Posted on 03/18/2007 1:07:46 PM PDT by forty_years
Just when it seems the darkest in Iraq, the people there seem to believe otherwise. I admit, like many other Americans, to being war-weary. And who could blame Americans for getting tired of seeing the daily carnage in Iraq, like today's chlorine gas attack? Yet three articles from the Times Online today show that, from an Iraqi perspective, removing Saddam was the right thing to do, and that Bush's troop surge should be given a chance to work. These articles confirm my belief that the top leadership of the Democratic Party, not necessarily the rank and file, want to see the Iraq effort fail just to get another dig into Bush (Monica Lewinsky all over again, just switch the party names). Here's a summary of the good news, with links to the original stories -- all must-reads:
Iraqis: life is getting better: "MOST Iraqis believe life is better for them now than it was under Saddam Hussein, according to a British opinion poll published today..."
Violence slashed as troop surge hits Baghdad: "...but now there are a lot more Iraqi army checkpoints and I’m feeling more secure. I feel better; I can go out and do my shopping. More people have opened their stores and the markets are open longer..."
Resilient Iraqis ask what civil war?: "The survey, published today, also reveals that contrary to the views of many western analysts, most Iraqis do not believe they are embroiled in a civil war..."
http://netwmd.com/blog/2007/03/18/1472
Now will the Bush admin sit on it's hands and not mention any of this in defence of itself???
Hasn't that been their game plan for 6 years?
Pretty much.
Unfortunately, it seems the Bush MO has been reactive -- not proactive. Now we may be seeing tangible results at a time when support for the war is at the lowest, and momentum to pull out is reaching the highest. Hope we can fix Iraq before 2008...
If you were ever a Democrat and wanted the United States to succeed at anything, you left that party many years ago. The rank and file Democrats want it to fail as much as does Nancy Pelosi...Ms. Goggle Eyes.
Another movement, in response to the "surge" of US troops into Baghdad, has been the swarm over the border into Syria, of large numbers of seeming "civilians", who appear to to be fleeing some kind of retribution. Not so much from the Americans, as from their fellow Iraqi citizens, who stand ready to turn them in. The same goes for the foreign "insurgents", who had been drawn to Iraq, thinking that it would be a killing ground, for Americans and non-jihadist Iraqis.
The war in Iraq is going horribly wrong. For the "insurgents" and the jihadists.
For everybody else, it is a brighter day. Unless you are a Dem'crat here in the US.
I don't like it when a civilian on American soil uses the term "war-weary." I think "war-weary" should be reserved for those actually fighting the battles, but I doubt that they would want to use it.
It would be more accurate if he used the term "pampered, short-sighted impatient brat"
Exactly right! This WH for the past 3 years (and the RNC for the last 5 years!) has been absolutely pathetic in getting the facts out....setting the record straight...and touting our incredible successes in this WOT/Iraq.
Where are the supporting WOT 527 groups? Why isn't the RNC looking to start up 527s that put out ads touting our successes?
I agree 100%. Now would be a great time for him to tout this poll and say since we are now seeing the light at the end of the tunnel so it's time to set some sort of timeline.
Silly Iraqis. What do they know? /sarcasm
Here's the complete poll: http://www.opinion.co.uk/Documents/FINALTables.pdf
Quite the opposite, actually. Were the Bush reactive and not pro-active, the Iraqis would have never gotten to this point and Saddam would be sitting on his pile of weapons thumbing his nose at us. The president soldiers on even as many "conservatives" as well as lefty slime are turning against him.
The President and his administration have done an absolutely pathetic job of promoting and defending his WOT policies. That is an objective observation not a position for or against him.
>> Now will the Bush admin sit on it's hands and not mention any of this in defence of itself???
Masochism.
bttt
Wrong! Wanting to stop the removal of a murderous dictator, the killing of terrorists, and continually stabbing our troops in the back is not a switch in party names from going after a corrupt President for obstruction of justice, lying under oath and witness intimidation among the many sordid elements of the Lewinsky matter.
Regardless of the PR angle, when so many have fallen by the wayside, President Bush has pushed forward. Regardless of how they try to "promote" their policies you know the rats are always going to be trshing them.
Great news (without a doubt) but (and isn't there always a but) we are a long way from declaring victory
If I may
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. but it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
Winston Churchill
Oh boy, you can sure say that again.
One of the most bizarre mysteries to me of these past few years has been this strange spectacle of seeing more and more pampered, wealthy, comfortable American people becoming "weary with the war" when the war hasn't affected 99.9% of them in any single tangible way that any of them could possibly rationally name.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.