Pajamas Media

127 Comments

1. AJ:

The Dems care about one thing: politics. Therefore, they want soldiers to die and the US to lose this portion of the War on Terror. This backwards, regressive, absurd thinking is why so many Americans no longer recognize this party and why they have nominated the most inexperienced, naive, unqualified, divisive, far left candidate in US history. The Party of Defeat is shameful!

Jun 17, 2008 - 8:58 am 2. Snooper:

Well, don’t tell Nancy Pelosi that. About two weeks ago in an interview in San Fran, she said that the Benchmarks were NOT met.

We all know that she is a liar and all but someone needs to let her know.

Jun 17, 2008 - 9:07 am 3. Sandra M:

The Iraqis will also give a percentage of oil profits to citizens as Alaska does, yes?

After all the billions of dollars we’ve given to the Iraqis, would it be rude to ask to become “preferred customers” for their oil? Would they be willing to sell to us at a lower price perhaps?

Jun 17, 2008 - 9:11 am 4. always right:

Dems-majority congress should acknowledge the progress made, beyond our wildest imagination. Put it in the historical perspective to the Marshall plans for the Japanese and the Germans.

Iraqis are a pround people, give credits where it is due.

If Dems want to continue to be a viable political party, that is.

Jun 17, 2008 - 9:45 am 5. politicalreacharound:

Progress after 5 years, wow! You guys are right this was worth it. If we can acheive this much progress after 5 just imagine what we can do after 20.

Jun 17, 2008 - 9:54 am 6. AJ:

politicalreacharound,

We won the war in 2001 and 2003. This is just a peacekeeping/humanitarian mission with minimal casualties. Usually, especially in a War to Save Liberalism, your party prefers this to real war. But hypocrisy is endemic to those who wish America falls from grace. I’m talking about Democrats. Side WITH your country…just once.

And we may be there 20. We’re still in Germany and Japan. Grow up and read a book. War is not like a trip to Starbucks. If you cannot stomach it, sit back, shut up and stop interfering.

Jun 17, 2008 - 10:11 am 7. huxley:

Abe — Thanks for collecting this information and writing it up.

politicalreacharound — You don’t seem to have much range. “Read a book” is good advice.

I recommend books on history, critical thinking, and non-fiction writing. William Zinsser’s “On Writing Well” is particularly good.

Jun 17, 2008 - 10:23 am 8. Cletus:

5 years isn’t a long time, and as AJ said, there currently is no “war” in Iraq. The Mission Accomplished banner was not unveiled too soon; the mission was to oust saddam, and saddam was ousted quite fast.

Liberals like you claim to care about human life, but you don’t seem to care about the wholesale slaughter that would take place if the U.S was to pull out of Iraq and leave it open to Al-Qaeda or Iranian proxies. Remember the end of the first gulf war, when the U.S encouraged the Iraqi people to rise up but then pulled out and offered no help? The Iraqi people were massacred by saddam’s forces. Not only was there a large loss of life, but it turned many people in the region bitter toward the U.S when once they had been friendly. We don’t want a repeat of that.

Jun 17, 2008 - 10:32 am 9. Yawn:

Well, AJ hit the main point. But I will add South Korea to that mix. Powell was right when he said that invading Iraq was like breaking something at the Pottery Barn (you break it, you buy it). Saddam busted up Iraq, and our invasion didn’t help much. But unlike EVERYONE else in the world, we at least try to fix what we wreck (in war anyway). Would you rather we treated the Iraqis like the Indians? No Marshall type plan to help out? Cut them loose and let them swing?

Real progressive thinking there.

Of course that would give some more ammo to the left: “Oh look what happened to Iraq, we just abandoned it and let it swing.”

Or maybe you want to let the UN fix this? The same guys who couldn’t get the, oh never mind. Its too easy to list THEIR failures. I’d rather dwell on how we were failing and then were able to turn it around. Not exactly an easy accomplishment by any standard.

Jun 17, 2008 - 10:34 am 10. Keith_Indy:

How about an effort to have the GOA revisit the benchmarks in August?

Jun 17, 2008 - 10:44 am 11. Bubbalicious:

AJ to politicalreacharound….ouch…that’s gonna leave a mark!

Liberals want drive-thru democracy with their Happy Meals. As if it were that simple. But nobody can ever accuse a lefty of having complex thought patterns.

Jun 17, 2008 - 10:49 am 12. Bird:

Liberals are full of sh*t. End of story. Politicalreacharound proves it every time he/she touches a keyboard.

Jun 17, 2008 - 10:57 am 13. apb:

AJ -

Brilliant smack-down of a petulant child.

The past 5 years has been an amazing growth period for the Iraqis, from the fall of the Saddamites to the initial elections, creation of a constitution, building of their self-defense and internal reconciliation.

Amazing stuff to those of us that have working memory; to the clueless breed of ‘progressives’ it’s a nightmare – the Bush doctrine is working in several ways.

First and foremost, we’re now the “strong horse” when it comes to dealing with terrorists. Second, Europeans are in fact trading in their former terrorist-enabling ‘leaders’ (Chirac, Schroeder) for US-leaning centrists. Third, economics. This economy is still surprisingly strong nearly seven years after 9/11; that single event *could* have completely shocked the system and knocked the wheels off.

I believe this country can survive even an Obomber presidency – one that would certainly remind centrists and conservatives what US ideals *should* be. Obomber may use his “tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore,” but he’d just as rudderless and inept as the rest of the dhimmis in Congress.

Jun 17, 2008 - 10:57 am 14. Remember Those Iraqi Benchmarks? Well, Guess What… : The Scott Fuller Show:

[...] Read the entire story here Filed Under: Show PrepTagged: Democrats, Iraq [...]

Jun 17, 2008 - 11:19 am 15. politicalreacharound:

Being told to read a book from some red state yokels really stings. Actually no it doesn’t its funny how mad you guys get when your discredited views are challenged. Its a good thing all of you are so well read on all of these subjects. Seeing how there are about 100 books explaining why the war was wrong to every 1 book that said it was right, I would say you are all good objective readers. Lets not forget that the majority of Americans and Iraqis want us out of Iraq, that Iraq is still a war zone not a happy occupation, that we are spending billions of dollars to blow things up while our schools, roads, and bridges are falling apart, the fact that Iraqis continue to die every day and that their living conditions are no better now than they were pre-invasion. Someone asked me to side with my country. Which side? the 20% of you idiots who want to stay in Iraq forever? or the side of the country where 80% want us out?

Jun 17, 2008 - 11:19 am 16. AJ:

Wow, thanks for the support and back up. This “reacharound” fellow posts nonsense here so often that he had it coming.

Liberals like him do not read, understand war, what is at stake nor what failure entails.

Like the little children they are, they need to be reprimanded every so often by adults.

Jun 17, 2008 - 11:22 am 17. dagwud:

Our schools, roads and bridges have been falling apart for decades. The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have little to do with that.

Politicians who would rather spend earmarks on teapot museums than on infrastructure maintenance, however…

Jun 17, 2008 - 11:43 am 18. Bird:

Reacharound, there you go again….

Jun 17, 2008 - 11:45 am 19. Vinny Vidivici:

A 40-year welfare-state ‘war on poverty’ creates a permanent underclass of wrecked familes, whole sections of our greatest cities riddled with government-subsidized pathologies and wracked with rampant violent criminality that has destroyed countless lives. But despite the human toll, no one on the Left issues impatient calls for withdrawals or exit strategies, only demands for ’surge’ after ’surge’ of failed policies, decade after decade.

Jun 17, 2008 - 11:47 am 20. AJ:

Reacharound,

Though I admire you for posting, maybe you should go back to Triple A, as this is the Big Leagues and your generic claims, polls from CNN and other Defeatist tripe is not wanted here in the Real World. Maybe on CNN.com, but not here.

Siding with your country means supporting the troops and their mission, not looking for all the wrong you believe they have done and denouncing those who support the very successful mission. Stop with the poll numbers, as it shows you drive from the same naive trough as most. Those questions are so charged and most Americans, sadly, know more about Survivor than the War on Terror.

And lastly, no stereotypes. I sadly live in a blue city in a blue state, as do many here. As for “red state yokels,” grow up. These are the men fighting for your right to say such balderdash and you poke fun at them? Shame on you. I wish I lived in a red state or a small town where real Americans, unlike you, live.

Enjoy your shopping at Whole Foods, while “yokels” fight for your freedom.

Gotta love how reacharound refers to those who support their country in a time of war as “idiots.” I’m sure that would fly well if he lived elsewhere. Being a selfish ingrate in another hallmark of the left.

Jun 17, 2008 - 11:49 am 21. AJ:

“Being told to read a book from some red state yokels really stings”

Actually, 90% of the conservatives I know read voraciously. I have never seen a lefty pull out a book. They watch TV, shop and eat expensive foods.

Jun 17, 2008 - 11:52 am 22. politicalreacharound:

I didn’t know that extending tours and denying benefits was supporting the troops. Do you really think all of our service men want to be there? Are the ones who want to come home traitors in your eyes? You need to learn the difference between supporting the troops and supporting failed policies by a failed administration headed by politicians who had benefited from deferments and favors. Bringing the troops home is supporting the troops. We have been there over 5 years, they are ready to come home. After 9/11 people didn’t enlist to become the Baghdad police. If the war is over like some above had suggested than lets come home, our mission was never to be a security force. Support the troops by coming home, support our military by coming home. Not only are we spread too thin but this fabulous “mission” we have accomplished has diminished recruiting for our armed forces. A healthy democracy and nation is one that allows dissent, perhaps some of you would feel more comfortable in Russia. BTW- what are y’all doing to support the war besides spouting off on blogs?

Jun 17, 2008 - 12:04 pm 23. AJ:

“Bringing the troops home is supporting the troops. We have been there over 5 years, they are ready to come home.”

As a former Marine and someone who has two sons and a nephew in in Iraq right now, this is offensive, wrong and typical. Have you ANY original thoughts? Was supporting our troops in ANY other war about bringing them home before the ENTIRE mission was done.

You leftists are so dangerous and deranged, just quoting from your professors and assorted media nitwits. You obvious care nothing about the folks who live in Iraq or liberal values, freedom of speech, the right to vote, etc. Basically, antiwar “liberals” are left wing fascists. I have always said that.

It’s a good thing most of them are arrogant atheists as G-d is ashamed of them. Ooooh. I mentioned G-d. Don’t be scared.

Jun 17, 2008 - 12:14 pm 24. Vinny Vidivici:

“red state yokels”

Nice. I guess certain forms of bigotry are more politically fashionable than others.

As a big-city, blue state resident, I can assure my red state cousins that there’s no shortage of narrow-minded provincialism in our nation’s (self-proclaimed) cultural centers.

politicalreacharound’s sneering missive (and circa-2006 take on Iraq) is a pretty typical specimen.

Jun 17, 2008 - 12:15 pm 25. Dane:

When you can’t counter the arguement, go off on a new tangent!

It’s a shame here in America we seem to have lost the idea of a “Loyal Opposition”.

Jun 17, 2008 - 12:16 pm 26. AJ:

A few more thing, reacharound:

“Not only are we spread too thin but this fabulous “mission” we have accomplished has diminished recruiting for our armed forces.”

WRONG, as usual. All branches exceeded goals. There are heroes out there who love their country. They aren’t the folks you’ll meet at Starbucks or your Phish concert.

“A healthy democracy and nation is one that allows dissent, perhaps some of you would feel more comfortable in Russia.”

Stop quoting from your Poli Sci text. And further, you fool, the MUSLIM countries we are fighting in are the ones who disallow free speech and you have NO interest. So who is the hypocrite?

“BTW- what are y’all doing to support the war besides spouting off on blogs?”

My boys are there. Some are fighting, others donate, write, march, etc. Another cliche question. I won’t answer another until you have an original thought. I’ve read an answered all these simplistic liberal thoughts for 5 years now. GROW up.

Jun 17, 2008 - 12:18 pm 27. Vinny Vidivici:

Thanks for you and your boys, AJ. Thanks, also, for taking the time to post a rebuttal to reacharound’s tiresome talking points. I guess if you hear something repeated often enough . . .

Jun 17, 2008 - 12:28 pm 28. AJ:

Yes, Hitler, Stalin and other rogue leaders always have loved to perpetuate “the lie.” Lefties and their media allies now keep up that tradition. Lovely, eh?

As to narrow provincialism, having lived in all corners of this nation and visited everywhere in between, the narrow-mindedness, arrogance, lack of tolerance and racism (yes, racism) of the big cities in unparalleled…aside from In Europe and the rest of the world, where, despite what the media declares, Obama would NEVER get elected.

As to the red state yokel comment, racism and sexism is okay in the 2008 USA as long as it is directed at white males, who have no rights, no freedom of speech and no help—even though they built this nation and preserved it for the first 100 years. The pendulum has swing. Guilt-ridden rich white liberals love it. Hypocrites all.

Jun 17, 2008 - 12:51 pm 29. Further Signs Of Iraq’s Good Condition « Tai-Chi Policy:

[...] condition of the country. The Democrats are now refusing to talk about the benchmarks, since it is something else that they can’t complain about. The real question is whether they’ll admit they’re wrong on their defeatist stance and [...]

Jun 17, 2008 - 12:52 pm 30. Javelin:

Bubbalicious
What did you sacrifice or risk in this war? You supported the war for all the wrong reasons and now you are trying to make yourself seem noble. I hope you become collateral damage.

Jun 17, 2008 - 12:57 pm 31. Dave II:

PolReacher- You and your kool-aid drinking minions are in for a big surprise if you think Obama is going to pull out of Iraq (..IF he wins, which he won’t), especially with the progress there…plus, just the mega-bases we are building there tell you the story. (And the fact he has Zbignew Brizinski as his foreign policy advisor…can you say Carter II?)

Even Obama himself said as much:

CBS’s Steve Kroft asked Obama in a 60 Minutes interview if he would pull out of Iraq according to a timetable “regardless of the situation?
Even if there’s sectarian violence?”

Obama responded “No, I always reserve as commander in chief the right to assess the situation.”

AT LEAST Obama says he is FINALLY going back to Iraq himself now. Gee, where has he been???? Too little too late, if you ask me…but there is SO MANY reasons NOT to vote for Obama…Iraq is probably about 4th or 5th on my EXTREMELY LONG list!

Jun 17, 2008 - 12:58 pm 32. Javelin:

AJ:
I can see why you became a marine, you are as brutal as you are ignorant. Your comments are as simple minded and cartoonish as your mind. You’re such a hero, but a complete bozo too.

Jun 17, 2008 - 1:00 pm 33. rvastar:

Don’t be too hard on reacharound, guys!

You see, he really cares about the poor Iraqis, unlike us “yokels”. Why? Not because he give’s a sh!t about how many of them live or die…he cares because, in his mind, they’re a nice tool for achieving Marxist political ends. In fact, the MORE that die, the BETTER…right, reacharound?

That’s why he’s so willing to simply abandon them to the mullahs and head-choppers. But don’t ever forget…his side is the one that cares about helping people. I mean, just a look at the great results that their strongly worded letters and denunciations in “the strongest terms” have accomplished in Zimbabwe and Darfur.

Screw the Iraqis…let ‘em sort it out for themselves. Right, reach?

Jun 17, 2008 - 1:04 pm 34. Yokel in a Blue State:

AJ, great smackdown.

As Reacharound displayes…liberals only care about themselves. They could give a rats a$$ about Iraqis or anybody else. The script this guy is reading from is simply tired. He has zero perspective of the larger strategic consequence of the effort. He has zero understanding that what happens NOW matters regardless of how we got here. All that matters to liberals is there belieF that BUSH LIED PEOPLE DIED and so on and so forth.

How about this Reacharound…

Americans don’t want to be in Iraq? Wow, that’s not an obvious point. Does anybody want to be in a war? No, but sometimes that’s the reality. American’s not wanting to be in Iraq doesn’t mean they want to lose.

Iraqi’s don’t want us there? Wow, another obvious point. I wouldn’t want another countries Army in my country either however if they removed a tyrant and terrorists began killing everyone (mostly innocent civilians), I would appreciate their help until it the population was safe from those terrorists.

Your talking points are tired and it is you that has been discredited, not just here but throughout history. If you read some, you would already know it.

Jun 17, 2008 - 1:19 pm 35. mishu:

Progress after 5 years, wow!

A lot better progress than the “War on Poverty”.

Jun 17, 2008 - 1:26 pm 36. AJ:

Javelin:

Thanks for calling names and not countering one of my points.

Oh, I am SO mean. Cry me a river.

No worries, my sons will still protect your ungrateful family.

Good afternoon, fellas. I’m off to a support our troops function. We won’t be telling them to come home; we’ll be sending care packages….while the left send care packages to….no one. They’re selfish. See here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026442/Dont-listen-liberals–Right-wingers-really-nicer-people-latest-research-shows.html

Jun 17, 2008 - 1:32 pm 37. ajacksonian:

The war had been won but the financial system in ruins… the poorest put-upon rose up in arms and nearly tore things asunder. Iraq? No, that other failure, that of the Articles of Confederation put into place by the Revolutionaries in 1776 and lasted until 1787, when they were coming about because of the bad situation after the peace. The Shaysites and others who were seeing their lives taken from them by courts had nearly caused the United States to come apart.

Five years in Iraq? Going far better than five years after the peace treaty with the British and eleven years after the Articles that founded the US. Those Articles *failed* and yet the US *succeeded* on its second try. They only had to deal with 10% dead and 15% fled and an economy in ruins and huge war debt to France…

Iraq is far more secure than the United States was at a similar point in time and in better economic health. The US stayed a decade after the peace treaty with Japan to ensure they got this idea of democracy and not reverting to a military class rulership. In 1901 the US won a short war in the Philippines and yet would spend nearly a decade in the bloodiest, most brutal fighting imaginable with as many dead with a same force size as we have today and half of those due to tropical diseases. By 1915 we could hand it over to local government.

Five years? Take a look at the problems of the reconstruction era after the US Civil War and compare how well *that* went, or didn’t, to Iraq, today.

As to what I’ve done? Besides work for the DoD on the civilian side for 14 years? And volunteer for experimental medical tests, that are always wanting for volunteers for which the NIH goes wanting? And giving as much of my worldly goods to Vietnam veterans organizations to pass on or sell as they see fit? Buying wanted goods for the wounded at WRMC or supporting Soldiers Angels? Not that it is anyone’s business, of course… but if you ask then what have you done to support the Nation, the health of others and the well being of our soldiers coming back wounded from wars past and present?

I have little health or energy in left in my life. My horizons fixed very close to home due to illnesses. I support by doing this thing known as supporting: taking a low paying job in the civil service, volunteering for medical studies until my health went south, and giving as I can to those even less fortunate than I am.

That is the honorable thing to do for those who cannot fight, but support the Nation. Even C.O.s during WWII recognized that and did those things and still served their Nation even when not fighting.

And those are good things to do in war or peace, if you love your Nation and honor her citizen soldiers who fight for you. They volunteered for a job I cannot do and they get my honor, respect and support to get this job done so we never, ever have to go back and do it again. That would be an extremely good thing.

If that means teaching tens of millions in far off lands that the Tree of Liberty grows from the blood of tyrants and patriots, so be it. It is a damned hard lesson to learn, and an extremely easy one to forget, these centuries after our forefathers gave so much so that we may be free.

Jun 17, 2008 - 1:33 pm 38. Quote of the Day » Pursuing Holiness:

[...] Remember Those Iraqi Benchmarks? Well, Guess What… Robbed of benchmark-rage, the Democrats have been floundering in their search for a substantive argument against the evident progress in present-day Iraq. Hoisted by their own petard, the anti-war crowd has become the enemy of cold, hard facts. Today they talk of John McCain’s “neo-imperial” ambition to keep peacetime troops in Mesopotamia, as if the U.S. didn’t already have thousands of troops stationed around the globe serving in just that capacity. If anybody in your household smokes, you’re fired? [...]

Jun 17, 2008 - 1:43 pm 39. Dave II:

I came across a list someone else did for not voting Obama…and it basically mirrors mine, so I’m posting it here. It sums it up:

12 Reasons I Can’t Vote for Obama —
1) ECONOMICS — Every platform plan leans towards Marxism (class divisiveness with a huge “redistribution of wealth”) in a MUCH bigger government.
2) TAXES – The cost of his proposed programs, plus his admitted tax increase plans, plus his intentions to not renew the Bush tax cuts would result in the LARGEST tax increase in history! His Global Poverty Act will commit the US to $845 billion in a stealth “world tax” to the United Nations.
3) IRAQ – I can’t fathom his premature withdrawal plans that will snatch defeat from our near-victory, negating all the sacrifice to this point. 4) FOREIGN AFFAIRS — Obama’s foreign policy credentials include only one brief official visit to London. He wants to have unstructured meetings without preconditions to rogue leaders. And he has yet to travel to Iraq or Afghanistan, which is ridiculous.
5) ABORTION – Obama never met an abortion bill he didn’t like, including “partial-birth” and not allowing medical care for “survivors” of failed abortions, basically infanticide!
6) JUDGEMENT – If Obama says the Rev. Wright (and Resko) was “not the man I knew” (for 20 years), he must be the worst judge of character in the world. 7) EXPERIENCE — Obama’s ONE productive year in the Illinois Senate (the first 7 were “do-nothing” years), and a couple of years in the US Senate shows us that the Democratic primary voters care little about experience. His ONE and ONLY bill he actually spnsored and got passed? The Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act of 2006. The bill would set forth specified U.S. political, social, civil, and economic policy objectives with respect to the DRC.
DEFENSE/MILITARY – His public statements call for cut-backs in all areas of the military at a time when congress has called for a larger Army and Marine corps, and we are in a global war on terror. 9) ASSOCIATIONS — Rev. Wright, Frank Davis, Tony Resko, William Ayers, Nadhmia Auchi, Eric Holder, Jim Johnson… enough said.
10) ELITISM — He sees himself as representing the “masses”, but he has no clue as to the mindset of the average American (guns-religion-bitter- gaff…oh, and “what’s a hitch ball?” ).
11) NO “CHANGE” — Obama can say “the challenges (are) too great to play the same Washington game with the same Washington players”, but his staff is full of the SAME back-seat Democratic operatives, Jim Johnson, Eric Holder, plus Dean, Read, and Pelosi “selecting” him for the DNC…’nuff said.
12) MICHELLE – Sorry, but she is “frustrated and disappointed” with this country, a negative “whiner”, and is all about reverse discrimination.

Jun 17, 2008 - 1:53 pm 40. gcblues:

hmmm, maybe i am to old. i recall “democracy building” as an unacceptable conservative thought. i opposed, as many conservatives did, both gulf wars. however, post vote, i strongly voice support for winning. i woulda preferred leaving Bathist heads on posts and exiting immediately, however we did not. we took a vote, so now i voice support for success in the mission to transform Iraq. my only question remaining, is do we intend to do this for all of islam? because i am not on board with that. i have friends in Tehran. they despised the revolution and all the green bands have brought with them. later however they despised Saddam even more. Now they despise the USA. the point being, unlike ww2, there is no limit of victories that will yield victory. our victory in Iraq was to have left the other parts of Islam more open to democracy. even in winning in Iraq we may create and embolden more evil. maybe not. i would love to be wrong. i would however enjoy a sincere discussion on the strategy of culling the Islamic herd of people we are unable to live with and accepting those we may disapprove of but have not war issues with. unfortunately the bad seeds are further spread and sown with our current tactics. you know if this was all simple and obvious, we would not be so divided. recall woodward’s books of inside discussions. all the above was posited. however in the public realm it is either surrender all or kill them all. clearly we need to improve our friendliness and define our needs more clearly and sanely to the Islamic world.

Jun 17, 2008 - 1:55 pm 41. newguy40:

Reading the responses here I am reminded of comments from VDH that I saw on CSPAN last week end.

He said (and I paraphrase) that many of the self styled liberals lack perspective and a knowledge and sense of history. Essentially, their comments and world view lack a meaningful context.

I can’t help reach the same conclusion when I see comments from Truth and Political Reach Around.

AJ – My thanks to you and your sons service. Believe me when I say, that there is no one and nothing I count on more than the USMC.

Jun 17, 2008 - 1:57 pm 42. Derek O'Connor:

If Americans think 5 years in Iraq is a long time, let them look at Northern Ireland.

Jun 17, 2008 - 2:25 pm 43. Cletus:

LOL reacharound, just because douche’s like you vomit forth hundreds of books why Iraq is bad, doesn’t make them right

Quality over Quantity, my friend (you’re not my friend)

and don’t call me a red state yokel. I live in Canada, the biggest blue state in existance

Jun 17, 2008 - 2:29 pm 44. The Compliment Vice Pays To Virtue — Dean’s World:

[...] links this PJM piece by Abe Greenwald (he’s the sockless Greenwald), which entree includes [...]

Jun 17, 2008 - 2:30 pm 45. Ciscokid:

A.J,- thank you to you and your family’s service to our great country. My “prayers” and undying support are with them. Amazing insightful read from your link regarding the liberal pathology. Hammer down my brother. There is no liberal defense that withstands true wisdom, reason and logic. You’re not a bad writer either. God Bless.

Jun 17, 2008 - 3:33 pm 46. a_pseudonym:

I am impressed with how the war in Iraq has been handled this past year. Thanks in part to an oversight requirement created, for the most part, by democrats and key advisors(those 18 milestones), the direction Generals and executive branch officials have been pushing very hard in is toward a mobilised and self supporting Iraq. There is even some U.N. training for a basic Navy! And the Iraqi Government are starting to chafe and bitch that they need to move in their own direction with decisions on religion or region focus on new elections. This is all good news. I agree with many of the opinions I have read on this thread, and disagree with some as well. One thing I am quite unhappy about is this partisan attitude everyone is willing to take. Cletus, reacharound “Yokel…” etc.: You are North Americans with a highschool or better education, the social views given you by your moms, stepmoms, fostermoms, dadmoms or other guardian to respect people and be polite, and you have navigated to a public forum to learn about and express opinions. …. Please know that disrespecting others does not defend your point, pigeonholing and titling your fellow Americans, who’s opinion you contend is incorrect, does NOT argue your point and lastly, simplifying the viewpoints of every individual in the U.S. to fall within a liberal or conservative bias does nothing but create opposition between people who essentially agree, or who diverge on certain key issues, but otherwise agree.
To put in terms I have observed to be the offensively simplistic norm on this thread (and most others, disappointingly enough):
Dude, you guys are being dumb. You’re not really dumb are you?

Jun 17, 2008 - 4:06 pm 47. Mission Accomplished:

Oh yeah, liberals are always the problem. Nevermind the fact our economy is in shambles. Don’t worry about the globe viewing the Bush administration as dangerously unstable, almost as much so as Ahmadinejad in Iran. Credit crunch, spending billions on a war in Iraq to protect people you hate anyways, inflation going out of control, the broken healthcare system, huge tax breaks for the rich, unemployment rising, and a less stable Middle East. All with a Republican fool as president. Congratulations on your successes.

McCain has admitted he doesn’t understand the economy as well as he should. I, and 95% of Americans, will see a larger tax cut under Obama’s economic plan. McCain has flip-flopped on countless issues, uses fear to gather votes, and panders to the base. Worst of all, he sides with Bush 100%. Obama draws record crowds of better educated, younger, and more diverse groups of people. Obama went to help out in the Midwest flooding area, where was McCain? Scream photo-op all you want. Leadership by example. The choice is obvious.

Bush was an absolute disaster for American foreign policy, for Constitutional rights, and for the pride of America herself. Just ask ANYONE on the PLANET outside of the US. More people across the globe like Obama more than McCain, so who do you think will get better trade deals and stronger alliances? Besides, up until this election, most right-wingers hated McCain. Now you cheerlead for him, just because he’s on your team? Abandon team-based politics. This is not a sport to be won. This is America’s future. The choice is obvious.

All Republicans have in their arsenal is fear. Don’t be afraid. Don’t be scared. Don’t believe in their boogeymen. Otherwise, you’ll live in fear your whole life. Use your brain and stay open-minded. THINK, and decide for yourself.

Jun 17, 2008 - 4:11 pm 48. The Iraq Few Report On « Cranial Cavity:

[...] what of all those Benchmarks the democraps were all in a tizzy [...]

Jun 17, 2008 - 4:16 pm 49. Democrates lose again to Bush - Southern Maryland Community Forums:

[...] by Kerad Are you intending to link to the articles that you’re pulling your quotes from? link Pajamas Media » Remember Those Iraqi Benchmarks? Well, Guess What

Jun 17, 2008 - 4:25 pm 50. ~Paules:

Mission A,

Have some FACTS on me. 1) The economy has slowed but the stock market is within 15% of all time highs. We are not yet in a recession (as defined: two quarters of economic contraction), and we might avoid it completely. 2) You might ask Sarkozy, Merkel, and Berlusconi what they think of Mr. Bush, and maybe the Japanese and Indians as well. He’s admired and respected despite the calumnies against him. 3) The credit crunch and housing problems are the normal excesses of capitalism. Markets are self-correcting. 4) Inflation is less than 3%. Yes, food and gas are inflating at a higher rate overall. The market will adjust if government would just stop meddling in the markets (ethanol comes to mind). 5) Healthcare is not “broken”. We still enjoy the best care in the world. No one gets turned away from an emergency room. 6) Unemployment is at an historically low 5.5%. 7) The Middle East is stabilizing. Terrorism is receding. Iran remains a problem that will be addressed by Israel if the United States doesn’t do something first.

You are welcome to your “narrative.” I prefer facts.

Jun 17, 2008 - 4:40 pm 51. mjk:

Israel has been fighting this war for 60 YEARS!! 5 years, not so bad. Yeah, it sucks that we have to fight a bunch of terrorists, but I’d rather fight them than lay down and take it.

Jun 17, 2008 - 5:16 pm 52. Patterson:

To Reacharound:

“BTW- what are y’all doing to support the war besides spouting off on blogs?”

I was there for 14 months during OIF2 fighting in the streets of Baghdad and I’m set to go back again here very soon for my second tour.

“Do you really think all of our service men want to be there?”

No, none of us WANT to be there. You would have to be crazy to enjoy being shot at. However, who here actually WANTS to go to work everyday? Besides the small fraction of us who truly love their jobs. Anyone here who has a job knows that they do their job because they filled out the application and said they’d come in and do what was required of them. Same with the military. We all filled out our “applications” and we knew what was expected of us.

Are the ones who want to come home traitors in your eyes?

Not at all. As I stated before no one likes to be shot at and on top of that away from their family for long periods of time. We all want to come home but we know better. Unlike you we know (and especially the troops who have been over and have seen first hand how the country works) that if we would have went in and took out Saddam and then packed up and left the next guy in line with the most guns and support would have came in and the cycle would have repeated itself all over again and then our kids, the next generation, would have to do the exact same thing. over again.

Furthermore:

People speak of the service members wanting to end this war by packing up and coming home. I am not one of those service members and neither is anyone in my unit or anyone I have really talked to on post about the situation in Iraq. The only people I have ever heard REALLY bitch about having to go to Iraq are the ones who have been stop-lossed (understandable) or the wanna-be-soldiers who joined the military JUST for the college money. Anyone else who complains I tell them all the same thing: Don’t re-enlist then and quit complaining. You signed up for this like the rest of us. Real soldiers hold their heads high and take going to Iraq an honor. An honor to fight for their country. It is for me.

Anyone else here a 13M?

Jun 17, 2008 - 5:36 pm 53. Mission Accomplished:

~Paules

You admit the economy has slowed, and we aren’t YET in a recession… but many economists expect us to get there, or assume we’re already there (though this doesn’t fit literal definition.) You admit Bush has many calumnies (which I assume means critics,) and mention TWO of the world’s countries, as well as three individuals. Well, 3 people + 2 countries << rest of globe. I’ll agree with you on point 3. Food and gas are inflating at a higher rate, so other things will likely follow, resulting in higher inflation across the board. This is not just because of ethanol. Unemployment is RISING, and in the past 28 years, it was lowest in 2000 at 4%. Draw your own conclusions at that fact. Sources:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104719.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSHAR64548120080606?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

We do NOT have the best healthcare in the world, and while people don’t get turned away at the emergency room, what about preventive care, like going in for a physical or blood work? People without healthcare can’t afford that, so they develop conditions which become more expensive to treat and last longer. Then they become more of a burden on the taxpayer. I believe I read somewhere that we pay more for healthcare, on average, than most industrialized countries as well. We are ranked number 37 in the world in terms of healthcare by The World Health Organization:
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

Iran is a problem that will be addressed by the world powers collectively, with Israel and US as participants, ideally. If military force is necessary, either candidate would be willing to use it. The difference is, McCain is LOOKING for a reason to use military force, while Obama sees it more as a last resort. We don’t need any more poorly-executed expensive wars.

My facts: our trade deficit is higher than ever. Our dollar has lost much worth in comparison to the Euro, and continues to lose value. Are you OK with this?

I don’t understand people who say they’re conservatives, yet they’re not absolutely irate over their money losing value! Our taxpayer dollars being burned away in Iraq, and for what? Protecting Iraqi Muslims? They want us out! Protecting us?? These people have grenade launchers, AK-47s, and roadside bombs! We have laser-guided missiles and more surveillance satellites than anyone on the planet! And you’re afraid of them? The suicide-bomber terrorist?

Don’t be afraid to THINK and be open-minded. It’s OK to agree with people of other political parties on issues. No one political party is 100% correct nor is one 100% wrong, ever. Think BEYOND party lines. I bet if you did, we’d agree on a lot more than you think.

Jun 17, 2008 - 5:40 pm 54. Tom W.:

There will always be American defeatists; they are always wrong.

“Americans are losing the victory in Europe” Life, January 7, 1945

http://www.kultursmog.com/Life-Page01.htm

“How we botched the German occupation” Saturday Evening Post, January 26, 1946

http://foros.fox.presidencia.gob.mx/read.php?5,136406

Jun 17, 2008 - 6:01 pm 55. Jay Reding.com — As Iraq Lifts Itself Up, Some Stick To The Script:

[...] that the US presence somehow undermines Iraq’s progress is ridiculous on its face—Iraq has made great political progress, and that progress is only possible because the Iraqis have security. If the Iraqi people cannot be [...]

Jun 17, 2008 - 6:34 pm 56. Bobdog:

Mission Accomplished:

I could indeed “ask ANYONE on the PLANET outside of the US” who ought to be the next President of the USA, but only Americans get to actually vote, so what would be the point? It’s not that they do not matter, its just that administering to their demands is what their governments are for–I do not begrudge the Indian government, for example, not deferring to US sensitivities each time it legislates. I am sure you would counter that the US is a mess, blah, blah blah. Although ~Paules does a reasonable job refuting these individual claims, it misses the larger point: if enough Americans agree that the US is a mess, Obama will be elected, if not it will be McCain. But it is a call that Americans should and will make for themselves. Why then do you feel the need to subvert this simple bit of democracy and demand that our government be beholden to foreign opinion? Is it more important that our government please “ANYONE on the PLANET outside of the US” than her own people?

Jun 17, 2008 - 7:38 pm 57. vincerinos:

Great, since we’re making so much progress how about we bring the troops home already? Any ideas there?

Jun 17, 2008 - 10:26 pm 58. Tom W.:

“Great, since we’re making so much progress how about we bring the troops home already? Any ideas there?”

Here’s one:

Monomania [mon-uh-MAY-nee-uh; -nyuh] noun:
Pathological obsession with a single subject or idea.

Jun 17, 2008 - 11:30 pm 59. krispos42:

Wow, AJ really has the Kool-Aid on tap, doesn’t he?

Let’s see what AJ is talking about.

“The Dems care about one thing: politics”

Ummmm… excuse me, I forget, which party is still calling this occupation a “war”? Which party is still calling Bush a “war president”? Which party has declared an perpetual “war” on terror?

And which party has used “terrah! terrah! terrah! 9/11!” 24/7 to push their entire agenda, like tax cuts for the top 1%, deregulation of industry and banking, globalization, slashing pollution standards, and privatization or politicalization of various government departments?

Hmmm… that’s a puzzler, isn’t it?

“Siding with your country means supporting the troops and their mission…”

Ooo, AJ, no good, my friend. You see, this sets up conditions where any politician and any political party can instantly quell critisism, accomplish political goals, and rally people to their side simply by starting a war someplace. And that, in turn, guarantees war at every opportunity for any reason.

No, AJ, we need to be thinking patriots, willing to hold those accountable that misuse and abuse the trust we give our leaders in time of war and patriotic fevor. Mindlessly falling in line is the path to endless war.

“We won the war in 2001 and 2003. This is just a peacekeeping/humanitarian mission with minimal casualties.”

Conviently forgetting, of course, that we’re the ones that broke the peace and caused the humanitarian crisis in the first place.

If I set your house on fire, then dragged your family outside to safety, am I an arsonist or a hero?

“We’re still in Germany and Japan.”

And South Korea. And amazingly, when our troops go there they don’t have to gun down or blow up men, woman, and children, they don’t come home missing internal organs or body parts, and they don’t have PTSD or other crippling psychological problems.

A year in Japan, Germany, or South Korea is like spending a year in the States. A year in Iraq is diametrically opposite. Do you really think that if our troops in Korea were still fighting an active insurgency 50 years later we’d still be there?

“These are the men fighting for your right to say such balderdash and you poke fun at them?”

Er, um, no, sorry. They are not fighting for my right to say anything because Iraq could not, ever, invade and occupy America and push their will onto our people. Sorry, Charlie.

The primary purpose of the military is to protect and defend America and Americans from external threats. However the military can be used for all sorts of things and all sorts of goals which may or may not have to do with protecting and defending America and Americans. In this case, they are not, and in fact have not done so since World War Two. They are “serving” their country, but they are not protecting it nor the people inside of it’s borders.

“WRONG, as usual. All branches exceeded goals. There are heroes out there who love their country”

Exceeding their lowered recruitment goals, you mean. And unprecedented use of “moral waivers” and big fat giant bribes, er, signing bonuses to fill the ranks.

“Stop quoting from your Poli Sci text. And further, you fool, the MUSLIM countries we are fighting in are the ones who disallow free speech and you have NO interest. So who is the hypocrite?”

And those MUSLIM countried need to progress. To become, you know, progressive. They need to become enlightened and separate church (or mosque) and state and move to some kind of secular republic or parlimentry system.

Invading them is not going to do that. In fact, use or threat of use of military force rallies them to their leaders the same way the specter of terrorism rallies American to the president. It actually discourages change!

Nor is change going to come as long as the fat pipeline of oil money is flooding those countries. As long as they have the easy cash of European, American, and Asian petrodollars flooding it they have absolutely zero incentive to grow their economy, their society, or their government.

Yet another reason to move to an oil-free economy.

“As to the red state yokel comment, racism and sexism is okay in the 2008 USA as long as it is directed at white males, who have no rights, no freedom of speech and no help—even though they built this nation and preserved it for the first 100 years. ”

Awww, the poor white males. Well, maybe one day somebody will strike the shackles from your wrists and ankles and you’ll be free once again. You’ll be able to vote and own property and run for office and maybe the police won’t arrest you and beat you quite so often for “driving while white”.

EVERYBODY, AJ, built this country. Some built it in chains, some built it without voting or property rights or political representation, but EVERYBODY built it.

And Cletus…

“Liberals like you claim to care about human life, but you don’t seem to care about the wholesale slaughter that would take place if the U.S was to pull out of Iraq and leave it open to Al-Qaeda or Iranian proxies.”

Um, then maybe we shouldn’t have gone in there in the first place?

Cletus, my friend, pretty much all the goals we are trying to accomplish in Iraq, now, were in fact accomplished before a single US soldier or marine cross the Iraq-Kuwait border. Consider:

-Functioning and fairly effective national, provincian, and local governments, including law enforcement, justice, and education.

-Functioning utility infrastructure, such as electricity, water, sewer, roads, bridges, etc.

-No weapons of mass destruction.

-No capability to make nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons.

-Secular, not religious, government, including woman’s rights and alcohol and adult product sales.

-No Al-Qaeda.

-Regional counterbalance to Iran.

-Religiously integrated neighborhoods. No ethnic cleansing or Balkanization.

Okay, Saddam was still in charge. Big whoop.

And if we wanted the oil of Iraq to be on the worldwide market to lower the whopping $28/barrel oil prices (that’s about what it was when Bush took office), all we had to do was lift the sanctions!

And my friend apb, we get this from you:
“The past 5 years has been an amazing growth period for the Iraqis, from the fall of the Saddamites to the initial elections, creation of a constitution, building of their self-defense and internal reconciliation.”

Yeah, amazing all right. They’re on their, what, third constitution? They are so unstable that the voters won’t know who’s on the ballots until the day before because of the thread of assassination! And we keep replacing prime minsters that don’t agree with us.

As to internal reconciliation, it’s happening via ethnic cleansing. You do realize that 15% of Iraq’s population are refugees, right? And that the Kurdish people are pushing for their own country?

“the Bush doctrine is working in several ways.”

*snort* ROFL!

Oh, wait, you’re serious. Okay, let’s see, confronting terrorism abroad so we don’t have to face it here.

Well, Saudi Arabia is taking the massive profits from selling for $140 what costs $15 to pump out of the ground and supporting Al-Qaeda and Sunni insurgents in Iraq. Glad we’ve sucessfully invaded and occupied them, those theocratic fundamentalist Muslim misogynic aristocrats!

Oh, wait. Well, at least we invaded Pakistan and threw out the unstable nuclear-armed military dictatorship that’s hiding Osama Bin Laden!

Oh, wait. Well, at least we invaded a cripped country that hasn’t pumped significant amounts of oil in decades and as a result has a much larger percentage of it’s oil reserves intact compared to it’s busily-pumping neighbors!

Yeah, that’s it!

Oh, and what happend to Tony Blair, anyway? Oh, yeah, retired. Imagine that.

And Yokel…

“As Reacharound displayes…liberals only care about themselves. They could give a rats a$$ about Iraqis or anybody else.”

Uh-huh. Says a person happily supporting a war and occupation that has caused the deaths of nearly a million Iraqis.

How else do you show your love for your fellow man, your compassionate conservatism? By sending US manufacturing jobs to China? Which, last time I checked, was a tolitarian nuclear-armed Communist country brutally enforcing a one-child policy?

“He has zero perspective of the larger strategic consequence of the effort.”

Ummm… says a Bush supporter. And Bush didn’t know that there was a difference between Sunni and Shia Islam. Or how it would affect the occupation of Iraq. Or how it would relate to Shia Iran or Sunni Saudi Arabia.

Keep in mind, of course, that if we didn’t go in in the first place, we wouldn’t have to be worrying about strategic consequences.

I noted above that our strategic goals were already met BEFORE WE INVADED.

“He has zero understanding that what happens NOW matters regardless of how we got here.”

I bet he does. But if he doesn’t, I do. First off, we get rid of and PUNISH the people that got us into this mess in the first place. That gives us an enormous boost in credibility. And keeps the people that f***ed up in the first place from continuing to f*** up.

Then we have to do one of two things: either institute a draft and war taxes and partially nationalize our defense industry to put a half-million troops in Iraq for a period of at least a decade to restore law and order, or we have to remove ourselves from the country (no bases, even) and pursue economic and political means to achieve get Iraq to reconcile with a minimum of violence. Which, frankly, isn’t a whole lot.

Regardless of which we do, we need a real Marshall plan, not this “unaccountable US contractors on fat cost-plus contracts” system of corruption and failure we currently have. Give the Iraqis money to rebuild their cement factories, then buy cement from them and hire local Iraqis to rebuild their country. There can’t be peace with 60% unemployment rates. Put those idle hands to work rebuilding, not rebelling!

Jun 18, 2008 - 1:09 am 60. Tom W.:

The gigantic wad of ego that precedes this response is a peek inside the mind of the voter who supports a candidate as vacuous and bereft as Obama.

The post above is the longest unbroken string of ultra-orthodox, uncompromisingly hackneyed talking points and clichés I’ve ever seen. The remarkable thing about it is that despite its length, it’s entirely content free.

That’s quite an accomplishment, but it mirrors the Messiah’s speeches. All that comes across is smugness, self-congratulation, and teenage snark, along with a perception of current events that’s so out of touch with reality the writer ought to be in a padded room.

Christophers Hitchens enjoys asking people what Obama said after a speech, and they can never tell him.

What gets me is the utter uniformity of expression of liberals. They really are mass-produced people. Stylistically, the endless, chortling masturbation above could have been written by any one of 40 million interchangeable people.

It’s quite depressing that an individual human would happily choose to be a complete, 100 percent-pure stereotype, as indistinguishable from his fellows as a penguin is from the millions of others in the colony.

Jun 18, 2008 - 4:05 am 61. Iraq benchmark report roundup [Karl]:

[...] of statistics measured by the Brookings Institution’s “Iraq Index.”  And at PJM, Abe Greenwald listens to the dogs that are not barking — Congressional Democrats who have stopped talking [...]

Jun 18, 2008 - 5:30 am 62. Mike:

Politicalreacharound: you should change your screen name to Political rustytrombone. ALL democrats hate America and wish for defeat. If you help I-SLAM defeat America, YOU will be among the 1st executed for un I SLAMIC activities. I SLAM hates homosexuals and actively murders them with pride. Wake up you stupid person, before the people you want to help, KILL you.

Jun 18, 2008 - 5:48 am 63. willis:

“After all the billions of dollars we’ve given to the Iraqis, would it be rude to ask to become “preferred customers” for their oil? Would they be willing to sell to us at a lower price perhaps?”

They might, but that would make our endeavor “blood for oil” wouldn’t it? And that would be wrong, wouldn’t it? Are leftists so deaf they can’t hear their own words?

Jun 18, 2008 - 5:58 am 64. ~Paules:

Some historical perspective for the youngsters:

1. In the late 1970’s gas was 40 cents a gallon, but you had to line up around the block to get it. In 2008 gas is 4 bucks because demand (think India and China) exceeds supply. We need new sources of energy, but that’s going to include nuclear and more drilling until the alternatives come on-line.

2. During the same period interest rates peaked at 19% and unemployment at 8 percent. You couldn’t find a job on the graveyard shift pumping gas. Today interest rates for mortgages and auto loans are about 6%. Unemployment just bumped 5.5%, but the statistic is a lagging indicator. Given the action by the Federal Reserve recently, it looks as though the recession (if it comes) will be shallow and short.

3. During the seventies inflation raged as the markets worked off the artificial excesses caused by Nixon’s wage and price controls. Today by any historical standard inflation is tame.

4. In 1979, the US was humiliated into impotence by Muslim radicals who sacked our embassy in Tehran and kidnapped the embassy staff. In contrast, under George Bush we marched into two Muslim countries and removed two of the most odious regimes in history. And we did it in a matter of months. AQ attempted to counter-attack in Iraq. They have lost.

5. US losses in Iraq are low by historical standards. Less than the 50K we lost in Vietnam over a decade. Less than the losses in the first two days following D-Day. Less than one hour’s fighting at Gettysburg.

And still we get the “narrative” from the Left that our nation is in the tank. Hardly. Not by any historical standard. Expect the Bush II presidency to rank along side that of Truman. History judges by more than the hysteria of the moment.

Jun 18, 2008 - 6:30 am 65. Tom W.:

Paules:

A valiant effort. Unfortunately, we’re up against nightmare zombies who can’t be turned aside with reason.

Here’s an exchange I had on another Web site:

Me: “The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the Robb-Silverman Commission, the 9/11 Commission, the British Lord Butler and Lord Hutton Reports, former Iraq Survey Group heads David Kay and Charles Duelfer, and the Australian government all concluded Bush didn’t lie about Iraq or pressure intelligence analysts to lie. Were they all wrong?”

My antagonist: “As far as your question is. I still think Bush lied. Of course there are many levels of lies and honesty. I think all those reports you quoted me are wrong. I have no proof it’s just intuition so there is no reason to argue over how accurate my intuition is. It is what I believe.”

In other words, don’t bother me with facts; I have my intuition. I have my beliefs. I have my feeeeeeeelings.

Spoken like a true religious extremist, on the order of the people we’re fighting.

Maybe that’s why so many leftists refuse to concede that we need to fight these folks. Kindred spirits…

Jun 18, 2008 - 7:04 am 66. Remember Those Iraqi Benchmarks? Well, Guess What… « Tizona’s Weblog:

[...] Posted by tizona on June 18, 2008 It was mentioned, that I should cut down the length, (Posts, for the dirty minded…lol) so here… [...]

Jun 18, 2008 - 7:28 am 67. ~Paules:

Tom W.

Logical argument based on facts cannot turn back a religious fanatic, but it might sway the masses in the middle. These are the voters who will determine the next president. How many thousands of people do you think read these comment threads? Every erroneous comment by the left must be thoroughly refuted. Be logical. Be polite. State the facts. Then let the voters decide. Know that the snarky comments from the opposition do their case no good. Trust that average Americans can look through the cotton candy of “hope and change” and demand some red meat in this debate. If Obama becomes president, his foolishness will be revealed in time. The country might take some damage, but the republic has survived worse. Unlike leftist elites, conservatives are supposed to trust the people. So, enter the fray and and hope the truth prevails. It’s all we can do.

Jun 18, 2008 - 8:05 am 68. P Pine:

Mission Accomplished, you cite the WHO report that the USA is ranked 37th in the world in health care. What factors does WHO base that on? What criteria do they weigh heavier than others?:
“““““““““““““““““““
In designing the framework for health system performance, WHO broke new methodological ground, employing a technique not previously used for health systems. It compares each country’s system to what the experts estimate to be the upper limit of what can be done with the level of resources available in that country. It also measures what each country’s system has accomplished in comparison with those of other countries.
WHO’s assessment system was based on five indicators: overall level of population health; health inequalities (or disparities) within the population; overall level of health system responsiveness (a combination of patient satisfaction and how well the system acts); distribution of responsiveness within the population (how well people of varying economic status find that they are served by the health system); and the distribution of the health system’s financial burden within the population (who pays the costs).
“““““““““““““`
Could it be that the countries that WHO has ranked ahead of the USA all have socialized medicine and that is weighted much more heavily than a private system. I’m sure if a citizen of Oman, Andorra, Malta or any of those other countries on the list would prefer to stay home for treatment instead of coming over here.
Using a biased WHO stat is like the Fidel Castro admirers touting Cuba’s healthcare system and their lower infant mortality rate than the US. When one looks closer, the standards that the USA uses for determining infant mortality is not the same as what Cuba or most other countries use.
“““““““““““““““““`
While the United States reports every case of infant mortality, it has been suggested that some other developed countries do not. A 2006 article in U.S. News & World Report claims that “First, it’s shaky ground to compare U.S. infant mortality with reports from other countries. The United States counts all births as live if they show any sign of life, regardless of prematurity or size. This includes what many other countries report as stillbirths. In Austria and Germany, fetal weight must be at least 500 grams (1 pound) to count as a live birth; in other parts of Europe, such as Switzerland, the fetus must be at least 30 centimeters (12 inches) long. In Belgium and France, births at less than 26 weeks of pregnancy are registered as lifeless. And some countries don’t reliably register babies who die within the first 24 hours of birth. Thus, the United States is sure to report higher infant mortality rates. For this very reason, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which collects the European numbers, warns of head-to-head comparisons by country.” [2] However, all of the countries named adopted the WHO definition in the late 1980s or early 1990s.[2]

Jun 18, 2008 - 9:12 am 69. krispos42:

Tom W, you disappoint me.

“The post above is the longest unbroken string of ultra-orthodox, uncompromisingly hackneyed talking points and clichés I’ve ever seen.”

The nice thing about facts, Tom, is that they don’t change. Unfortunately for people that deny facts and have set their political identities on refuting facts with right-wing spin, the constant refutation of that spin or those talking points with FACTS does get tiring.

Think of it this way. The anti-war people have been saying for six years now that we’re in Iraq for the oil. The pro-war people have been changing their statements the entire time. They have WMDs! We’re freeing them from Saddam! Establishing democracy! We broke it so now we have to fix it! We can’t break the faith with those that have already died! They’ll be a genocide if we leave! A new excuse every year. Dance and spin, dance and spin.

We’re in Iraq for oil. More specifically, we’re in there for Big Oil to get the right to pump something that costs maybe $10-20 to get out of the ground and sell it for market value which is currently about #140. This was the end result of Cheney’s super-secret energy meeting.

At that energy meeting several problems were outlined. One, the US is critically dependent on foreign oil. Even though we, personally, use very little Middle Eastern oil, all oil, whether from Canada or Kuwait, is traded on the global market. A shortage of Middle Eastern oil raises everybody’s prices. And rather than starting to move away from an oil economy as a priciple of independence and national security, as well as for environmental and health reasons, the neocons decided to secure worldwide access to that oil by militarily dominating the Middle East.

Point two: Iraq was in many ways perfect for domination. It barely has a military. The terrain was great for our tanks, troops, and aircraft: flat with few natural obstacles. Saddam was pretty well hated, so not much international sympathy or national protest.

Point three: Iraq had a LOT of oil. During the Iran-Iraq War, Iraq was not able to pump very much oil. Unlike Iran, Iraq only has one port city on a small sliver of the Persian Gulf, and that was easily within reach of Iranian fighter/bombers. So during that 8-year war, Iraq was pumping far below capacity while it’s neighbors were busy pumping away for the world. Then, again after the invasion of Kuwait, UN sanctions also stopped Iraqi oil from being exported, and this continued until 2003. And since then, civil war and infrastructure decay has kept them from pumping very much.

In short, while Iraq’s neighbors have been busy pumping away for the last 28 years, Iraq hasn’t. At with it’s national reserves worth $140 a barrel, there’s trillion of dollars of wealth under that sand.

Point four: the fundamentalist Saudis in Saudi Arabia were getting restless. With high unemployment rates and, thanks to the billions of daily profit from selling oil, no reason to really work on economic development, the Saudi population was getting restless with the House of Saud and their “Muslim-in-name-only” princes. Our dear friend and ally Saudi Arabia is the home and the core of radical fundamentalist Islam, and those radicals needed a cause. Overthrowing the secular government in Iraq would draw a lot of attention away from the royalty.

Point five: The Saudies had large budget shortfalls in the early 2000’s because they are in large part a welfare state. They needed the price of oil increased to fill the government’s coffers and major combat in the Middle East would certainly do that.

So the invasion and occupation of Iraq was seen as a panacea for all these problems. With the added political benefit of Bush being a “war president”, of course. Not going to miss a trick like that one! Shamelessly exploiting the patriotic fevor of people like AJ.

