Posted on 04/30/2007 9:23:14 AM PDT by shrinkermd
...On Wednesday, fueled by seemingly limitless liquidity and reports of strong corporate earnings, the Dow Jones industrial average hit a record 13,000. The financial markets seem to have shrugged off their recent anxieties about so-called subprime mortgages, focusing instead on the megabucks being made at the other end of the income distribution scale. A survey by Alpha magazine revealed that three American hedge-fund managers earned more than $1 billion last year.
...Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, Iraq burns. More than 3,100 Americans have died there, the equivalent of 100 Virginia Techs. Nearly 25,000 have been wounded in action, many of them gravely. And that's nothing compared to the number of Iraqis who have been killed as the country has slid into civil war.
Fatalities among the civilian population are running about 3,000 a month. The Brookings Institution's latest Iraq survey carried one statistic that froze my blood: According to a recent poll, one in four Iraqis has personally experienced or witnessed the murder of a family member as a result of violence since the U.S.-led invasion. Dow 13,000, meet Iraq 13,000. That's approximately the number of Iraqis killed so far this year.
Last week, Army Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq, tried to explain to his fellow Americans that stabilizing Iraq would require "an enormous commitment."
"This effort may get harder before it gets easier," he told reporters at a Pentagon briefing. Real stability might be "years down the road."
UNFORTUNATELY, this is not what anyone wants to hear these days, least of all Democratic lawmakers. Even before Petraeus returned to his unenviable post in Baghdad, the House narrowly passed a bill that would require the administration to start withdrawing troops Oct. 1 and to end all combat operations by late March of next year.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Consequently, the MSM is stuck. They now have positioned themselves with their DemocRAT colleagues as being in favor of defeat at any price.
But in the meantime, as usual, people are not much interested in the war until someone asks.
Before the MSM had so much power we faced another "insurrection"--the Philippine Insurrection that occurred between 1899 and 1913. During this time we lost 4,000+ with a much smaller population. Only a few were vociferous antiwar at this time--Mark Twain and Albert Jay Nock for two.
POTUS and America have won two wars--Iraq where there the enemy controls no appreciable territory and fights with IEDs and suicide/homicide bombers and Afghanistan where the enemy still controls some mountain provinces but cannot do what they have promised to do and wage a massive attack on coalition and Afghani forces.
Yes, we have an ongoing insurrection in Iraq but we have prevailed in the war. This insurrection undoubtedly is being fed by Iran and Al Queda who focus on terrorizing the local population while using IEDs and suicide/homicide bombers as their predominant tactics. Their only real allies are the DemocRAT party and the DemocRAT MSM. We have lost in the polls to these two but we have neither lost the war or caved in to the insurrection.
I might, just might, read the LA Times if it occasionally reported how many of the enemy we are killing. Their coverage is incomplete, people stop reading, they whine.
Maybe if they reported on the 1400 schools reopened, the 350 hospitals and 675 clinics opened, the water, sewer and electricity infrastructure in towns that never had any before......just maybe people would be interested in what our heroic military is doing.
The WAR is over... WE KICKED ASS~!!
It is managing the rebuilding that we are having trouble with. Don’t we have any advertising specialists (spin doctors) on our side that can explain correctly what we are trying to do??????????????
Most of the spin doctors are Democrats. Look at the MSM, the entertainment business... nobody's going to spin a better victory story. When you set up a goal of "stability" then it's all to easy to knock that goal down with a little violence. Where are all the quotes of Democrats insisting that we "win the peace"? After all, nation building was THEIR idea.
The LA Times is still pining away for the good old days of Saddam — when Iraq was a peaceful land of milk and honey and butterflies, and the good people of Iraq lived in harmony.
In a way they are right. The MARINES are at war. Americans are at the MALL! /sad
Except for the families of the military personnel, no one else is really affected by what is happening in Iraq. The idea that America is “tired” of the war really means that the public doesn’t like seeing the car bombing pictures on the nightly news and hearing it covered on cable news. They are not tired, but bored.
Perhaps this screaming moron columnist might consider THESE poll numbers. Then he can sit down, shut up and finally learn even ONE basic fact about the situation in Iraq. So far he is batting a perfect factual ZERO.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1824755/posts
Vox Populi-Poll Results On Withdrawing Troops
Too bad the DBM doesn't run stories of heroism on the part of our military. People would be interested and read their papers. Their bottom line is obviously less important than their Dem propaganda.
