flat out said (and I quote)…
“we are there, as we should’ve been there during Carter’s dismal presidency. Carter gave these thugs a pass after they took our folks hostage for 444 days”
You said that. So a)We are not in Iran and b) if you are talking about us being in Iraq, they weren’t the ones that “took our folks”.
So if you are going to be an attack dog, at least try to speak some truth.
No go hump a leg somewhere. Oh damn… I got pulled down to your level.
27. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Deleted - off topic.
28. SteaM | April 9th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
For all of you who are concerned about the costs Senator Barack Obama’s proposed programs I ask you; how do you feel about the current Republican president’s war costs which are already at $500 billion dollars and are projected to cost $2 trillion dollars?
29. Mark Noonan | April 9th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
SteaM,
Yeah, ’cause money is more important than human liberty and basic decency…if only we could have our liberty for free, then everything would be cool…
30. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Noonan,
That is all well and good, but are we going to go spend $2 trillion in all the other countries that are not free and do not have human liberty and basic decency?
Iran is brokering deals/cease fires in Iraq. Meanwhile our President that so generously gave them their freedom has to sneak into the country.
31. SteaM | April 9th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Well?
Do I hear crickets?
Bush made a mistake and it has cost $500 billion and counting… counting all the way up to at least $2 trillion.
Money which goes to contractors who waste it, or lose it. Money which goes to bribe militias. Money which goes to weapons and equipment which ends up in the hands of terrorists.
What is it again that Obama wants to do? Spend money on our health and education? Our infrastructure? Our inovation in terms of green energy to create exports and jobs at home?
32. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
OT……… go to mikehuckabee.com. All it says is…….. COMING SOON and it has a countdown clock at about 5 days.
Is that when McCain names him for Veep????
33. SteaM | April 9th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
human liberty and basic decency?!
Which of Obama’s proposed plans does not do go towards that in some fashion?
Do you think people in the middle east are entitled to our tax money? I thought you were against entitlement?
34. Mark Noonan | April 9th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
You liberals, naturally, are entirely missing the point. I’ll try to illustrate it for you, in the hope (perhaps entirely forlorn) that you might, for the first time in your lives, think outside the leftwing box.
You might recall that this past week NATO was working on admitting Ukraine and Georgia to the alliance…now, just why would these two nations, with the Russian Bear right next door, wish to ally themselves with a United States many thousands of miles distant? Because they trust us as the bulwark of their liberty against any threat - Russian or otherwise - to reduce them to their former servitude. Why do they trust us? Because under President Bush we have shown ourselves determined to keep our promises, regardless of how difficult it might be.
You on the left bemoan the way the world supposedly hates us - of course, what really hates us are the terrorists, the tyrants and those global leftists who hate us for what we are, not what we do. They’ll hate us if Obama is President, too…though they’ll also hold us in contempt, into the bargain. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding…and no one imagined in 2000 that the US would, in 2008, be building up a whole string of new alliances (Ukraine, India, Georgia, Eritrea, Djibouti, etc, etc, etc) which have magnificently improved our ability to project power and thwart those who threaten peace and liberty. A poll saying we’re hated vs a growing alliance between the US and India - which, really, is more substantial and worthwhile?
All of this; all we have fought for will the idiotically thrown away by the Democrats if they obtain power to do so in January…they’ll do it as a mere sop to kook left opinion, not caring for a moment for the world or America, but only for their power, and the necessity to pay off those who helped them gain it.
It is GOP victory in November, or US defeat in January…and don’t think that our defeat will stop just with our withdrawal from Iraq - oh, no, not at all. You liberals are mixing a cub of bitterness and shame which, if we drink it in November, will be offered to us again and again as the years unfold…the war you say you’ll end is actually just the opening act in a much larger, much more deadly human tragedy.
And, in the end, all because you’re still mad at President Bush over Florida, 2000! Just flabbergasting…
35. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
What ever happened to Iraq’s oil money going towards reconstruction?
36. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Mark notes, “…if only we could have our liberty for free”. “Our liberty”? I thought, after all the other justifications for bombing and invading a country that had not attacked us had turned out to be something other than real, that it turned out we were shelling out $12 billion American taxpayer dollars per month to get liberty for the Iraqis. Is Iraq going to be the 51st state now? Can all the other fifty states in the Union get $12 billion per month from the federal government, too?
37. Mark Noonan | April 9th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Joe,
Only in the ignorant left is it that Sadr won or that Iran’s position is strengthened…those of us who pay attention to facts know better.
At any rate, you’re a hopeless case - so entirely sunk into leftwing folly that there’s really nothing for us to discuss anymore. Go to Kos, and there talk endlessly about what a horror Bush has been and what a smart person you are for knowing this…leave those of us who are grounded in facts untroubled by your rants.
38. Sunny | April 9th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
29. Mark Noonan | April 9th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
SteaM,
Yeah, ’cause money is more important than human liberty and basic decency…if only we could have our liberty for free, then everything would be cool…
It appears that human liberty and basic decency is only important if the nation we are giving our sons and daughters to die for and our national treasure has a nice oil base. For those other third world countries that do not have such a lovely natural resource, well, too bad.
39. Canadian Observer | April 9th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Look, bottom line, the invasion and occupation of Iraq was a colossal American mistake; an error in judgement made by an inept leader and clueless advisers.
Why in the blue blazes can’t y’all admit you were wrong and that the Iraqi debacle is now responsible for bringing your country deeper and deeper in debt and has negated the claim that the United States of America is the greatest country on earth.
American moral superiority is a lie, a blatant lie. The U.S. has the morals of an alley cat. My apologies to the cat.
40. Rico's ghost | April 9th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
The thing I found notable about the Petraeus/Crocker interviews by the Sen Foreign Relations Committee was how many Republicans were putting their feet to the fire — Voinovich, Lugar, Coleman, Hagel, and others, wanted to know… where are we going with this?
