WaPo: Where Is the Good Iraq News?

[red states rule]

You know the anti war left is in trouble when the Washington Compost talks about the US winning in Iraq


The Iraqi Upturn
Don't look now, but the U.S.-backed government and army may be winning the war.


Sunday, June 1, 2008; Page B06

THERE'S BEEN a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks -- which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war. While Washington's attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the Shiite militias that have ruled them for years and sending key militants scurrying to Iran. At the same time, Iraqi and U.S. forces have pushed forward with a long-promised offensive in Mosul, the last urban refuge of al-Qaeda. So many of its leaders have now been captured or killed that U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, renowned for his cautious assessments, said that the terrorists have "never been closer to defeat than they are now."

Iraq passed a turning point last fall when the U.S. counterinsurgency campaign launched in early 2007 produced a dramatic drop in violence and quelled the incipient sectarian war between Sunnis and Shiites. Now, another tipping point may be near, one that sees the Iraqi government and army restoring order in almost all of the country, dispersing both rival militias and the Iranian-trained "special groups" that have used them as cover to wage war against Americans. It is -- of course -- too early to celebrate; though now in disarray, the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr could still regroup, and Iran will almost certainly seek to stir up new violence before the U.S. and Iraqi elections this fall. Still, the rapidly improving conditions should allow U.S. commanders to make some welcome adjustments -- and it ought to mandate an already-overdue rethinking by the "this-war-is-lost" caucus in Washington, including Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101927.html

[mundame]

Great, declare a victory and bring the troops home!!!!!




Oh, wait -------------------- you mean, if we're losing we have to have lots of troops fighting there;

And if we're winning we have to have lots of troops fighting there??



Something verrrry wrong with this kind of thinking...........................

[red states rule]

Great, declare a victory and bring the troops home!!!!!




Oh, wait -------------------- you mean, if we're losing we have to have lots of troops fighting there;

And if we're winning we have to have lots of troops fighting there??



Something verrrry wrong with this kind of thinking...........................

How did I know you would be one of the anti war peace niks who would toss a wet blanket on the good news?

[mundame]

There is no good news.

Good news would be the end of the war.

[red states rule]

There is no good news.

Good news would be the end of the war.

Take your hands from your eyes so you can read the good news. I know it is devestating for libs to see this in the Washington Compost - but even the liberal media will report the good news from Iraq every once in awhile

[Hagbard Celine]

You know the anti war left is in trouble when the Washington Compost talks about the US winning in Iraq


The Iraqi Upturn
Don't look now, but the U.S.-backed government and army may be winning the war.


Sunday, June 1, 2008; Page B06

THERE'S BEEN a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks -- which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war. While Washington's attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the Shiite militias that have ruled them for years and sending key militants scurrying to Iran. At the same time, Iraqi and U.S. forces have pushed forward with a long-promised offensive in Mosul, the last urban refuge of al-Qaeda. So many of its leaders have now been captured or killed that U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, renowned for his cautious assessments, said that the terrorists have "never been closer to defeat than they are now."

Iraq passed a turning point last fall when the U.S. counterinsurgency campaign launched in early 2007 produced a dramatic drop in violence and quelled the incipient sectarian war between Sunnis and Shiites. Now, another tipping point may be near, one that sees the Iraqi government and army restoring order in almost all of the country, dispersing both rival militias and the Iranian-trained "special groups" that have used them as cover to wage war against Americans. It is -- of course -- too early to celebrate; though now in disarray, the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr could still regroup, and Iran will almost certainly seek to stir up new violence before the U.S. and Iraqi elections this fall. Still, the rapidly improving conditions should allow U.S. commanders to make some welcome adjustments -- and it ought to mandate an already-overdue rethinking by the "this-war-is-lost" caucus in Washington, including Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101927.html

Winning what? The chance to pay the bill for another twenty years of occupation? The chance to sacrifice more of its sons and daughters for a worthless patch of sand and a country full of people who despise and resent us? Whoopee! :slap:

[red states rule]

Winning what? The chance to pay the bill for another twenty years of occupation? The chance to sacrifice more of its sons and daughters for a worthless patch of sand and a country full of people who despise and resent us? Whoopee! :slap:

Another proud member of the party of surrender and appeasemnt. So what if we are winning in Iraq and killing AQ members? We need to drop our pants, bend over to show we mean the terrorists no harm

[Hagbard Celine]

Another proud member of the party of surrender and appeasemnt. So what if we are winning in Iraq and killing AQ members? We need to drop our pants, bend over to show we mean the terrorists no harm

I'm still confused as to what we'd be surrendering. I guess we'd be surrendering our right to invade and occupy any country we feel like without provocation? We invaded the wrong country. If we left, it would just mean that we had righted our own wrong. And once again, AQ wasn't in Iraq until we invaded it and allowed them in. I'll stop short of calling you "stupid."

[red states rule]

I'm still confused as to what we'd be surrendering. I guess we'd be surrendering our right to invade and occupy any country we feel like without provocation? We invaded the wrong country. If we left, it would just mean that we had righted our own wrong. And once again, AQ wasn't in Iraq until we invaded it and allowed them in. I'll stop short of calling you "stupid."

No wonder Obama and other Dems have no desire to go to Iraq. They do not want to see the progress being made

Dems invested their political future in the US losing "Bush's war" and no matter how progress the troops make - Dems will still do all they can to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory

[Hagbard Celine]

No wonder Obama and other Dems have no desire to go to Iraq. They do not want to see the progress being made

Dems invested their political future in the US losing "Bush's war" and no matter how progress the troops make - Dems will still do all they can to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory

And absolutely no acknowledgement of the righteous points I made in my previous post. Once again, rsr's extremist fantasies trump common sense. (shrug)

[red states rule]

And absolutely no acknowledgement of the righteous points I made in my previous post. Once again, rsr's extremist fantasies trump common sense. (shrug)

What "righteous points"? Surrendering to terrorists? Allowing them to have a country as a base of operations? Using oil money to fuind their terrorist activities? Leaving the door open for Iran to move in?