So the author thinks our troops would somehow feel less alienated if upon returning to the States they instead found a nation in the grips a depression? Memo to author: the alienation of our troops, if it exists at all, is a direct result of the deliberate undermining of the war effort by the likes of Reid, Pelosi, Murtha, and the rest of the Democrat surrender gang. Period.
Perhaps, or perhaps when you actually look up all the polling data you cite, it tells more than one story. Instead of mindlessly spamming the forum with liberal polling data, you could actually look the data up, and see what it says for yourself, or are you cherry picking data, in order to back up your own closely held dogmas, because it makes you "feel" good?
Here, take a look:
Gallup Poll Review: 10 Key Points About Public Opinion on Iraq
Most Americans support timetable for removing troops, oppose cutting funding altogether
More results from the poll you refer to:
* A majority of Americans say it was a mistake for the United States to have become involved in Iraq.
*Americans perceive that the war is not going well for the United States.
Since April 2005, a majority of Americans have said things are going badly for the United States in Iraq, and more recently this perception has become even more pronounced. Most Americans also doubt the United States will win the war.
*Americans do not believe the troop surge is having a positive effect.
Since April 2005, a majority of Americans have said things are going badly for the United States in Iraq, and more recently this perception has become even more pronounced. Most Americans also doubt the United States will win the war.
As of January 2007, 71% of Americans in a Gallup Poll said the Iraq war is going badly, including 38% who said it is going very badly; only 28% said it is going well. A CBS News poll conducted in mid-April showed 66% saying the war was going badly.
*Most Americans do not think the United States will win the war.
Americans do not believe the troop surge is having a positive effect.
There are few signs so far that significant numbers of Americans perceive that the troop surge in Iraq is making things in that country better. The majority either say the surge is making no difference or is making things worse.
*Americans perceive that the benefits of winning the war do not outweigh the costs involved.
With negative perceptions of the war's progress as a backdrop, it may not be surprising that the public sees little upside for Americans in the cost-benefit trade-off of continuing the war.
By a nearly 2-to-1 margin, 65% to 31%, Americans say the benefits of winning the war in Iraq to the United States are not worth the costs the United States would have to bear in order to win it.
*Most Americans support a timetable for removing troops from Iraq within the next year, but not immediate withdrawal.
*Democrats are better positioned than the Republicans on handling the issue of Iraq.
http://www.galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=27391
So before you start mindlessly spamming your liberal polling data, research it first.
What is the LA TImes?
According to a recent USA Today/Gallup poll, 61% of Americans oppose “denying the funding needed to send any additional U.S. troops to Iraq,” and opposition is up from 58% in February. (3/23-25, 2007). --snip-
A recent Public Opinion Strategies (POS) poll found that 56% of registered voters favor fully funding the war in Iraq, with more voters strongly favoring funding (40%) than totally opposing it (38%); (3/25-27, 2007).
POS found also that a majority of voters (54%) oppose the Democrats imposing a reduction in troops below the level military commanders requested (3/25-27, 2007). A separate POS poll finds 57% of voters support staying in Iraq until the job is finished and “the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security for its people.” And 59% of voters say pulling out of Iraq immediately would do more to harm America’s reputation in the world than staying until order is restored (35%); (2/5-7, 2007).
In the future try actually reading the data before you respond. Do so and that will maybe help you avoid making a complete ass of yourself like you usually do.
Ah I see. Just another loser Demorat pretending to be a “Betrayed Conservative”. So which DNC front group do you work for Al Qeda stodge? Moveon.org? Act Up? Answer?
Sit down, shut up and try to actually FINALLY learn something about Iraq.
Why Iraq
One of the really infuriating things in modern politics is the level of disinformation, misinformation, demagoguery and out right lying going on about the mission in Iraq. Democrats have spent the last 3+ years lying about Iraq out of a political calculation. The assumption is that the natural isolationist mindset of the average American voter, linked to the inherent Anti Americanism (what is misnamed the “Anti War movement”) of the more feverish Democrat activists (especially those running the US’s National “News” media) would restore them to national political dominance. The truth is the Democrat Party Leadership has simply lacked the courage to speak truth to whiners. The truth is that even if Al Gore won the 2000 election and 09-11 still happened we would be doing the EXACT same things in Iraq we are doing now.