I’m sure (because I’ve heard it said) there are some here who believe Voinovich, Lugar, Coleman, Hagel and others, should be ousted from the GOP. I’m guessing that fits into the “be careful what you wish for” category. At any rate, I think it’s a legitimate question. And though I will admit I didn’t listen to their entire testimony (I did listen to a lot of it though), I didn’t hear anyone directly ask the question I wanted most to hear asked, which is…
[Okay, let me frame it a bit first. Back when Petraeus was being interviewed for the job he said that “success” would require a coordinated effort by various agencies within the US government to provide the necessary political and diplomatic framework upon which any security successes would depend. Crocker did mention that at levels closest to the ground cooperation was reasonably positive. But he put it in some context too — he indicated that they all “answered to different bosses” (or something like that), implying that at the upper levels a disconnect still exists. But no one pressed him on it. That’s the question I wish they asked them…]
Do you think you’re getting the kind of cooperation that is required at the top levels of authority? Because, frankly, I don’t see much of a coherent approach between the State Dept, the Pentagon, the rest of the DoD, and the administration when addressing not only Iraq but the entire region. It seems to me that Petraeus is being required to do yeoman’s work on the ground (to which he has responded far beyond anyone’s expectations) while the atmosphere further upstairs remains a vacuum. I think the fact that he was repeatedly unwilling to speculate in any detail on issues outside his immediate authority. The only thing he offered was very general — like we should shove the champagne bottle to the back of the refrigerator. I’m guessing he took cognizance of Shinseki’s and so many other’s fate.
41. Mark Noonan | April 9th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
CO,
Actually, we’re waiting - though not holding our breath while so doing - for you on the left to finally figure out that fighting for freedom is a good thing…its not just something you do with words, protected by American might and then off to the swank cafe for a latte…it is, some times, something you do with Marines, and the shedding of blood.
42. Bay State | April 9th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
“they don’t want us to prevail in Iraq because their entire political narrative for 2008 hangs on Iraq being a failure”
The loss of 4,000 young men and women in a civil war is important and their sacrifice will get a good airing this fall. However Republican incompetence has provided Democrats with a cornucopia of issues needing to be discussed. Americans also want to rid the nation of warmongers who focus the nation’s wealth and resources on nation building instead of solving America’s problems, those that make policy that lets Wall Street regulate itself resulting in a middle class America financial disaster, Republican Katrina style incompetence, abusers of the environment, those who would destroy individual rights of habeas corpus, those who advocate warrant less intrusion of the government into peoples lives, and Republican borrow and spend mentality that has left our children with a massive debt.
As for the hearing I believe Senator Biden summed up the mess best. “America has spent in Afghanistan, the country from which we were attacked, in six years what we spend in Iraq every three weeks with barely a dime coming from Iraq.”
Prediction: General Petraeus will be back before November to tell us progress is being made just give us four more months for another evaluation and Republicans willing to sacrifice nothing will call the 63% opposition un-American defeatist traitors.
43. OperationChaos | April 9th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
…and Republicans willing to sacrifice nothing will call the 63% opposition un-American defeatist traitors.
What have you sacrificed, Bay Leaf? You come from the bastion of America-hatred. What have you sacrificed?
44. Tractatus | April 9th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
We get your point, such as it is, Noonan. It’s just a rather foolish point entirely “informed” by right-wing talking points and a bizarro-world outlook in lieu of actual facts and events. You’ve got yourself convinced about how the damn dirty liberals want to destroy America and how if a Democrat gets elected in November, it will be the most horrific thing imaginable…and then you get all bewildered that most folks just roll their eyes at your oddity if they’re not busy pointing out the very obvious holes in your “logic” that lead you to such conclusions. And then you get upset that people with a much better grasp of reality than you have the gall to point out how wrong you are about this stuff and chalk it all up to “Bush hatred” (which, of course, merely demonstrates the intellectual shallowness of your position).
And then, hilariously, you’ll claim that it’s everybody else, not you, who can’t seem to “think outside the box.”
45. SteaM | April 9th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
That’s nice Mark, but you again are ignoring the reality of what i am saying.
It’s not hard.
Bush made a mistake and attacked a country based on three reasons: 911, terrorism, and WMDs.
1. Iraq had nothing to do with 911
2. Attacking Iraq has created more terrorism around the world.
3. They had no WMDs.
He made a mistake and you know it. It will cost us 2 or more trillion dollars and if it truely goes on for an indefinite amount of time that cost could skyrocket. None of that money goes towards improving our country. Our infrastructure needs work. Education costs, healthcare costs, fuel costs, housing costs, food costs… all keep increasing as well.
So when compared to what Obama proposes in terms of spending how dare you criticize him and then turn around and praise this costly mistake of a war and the president who decided to wage it.
46. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
It is very simple Mark if you just think outside the right-wing box.
First step to fixing a problem is admitting a mistake was made.
Go on… you can do it.
OUR country needs money spent on infrastructure among other things. $12B a month would go a LONG way to fixing some of our domestic problems.
47. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
The DEMOCRATS are coming up with ideas for us to not spend $12B a month. Do you think the GOP will vote for this? Will W veto it?
48. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
What it comes down to with Mark is his idiosyncratic theory that because we didn’t honor our promises to the South Vietnamese government that everything he doesn’t approve of in American foreign affairs after that was caused by the fact that other governments didn’t trust us. Of course, the lack of evidence for such an idea is of no moment. In Mark’s world, we humiliatingly lost in Vietnam. He knows because all the predicted results came true - all those southeast and south Asian countries that went Communist and remained our bitter and implacable enemies forever and ever.
49. Bay State | April 9th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
OperationChaos | April 9th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Thanks for reminding me it should read:
and Republicans willing to sacrifice nothing will call the 63% opposition “America haters” un-American defeatist traitors.
The Iraq war was created and implemented under Republican policy.
50. SteaM | April 9th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Think outside that right-wing box, Mark.
We cannot afford to keep paying for this war.
51. OperationChaos | April 9th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Soooo Baywatch, what have you sacrificed, or are you just another “abolish the military” loon from San Franfreako?
52. Dennis | April 9th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Abraham Lincoln spoke of the ideal “that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” The people of America don’t want this war. They see that it was not a war of defense or necessity, they now understand it was sold to them dishonestly and they are finished with it. And since this is a government of the people, it is time to draw things down in Iraq.
Mark is right about one thing: this war has consumed an immense expenditure of blood and treasure. He is wrong about nearly everything else. He is dead wrong in prefering a military state over a government of the people.
But Mark is also right on one other thing: we’ve gotten ourselves into a real jam in the Middle East. We definitely broke Iraq and created a mess that will testify against us for a very long time. And when I say “us” I mean the large number of Americans who were rah-rahing our headlong rush to war six years ago. I personally feel no responsibility for this; I was kicking and screaming that we were going to create a train wreck, which is exactly what has happened.
Now it has become abundantly clear that we can’t make things better by staying. And the blunt truth is, we can’t afford to anyway. At nearly half a billion a week this war is sucking us dry. But tragically (and this is where Mark may be partly right again) I’m afraid things won’t get better after we leave. We just screwed it up, plain and simple. George W. Bush was a dry drunk trying to outdo his daddy’s war. He removed the organizing principle from a mechanism about which he understood nothing, and he had nothing to replace it with. This whole situation is like a Greek tragedy; it has Oedipal aspects to it that Maureen Down has already examined at some length.
Mark is “purblind” (to use one of his favorite words) to the hopelessness of the situation his hero the dry drunk created. Mark is also purblind to the staggering human tragedy of this war; to him military adventure is bathed in glorious light, seen through a gauzy heroic filter of epic poetry and stirring martial music. He never had to kill another man, scoop up bloody body parts or smell the stink of his own fear in battle.
Mark is above all that - he sees himself as a superior moral creation, looking down with vexation on the ignorance and coarseness of his fellows. Had Mark been treading the earth in those days I suspect he even would have taken it upon himself to instruct that liberal troublemaker, Christ, in the moral verities.
53. felix the cat | April 9th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Mark just doesn’t get it. To him in is out and up is down. What are these”facts” you keep refering to Mark?? Let me clue you in a few things; not that you are open minded enough to listen, but Iraq was never a threat to our liberty. Our liberty has been compromised by the current administration via the “Patriot” Act, the suspension of due process and creative legal manipulations which have resulted in a unitary executive and over 250 signing statements. In other words, a President who is above the law.
Furthermore, the people who hate us do so not for who we are, but for what we do! The complete opposite of your contention. Our country is being bankrupted. Our military is at the breaking point and yet you continue to cheerlead this fiasco led by the most incompetent group of “leaders” this nation has ever had? If you are so right (no pun intended) then why aren’t your deluisons: errrrrr observations shared by the majority? You’re like Captain Terrill in Josey Wales. Whose side are you on anyway? Your duplicity makes you worse than a Manchurian Candidate.
54. SteaM | April 9th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
And, Mark, how can you sit here and say that anyone who is against the war is unpatriotic or a defeatist when it is most of the country who wants us out?
It is a country for the people by the people. The people want out. Are you down with Cheney and gonna just tell me: “SO?”
55. OperationChaos | April 9th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Gee, Dennis the Menace and felix the puss, back-to-back, spouting CNN talking points.
Change the channel, boys…
56. FoolYouTwice | April 9th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Say something of substance kiefer.
57. SteaM | April 9th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
We can’t define victory in this war.
We can’t afford to pay for it.
That is reality and has nothing to do with watching CNN.
58. DBM | April 9th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Noonan,
1) Just because someone disagrees with you on Iraq, doesn’t mean they’re “the left”. Time was when the Republican presidential candidate in 2000 argued against frivolous wars and nation building.
2) Unless you are proposing a crusade to wage war everywhere freedom doesn’t exist, let’s just stow away the canard of “left doesn’t think fighting for freedom is a good thing”. Since resources are limited, and there’s no scarcity of despotism in the world, there’ll always be wars to fight in your way of thinking. Is that what you’re proposing?
3) And let’s do a consistency check. With all this talk of “fighting for freedom”, I suppose you supported the intrusions into Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo?
You need a good dope slap of history. Over the past four decades, the right has been the most vocal critic of military adventurism for the sake of esoteric principles of liberty, democracy, and freedom. They’ve been the advocates for military action only where “our strategic interests were at stake”, whether it was to contain a dangerous threat, or to ensure access to vital resources.
To be really frank, hypocrisy abounds on both sides. Bumble into a war, make strategic and tactical blunders, and then answer the critics with any mixture of the following
A) YOU DON’T SUPPORT THE TROOPS!
B) If our forefathers thought like you, today we’d be speaking [German/Japanese/Arabic/French].
C) I suppose you don’t think freedom and liberty are worth fighting for!
D) Talk like that only emboldens the enemy! (Like the taliban reads this miserable blog)
59. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Iraq… the “Central Front in the War on Terror”
Or not so much. But hey…. it is worth every penny, right? Good grief.
p.s. just about to submit this post and the two words I had to type below were… “stunned President”. Some things you just can’t make up.
60. Mark Noonan | April 9th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
felix,
Thank you for exposing yourself for all to see as a kook conspiracy theorist. Now, you shall be placed on “ignore”.
61. Canadian Observer | April 9th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
55. OperationChaos | April 9th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Yeah, let’s talk about something else, eh, keefer. When you can’t justify your position, a change of subject is always welcomed.
You know, keefer, I remember when CNN was one of the biggest cheerleaders of the American invasion and occupation of Iraq; now you quote them as a leftist media outlet. What’s up with that, anyway? When did they drop their support?
