actsnoblemartin
06-17-2008, 07:25 AM
was it really ethical to let 400,000 innocent iraqis be killed by saddam, women get raped, iraqi's starve to death, and so on
how are you the party of compassion, until it gets hard?
Im not saying we couldnt make this argument 18 times for other places, but were there, why not try not to repeat the 2.5-3 million potential mistake that many hollywood liberals wont admit in vietnam.
all i hear from the anti war left is this obsession with before the war, and a complete ignorance on whats going on NOW in iraq.
you know youre right, screw what patreus says, he probably works for al sadr anyway :laugh2:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/72030/output/print
The Case For Facing Facts
Why we need to acknowledge that the news from Iraq has been getting better.
Charles Peters
NEWSWEEK
Updated: 1:12 PM ET Nov 24, 2007
I have been troubled by the reluctance of my fellow liberals to acknowledge the progress made in Iraq in the last six months, a reluctance I am embarrassed to admit that I have shared.
Giving Gen. David Petraeus his due does not mean we have to start saying it was a great idea to invade Iraq. It remains the terrible idea it always was. And the occupation that followed has been until recently a continuing disaster, causing the death or maiming of far too many American soldiers and Iraqi civilians.
Still, the fact is that the situation in Iraq, though some violence persists, is much improved since the summer. Why do liberals not want to face this fact, let alone ponder its implications?
The problem is one that I have seen cripple our political life again and again and that seems to grow steadily worse. Liberals and conservatives are equally guilty. Neither side wants to face facts that don't fit its case.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070413161507AA4ibSr
Why are Democrats ignoring real progress?
Turning the Corner in Iraq
Democrats are ignoring real progress.
By Charles Krauthammer
By the day, the debate at home about Iraq becomes increasingly disconnected from the realities of the actual war on the ground. The Democrats in Congress are so consumed with negotiating among their factions the most clever linguistic device to legislatively ensure the failure of the administration’s current military strategy—while not appearing to do so—that they speak almost not at all about the first visible results of that strategy.
And preliminary results are visible. The landscape is shifting in the two fronts of the current troop surge: Anbar province and Baghdad.
The news from Anbar is the most promising. Only last fall, the Marines’ leading intelligence officer there concluded that the U.S. had essentially lost the fight to al-Qaeda. Yet, just this week, the marine commandant, Gen. James Conway, returned from a four-day visit to the province and reported that we “have turned the corner.”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2007/08/10/surge-derangement-syndrome-grips-msm-liberals
Surge Derangement Syndrome Grips MSM and Liberals
By P.J. Gladnick | August 10, 2007 - 09:04 ET
With the success of the surge in Iraq becoming more evident with each passing day, a new ailment has gripped the Mainstream Media and the liberals: Surge Derangement Sydrome (SDS). The earliest known case of SDS occurred on April 23 when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid responded to a question by CNN's congressional correspondent Dana Bash about whether he would believe General David Petraeus if he reported that the "so-called surge" is working:
REID: No, I don't believe him, because it's not happening. All you have to do is look at the facts.
Well, as we do look at the facts that the surge is working, the MSM and the liberals are showing more signs of severe SDS. Some of these SDS signs have been noted in the August 9 edition of Investor's Business Daily, 'Surge' Critics Perhaps Were Bit Premature:
how are you the party of compassion, until it gets hard?
Im not saying we couldnt make this argument 18 times for other places, but were there, why not try not to repeat the 2.5-3 million potential mistake that many hollywood liberals wont admit in vietnam.
all i hear from the anti war left is this obsession with before the war, and a complete ignorance on whats going on NOW in iraq.
you know youre right, screw what patreus says, he probably works for al sadr anyway :laugh2:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/72030/output/print
The Case For Facing Facts
Why we need to acknowledge that the news from Iraq has been getting better.
Charles Peters
NEWSWEEK
Updated: 1:12 PM ET Nov 24, 2007
I have been troubled by the reluctance of my fellow liberals to acknowledge the progress made in Iraq in the last six months, a reluctance I am embarrassed to admit that I have shared.
Giving Gen. David Petraeus his due does not mean we have to start saying it was a great idea to invade Iraq. It remains the terrible idea it always was. And the occupation that followed has been until recently a continuing disaster, causing the death or maiming of far too many American soldiers and Iraqi civilians.
Still, the fact is that the situation in Iraq, though some violence persists, is much improved since the summer. Why do liberals not want to face this fact, let alone ponder its implications?
The problem is one that I have seen cripple our political life again and again and that seems to grow steadily worse. Liberals and conservatives are equally guilty. Neither side wants to face facts that don't fit its case.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070413161507AA4ibSr
Why are Democrats ignoring real progress?
Turning the Corner in Iraq
Democrats are ignoring real progress.
By Charles Krauthammer
By the day, the debate at home about Iraq becomes increasingly disconnected from the realities of the actual war on the ground. The Democrats in Congress are so consumed with negotiating among their factions the most clever linguistic device to legislatively ensure the failure of the administration’s current military strategy—while not appearing to do so—that they speak almost not at all about the first visible results of that strategy.
And preliminary results are visible. The landscape is shifting in the two fronts of the current troop surge: Anbar province and Baghdad.
The news from Anbar is the most promising. Only last fall, the Marines’ leading intelligence officer there concluded that the U.S. had essentially lost the fight to al-Qaeda. Yet, just this week, the marine commandant, Gen. James Conway, returned from a four-day visit to the province and reported that we “have turned the corner.”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2007/08/10/surge-derangement-syndrome-grips-msm-liberals
Surge Derangement Syndrome Grips MSM and Liberals
By P.J. Gladnick | August 10, 2007 - 09:04 ET
With the success of the surge in Iraq becoming more evident with each passing day, a new ailment has gripped the Mainstream Media and the liberals: Surge Derangement Sydrome (SDS). The earliest known case of SDS occurred on April 23 when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid responded to a question by CNN's congressional correspondent Dana Bash about whether he would believe General David Petraeus if he reported that the "so-called surge" is working:
REID: No, I don't believe him, because it's not happening. All you have to do is look at the facts.
Well, as we do look at the facts that the surge is working, the MSM and the liberals are showing more signs of severe SDS. Some of these SDS signs have been noted in the August 9 edition of Investor's Business Daily, 'Surge' Critics Perhaps Were Bit Premature: