Looking for the New Baghdad (Iraqis pray for McCain victory)

Time ^ | Apr. 03, 2008 | Bobby Ghosh

[do the dhue]

I am not a big McCain fan, but I would hate to see us turn our Military over to Hussein or Hillaryious. And if you ask me, the Iraqi people are smarter then demoratic voters.

[enough_idiocy]

“Iraqi people are smarter then demoratic voters.”

A bag of rocks is smarter than most democratic voters

[Clintonfatigued]

They don’t want to end up like Afghanistan did with the Taliban.

[SandRat]

If democratic voters were dogs they'd be so dumb they could chase and catch their own tail.

[do the dhue]

lol

[Tears of a Clown]

“The Iraqi people are smarter than democratic voters”

Give the Iraqis more credit than that! Lol.

[infantrywhooah]

"And if you ask me, the Iraqi people are smarter then demoratic voters."

And better than 70% of them are flat out illiterate or functionally illiterate. What does that tell you about democrats?

[do the dhue]

Tells me 70% of the dems have dain bramage.

[ryan71]

While every terrorist prays for Obama to win.

[LaurenD]

“Andalus Abdel-Rahim Hammadi, a Baghdad school-bus driver, has this much in common with John McCain: both men gambled on the U.S. military’s “surge” in Iraq long before it looked like a sure thing.”

Well, I’m never going to be a democrat voter, but can someone please explain to me what is so mind blowing about the concept of a surge? Are there really people out there that are surprised when a drastic increase in the numbers of troops brings increased security? I’m pretty sure that if we added 1000 more cops to patrol a gang infested area of my city, the security of that neighborhood would increase. That wouldn’t make it a long term solution and wouldn’t get to the core problem. As soon as the cops would leave, the gangs would return to their previous level of criminal activity.

Whew......that was some gamble McCain took! Who’d of thunk it? Brilliant, the man is. Why haven’t we crowned this God, king for life? He’s such a brilliant strategist. Troop surges increase security. Mind blowing! Just mind blowing!

[txrangerette]

Nice going, taking McCain (of whom I am not a fan) out of context.

The context was, most others were not willing to propose or back a surge. They were afraid to propose or back sending more troops to Iraq. All the pressure was on to reduce our presence and role and leave more and more to the Iraqis.

In the midst of this virtually unanimous and unyielding pressure stood McCain, who advocated for a very long time that we needed lots more troops.

Now.

The truth is, more troops alone did not do it. Petraeus proposed a different strategy. Very different.

And President George W Bush accepted the General’s plan.

As Rush would say, it’s the truth, love it, learn it, live it.

[Hamilcar_Barca]

I’m praying also. I was not a McCain supporter in the primaries and I hate to pray for a victory by a political party but when the Democrats have gone off the deep end of anti-Christian socialism I don’t see a choice. First Timothy 2:1 & 2 is good verses to keep in mind.

[do the dhue]

Well, at the time McCain was pushing to increase the number of Troops. Rumsfeld was advising to keep a small footprint. So, there was a difference in thinking between the Bush Admin and McCain. I understand where Rumsfeld was coming from. He was thinking that you look less like an occupier with a smaller footprint and he stuck to his guns. As we all know, Bush did relieve him and increased the Troop level and things changed. So, Bush and others could have gambled with Rumsfeld or gambled with the increasing the Troop level. Nobody has a crystal ball and we can all sit here in our Monday morning quarterback chair, but these decision are not always easy. To me, the good thing would be for those of us who are not privy to what our Commanders and boots on the ground know, should listen and support the boots. That would include those who are in DC.

I know that it is not mind blowing that the more security personnel on the ground creates better security, but you have to remember the mindset of those in the DOD at the time. Like I said, I am not a huge McCain fan, but he did listen to the commanders while others didn't.

The more interesting thing that I see (and you don't see the media mentioning it) is that the increase in Troops help calm the Sunni triangle down. Meanwhile the British scaled back in the southern part of Iraq and now this is the first place that is having problems. Granted this is where the majority of Al Sadr's Army is, but if there were British Troops in this area it would be harder for Al Sadr's Army to upset the apple cart.

[Hamilcar_Barca]

Excellent point. But at the time few others were advocating it. As the poem goes “If you can keep your head while others are losing theirs....” McCain kept his. I’m not a McCain admirer but it’s a big point to his credit. If this answer does not satisfy you ask yourself -what would Obama do?

[do the dhue]

I think a quiet and peaceful life would be a great thing to pray for for all people.

[do the dhue]

To be honest, I am not so sure they would catch their own tail. I think they would do what they do now: just spin in circles getting absolutely nothing done.

[Right Wing Assault]

Iraqis want McCain.

Muzzl’ems want Obama.

Pathological liars want Hillary.

[SandRat]

They couldn’t chase and catch a parked car.

[Right Wing Assault]

Are there really people out there that are surprised when a drastic increase in the numbers of troops brings increased security?

YES! Most of the dem party.

[do the dhue]

I wish I didn’t have to say this, but that is true.