62. Mark Noonan | April 9th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
DBM,
All of those had one thing in common - pre 9/11. Some of us awoke from the post-Cold War slumber on 9/11…others, like you, went right back to sleep.
63. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
DBM:“…there’ll always be wars to fight in your way of thinking. Is that what you’re proposing?
“
That actually IS what McCain is proposing…
64. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Mark also has to struggle with the burden of being part of the minority (primarily Republican) of Americans who don’t believe that invading Iraq was a mistake and don’t believe that we should set a timetable for withdrawing and stick to it regardless of events in that country.
65. Mark Noonan | April 9th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
CO,
One of the more amusing things we see from the left is your continuall assertions that CNN - or even the New York Times! - were cheerleaders for the liberation of Iraq. I mean, we seriously laugh out loud when we see such assertions…
66. Mark Noonan | April 9th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Diana,
Being part of a minority is actually fine by me - as long as it is the minority which bases its beliefs on facts rather than disgusting appeals to emotion as you on the left deal in.
67. Mark Noonan | April 9th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
SteaM,
The will of the people was ascertained in November of 2004 - the issue vis a vis the liberation of Iraq was clearly stated and a majority of the people voted for the man who pledged to fight on until complete victory is attained. While you on the left claim that the 2006 mid-terms repudiated the 2004 result, but the plain fact of the matter is that the Democratic party did not campaign on an end to the liberation of Iraq in 2006 - they campaigned on a “new direction”, which promise was fulfilled when President Bush forced them to back the troop surge.
This November, we will once again address the issue of Iraq and the two candidates (McCain and whichever of HillBama) will have clearly defined differences on what to do in Iraq - and the American people will choose, and that result will hold true until 2012.
You don’t get do-overs, and 10,000 public opinion polls don’t matter in the least. In point of fact, it is President Bush who is obeying the will of the people while it is you on the left who are trying to subvert that will.
68. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Mark,
Yes, we can’t have that dirty, defeatist, lefty, America-hating, terrorist-loving majority of Americans have any say in this country. After all, that’s why we have Resolute Churchillian Warriors From Afar.
69. Rich | April 9th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Once again we have Diana espousing that public opinion polls guide legislation. I take it abortion should be made illegal in every state where it is unpopular? What about if the population of a state wants to kick out all the gay people? Same thing? We have a thing called elections where our representatives are supposed to reflect the will of the people. We don’t have snap polling decide legislation. The Democrats took control of the House and the Senate in 2006. They have had two years to end the war if it was indeed so unpopular, and it hasn’t happened. Take it as you will.
70. Meanwhile on another plan&hellip | April 9th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
[…] again, Mark Noonan proves there’s no lie too big for Rabid Right Wingers to push, in his latest ramblings on Iraq at […]
71. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
This is truly comedy gold. President Bush (Mr. 30% Approval Rating, if that much) is doing the will of the people. The “will of the people” only counts every four years and the rest of the time they can just shut the hell up, sez Mark.
Please, please, please, let Senator McCain mention in every public appearance that he wants to assure the American people that he will ensure we stay in Iraq even if we have to be there 100 years! I want him to put it in every ad. Let John “Flip-Flop” McCain make sure that every single American voter is completely clear that he is the unending war candidate. Pleeeeeasse!
72. DBM | April 9th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Noonan in #62:
Responded to me but dodged the question:
Are you proposing we wage war where ever “freedom does not reign”?
And if not, why not? Don’t you love freedom?
And, oh yeah, thanks for reminding me to add a new one to my list:
Answer any critic to any war with any mixture of the following
A) YOU DON’T SUPPORT THE TROOPS!
B) If our forefathers thought like you, today we’d be speaking [German/Japanese/Arabic/French].
C) I suppose you don’t think freedom and liberty are worth fighting for!
D) Talk like that only emboldens the enemy!
and Noonan’s new entry [drumroll]…
E) 9/11! 9/11! 9/11!
73. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
The Democrats took control of the House and the Senate in 2006. They have had two years to end the war if it was indeed so unpopular, and it hasn’t happened.
Have you seen the Senate voting results? The GOP has blocked all of the attempts.
What is your point?
You are correct in that…
We have a thing called elections where our representatives are supposed to reflect the will of the people. We don’t have snap polling decide legislation.
You are correct. And in those elections it was determined to end the ongoing disaster.
74. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Rich,
Yes, I do severely criticize the Democrats in the Congress whose decline in their approval ratings reflect the fact that they have mostly just enabled the White House during the last year and a half.
DBM,
Yes, and we saw how well that strategy worked for candidate Rudy 9u11iani.
75. felix the panther | April 9th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
What conspiracy Mark? Where are the facts I asked for? Emperically prove me wrong. And submiting patriotic platitudes or your opinions or examples of your limitless capacity to deny the obvious do not count. You must have some very deep seated feelings of inadequacy to be so convinced of your superiority. These Iraqi allies you refered to when exposed to combat in Basra last week cut and ran, didn’t they? Petraeus said yesterday that there is no light at the end of the tunnel, didn’t he? Ambasador Crocker said that the Iraqi congress has more authority in deciding if and when our troops leave than our own, didn’t he? And we still haven’t found any WMD’s or killed OBL!
Like Captain Terrill said “……doin’ right ain’t got no end”. Until, that is he met his.
Iraq will go down as the worst foriegn policy disaster in American history and you just can’t stand it! Let me postulate on final thought. Even if you are correct in everything you want to believe about Iraq, if the majority of Americans who comprise the liberal democracy that we live in disagree, then our time in Iraq will be over soon. Unless, of course you purposefully support a forced hand in bringing about Armagddon!
76. SteaM | April 9th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Ok but Mark you just haven’t told me how we can actually afford to continue this war. You haven’t explained your support for entitlement in Iraq. They are entitled to my tax dollars because … why?