So that’s why it was done, and we were promised things like $20 a barrel oil, the war will only cost $20 billion and would ultimately pay for itself, etc. And we were promised it was necessary because Saddam had sarin and nukes and antrax and was in bed with Al-Qaeda and killed puppies and left the toilet seat up and wore white after Labor Day…

Blah blah blah.

But Americans would say “Why don’t we just lift sanctions so Iraq can sell their oil on the open market again?”

That would be unacceptable, of course. Saddam would profit politically and economically, and Bush and his backers wouldn’t. Clearly a crazy idea.

“That’s quite an accomplishment, but it mirrors the Messiah’s speeches. All that comes across is smugness, self-congratulation, and teenage snark, along with a perception of current events that’s so out of touch with reality the writer ought to be in a padded room.”

Methinks thouest need to go look in a mirror, my friend. And if you want to see smugness, go look up all the statements the right-wing pundants made in the weeks Commander Codpiece Day. Here’s a taste:

“The only people who think this wasn’t a victory are Upper Westside liberals, and a few people here in Washington.”
(Charles Krauthammer, Inside Washington, WUSA-TV, 4/19/03)

“Why don’t the damn Democrats give the president his day? He won today. He did well today.”
(MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, 4/9/03)

“Now that the war in Iraq is all but over, should the people in Hollywood who opposed the president admit they were wrong?”
(Fox News Channel’s Alan Colmes, 4/25/03)

“I doubt that the journalists at the New York Times and NPR or at ABC or at CNN are going to ever admit just how wrong their negative pronouncements were over the past four weeks.”
(MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, 4/9/03)

(cough cough)

Here’s some more smugness if you can stand looking in the mirror, Tom:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×3352887

“What gets me is the utter uniformity of expression of liberals. They really are mass-produced people. Stylistically, the endless, chortling masturbation above could have been written by any one of 40 million interchangeable people.”

Again, want to get a mirror so you can see yourself as you masterbate to fantasies of Pax Americana? And how many times can we say “we were right”, anyway?

The points that I responded to I notice you’re not defending. Once again, it’s attack the messenger to distract from the message. Same thing that Simple Scotty McClellen is going through. All you year is “Oh, he’s disgruntled”, “oh, he’s an opportunist”, yet despite the fact that the Bush Administration has a copy of the book a month before it hit the shelves no conservative cheerleaders seem to be actually refuting or addressing the claims made in the book.

I guess you’ll have to speak up; I can’t hear you over the roar of the crickets.

“It’s quite depressing that an individual human would happily choose to be a complete, 100 percent-pure stereotype, as indistinguishable from his fellows as a penguin is from the millions of others in the colony.”

Yeah, isn’t it a shame that AJ and his kind chose to be part of the diehard 28% instead of the “oh my god I was wrong” 50%?

The resemblence to a gambling addict at a roulette wheel is disturbing, don’t you think? “Just a little more time, just a little more money, and it will all be worthwhile!” goes AJ and his kind, while from behind him the ignored liberals go “The only way to win is not to play, the only way to win is not to play”.

test test

Jun 18, 2008 - 9:16 am 70. AJ:

pretty clear STILL that the Left will do anyting they can to paint our heroes and our leaders as losers, murderers, evil, etc

yet, is there ANY liberal alive who ever has a bad word to say about Islamo-Fascists? Of course not. End of story.

Jun 18, 2008 - 9:19 am 71. Air2air:

Boy am I enjoying reacharound getting slammed around like a pinball. He will grow from this and one day his energy will turn in a positive direction once he understands the great sacrifice and hard work behind his great country.

I remember being like him in my early twenties. I hated everything about America because I made zero money and wondered why. Because the American dream had not yet visited me, I was gonna get back at The Man no matter what.

If I was reacharound today, I would do exactly as he is doing; cowardly sniping at our success in Iraq, one of the great humanitarian successes in the postwar period.

Jun 18, 2008 - 9:58 am 72. krispos42:

AJ, the Islamo-Fascist meme again?

How cute.

So the jihadists are channeling Mussolini?

So what exactly should we call Christians that worry about cultural decline and call for national unity based on religion, nationalism, militarism, autocracy, corporatism, tolitariansim, and the unitary executive?

Christo-Fascists?

Republicans?

AJ, this mentality that “they’re out leaders, they must be right and we must support them” is something I find distrubing and open to abuse. I would be interesting if you felt thus during the Clinton years. I know the Republicans of the time didn’t; they went out of their way to make Clinton look bad and block him at every term..

And AJ, I have plenty of bad stuff to say about fundamentalist Islam. I think religious fundamentalism of any stripe is a danger to everybody.

And I know that the way to defeat them is with the liberal ideas our Founding Fathers put forth: secular government and a separation of Church and State, strong and just central government, absolute respect of the rights of property and person, gainful and plentiful employment, a well-educated citizenry, and truly representative government through an elected body.

When we overthrow elected governments and replace them with dictators, when we support ruthless strongmen and repressive governments, and when we do not live up to our own ideals, we don’t move those countries towards us. We stop being a shining beacon, to our and their detriment.

Jun 18, 2008 - 10:02 am 73. KZO:

Hey AJ,

Actually, your “heroes and leaders” do a pretty good job on their own painting themselves as losers, murders, evil, etc. Don’t blame us for your own failings.

You ask “is there ANY liberal alive who ever has a bad word to say about Islamo-Fascists?” Yes we do. All the time. But you would have to unglue yourself from Fox Noise to know that.

We supported the invasion of Afghanistan. In fact a lot of us wanted a bigger invasion of Afghanistan to do the job right.

But then your heroic leaders got a little off track. When you were staining your jeans to invade Iraq, we were asking why go after a country that had nothing to do with 9/11? Bin Laden actually called Sadam an infidel. Sadam, a guy who had no WMDs and no ties to al Queda. Of course as regular viewers of Fox Noise and Rush Oxycotin Limbaugh, you weren’t really all that well informed so it probably made sense to you.

And what about Saudi Arabia – the country that spawned 15 of the 9/11 hijackers, Osama bin Laden and tons of money for Al Queda? Certainly we can’t offend them, they buy our planes and sell us oil. Heck, Bush literally kisses their leader on the cheek.

And what’s up with that Osama bin Laden guy anyway? He’s hiding out in Pakistan. So why don’t your heroic leaders do something about those Islamo-Fascists harboring this criminal? Oh, yeah, I forgot they are our allies in the war on terra. Besides, Bushy said “I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important.” See? He’s doing a fine job painting himself as a loser all by himself.

Jun 18, 2008 - 10:35 am 74. Mike:

The left has a montra “Bush lied people died”
I have one “Roe V Wade was a lie babies died”
Can someone from the left tell me how you can be so passionate about the lives of our soldiers but could give 2 Sh!ts about an unborn babie. I hear the left talk about a womans right to choose.
But the only choice I hear is the abortion choice.
Does anyone on the left believe in adoption?
Please people on the left tell me why you value the lives of soldiers and not the truely innocent?

Jun 18, 2008 - 10:40 am 75. Mission Accomplished:

We live in a day and age where fact-checking is easy and accessible.

Most Iraqis want American troops out of their country:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/26/AR2006092601721.html

Most people in the world are losing confidence in Bush, less favorable view of Americans, and falling support for the US-led war in Iraq:
http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?PageID=825
(Notice how there is more confidence in Putin than Bush)

Most insurgents in Iraq are Iraqi:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0923/dailyUpdate.html

I just don’t understand how anyone can still support this man, or this war. Some Republican individuals cheerlead both like this is some sort of game. Anything to smear the other team, while either defending or deflecting criticism on one of the worst American presidents in modern history. You know I’ve heard people claim that liberals were the cause of all American problems… that is borderline insanity. And so is blaming everything on Bush, which some people on the left tend to do. He certainly was a BAD president, and I want to avoid a continuance of his failed policies through John McCain.

Someone mentioned ‘trust the people.’ Obama received donations from 273709 individuals:
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/can_ind/P80003338
While McCain got donations from 117800:
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/can_ind/P80002801

Obama has more disclosure on his finance reports than McCain:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.php?cid=N00006424&cycle=2008
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.php?cid=N00009638&cycle=2008

My point is simple. Don’t be a cheerleader. Don’t turn this into team politics. Think for yourself. We have to eventually work together to fix America’s problems. Some people, sadly, outright refuse to EVER work with ‘players on the other team’ and that’s detrimental to all of our efforts and is just pathetic.

P Pine

My point on our healthcare system was that we certainly do not have the best healthcare in the world. You may be right in arguing that we should be ranked higher than 37. But we certainly aren’t even near the top. Our current healthcare system is in definite need of improvement or repair.

Jun 18, 2008 - 10:49 am 76. ~Paules:

krispos42,

Your blood for oil meme is factually wrong on all counts:

#1 You claim the war was about oil. No, it wasn’t. UN Security Council Resolution 1441 (passing on a vote of 15-0) states the reasons quite clearly. Saddam’s regime was in material violation of previous UN resolutions designed to prevent further military aggression against his neighbors. The only mention oil gets in the resolution was to note that Saddam was bypassing UN restrictions designed to provide “food for oil.”

#2 You say that Iraq had no army. Wrong again. By 1990, Saddam had grown his army to 900,000 strong. It was rated the 4th largest in the world. Casualties for his army during Gulf War One were estimated as high as 100,000. Yet the core of his army, The Republican Guard, escaped the carnage intact.

#3 You claim Iraq was not pumping any oil. Not true. Saddam avoided sanctions by manipulating the UN’s oil for food program into his own pockets. While the Iraqi people suffered, Saddam continued to spend billions on monuments to himself. By 2003, he had over a hundred presidential palaces each costing hundreds of millions of dollars.

#4 & #5 You say that the war was started to benefit the Royal House of Saud. Your claim rests on the belief that US intelligence had the foresight to see that a war next door would draw in Saudi fundamentalist jihadis. In fact, this was manifestly an intelligence failure on our part. Failure to predict exactly this possiblity forced us into the quagmire of an urban guerilla war. As for Saudi domestic concerns, you are misinformed. Generous government benefits ensure that Saudis don’t need to work. In fact, the Saudi economy supports some five million guest workers. The problem with the Saudi education system is that it produces students with useless degrees in subjects like Islamic jurisprudence rather than technology.

BTW, I love the reference to “Cheney’s super-secret energy meeting.” If it was so super-secret, how do YOU know about it?

Your thesis stands refuted, sir.

Jun 18, 2008 - 10:52 am 77. ~Paules:

krispos42,

Credit where credit is due. You are correct, Islamo-fascism is a poor term. The more accurate description would be “Islamic totalitarianism.”

Jun 18, 2008 - 10:56 am 78. Rob Schick:

Fighting evil is not for sissies…As a combat Nam vet..I witnessed many brave young Americans fight the Vietnam commies and beat them decisively only to end the war without victory because of the cowards and weasle leftist, Fonda and John Kerry ..etc..who cared not about the slaughter of millions of innocent Vietnamese and Cambodians…they’re still at it…trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory..!

Jun 18, 2008 - 11:45 am 79. Obama Remains Undeterred on Iraq - At Least Publicly:

[...] have been curiously absent from the news this year. As Abe Greenwald reports today, that is because most of the 18 benchmarks have been met: Seven of the 18 benchmarks relate to Iraq’s national security. We can just about put a check [...]

Jun 18, 2008 - 11:49 am 80. krispos42:

Paules, I appreciate the tone of your response. It is refreshing.

However, 1441 was not an authorization for military intervention. That is why nations such as Syria voted for it. Such an act required another meeting of the Security Council, something that the never happened because support for military option was not forecoming in the UNSC. The US and UK went off on their own and invaded Iraq.

Point 2: I was referring to the 2003 invasion, not the 1991 one, hence the comment about $140/barrel. Although I did hit the “#” key instead of “$”.

Point 3: Iraq did of course pump oil. My point was that production was far below nominal for nearly all of the period from 1980 to 2008 while Iraq’s neighbors were having no such problems. Therefore, Iraq’s neighbors have much less oil as a percentage of their national reserves than Iraq does. Iraq may ultimately have more oil, right now, than Saudi Arabia does. It seems likely; research and exploration of Iraq’s oil fields is far less complete than other oil-producing nations.

Points 4 and 5: Our intelligence “failures” were deliberate. Plausable deniability. After all, part of the CYA game is to make it plausible you made a good-faith mistake. Americans are uncomfortable with accusing somebody of lying. “Must have made a mistake” is a common excuse, or “must have misunderstood”. It’s always part of the calculation, the “what if we’re wrong?” scenario.

Remember, Cheney had is own Intelligence section operating out of his Vice-Presidential office who’s job was to process this kind of thing. When you base your decision on intelligence that you yourself manufactured, it’s not an intelligence failure, it’s a lie.

Continually beating up the press as being “unpatriotic” for questioning the administration doubtless encouraged dissent, and conservative dominance of the media helped as well.

And we can’t forget politicalization and cronyism of the various government agencies. Bush and Rove have little scruples against doing that.

Neocons has been frothing to get Saddam since the ’90s. Cheney himself said (as SecDef) a couple of years after the 1991 Gulf War that invading Iraq would be a quagmire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YENbElb5-xY

The fact that Saudis don’t need to work, as you claim, combined with religious fundamentalism, means that they have a lot of time to sit around and think and talk and get politically active. People by and large want to work, to be productive, to accomplish things. Many in Saudi Arabia do not have that chance and are not happy, despite their material needs being met.

I know the conservative view of people is that given a choice, people will jump at the chance to be welfare queens, but that really isn’t the case.

And they’re competing with millions of foreign workers that come there, most of them non-Arab and non-Muslim. Which makes them angry because they see is an an affront to Islam. And they have times to let that anger build.