Appeasers think if we run from Iraq, AQ will stop hateing us and not attack us again

Again, no wonder Obama and Dems wil not go to Iraq - they do want to see the progress being made. Look at how Dems treated Joe Lieberman for telling the truth about Iraq

[mundame]

There's no question of either surrendering or appeasement, fortunately.

We've already trashed Iraq completely -- it's demolished and its leader killed. There is no point to hanging around letting them IED all our soldiers forever, burning all the skin off their heads.

There's nothing to win; Iraq is already destroyed. Why stay and stay and stay and stay? With our troops getting killed and killing themselves in despair --- for nothing?

[Hagbard Celine]

What "righteous points"? Surrendering to terrorists? Allowing them to have a country as a base of operations? Using oil money to fuind their terrorist activities? Leaving the door open for Iran to move in?

Appeasers think if we run from Iraq, AQ will stop hateing us and not attack us again

Again, no wonder Obama and Dems wil not go to Iraq - they do want to see the progress being made. Look at how Dems treated Joe Lieberman for telling the truth about Iraq

We're not fighting anybody rsr. There would be no surrender. We are an occupying force. Do you even understand what that is? We're effectively paying for our military to police the streets of Iraq. And the only reason we're there is because the Bush administration took us there based on bad intel. AQ was NOT in Iraq before we invaded. Except for a few small cells, the majority of AQ forces were in Afghanistan. Iraq was a boondoggle. Getting out of it is not surrender, it's fiscally responsible! We don't need to waste another day there imo. Maleki's government can sink or swim for all I care--they're loyal to Iran anyway! The whole thing's a huge f*cking joke and us taxpayers are the butt of it!

[red states rule]

We're not fighting anybody rsr. There would be no surrender. We are an occupying force. Do you even understand what that is? We're effectively paying for our military to police the streets of Iraq. And the only reason we're there is because the Bush administration took us there based on bad intel. AQ was NOT in Iraq before we invaded. Except for a few small cells, the majority of AQ forces were in Afghanistan. Iraq was a boondoggle. Getting out of it is not surrender, it's fiscally responsible! We don't need to waste another day there imo. Maleki's government can sink or swim for all I care--they're loyal to Iran anyway! The whole thing's a huge f*cking joke and us taxpayers are the butt of it!

So when AQ says Iraq is their main battlefield in their war against America - we are to run away?

When we have killed most of the leaders of AQ, you want us to leave?

When worldwide support for AQ is at its all time low, you want to throw in the towel?

Yep, you are one of the appeasers Pres Bush was talking about

[Hagbard Celine]

So when AQ says Iraq is their main battlefield in their war against America - we are to run away?

When we have killed most of the leaders of AQ, you want us to leave?

When worldwide support for AQ is at its all time low, you want to throw in the towel?

Yep, you are one of the appeasers Pres Bush was talking about

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the leaders you speak of were created by our invasion of Iraq and the leaders responsible for 911 are still on the loose.
President Bush is a forked-tongue politician who will say anything if he thinks it will save him face or further his agenda. And you are a gullible twit who laps-up his every word. Pathetic.

[red states rule]

Sorry to bust your bubble, but the leaders you speak of were created by our invasion of Iraq and the leaders responsible for 911 are still on the loose.
President Bush is a forked-tongue politician who will say anything if he thinks it will save him face or further his agenda. And you are a gullible twit who laps-up his every word. Pathetic.


Dems asaid the same things about Saddam, Iraq, and WMD's as Pres Bush did. Libs like you like to forget that fact

Libs also like to ignore the political and military gains being made. It makes their demand for surrender harder to defend

As a typical liberal appeaser, Obama will sit down and hold hands with the likes of Little Adolf from Iran, and not Gen David Petraeus, or the troops

[mundame]

the leaders you speak of were created by our invasion of Iraq and the leaders responsible for 911 are still on the loose.


Bush doesn't even BOTHER to go after the men who bombed New York.

He had other fish to fry, helping Haliburton and his oil buddies, so he hustled into Iraq, where bin Laden WASN'T.

Bin Laden is still sending out videos calling for death to America and Denmark and I don't know where all, but Bush doesn't care -- he still keeps on letting soldiers get burned up with IEDs in Iraq, year after year after pointless year.

[red states rule]

Bush doesn't even BOTHER to go after the men who bombed New York.

He had other fish to fry, helping Haliburton and his oil buddies, so he hustled into Iraq, where bin Laden WASN'T.

Bin Laden is still sending out videos calling for death to America and Denmark and I don't know where all, but Bush doesn't care -- he still keeps on letting soldiers get burned up with IEDs in Iraq, year after year after pointless year.

Who said Iraq had anything to do with 9-11?

Dems said the same thing about Saddam being a threat and WMD's? Were they lying as well, or do you choose to ignore that fact?

[mundame]

Dems said the same thing about Saddam being a threat and WMD's? Were they lying as well, or do you choose to ignore that fact?


Dems collaborated, but Bush started the Iraq War and lost the Iraq War --- he is to blame.

[red states rule]

Dems collaborated, but Bush started the Iraq War and lost the Iraq War --- he is to blame.

Like Obama you want to ignore the facts, and stick with your defeatest POV

So many sources prove you (and Dems) wrong, yet you cover your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears as you stroll down the Yellow Brick road