77. bagni | April 9th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
mark-ficient
i know this isn’t the first time you’ve heard this
but
the alienistas are happy
that you don’t work for us
you obviously don’t give your employer 8 hrs/day
with all this left/right bloggish banter
now get back to work will you?
78. Canadian Observer | April 9th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Well it is obvious that there will always be those few who, for whatever reason, steadily and stubbornly will refuse to be swayed from their erroneous convictions no matter what truth is brought to light.
We can argue with them until we are blue in the face; no amount of common sense will penetrate. They will go to their death convinced they were right.
Whatcha gonna’ do?
79. FoolYouTwice | April 9th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
I believe Noonan advocates hitting those you disagree with over the head with a two by four, or dropping a bomb on them.
80. bongoman | April 9th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Mark, the failure of the mainstream media in the run up to Iraq was shameful. The way they simply parroted the Bush Administration’s spin and propaganda and failed to adequately scrutinise and investigate is a dark period in the history of the free press.
Your heart sickness might be best expressed in relation to the current Administration who led the USA into this unholy mess in the first place. Shame on Bush & Cheney and the warmongers. What a disgrace.
And K4v, you do realise that AQ in Iraq is only a very minor factor in the violence over there?
81. maryjane | April 9th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
The Democratic candidate will run on more than just Iraq. Lets not forget the economy. People vote their pocketbooks and when the moths fly out of them, they tend to get perturbed. Especially when so many have lost their homes, their jobs, they can’t afford health care or gas and yet they see the oil companies making obscene profits and a trillion dollars spent already in a disaster of our own making in Iraq. Add that to an administration whose attitude towards the public that they work for is “So?”
82. SteaM | April 9th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Pray for them?
83. Joe | April 9th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
maryjane:
Especially when so many have lost their homes, their jobs, they can’t afford health care or gas and yet they see the oil companies making obscene profits
That is exactly what the GOP wants!
With no home, you have no way of voting.
Can’t afford gas? you can’t get to the polls.
You are too sick because of no healthcare, you can’t get to the polls.
The oil companies making huge profits? THEY will get to the polls.
Damn… we are already behind the eight ball!
LOL
Seriously though…. This should be on the “November on our mind” thread, but after people see McCain debating Obama I have to like the Democratic possibilities.
But of course, we all are just flat out guessing until November.
84. Tractatus | April 9th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
which bases its beliefs on facts rather than disgusting appeals to emotion as you on the left deal in.
Except that you have no facts, Noonan, and this entire post of yours is just a “disgusting appeal to emotion” (”if the Democrats win, we are DOOMED, I tell you!”).
Do you seriously have no conception of how your views are diametrically opposed to reality? How your descriptions are applied to the exact opposite groups for which they hold true? Are you seriously this utterly freaking clueless? I’d like to think that you aren’t, but you aren’t providing me much evidence upon which to base that conclusion (I know, I’m one of those terrible people who actually goes off of evidence, not wishful thinking).
85. DBM | April 9th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
And Noonan? Another thought on #62?
This should be absolutely unnecessary to say, but being against the Iraq war and being “awakened by 9/11″ are not mutually exclusive.
We recognize 9/11 redefined “strategic interests” dramatically. That’s why we attacked Afghanistan. Note that few opponents to the Iraq war (or the “left” as you label them) had little problems with that war.
To filch from someone smarter than I:
86. bongoman | April 9th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Do you really, in your heart, think this is what our military adventure in Iraq is about?
Do you think that maybe, just maybe, there are other strategic considerations involved?
What if a free Iraq told the USA to remove all military bases from Iraq? Do you think we’d still support freedom in that case?
History has shown that the USA has actually worked to subvert democratic regimes when their trade, strategic & military interests were not being advanced.
So Mark, do you concede that behind the ‘freedom’ or ‘WMD’ rationales for the invasion/occupation of Iraq, there might be an agenda for military domination of the Middle East?
We know that Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz et al saw it this way, ’cause they laid it out in the PNAC Blueprint, which called for military domination of the Gulf, through pre-emption etc. Basically a call for global domination. An ‘empire’ if you will, but that’s a dirty word of course.
But you somehow only see it through the lens of ‘freedom’ without the concomitant military aspect.
So if a future Iraqi government told us to pack our bags and leave and take the permanent bases with us, what would prevail - Iraqi ‘freedom’ or our military interests in the region?
No prizes for guessing which is more important…
This whole thing is about control, nothing more, nothing less.
87. FmrMarine | April 9th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Mark;
>>>>Outside of being entirely divorced from reality, I additionally fail to see how insulting the Iraqi government and its military is going to help us prevail in Iraq. But that, of course, is the actual point for the Democrats - they don’t want us to prevail in Iraq because their entire political narrative for 2008 hangs on Iraq being a failure…<<<
They are a sick, demented, pathetic lot. The “posters” ( really organized trolls) here, prove that every day.
88. FmrMarine | April 9th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
MJ
>>>and a trillion dollars spent already in a disaster of our own making in Iraq.<<<
So what is the alternative and cost?
1.Pull out and let militant islam control the worlds oil supplies?
What would that cost ? are YOU willing to pay the price?
2. pull out and let militant islam start a nuclear war with Isreal?
What would that cost? are YOU willing to pay the price?
3.pull out and embolden militant islam to further attack us because of our perceived weakness?
what would that cost ? are YOU willing to pay the price ?
Would you support drilling for oil in anwar ?
in the gulf of mexico ? anywhere?
would you suppord building several new refineries?
would you support building dozens more nuclear powered electrical plants ? coal fired plants ?
if not we face more of this and you wont be able to blame W, you will long for the return of such a man.
http://ballyblog.wordpress.com/2007/07/03/terrorists-are-muslims-list-of-islamic-terrorist-attacks/
89. Rico's ghost | April 9th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Mark: Only in the ignorant left is it that Sadr won or that Iran’s position is strengthened…
Ayatollahs to Sadr: keep your militia.