Regarding the Cheney energy meeting, the fact that the task force met was well-publicized. The attendees, the documents, the records, and the conclusions are all currently covered under “executive priviledge”, and several organizations such as Judicial Watch and Project Censored are currently in the process of litigation about them.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/Litigation-cheney-energy-task-force

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/8-secrets-of-cheneys-energy-task-force-come-to-light/

Jun 18, 2008 - 11:50 am 81. AirborneInfidel:

Just a few observations: 1)where were the anti-war protests when Clinton deployed us to both Kosovo and Somalia? (are Democrat wars good and Republican wars bad?) 2)why is it okay to use deadly force to stop genocide in Darfur but not to stop a murderous dictator in Iraq who used chemical weapons to kill over 100,000 Kurds? (by the way, that’s mass destruction by anyone’s figures)
3)Is reacharound reaching for a javelin, perhaps?

Jun 18, 2008 - 2:12 pm 82. b:

“Seeing how there are about 100 books explaining why the war was wrong to every 1 book that said it was right, I would say you are all good objective readers. ”

I can’t figure out if this is appeal to authority, argument by statistics, or a non sequitur, but I am sure it’s grammatically incorrect.

Jun 18, 2008 - 3:01 pm 83. Roque Nuevo:

Along with the “benchmark” line, it’s interesting to follow the “more troops”/Rumsfeld-has-to-go line. This was an important line of criticism before the surge. When Bush did send more troops and did get rid of Rumsfeld, the line was, “too little, too late.” Now that there’s progress due to the surge and Gates’s leadership, the “more troops/Rumsfeld” line is forgotten. This is the clearest evidence that these “critics”, while exercising their patriotic rights to criticize, are not being honest. Plainly, they’re anti American (or dupes of anti Americans) and just cast about for a plausible handle to create “dissidence” (which is also supremely patriotic, of course). I find it difficult to imagine how an American could or our increasing our influence in the most volatile region of the world while at the same time increasing freedom in that same region. If you want to be anti American, fine. There are millions and millions of you in the world. But don’t try to fool people into thinking that you’re patriotic about it. That smacks of the “fifth column”. The neo colonial argument is only one of the many arguments that the Democrats/Obama will be pulling out of their hats:

1. Strategic mistake: we damaged the geopolitical system. Among other things, the Iraq war has increased Iran’s influence.
2. Humanitarianism: we caused an immense number of baby deaths, which can not be justified by any short-term strategic benefits.
3. “Bush lied”. This one will never go away.
4. The Iraq war is a distraction from the “real fight” against al Qaida. This is sure-fire. One can always say the bin Laden got away because or our incompetence and that we face a strategic threat from them, which is undiminished and even strengthened by the Iraq war. Then one gets a lot of sage nodding from the intellectuals.

Jun 18, 2008 - 3:18 pm 84. KZO:

…AirborneInfidel:

“1)where were the anti-war protests when Clinton deployed us to both Kosovo and Somalia? (are Democrat wars good and Republican wars bad?)”

There was anti-war rhetoric. Interestingly most of the anti-war rhetoric for the Kosovo invasion was by Republicans (Delay, Lott, Hannity, Snow, etc.) http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/18/161016/461 The irony is that Kosovo was a success, unlike Iraq.

“2)why is it okay to use deadly force to stop genocide in Darfur but not to stop a murderous dictator in Iraq who used chemical weapons to kill over 100,000 Kurds? (by the way, that’s mass destruction by anyone’s figures).”

And why didn’t Reagan do something about it when it happened…20 YEARS AGO? Or Bush 41? Hint: we didn’t care about the Kurds and still don’t. Sadam was a murderous dictator for years and we supported him with our money and rhetoric. Only when he no served our needs did we suddenly get a concience about the Kurds.

“3)Is reacharound reaching for a javelin, perhaps?”
I dunno.

Jun 18, 2008 - 3:51 pm 85. Roque Nuevo:

Krispos42 thinks of islamic fascism as a “meme”. He tries to be sarcastic by asking if the Muslims are “channeling Mussolini”. Har-de-har-har-har! That should destroy any attempt to link radical Islam with fascism!

This might interest him, if he’s interested in reading people who actually know something:http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=2308. There are many other analysts who have drawn the same conclusion, Paul Berman foremost among them–”Terror and Liberalism”.

You can’t compare the Christian right with the islamic fascists. That’s just stupid, even if it allows you to think you’re so smart. And don’t make me explain why, because you’ll just end up looking even more stupid than you do right now.

Jun 18, 2008 - 3:55 pm 86. Jim:

Hooray! Mission Accomplished. Since failure to meet the benchmarks was the excuse for not bringing the troops home, logically success means the troops can now come home (probably right after heavy GOP election losses in November: Part II).

Jun 18, 2008 - 4:09 pm 87. Tom W.:

krispos42 says: “Tom W., you disappoint me.”

Good. I’d be worried if you approved of me.

Wading through the approximately 9 million words you’ve written so far, I learn that you think the failures of the U.S. intelligence community were deliberate.

You clearly get your ideas from Steven Seagal and Jean-Claude Van Damme movies.

Just… embarrassing.

Jun 18, 2008 - 6:37 pm 88. exDemocrat:

Mission Accomplished, you are the worst of America.

Socialist/Soros talking points spewed from dailykos like a degenerate moonbat.

Get the hell out of my country.

Jun 18, 2008 - 7:08 pm 89. joe:

when did Petreus become in charge of policy. Did I miss an election?

Jun 18, 2008 - 7:59 pm 90. gus_itarian:

Why is it that progressives think that the Middle East/OPEC can sell their asphalt crude for the $140 a barrell that west texas sweet goes for?

Jun 18, 2008 - 8:57 pm 91. Bart:

“Mission Accomplished”:

Your references are inadequate, inaccurate, tendentious, and out of date. Liberal fools are still clinging to the past, desperately hoping that the “insurgency” will flare up again so that they can smugly pretend that their ability to be gulled by the major media is a sign of their overarching intellectual superiority.

Get a clue. The insurgency is over, Al Qaeda is on the run, a new day is dawning for the people of the Iraq and the greater ME, and you and your sycophantic “anti-war” cohort were selfish, mean-spirited, neurotic, gullible, naive, callow, foolish, childish, and just plain wrong in your opposition.

Jun 18, 2008 - 10:08 pm 92. krispos42:

Roque Nuevo, that’s a good hearty laugh you have there. Which is a good thing, because the “your sarcasm bounces of me and sticks to you” attempt was rather lame.

The fascists states of past were not religious ones. While obviously religion was present, it was subverted and controlled by fascism, not the other way around.

What we are facing is theocratical Muslim states that may or may not have some trappings of a representative government, not authoritarian states that have some trappings of Islam.

And we can’t compare theocratical Christian states to theorcratical Muslim ones? Why not? Oh, right, I forgot. Christianity is automatically good and always has been and all ways will be.

However, I did thumb through the article you mentioned, and it appears that Algeria as described has elements of Nazism/fascism, however it appears that the most important entity in Algeria is Allah, not the State itself or a particular ethnic group. So what we get is theocratical tolitarianism, or perhaps fundamentalist tolitarianism.

As a practical matter, there probably isn’t much difference. A bullet to the back of the head is a bullet to the back of the head, after all.

Tom W.

“Wading through the approximately 9 million words you’ve written so far, I learn that you think the failures of the U.S. intelligence community were deliberate.

There were no intelligence failures, really. President’s Daily Briefing, August 6, 2001, for example. The FBI and the CIA concluded in Febuary 2001 that Al Qaeda was behind the USS Cole bombing. What’s-his-name, some guy from the Pentagon, flying down to Crawford to personally deliver a warning about Al Qaeda. The Minneapolis Field Office of the FBI finding and arresting Moussaoui, but an FBI lawyer named Marion “Spike” Bowman bungled the request for a search warrant for his rooms, and they weren’t searched until after 9/11.

There was spin and manipulation of good intelligence, repression of bad intelligence, and in at least one case a deliberate move to destroy a bearer of unwanted facts. Joe Wilson, specifically.

Remember that George Tenet was given Medal of Freedom when he retired. Why? He failed to disrupt the 9/11 attacks, although this may be due to a lack of guidence from the White House. However, he also failed on the question of the types, quantities, and locations of Iraqi WMDs.

If Bush gave him a MoF, then Bush is rewarding him for his performance. Which means that being “wrong” about 9/11 and/or Iraqi WMDs made Bush pleased. And why would falsely having an excuse to invade Iraq make Bush happy?

Marion “Spike” Bowman got a medal and a bonus, too, for “exceptional performance”, even though he gave the Mpls Field Office bad legal advice and didn’t pursue the warrant for Moussaoui’s room, which contained evidence of links to an Al-Qaeda financier and an Al-Qaeda boss that ran hijacking operations.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=marion_(_spike_)_bowman

The whole thing stinks to high heaven. Failures getting medals shoved up their butts. I mean, okay, they screwed up, and assuming it was accidental you just quietly put them out to pasture. But then giving them medals and bonuses and public congratulations???

Jun 19, 2008 - 12:31 am 93. Bruce:

The Demoncats should have their noses rubbed in it by the Pubbies (if they had spines). Only Rush and other talk show hosts seem to be doing this at all.

Jun 19, 2008 - 5:48 am 94. Roque Nuevo:

Krispos 42,

Fascism is notoriously difficult to define, mainly because it’s an anti intellectual movement and as such does not generate much “theory”. Moreover, there is no such thing as a “fascist ideology” apart from its manifestations in specific cases. In other words it takes on different characteristics depending on the nation it rises in. Even so, can you explain why today’s Islamic fascism is not “subverting and controlling” religion in the same way Franco did? It’s impossible to understand “What we are facing is theocratical Muslim states that may or may not have some trappings of a representative government, not authoritarian states that have some trappings of Islam.” What on Earth are you talking about?

Can you think of an example of a theocratical Christian state in the last 200 years?

Can you think of an example of a Republican of the religious right who “calls for national unity based on religion, nationalism, militarism, autocracy, corporatism, tolitariansim, and the unitary executive?”

I didn’t think so.

That’s why you sound so stupid.

Jun 19, 2008 - 7:52 am 95. Aureliano:

That’s why you sound so stupid.

Among other reasons. I mean, really, who can take anybody seriously who still hangs out on Democratic Underground? That site is so far in the rear-view mirror that nobody even bothers to make fun of it anymore.

As per his ‘arguments’, I mostly skipped over his incoherently organized first screed, a screed rife with endless easily refuted leftovers froms years old polemical rants.

Geez, the guy actually pulled out the old ‘million dead Iraqis’ balderdash. This leftover doesn’t even know those Lancet studies citing those ridiculously overinflated numbers are a running joke: Some people are laughingly guessing how many Lancet’s next ’study’, undoubtedly timed with the 2008 election the way the last studies were timed for the 2006 and 2004 elections, will claim are dead due to the war. Five million? Six hundred trillion? A google? I’d put money on 2.5 million dead (an even 10% of Iraq’s total population), but I think instead I’ll bet money that UC Berkeley ’sociologists’ will come out with yet another election-year timed ’study’ about how conservatives are dumb, mean ol’ poopy-heads.

How very droll.

Jun 19, 2008 - 8:51 am 96. SukieTawdry:

Just you wait. One day the Democrats will take credit for the success of the independent, democratic, western-friendly Iraqi state claiming it was all the pressure they brought to bear that turned the trick. In fact, they’re doing it already.

Jun 19, 2008 - 8:54 am 97. krispos42:

Roque Nuevo-

A theocratic Christian state in the last 200 years? None come to mind. Of course if you go back further you will find many of them, but the secularization of Western governments (one of those evil librul concepts) did away with them. Boo theocracy, hooray Enlightenment!

“Can you think of an example of a Republican of the religious right who “calls for national unity based on religion, nationalism, militarism, autocracy, corporatism, tolitariansim, and the unitary executive?”

Yes. George W. Bush, his administration, and his supporters.

Religion: Public prayer in school, 10 Commandments everyplace, the constant declaration that we are a “Christian Nation”, Intelligent Design, White House Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, the constant, bi-annual sucking-up to the Religious Right, anti-abortion and anti-gay laws, and the constant expressed desire to base American secular law on the Bible. In fact, Mike Huckabee said a couple of months ago that the Constitution was inferior to the Bible and must be amended to be in with it, for which he got robust cheers.

Nnationalism: America, love it or leave it, America’s the greatest country on the globe, America’s the greatest country ever, we have the best health care system, if you criticize America you’re an America-hater, evil liberals should just get out of America. You can find many examples just on this Web page if you scroll up.

Autocracy: hmmm, I made a mistake here, for this topic was covered under “unitary executive”. I was thinking of a oligarchy, which is what we’re getting thanks to corporate consolidation and the Reagan and Bush tax cuts.

Corporatism: Washington is awash in lobbyists who outnumber legislators about 800 to 1, industries are writing legistation for Congress (usually Republicans) that gets put into bills as written, the replacement of traditionally government services with corporate contactors (privatization), subsities and tax breaks for transnational corporations, and the removal of laws and regulations that corporations find inconvenient such as environmental laws.

Tolitarianism: Extensivie corruption and politicalization of the federal and several state governments for partisan political purposes, electioneering and election fraud, partisan congressional redistricting, domination of the media, denial and disregard for Constititonal rights and personal liberties such as habeas corpus, and creation of a surveillence society.

Unitary executive: Bush, specifically, has been using this theory to ignore Congress and the law because that would infringe upon his executive power. Signing statesments used as line-item vetoes are one aspect of this theory.

Of course, this is all to keep us safe from terrorists, as Bush and Company never ever ever fail to remind us.

Jun 19, 2008 - 9:17 am 98. frankhagan.com » Benchmarks, smenchmarks:

[...] being resolved? We haven’t heard much about them lately. Abe Greenwald at Pajamas Media has the scoop: [In 2007,] Congress’s Iraq “benchmarks” were all the rage among Democrats. Every argument [...]