Based on the political situation in the region left over from the 1991 Gulf War plus the domestic political consensus built up in BOTH parties since 1991 as well as fundamental military strategic laws, there was NO viable strategic choice for the US but to take out Iraq after finishing the initial operations in Afghanistan.
To start with Saddam’s Iraq was our most immediate threat. We could NOT commit significant military forces to another battle with Saddam hovering undefeated on our flank nor could we leave significant forces watching Saddam. The political containment of Iraq was breaking down. That what Oil for Food was all about. Oil for Food was an attempt by Iraq to break out of it’s diplomatic isolation and slip the shackles the UN Sanctions put on it’s military. There there was the US Strategic position to consider.
The War on Islamic Fascism is different sort of war. in facing this Asymmetrical threat, we have a hidden foe, spread out across a geographically diverse area, with covert sources of supply. Since we cannot go everywhere they hide out, in fact often cannot even locate them until the engage us, we need to draw them out of hiding into a kill zone.
Iraq is that kill zone. That is the true brilliance of the Iraq strategy. We draw the terrorists out of their world wide hiding places onto a battlefield they have to fight on for political reasons (The “Holy” soil of the Arabian peninsula) where they have to pit their weakest ability (Conventional Military combat power) against our greatest strength (ability to call down unbelievable amounts of firepower) where they will primarily have to fight other forces (the Iraqi Security forces) in a battlefield that is mostly neutral in terms of guerrilla warfare. (Iraqi-mostly open terrain as opposed to guerrilla friendly areas like the mountains of Afghanistan or the jungles of SE Asia).
Did any of the critics of liberating Iraq ever look at a map? Iraq, for which we had the political, legal and moral justifications to attack, is the strategic high ground of the Middle East. A Geographic barrier that severs ground communication between Iran and Syria apart as well as providing another front of attack in either state or into Saudi Arabia if needed.
There were other reasons to do Iraq but here is the strategic military reason we are in Iraq. We have taken, an maintain the initiative from the Terrorists. They are playing OUR game on ground of OUR choosing.
Problem is Counter Insurgency is SLOW and painful. Often a case of 3 steps forward, two steps back. One has to wonder if the American people have either the emotional maturity, nor the intellect” to understand. It’s so much easier to spew made for TV slogans like “No Blood for Oil” or “We support the Troops, bring them home” or dumbest of all “We are creating terrorists” then to actually THINK.
Westerners in general, and the US citizens in particular seem to have trouble grasping the fundamental fact of this foe. These Islamic Fascists have NO desire to co-exist with them. The extremists see all this PC posturing by the Hysteric Left as a sign that we are weak. Since they want us dead, weakness encourages them. There is simply no way to coexist with people who completely believe their “god” will reward them for killing us.
So we can covert to Islam, die or kill them. Iraq is about killing enough of them to make the rest of the Jihadists realize we are serious. They same way killing enough Germans, Italians and Japanese eliminated the ideologies of Nazism, Fascism and Bushido.
Americans need to understand how Bin Laden and his ilk view us. In the Arab world the USA is considered a big wimp. We have run away so many times. Lebanon, the Kurds, the Iraqis in 1991, the Iranians, Somalia, Clinton all thru the 1990s etc etc etc. The Jihadists think we will run again. In fact they are counting on it. That way they can run around screaming “We beat the American just like the Russians, come join us in Jihad” and recruit the next round of “holy warriors”. Iraq is also a show place where we show the Muslim world that there are a lines they cannot cross. On 9-11-01 they crossed that line and we can, and will, destroy them for it -
If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”
Winston Churchill
The article you've been spamming everyone with, included only one polling data entry (the first sentence, Gallup)that fits the agenda you are trying to pedal. I included THE ENTIRE SAMPLE FROM THAT DATA.
get it now?
What’s the matter Johnnie, got caught using liberal polling data?
Squeal all you want little piggy, your posting prove your claims so many lies.
According to a recent USA Today/Gallup poll
I went and posted the whole poll that they conducted, which runs counter your closely held screams, screeches, and liberal dogmas. You owe everyone an apology for your spamming.
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.