Ouch. It appears Dianna Powe was right… Sadr only asked the question because he was reasonably certain of the answer. I don’t know if she read it somewhere, or if she figured it out all by herself. But she did call it before it happened. Me, I figured it might be a definitive moment: had they said disband it would have been a thundering indication of Sadr’s weakness. But they didn’t. And in retrospect, it’s reasonable to assume that’s why he asked — because he knew they wouldn’t. Sadr can be accused of many things, but it’s becoming more and more clear that stupidity isn’t one of them.
Face it, Iraq is not an easy nut to crack. Iran has its tentacles in both Sadr’s JAM as well as the Iraqi government (and I’m simplifying). Barbara Boxer, arguably the purest moonbat in the Senate, scored some emotional points (with those that approach the issue emotionally) when she compared the receptions that Bush and Ahmadenijad received in Baghdad — Ahmadenijad was greeted with a red carpet, kisses, and a brass band while Bush had to spiral in under cover of night.
Crocker responded to the effect that we need to understand that Iran is Iraq’s neighbor, so a level of respect is required. To which Obama pointed out… that’s exactly why we should engage Iran effectively. Sounds reasonable to me. After all, the definitions of “talk” and “concede” are quite different. They’re only the same if you require them to be.
In the mean time McCain remains confused as to which Islamic sect AQI is most closely aligned.
Success in Iraq, to the extent it can be had, requires attention to details, IMO. Bush hasn’t demonstrated that attention. I’ve been a McCain fan from the beginning (although I admit that my support waned when it looked like he was becoming unnominatable). However, I sincerely worry that McCain’s serial gaffes suggest the same lack of attention. If he continues to give the impression that he has to have his buddy Joe constantly whispering in his ear for the next hundred years he’s toast. He has to stop that.
On the other hand, Obama has risen in my estimation every time he’s been tested. People criticized him for his willingness to talk to a**holes, then Crocker basically vindicated him. People criticized Obama for advocating unilateral action against AQ in Pakistan, then no more than two weeks later the Bush administration vindicated him (repeatedly) by doing the exact same thing. He responded to the Wright issue by presenting one of the most powerful speeches I’ve ever heard. When his relationship with Rezko was challenged he sat down with the media at length and answered their questions until they didn’t have any more questions. And even the right wing participants came away impressed (or at least mollified). The guy has managed a nearly flawless campaign, far more flawless in this cycle than any other candidate, current or past, while more often than not exceeding expectations. Obama certainly doesn’t have the same level of experience as the other remaining candidates, but it’s becoming increasingly clear to me that he has the kind of judgement I look for in a candidate — the kind of judgement that counts in a complex, multivariate reality, not the kind that fits neatly in a cartoon conception of the world.
I’m not an Obamaniac, but I like the guy. I want to know more. I hope he gets the nomination, because I think that a race between him and McCain, while probably not likely to be always positive (that’s too much to ask in this day and age), would be far more positive in balance than a race between McCain and Clinton. That could get really ugly.
90. FmrMarine | April 9th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
bozoman.
>>>This whole thing is about control, nothing more, nothing less.<<<
why not ask them……………
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=FNgaVtVaiJE
91. DBM | April 9th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Okay, Mark and Former Marine, I’ll play your game.
If Democratic success in 2008 hangs on Iraq being a failure…
… isn’t it also true that in every election cycle since the war started, the Republicans have staked their fate to Iraq being a success? And since that still hasn’t happened, isn’t it true that the only hope of them retaining power is to reclassify reality? Call failure success, and wisdom treachery?
So who is really pathetic and twisted here? The people that recognize reality for what it is, and want to take corrective action? Or the people who can’t freaking admit they’re wrong for fear of losing the white house in 2008?
They have a name for what you’re doing: psychological projection.
You obsess so about retaining power that you twist facts to rationalize your errors, and then “project” your behavior on your enemies.
Look, I’m sorry. It sucks to be you. But like an alcoholic, the first step is in admitting you have a problem. Just do it. C’mon. We’ll be waiting over here in reality with open arms.
92. maryjane | April 9th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Fmr Marine:
What rank did you obtain, because you clearly lack leadership qualities, sound judgement and reasoning skills. With that being said allow me to elaborate further. You possess the rare combination of being uninformed, opinionated, paranoid and easily manipulated by those who prey on your most primal fears.
Investigate the following link. I don’t think that if you can read that you will still think that “militant Islam” will control our oil exports. Those zealots do not now.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
As an energy source, oil creates more problems than it solves. Throughout history wars have been fought for very few reasons. Competition for resources and religious ideology come to my mind. I am not against nuclear power but I know that it is an excersize in futility to think that we can drill our way out of being oil dependent so yes, I am against Anwar and more ocean drilling. (Do you even know where oil comes from? And “in the ground” is not an acceptable answer)
I am not opposed to building more refineries with plenty of non-Bush EPA oversight.
I am not anti-war either. I am pro smart wars that go after those who went after us. Iraq was a rouse and to make matters worse those that designed and sold the war were the most incompetent, ideologically driven collection of miscreants ever assembled on the world stage. Wrong way Murgitroid and that literary character (can’t think of his name) who fought windmills all rolled into one.
93. FmrMarine | April 9th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
MJ
>>>Iraq was a rouse and to make matters worse those that designed and sold the war were the most incompetent, ideologically driven collection of miscreants ever assembled on the world stage. Wrong way Murgitroid and that literary character (can’t think of his name) who fought windmills all rolled into one.<<<
You must be correct because these people all said it.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=FNgaVtVaiJE
PS i was higher in rank than gore,
and served in a WAR zone LONGER than kerry and gore COMBINED!
94. FmrMarine | April 9th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
MJ;
Background
The Persian Gulf produced about 28 percent of the world’s oil supply and exported over 18 million bbl/d in 2006.
In 2006, the Persian Gulf countries (Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates) produced about 28 percent of the world’s oil, while holding 55 percent (728 billion barrels) of the world’s crude oil reserves. In 2006, the Persian Gulf countries combined exported 18.2 million barrels per day (bbl/d) including about 17 million bbl/d via the Straight of Hormuz representing roughly one-fifth of world oil supply. The group exported the remaining oil via pipelines through Turkey to the Mediterranean and Saudi Arabia to the Red Sea. OECD gross oil imports from Persian Gulf countries averaged about 10.4 million barrels per day (bbl/d) during 2006, accounting for 31 percent of the OECD’s total net oil imports. U.S. gross oil imports from the Persian Gulf were 2.2 million bbl/d during 2006, accounting for 17 percent of the US total net oil imports. Besides oil, the Persian Gulf region also has sizeable reserves (2,509 trillion cubic feet — Tcf) of natural gas, accounting for 41 percent of total proven world gas reserves.
95. maryjane | April 9th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Marine:
Gee! I am impressed. You do have some comprehension skills. But those numbers are not extractable to “militant Islam” taking over less than a third of all oil imports to the U.S. do they?? And of the countries that you cited, only 2 (both begining with the letter I) are considered to be overtly hostile to America. Looks like our neigbors to the north export the most amount of oil to us and; correct me if I am wrong, but Canada doesn’t exactly pose an “Islamic threat” to us. Hell, we aren’t even concerned with building a fence along our northern border, are we???
Give it up man. Your arguement has no basis, no substance and no factuality. It is; instead, a blindly supportive opinion of the Bush doctrine. An example of failed policy, flawed thinking and a supreme recalctrinst to admitt mistakes.
A worthy example of an informed and reasoned leader is to admitt to mistakes. To come clean about errors in judgement, skills and accountability. None of these traits are exemplfied by GWB and yet you: as a sworn memeber of the military support these errors and in fact encourage them because they are self serving. Just like Mark Noonan is a self serving syncopant preaching to an ever dwindling crowd of rabid “true believers”.
Have a nice day. :-)
96. SteaM | April 9th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
I’ll admit that this is a sarcastic bitter comment I am about to make but I thought that only the kook left thought this was about oil?
I agree Rico. Although I will admit I have been a big fan of Obama for a long time now in terms on this election. You might be interested in today’s gallup polling. Obama has been climbing.
Check it out:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/106369/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Leads-Clinton-Points.aspx
97. brett micheals | April 9th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
FmrMarine | April 9th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
2. pull out and let militant islam start a nuclear war with Isreal?
What would that cost? are YOU willing to pay the price?
You claim to be a former Marine…even further you claim to be a former O2+.. I am current Marine..definitely not in claimed former paygrade. But since you do claim to be O2+..
What is Israel’s strategic placement within centcom?
IE: What strategic value do they have? Which has greater strat. value..Israel or Qatar?
Im calling you out former marine…if u truly were a Marine…what was the derogatory slang for the IDF within the corp for anyone that trained at NUTC?
If you were a marine..I know NUTC was before your time…but it would take one phone call to find out.
Put up or shut up.
98. it matters not | April 9th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
Deleted - off topic.
99. js | April 9th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
wow, incredible
nice to know we have bigots like brett posting here
gratz brett, nice to know you dont like Jews
100. Mark Noonan | April 10th, 2008 at 1:24 am
Rico,
Sadr lost:
Troop tours are being reduced.
Ayatollah Sistani on the Mahdi Army: “the law is the only authority in the country”
Sadr calls off a planned demonstration.
And the terrorists are losing:
Terrorists are being cornered in Iraq.
Iraqi security forces are doing the job.
101. Mark Noonan | April 10th, 2008 at 1:30 am
bongoman,
Yeah, you’re right - I mean, I should have figured we were there just to impose our own imperialist vision…just like we’ve done in France, Germany, Belgium, South Korea, Italy, Greece, Poland, Romania, Georgia, Ukraine, Latvia, Taiwan, Phillipines, Eritrea, Djibouti, El Salvador, Denmark…all we’ve ever been about is a ruthless and cruel expansion of AmeriKKKa’s Empire of Evil.
102. Mark Noonan | April 10th, 2008 at 1:34 am
DBM,
I gave you all the response your contemptible opinion deserved.
Advice to lefties: If I don’t respond to you at all on a thread where I’ve been commenting a lot, it means your opinions are too stupid for me to do anything but insult, and I don’t want to spend my whole day doing that.
103. brett micheals | April 10th, 2008 at 1:35 am
JS,
Bigot?
Not at all. But from a strategic viewpoint, Israel is not worth that much.
Qatar on the other hand has a high strat. value.
I only brought it up because privately any active O2 or higher will agree to this and I have yet to meet any retired O2 or higher that wouldnt say it publicly. Bigotry has nothing to do with strategical value.
For example…why dont we have boots on the ground in Darfur? From a loss of life standpoint, we should have invaded some time ago…but we havent…not alot fo strat. value in Darfur.
Does that make you a bigot because you havent signed up with an NGO to help out in Dafur? Of course not…so why accuse me of bigotry?
But I suppose that is why you are civvie and I am not.
104. Mark Noonan | April 10th, 2008 at 1:35 am
Bagni,
Today was an odd day - I had to come home for a bit to deal with a minor household crisis. You’ll note that most of the time, you never see comments from me during the day.
105. Mark Noonan | April 10th, 2008 at 1:37 am
CO,
Mostly what we do is laugh at you - it is either that, or we’d have to cry. Its just so sad to see people so entirely divorced from reality…but then it gets funny when you guys claim to be part of the “reality based community”.
106. brett micheals | April 10th, 2008 at 1:46 am
JS,
The more I think about it…how could you have inferred my post to frmMarine has hatred towards Jews?
I asked a military question…which holds higher strat value…Israel or Qatar?
The reason I used that as an example is because he claims he is a former Marine (and a O2 or higher at that)…as such..I was taken aback why he didnt use Qatar or Saud as an example?
If we pull out of Iraq, Qatar is our only port of entry into ME and the Sauds oil. From a military standpoint Israel is not important.
My question in reference to NUTC is well know within active duty Marines. Rotating thru the NUTC leaves alot to be desired and has raised alot of questions about the IDF.
Thats not bigotry its a known fact.
107. brett micheals | April 10th, 2008 at 1:56 am
Mark,
Why have all your posts have such a negative tone to them?
You act like this country will die if a Democrat is elected. You live in way too much fear my friend.
I am alot younger than you, but I am also a student of history. We could elect a monkey and this great nation will survive.
“I feel in good spirits about the future and, unlike our Democrats, am not consumed neither by hatred nor by despair”
I’ve always been curious why you have chosen politics as your crusade and not some local children’s charity or even better…a local VA hospital.
:)
108. Dennis | April 10th, 2008 at 1:56 am
Mark: “If I don’t respond to you at all on a thread where I’ve been commenting a lot, it means your opinions are too stupid for me to do anything but insult…”
Apparently Abraham Lincoln’s ideal “that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth” is an opinion too stupid for you to insult.
And Jefferson’s and Madison’s lefty opinions on war (the Sadr thread) are “contemptible” as well.
Hey, never let it be said you’re not a hell of a patriot, Mark. And a fine Christian to boot.
109. Mark Noonan | April 10th, 2008 at 2:32 am
Brett,
By my estimation, 7 out of my past 10 posts were positive in nature - though you, disagreeing with me, might view something I’m delighted about as a negative comment.
And once you learn a bit more about history, you’ll learn that certain people doing certain things can utterly destroy a nation. Heard much lately of Prussia? How about the Austro-Hungarian Empire? Both were once major players in the world, and now they don’t exist in any way, shape or form…800 years for the Austrian Empire, 200 years for Prussia…and gone as if they’d never been.
Then there are the nations which, while still in existence, are mere shadows of their former granduer - Portugal, Spain, Turkey, France, Britain…Russia only carries weight these days due to its large nuclear arsenal…but underneath that sharp point, Russia is dying, and unless some sort of miracle occurs, the land we know today as Russia will cease to be Russian within a century.
People can put into power people who are the ruin of their nation…some times (as in the case of Bismark and his Prussia) they can ultimately be the ruin of whole civilizations.
The United States rears up mighty in 2008 - but we can be destroyed, if we choose to destroy ourselves. It wouldn’t happen over night, but it could happen much more quickly than your as yet ill-instructed mind can imagine. Just put into power the wrong people - and right now, in 2008, the wrong people are the Democrats.
110. Dennis | April 10th, 2008 at 2:43 am
“People can put into power people who are the ruin of their nation…some times (as in the case of Bismark and his Prussia) they can ultimately be the ruin of whole civilizations.”
Why does the name George W. Bush spring so suddenly to mind?
No, not hatred (as you are so quick to accuse) - but a dispassionate review of the last century of world history will suffice…
111. Dennis | April 10th, 2008 at 2:59 am
Mark, if there is anyone to credit for the promise of America’s longevity and its transcendent ideals, it is our nation’s founders and their divinely inspired wisdom.
And if there is anyone who has more high-handedly repudiated and scorned that wisdom than the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, inquiring minds out here would like to know who that scoundrel is.
112. DBM | April 10th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Noonan — How could my post be stupid if I was just asking you to clarify your position?
So I’ll ask again:
1) Since “Freedom” isn’t ubiquitous in the world, are you proposing to wage war anywhere it doesn’t exist?
2) And if not, how do you choose where and when to fight?
3) And if you do choose not to fight in a particular place, why not? Don’t you love freedom?
And again, it is totally indefensible to say anyone critical of the Iraq war in concept and prosecution is a lefty. That may simply your worldview, and greatly reduce your cognitive dissonance, but it ignores the fact that many people who consider themselves Republicans, Conservatives, and “The Right” have a range of opinion that you’d label “defeatist” or “treasonous”.
It’s only a shrinking minority like yourself that cling to fantasy. You keep castigating everyone who disagrees as a lefty, and soon you’ll find yourself alone on your island.
I think at some level you actually recognize this, and that’s why the tone of your postings has become so wrought with pathos. Your developing a bunker mentality.
113. SteaM | April 10th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
I don’t think we need facts, reason, history lessons, or sense to convince that he has a problem with reality.
We need psychiatry.
Any shrinks out there care to help?
114. Canadian Observer | April 10th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Im calling you out former marine…if u truly were a Marine…what was the derogatory slang for the IDF within the corp for anyone that trained at NUTC?
If you were a marine..I know NUTC was before your time…but it would take one phone call to find out.
Put up or shut up.
97. brett micheals | April 9th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
For some reason, FmrMarine is unable or unwilling to address your post.
Well, there goes his credibility.
115. Sean Taylor | April 17th, 2008 at 2:44 am
I think if elected , Obama should immediately ‘pull out’ from Iraq…..
If you’re tired of waiting around for those super delegates to make a decision already, go to LobbyDelegates.com and push them to support Clinton or Obama
If you haven’t done so yet, please write a message to each of your state’s superdelegates at http://www.lobbydelegates.com
It takes a moment, but what’s a few minutes now worth to get Obama in office?!
Sending a note to current Obama supporters lets them know it’s appreciated, sending a note to current Clinton supporters can hopefully sway
them to change their vote to Obama, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Obama. It’s that easy…
Clinton Supporters:
It takes a moment, but what’s a few minutes now worth to get Clinton in office?!
Sending a note to current Clinton supporters lets them know it’s appreciated, sending a note to current Obama supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Clinton, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Clinton. It’s that easy…
we’ll make it REALLY easy and include a list of names, addresses, and affiliations of superdelegates from each state including your state.
116. Pussy Pussy Lips Indian P&hellip | May 10th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
Pussy Pussy Lips Indian Pussy
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view