Jun 19, 2008 - 9:47 am 99. john:

So few pearls so many swine. Remember the Carter years? They may be comming back. GOD help us all.

Jun 19, 2008 - 10:32 am 100. haywood jay:

Would the unwashed masses please go back and read the UN Resolution 1441, they might see that it did indeed authorize the continuation of the initial conflict. They might read how when the conditions for the cease-fire that halted (temporarily) the 1991 campaign were not met, the UN resolutions (most notably 687) which authorized the 1991 campaign were back in play.

Jun 19, 2008 - 11:45 am 101. Roque Nuevo:

Krispos42,

Well, I warned you that if you made me explain these things you’d end up looking more stupid than you do already. But, you went ahead anyway, so it’s not my fault.

No theocratic Christian states out there? Well, so much for your original comparison. Right? The only theocratic states out there are Muslim, not Christian. It’s even debatable whether there ever was such a thing as a theocratic Christian state (after the Eastern Roman Empire, that is).

“Public prayer in school, 10 Commandments everyplace, the constant declaration that we are a “Christian Nation”, Intelligent Design, White House Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, the constant, bi-annual sucking-up to the Religious Right, anti-abortion and anti-gay laws, and the constant expressed desire to base American secular law on the Bible” does not add up to “national unity based on religion”. That’s because we have the First Amendment. Idiot.

The ideas you call “nationalism” would fit just about every nation on earth. Therefore it’s meaningless for analysis. In the context of a discussion of fascism, “nationalism” must mean something more than that. Something like glorifying the nation above the individual. In this sense, nobody in the US is nationalist.

“Militarism”, again when discussing fascism, doesn’t mean having a strong military or even having the strongest military. It means glorifying the military ethic and it means militarizing society as a whole. For example the “Hitler Youth”, “the Joy in Work” movements in Nazi Germany, which effectively organized society into military-like groups subject to control from above. Give me some examples of Bush doing anything even analogous to this. You can’t? Well, like I said, you’re looking pretty stupid right now.

“Autocracy” is a synonym for “dictatorship”. Rule of one, according to the word’s Greek roots. Just how does Bush fit this definition? Just to begin with, if he were an autocrat, he wouldn’t be leaving office next year in accordance with the Constitution. It does not mean trying to expand executive authority. All (and I mean all) presidents have done this, beginning of course with Washington, who expanded it the most with respect to the Constitution. The tendency of the executive to do this is recognized and even encouraged by the doctrine of separation of powers, which is one of the keystones of the Constitution. If Bush has done this effectively, then future presidents will thank him for it, just as they thank Washington and others today.

“Corporatism” does not mean “rule by great business enterprises” as you think. It means that society is divided into groups according to some standard (workers, businessmen, military, middle class) and these groups have representation at the national level, while individuals do not. See “militarism”. This is anathema to Bush and to Conservative ideology in general. It just doesn’t apply to today’s America. It applies, for example, to today’s Venezuela.

“Tolitariansim”, is a word invented by Mussolini to express the will to control society down to the individual’s own thought by the state. This has never happened in human history. It’s only an ideal. But it’s obviously related to state control over education, religion, the press and so forth. It’s related to a police state, which will enforce thought crime with prison and worse. If you think you live under a totalitarian regime in America under Bush, you are seriously deluded. Where are the concentration camps? Where have people been rousted at three am and disappeared? Where are the songs and poems dedicated to the Great Leader? Come on! Gimme a break! You can’t be that stupid!

“The unitary executive” is not synonymous with autocracy, as any high school student should know (or used to know, anyway. Were you home schooled by deranged socialists, or what?) The US has a unitary executive because it’s in the Constitution. I can’t see anything even remotely similar to fascism in this.

Like I said, leave it alone now. You’re just digging your stupid hole deeper all the time. Just bug out and maybe read a bit and get some education. Then you can come back with something that makes sense.

Jun 19, 2008 - 11:53 am 102. Roque Nuevo:

Krispos42,

I want to apologize for my last post. After I posted it, I realized that you are not really stupid at all. You’re only very young. Probably about sixteen or thereabouts. So it’s really very normal for you to have such half-baked ideas. It doesn’t mean you’re stupid. Just the opposite. It means you’re thinking and trying to figure some stuff out that seems very confusing to you. It’s natural for someone so young to latch on to the simplest explanation (for example, Bust lied, Bush is fascist and so forth) and even more so when this simple and reductionist explanation is labeled “progressive” by today’s media. Teenagers will always want to belong to the most popular group and the “progressive” group fits the bill nicely. Plus it may put you into conflict with older people and give you a way to irritate them and get revenge for their supporting you, giving you an education, and otherwise preparing you to assume an adult’s responsibilities.

I am no longer a teenager. So I cannot debate with one. It would be taking unfair advantage. This was a huge slip-up on my part and very dishonorable. Therefore, I beg your forgiveness.

Jun 19, 2008 - 12:34 pm 103. The Dude:

People don’t really care about the benchmarks, it was just another hammer the left used to pound the Iraq War. Also, when will John Murtha Apologize to our Marines????…..http://thedudesblog.com/2008/06/18/murtha-refuses-to-apologize-to-exonerated-marines-does-anyone-care/

Jun 19, 2008 - 12:38 pm 104. Tom W.:

krispos42 says: “There was spin and manipulation of good intelligence, repression of bad intelligence, and in at least one case a deliberate move to destroy a bearer of unwanted facts. Joe Wilson, specifically.”

For some reason–well, the reason is a desire to lie–the Joe Wilson cultists never admit that Wilson actually confirmed the White House’s position, that Iraq TRIED to get uranium from Niger.

All you have to do is read the report by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence,

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/iraq.html

“II. Niger.”

Page 43:

“The intelligence report [based on Wilson’s information] indicated that former Nigerien Prime Minister Ibrahim Mayaki was unaware of any contracts that had been signed between Niger and any rogue states for the sale of yellowcake while he was Prime Minister (1997-1999) or Foreign Minister (1996-1997). Mavaki said that if there had been any such contract during his tenure, he would have been aware of it. Mayaki said, however, that in June 1999 [redacted] businessman, approached him and insisted that Mayaki meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss ‘expanding commercial relations’ between Niger and Iraq. The intelligence report said that Mayaki interpreted “expanding commercial relations” to mean that the delegation wanted to discuss uranium yellowcake sales. The intelligence report also said that ‘although the meeting took place, Mayaki let the matter drop due to the UN sanctions on Iraq.’”

Wilson didn’t bring the Bush administration any “unwanted facts.” That’s a total lie, told by total liars.

Jun 19, 2008 - 12:44 pm 105. krispos42:

Roque Nuevo:

Oh, goodie, you’re going to spank my metaphorical bottom until it’s metaphorically red? I can’t wait, becaue bragging about how smart you are and what you’re going to do to me is quite amusing.

No theocratic Christian states out there? Well, so much for your original comparison. Right?

Yeah, I think that’s what I said. Lemme check. Oh, yup, here it is. You asked me to name a theocratic Christian state in the past 200 years and I said there aren’t any. Then I said that the evil libruls and their progressive agenda were the cause of that. Boo theocracy, hooray Enlightenment! But let’s not forget who was launching crusades and having Inquisitions, shall we?

…does not add up to “national unity based on religion”. That’s because we have the First Amendment. Idiot.

If you can’t see that mandatory public-school Christian prayer, mandatory public-school teaching of Christian creationism, mandatory public-building displays of religious tracts, forbidding certain actions such as gay marriage and abortion because Christian activists think it is a violation of God’s word, is the establishment of Christianity as the official religion of the US government. If you’re doing it, you’re violating the First.

The ideas you call “nationalism” would fit just about every nation on earth. Therefore it’s meaningless for analysis.

Most people have a national identity of some kind. And being part of that national identity and supporting it is called “patriotism”. Nationalism is loving your country so much you become immune to what it does wrong and any problems it may have, and becoming hostile to anybody that dares to suggest otherwise.

Nationalism in this thread:

“If you cannot stomach it, sit back, shut up and stop interfering.”

“Siding with your country means supporting the troops and their mission, not looking for all the wrong you believe they have done…”

“Gotta love how reacharound refers to those who support their country in a time of war as “idiots.” ”

“ALL democrats hate America and wish for defeat. If you help I-SLAM defeat America, YOU will be among the 1st executed for un I SLAMIC activities.”

“pretty clear STILL that the Left will do anyting they can to paint our heroes and our leaders as losers, murderers, evil, etc”

“surge and Gates’s leadership, the “more troops/Rumsfeld” line is forgotten. This is the clearest evidence that these “critics”, while exercising their patriotic rights to criticize, are not being honest. Plainly, they’re anti American (or dupes of anti Americans) and just cast about for a plausible handle to create “dissidence” (which is also supremely patriotic, of course).”

“If you want to be anti American, fine. There are millions and millions of you in the world. But don’t try to fool people into thinking that you’re patriotic about it.”

“Socialist/Soros talking points spewed from dailykos like a degenerate moonbat.

Get the hell out of my country.”

George Orwell had a good qoute about this: “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.”

Militarism”, again when discussing fascism, doesn’t mean having a strong military or even having the strongest military. It means glorifying the military ethic and it means militarizing society as a whole.

Well, then, let’s look it up.

Militarism is the “belief or desire of a government or people that a country should maintain a strong military capability and be prepared to use it aggressively to defend or promote national interests” [Source: Apple Dictionary, Version 1.0.2]. It has also been defined as “aggressiveness that involves the threat of using military force” Online die.net dictionary, as well as “Glorification of the ideals of a professional military class” and “Predominance of the armed forces in the administration or policy of the state” American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language

Regarding autocracy, I corrected myself in the post you replied to.

Corporatism” does not mean “rule by great business enterprises” as you think. It means that society is divided into groups according to some standard (workers, businessmen, military, middle class) and these groups have representation at the national level, while individuals do not.

Yeah, that’s the definition of “corporatism”… in the 1920s. How about a modern look at it?

Contemporary popular (as opposed to social science) usage of the term is more pejorative, especially when used in the shorter form corporatism (corporativism usually implies only the Italian construct indicating public rather than private organizing), emphasizing the role of business corporations in government decision-making at the expense of the public. The power of business to affect government legislation through lobbying and other avenues of influence in order to promote their interests is usually seen as detrimental to those of the public. In this respect, corporatism may be characterized as an extreme form of regulatory capture, and is also termed corporatocracy, a form of plutocracy.

If you think you live under a totalitarian regime in America under Bush, you are seriously deluded. Where are the concentration camps? Where have people been rousted at three am and disappeared? Where are the songs and poems dedicated to the Great Leader?

No, I don’t think that, at least, not yet. However there are things that he has done, by executive order, that if Clinton has done a mere decade ago, would have had righties buying guns and stockpiling ammo and toilet paper at their local militia compound. The repeal of Posse Commitatus (sp?) is one, the use of unaccountable mercenaries against Americans is another. And that nifty executive order that allows him to free the assets of anybody that he and he alone determines is undermining Iraqi reconstruction is pretty nifty. And of course the secret “no fly” lists that now include political activists is an interesting development.

John Dean himself said we were in a “proto-fascist” state. God, I miss the old-school Republicans. I’d probably be one if they were still the party of Eisenhowser.

Interesting apology there. Quite a way to dig yourself out of pit of embarassment, just declare that your Mighty Sword of Facts is TOO POWERFUL for my “16-year-old” undeveloped crowd-following brain to deal with. So you graciously spare me any more mental torment or body blows to my ego.

Hmph. A Republican that knows when to quit. Fascinating.

Jun 19, 2008 - 11:39 pm 106. krispos42:

Tom W.

…Mayaki interpreted “expanding commercial relations” to mean that the delegation wanted to discuss uranium yellowcake sales.

“Interpreted”. For an assumption, Bush, his administration, and his media cheerleaders sure spend a lot of time and effort asserting this as a fact.

So they why did Bush blow Valerie Plame’s cover? Why did Bush blow her CIA cover agency’s cover?

Hmmm… why would the Bush Administration want to destroy a vital anti-nuclear-proliferation intelligence unit who’s area of operation included Iran?

Gee, it’s almost like… he didn’t want any intelligence out of Iran. Like… he wanted an absence of facts so there would be uncertainty. Like… he wanted uncertainty to bolster his excuse for attacking Iran because “we don’t know”.

But I’m sure Bush wouldn’t do that. That would put Brewster Jenning’s CIA agents at risk of capture, interrogation, and death. That betrayal would hurt both the CIA’s retention of current employees and recruitment of new employees. That betrayal would make other countries’ intelligence services much more reluctant to share information for fear it would be used for partisan domestic political purposes, and that would inhibit our prosecution of the War on Terror. And Bush would never to that!

Jun 19, 2008 - 11:51 pm 107. krispos42:

Aureliano:

I mostly skipped over his incoherently organized first screed, a screed rife with endless easily refuted leftovers froms years old polemical rants

So you didn’t read it, but you know it’s full of easily refuted items? Items that you can’t be bothered to actually refute?

All talk, no action, then.

Jun 20, 2008 - 12:01 am 108. Tom W.:

krispos42:

You said Wilson brought unwelcome information, when the reality is he confirmed the Bush administration’s position that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Niger. Why didn’t you know this? Why weren’t you familiar with the Phase I report of the SSCI?

No amount of smug verbal diarrhea from you can obscure that fact. You were dead wrong, and proven to be dead wrong. Either you’re ignorant or a liar.

You can amuse yourself all you want with what you see as your own rhetorical brilliance; the notion that Wilson refuted the Bush administration’s claims is a flat-out lie.

And everybody her knows that Richard Armitage was the leaker of Plame’s identity. Armitage himself has admitted it.

If you had truth on your side, you wouldn’t have to lie.

Your hero Wilson is a real piece of work. Page 45 of the SSCI’s report on Iraq pre-war intelligence contains the following paragraph:

“The former ambassador also told Committee staff that he was the source of a Washington Post article (’CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report of Uranium Bid,’ June 12, 2003) which said, ‘among the Envoy’s conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because “the dates were wrong and the names were wrong.’” Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the ‘dates were wrong and the names were wrong’ when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have ‘misspoken’ to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were ‘forged.’”

“Misspoken.” Another sickening liar with no morals whatsoever.

Some of us actually care about our country and aren’t willing to embrace liars and seditious opportunists just because of political expediency.

Jun 20, 2008 - 2:25 am 109. Aureliano:

So you didn’t read it, but you know it’s full of easily refuted items? Items that you can’t be bothered to actually refute?

I glanced through your little high school manifesto. EVERY item I saw was in error, or unbelievably simplistic, without exception, beginning with the million dead Iraqis myth, non sequitors like Valerie Plame (already covered), misrepresented timelines, five years old debunked assertions, etc., etc., etc.

If you were 0-for-5, or 0-for-10, why would I have continued perusing your badly organized, poorly thought out ‘treatise’. Some of these arguments are OVER five years old. You can’t just write and think like a bumpkin, rehash ancient debunked assertions, and expect to be effective or influential.

Face it, krispos42. You’re yesterday’s news. You’re trying to keep a war from happening that has already happened, trying to lose a war that has already been won. You’re way too late for this party. All the pretty girls have left and you’re left in a dark corner with the rest of the losers nursing your warm watery beer.

Do you really think that politics is nothing more than a big giant game of ‘Find the Conspiracy’? Only ignorants and nutters believe that.

And kids.

Jun 20, 2008 - 6:28 am 110. krispos42:

Tom W.

No amount of smug verbal diarrhea from you can obscure that fact. You were dead wrong, and proven to be dead wrong. Either you’re ignorant or a liar.

I find it very interesting that the only think you “claim” to have gotten me on is the Wilson/Plame affair. You’ve conspiciously dropped your other mistakes from this discussion, and I’ve been civil enough to let sleeping dog lie without insults. You method of argument strongly resembles that famous Faux News charon the day that Libby was convicted of four out of 5 federal counts. Remember that one? It said “Libby Found Not Guilty of Lying to the FBI” or words to that effect.

None of what you way, of course, refutes the simple facts that the Bush Admistration grossly overstated the case of Iraq looking for more uranium ore to supplement the 580 metric tons it had sitting in a bunker under IEAE supervision and was called on it by Joe Wilson in an op-ed in July 2003. Coincidently, the same month senior Adminstration officials told Novak that Valerie Plame was in fact NOC agent for a covert CIA front company called Brewster Jennings that worked on counter-proliferation.

Since the quote you provide above has very little context, I will simply note that the Niger documents were proven fakes in January of 2003 by a variety of federal agencies.

In September of 2002 Bush’s Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley was given those fake documents by the head of the Italian intelligence agency SISMI because the CIA was skeptical about them. A month later, Bush begins talking in speechs about how dangerous Iraq would be if they got uranium. A specific charge, that Iraq had been caught trying to buy uranium, is removed by Tenent.

A month after that, the part removed by Tenet winds up in a State Department “fact sheet”.

A month after that, the various federal agencies conclude the documents are false, yet they still somehow wind up in the 2003 SOTU speech gave, the famous Sixteen Words.

Oh, if only Another sickening liar with no morals whatsoever applied to Republicans a tenth as much as they apply to non-Republicans.

Some of us actually care about our country and aren’t willing to embrace liars and seditious opportunists just because of political expediency.

We are in agreement.

Jun 20, 2008 - 11:51 am 111. krispos42:

Aureliano-

I glanced through your little high school manifesto. EVERY item I saw was in error, or unbelievably simplistic…

Ho boy, a representative of the “they hate us for our freedom” side of the argument is accusing me a being simplistic.

[sigh]

If you have a problem with the Lancet study regarding Iraq, then you also have a problem with the estimated casualties of the 2005 tsunami and the violence in the former Yugoslovia.

Past that point, I don’t see much purpose in any conversation with you, as we seem to have a fundamental difference about what constitutes a fact.

Jun 20, 2008 - 12:15 pm 112. Captain Hate:

The irony is that Kosovo was a success, unlike Iraq.
I don’t think I’ve seen irony used before in a way that means “untruth”. The most charitable thing to be said about Kosovo is that it’s a work in progress but it still has deep divisions and hasn’t really gotten on its feet economically or politically. Russia still doesn’t recognize it which is problematic considering its location. That’s not to say it can’t become a success in time but that hasn’t happened yet by any reasonable benchmark.

Jun 20, 2008 - 1:11 pm 113. Tom W.:

krispos42 says, “A month after that, the various federal agencies conclude the documents are false, yet they still somehow wind up in the 2003 SOTU speech gave, the famous Sixteen Words.”

You’re lying about the time line.

SSCI Phase I report, page 80:

Conclusion 21. When coordinating the State of the Union, no Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) analysts or officials told the National Security Council (NSC) to remove the “16 words” or that there were concerns about the credibility of the Iraq-Niger uranium reporting. A CIA official’s original testimony to the Committee that he told an NSC official to remove the words “Niger” and “500 tons” from the speech, is incorrect.

Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction (Lord Butler Report)

Paragraph 503:

From our examination of the intelligence and other material on Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa, we have concluded that:

a. It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999.

b. The British Government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger’s exports, the intelligence was credible.

c. The evidence was not conclusive that Iraq actually purchased, as opposed to having sought, uranium, and the British Government did not claim this.

d. The forged documents were not available to the British Government at the time its assessment was made, and so the fact of the forgery does not undermine it.
__________

As for insults, your entire approach reeks of carefully crafted condescension and über-snarkiness, so for you to congratulate yourself on your patience and forbearance is simply more dishonesty.

You really do have a problem expressing the truth in all its forms, don’t you?

Jun 20, 2008 - 8:13 pm 114. Headlines You Might Have Missed « New Wars:

[...] Remember Those Iraqi Benchmarks? Well, Guess What… [...]

Jun 21, 2008 - 5:24 am 115. Dave:

I’ve been waiting for months to hear about a friend or associate of Obama’s who is not either corrupt, radical or a criminal.

Still waiting. Does he have ANY normal American friends and associates? Or are ALL of them radical leftists, corrupt kleptocrats or criminals either convicted, indicted or about to be both?

Still waiting.

Jun 21, 2008 - 6:49 am 116. krispos42:

Oh, Tom W., Tom W., Tom W.,

The stationary was stolen from the Niger Embassy in Italy in Jeanuary 2001.

In September 2002 the Italian intelligence agency SISMI passed on forged documents written on the stolen stationary to Hadley after the CIA wasn’t going anywhere with them.

In October 2002, the CIA removed from a Bush speech in Ohio the phrase “having been caught attempting to purchase up to 500 metric tons of uranium oxide”.

Also in October 2002 an Italian journalist presented the forged Niger documents to the US Embassy for confirmation of authenticity, as she had a source that wanted to sell them to her.

In December 2002, “having been caught attempting to purchase up to 500 metric tons of uranium oxide” has become inbedded in a State Department fact sheet about Iraq.

In January 2003, the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research as well as the National Intelligence Counsel both say the documents are forged. The”16″ words still wind up in the SOTU speech because, apparantly, George Tenet and his underlings are just too busy to check it beforehand.

*****

In addition, Joe Wilson went to Niger in 2002 after Dick Cheney reads about an earlier reports (probably the 1999 one you are referencing) and wanted the CIA’s analysis of the issue. Joe Wilson went, interviewed, researched, and came back, saying that there was nothing to the report.

Because this issue is complex, I’ve been using the timeline on Wikipedia. Enjoy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_leak_scandal_timeline

*****

Sarcasm and snark are part of the game. You’ve done both as well, so you’re hardly in a position to complain. However, I do give you credit and a “thumbs-up” for not being unneccessarily vulgar like Aureliano and Roque Nuevo.

Jun 21, 2008 - 9:30 am 117. Tom W.:

krispos42 says “Joe Wilson went, interviewed, researched, and came back, saying that there was nothing to the report.”

That’s a lie. Wilson confirmed what the Bush administration claimed, that Iraq TRIED to get uranium from Niger. I’ve posted the proof above.

Again, you’re lying about the time line, and you’re lying about Wilson. You’re deliberately conflating different issues in an attempt to confuse people.

If you had truth on your side, you wouldn’t resort to lies.

But what else can I expect from someone who believes the “Lancet” report.

We’ve been in Iraq five years. That’s about 1865 days.

One million deaths divided by 1865 is about 548 deaths per day.

This is an average, so that means on some days there would be many more than 548 deaths.

I challenge you to find me ten news reports of 548 or more people dying in Iraq on one day. I know of a stampede that killed almost a thousand, and a multiple truck bombing that killed about 300. The stampede can’t be blamed on the invasion, so it doesn’t count.

You should be able to find hundreds of articles that report at least 548 deaths in one day, as a direct result of terrorism or Coalition military action. All I ask for is ten such accounts.

If you can’t find these articles, then that proves the “Lancet” study is wrong, and you’ll admit it, right?

Sure you will.

Even if the “Lancet” study were right–and it isn’t–how can the deaths be blamed on the Coalition? Iraqis and their Muslim co-religionists chose to murder Iraqis by the tens of thousands in an effort to derail democracy and install some form of totalitarian rule.

The deaths are the fault of the Iraqis and their Muslim co-religionists.

Jun 21, 2008 - 4:07 pm 118. Dave Surls:

“I’ve been waiting for months to hear about a friend or associate of Obama’s who is not either corrupt, radical or a criminal.”

My best advice is: don’t hold your breath while you’re waiting.

Jun 21, 2008 - 8:26 pm 119. Dan R.:

Has anyone besides me noticed that the great majority of the posts from the anti-war types, both here and elsewhere, read as if they were written by seventh-graders? When confronted with facts that contradict their assertions, they invariably begin cursing and calling people names.

I don’t care for Ann Coulter, but she really nails it when she says “Debating a liberal is like debating a 5-year old.”

Jun 22, 2008 - 12:04 pm 120. abe greenwald:

[...] progress in Iraq because so much progress has now taken place. June 17, 2008 – by abe greenwald …http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/remember-those-iraqi-benchmarks-well-guess-what/Media Matters – Abe GreenwaldMedia Matters – abe greenwald &ampltem&ampgtCommentary&amplt/em&ampgt [...]

Jun 29, 2008 - 9:13 am 121. BizzyBlog » Victoria Wells Wulsin’s ‘Brilliant!’ Insights on Iraq and Energy:

[...] said, “I should have felt that in my biiiiiig heart. ….. Hold on — The Iraqis have met or are working towards meeting those [...]

Jun 30, 2008 - 10:14 am 122. Biased Liberal Media Goes GaGa over Obama Iraq Visit « Start Thinking Right:

[...] A more detailed story provides more illumination on why Iraq’s success in meeting 15 of the 18 benchmarks somehow didn’t deserve coverage. They don’t want progress in Iraq. They don’t want you to know about the progress in Iraq. They want the American people to be mushrooms: they want you K.I.T.D.A.F.O.H.S. (Kept In The Dark And Fed On Horse you-know-what). [...]

Jul 18, 2008 - 4:36 pm 123. ABC, CBS, NBC Skip Report of Benchmarks Met in Iraq - Debate Politics Forums:

[...] official as saying,

Jul 21, 2008 - 2:37 pm 124. Obama - Surge was a Bad Idea | Conservative247:

[...] Encouraging Political Accommodation – Yup, the Bush administration has been doing that too. As a matter of fact, 15 of the 18 benchmarks set by Congress – not the Executive Branch – have been met. Of course, the main stream media won’t tell you about it, but Pajamas Media will. [...]

Jul 22, 2008 - 4:35 pm 125. sjb:

I am a dem but I don’t want our soldiers to die just to have my party win an election, that is an ignorant comment. I was against the invasion of a country unprovoked and wanted the US to focus on the terrorists in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and everywhere else we could hunt them down and kill them. Now that we are committed I do not favor an immediate exodus from Iraq. I am pleased that conditions are much improved for our troops. Getting the troops out has to be handled responsibly depending on conditions on the ground at the time. I believe the war was mishandled early on and the “no bid” contracts gained by Haliburton should cause Dem or Rep to give pause.
Also, What happened to our number one enemy Osama bin Laden? Now “W” says it’s not that important to find and kill him, that’s BS.
As for Dems having complex thought patterns, are you referring to the complex thoughts of a president who cannot put a cogent sentence together? Give me a f—-ing break. If my teenage son came home with the same grades “W” earned in school I’d pull him out of sports, whip his ass and ground him for a semester. The “W” record is in the books, record breaking bankruptcy filings, record breaking foreclosures, energy prices out of sight, failure on hurricane Katrina, screwed up the war until relieving Rumsfeld under pressure and changing strategy, no improvement on the health care crisis, no improvement on the illegal alien problem, and finally the horrible treatment of our brave military personnel when they return home with physical and psychological disabilities. Taking a position of being “for the troops” goes way beyond supporting the war. Giving them the best care, re-training for employment, psychological treatment and any other assistance they need should be our countries priority without regard to party or politics.

Aug 17, 2008 - 10:14 pm 126. ламинат:

6jThank’s for greate post.5a I compleatly agree with last post. str
паркет 9n

Aug 22, 2008 - 11:29 am 127. Obama - surge was a bad idea : Radio Vice Online:

[...] Encouraging Political Accommodation – Yup, the Bush administration has been doing that too. As a matter of fact, 15 of the 18 benchmarks set by Congress – not the Executive Branch – have been met. Of course, the main stream media won’t tell you about it, but Pajamas Media will. [...]

Dec 31, 2008 - 5:21 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: