Petraeus is significantly reducing forces in Iraq.

Email Print posted by KenTX 05/24/2008 11:51:16 AM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
“Earlier this year, Petraeus recommended a reduction of 30,000 troops by July. The general said there should then be a pause in reductions to evaluate the situation on the ground. But on Thursday Petraeus suggested additional cuts to the 30,000 already withdrawing.”
Here are more details.

Thanks to the Surge, Al Qaeda in Iraq was destroyed.
The decision is now unanimous. The Surge worked.

I want to take this opportunity to thank all of you liberals who put politics aside, and steadfastly supported the President in the War Against Ai Qaeda.

The problem is that I can’t remember any of you guys supporting the war.

< She wants him assassinated | Actual news from Iraq: Fatwa against the US occupation from Al-Sistani? >
 Display:
Petraeus is significantly reducing forces in Iraq. | 48 comments (48 topical, 0 hidden)
you mean (none / 0)

The war against Al Qaeda in Iraq that wasn't there before he started it.

by desertpear on 05/24/2008 12:53:55 PM EST

Surge of shit (none / 0)
The surge was not what destroyed Al Q, what did was the US supporting local Sunni militia's to fight Al Q. America's allies in Iraq are bought, they are not authentic allies of the US, once the Al Q threat is subdued it is entirely possible and likely that these same militia's will turn against the US or the Shi'a, empowered by their weaponry and legitimacy. The surge FAILED in its own objective, which was to give breathing space for the Iraqi government to solve the outstanding issues that preventing a functioning Iraqi state. To my knowledge the Iraqi's still are deadlocked on many issues, so no the surge has failed. The surge was not about a military victory, it was only a temporary act to allow the Iraqi government to actually build functioning institutions, etc. The surge has failed according to its own criteria.

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 05/24/2008 01:09:47 PM EST

Man, this is fun! (none / 0)
“The surge was not what destroyed Al Q, what did was the US supporting local Sunni militia's to fight Al Q.”
Thanks! You just admitted that Al Qaeda in Iraq was destroyed, even if you disagree with tactics or causality.

“The surge FAILED in its own objective.”
The objective of the surge was to destroy al Qaeda. The purpose of the War on Terror is the kill the terrorists. If al Qaeda foreign fighters want to infiltrate Iraq and do battle against the world’s greatest military, and against their Sunni and Kurd and Shiite allies on a flat, barren, open field of battle, then that’s a desirable development.

Statistics prove there are a finite number of Islamic Jihadists who want to die for Allah. When American forces kill an average of 1500 jihadists per month, their numbers naturally diminish through attrition.

“objective, which was to give breathing space for the Iraqi government to solve the outstanding issues that preventing a functioning Iraqi state.”
The objective was to allow the government to take the reigns of power. The Iraqi government has had time to build a strong military that is taking control of the troubled regions of the country.

The Iraqi government is swimming in cash from oil revenues.

“To my knowledge the Iraqi's still are deadlocked on many issues.”
As usual, your knowledge is woefully lacking. You need to keep up with current events.

“It may be that February 13, 2008 will be remembered as the day when Iraq’s political climate began to catch up with its improved security situation—or, more to the point, when Iraqi leaders discovered the key to political compromise and reconciliation. That day, the Council of Representatives (CoR) simultaneously passed a law setting forth the relationship between Baghdad and the provinces, an amnesty law, and the 2008 national budget. Each piece of legislation is significant in its own right. Moreover, each legislative act reflects important compromises and concessions, revealing much about the political dynamics in Iraq.”

So let’s recap. What did the surge accomplish?
1. Al Qaeda in Iraq is destroyed.
2. Tens of thousands al Qaeda fighters are dead.
3. The Iraqi Government has had time to build a strong military.
4. The Iraqi Government has had time to work out important compromise laws.
5. The level of violence in Iraq has dropped precipitously. 6. Iraq is now a very rich country, and capable of taking control of it’s own affairs.
7. The people of the Sunni Triangle have come to admire and respect America.
8. The people of Iraq love America.

You know what the best proof is that the surge is working in Iraq? Here we are in the heat of the election season, and Democrats are speechless on Iraq. Is it the number one issue in this campaign? Hell no!

I’d like to thank all of the American liberals who made this possible. But there aren’t any. You people are as worthless as a screen door on a submarine. In fact, history will remember American Liberals of the early 21 century as the most vile, worthless bunch of cocksuckers who ever lived in this country

by KenTX on 05/24/2008 02:34:54 PM EST

[ Parent ]
gee (none / 0)

"In fact, history will remember American Liberals of the early 21 century as the most vile, worthless bunch of cocksuckers who ever lived in this country."

That's not fact Ken, that's conjecture.  And considering how well the Republican party is doing, seems more like a statement born of a feeling of desperation.  

Since you are calling me "worthless," what do you do for your country?  Because if your sole purpose in life is amassing wealth, I wonder how you sleep at night.  Oh, that's right, you are protecting the world from cocksucking liberals by monitoring progressive websites and posting on them.

In disclosure, I am a stream biologist working for a private company that helps clients balance resource use with conservation.  One of my "spare time" projects right now is looking into getting involved with using animal-assisted therapy to help returning vets with PTSD.  I could not live with myself if making money was an end in itself, regardless of how it was made.  Maybe you will be "more successful" at making money than I, but I bet I am happier on my death bed.

by desertpear on 05/24/2008 02:55:53 PM EST

[ Parent ]
that depends (none / 0)
It depends upon your relationship with your family. We're here to love and be loved. If you have love, you have everything. Wealth and work don't count for much in the final analysis. That said, killing al Qaeda is a good thing. I don't love those guys.

by KenTX on 05/24/2008 03:16:39 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I think (none / 0)
I know I'm sort of a hippie-dippy pacifist when it comes to war, but I do agree it is necessary sometimes.  But this war seems to only have increased hatred of the USA and the number of terrorists in the Middle East.  And I can't separate killing Al Qaeda terrorists from the tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis that died.  They all have family too.  On very rare occasions, I have dreamed of being in a war zone and woken up terrified and understanding how it must feel to be there.  I don't wish that on anyone.  I don't hate terrorists; I hate the emotions and ideas that are driving them.  And yet, if we were occupied by another country, I imagine I would feel strongly too.

by desertpear on 05/24/2008 03:28:53 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Good god (none / 0)

How easy is this one to tear apart using actual facts and Ken's own links?

Maybe later if I am motivated but I am sure someone will go through 1 to 8 before I get a chance. 

by z1p101 on 05/24/2008 03:21:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The ignorant ramblings (none / 0)
of a lunatic mind are hardly worth responding to at all. Im surprised anyone bothered.

by Chinese Democracy on 05/24/2008 05:16:12 PM EST

[ Parent ]
sorry (none / 0)

This post of yours really disturbs me.  I am always willing to listen to people who argue their points reasonably, but who in this relatively small community is going to listen to you if you call us all worthless cocksuckers?  Do you include Cenk and the other young turks in this characterization?  Because I love the young turks and if you are calling Cenk a worthless cocksucker, that sucks.

I am honestly curious as to what your dream of an ideal America would be and why you have this seething hatred towards liberals.  What would a KenTX America look like?  What exactly is so bad about wanting a healthy environment, health care for poor people, etc.?  What is the real root of your hatred? 

by desertpear on 05/24/2008 03:22:14 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Sieg Ken (none / 0)

Have you heard of Nazi Germany? He has consistently supported Eugenic policies of mass sterilization's for the poor and other "life not worthy of life" types. KenTX whether he realizes it or not, is a real life fascist.

Since I refuse to respond to KenTX's posts as to not feed the fascist troll, I will post this video to discount all the propaganda from the likes of KenTX and Bush:

http://youtube.com/watch?v= zhtd0yaofoU

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 05/24/2008 06:16:15 PM EST

[ Parent ]
credibility check (none / 0)
"Since I refuse to respond to KenTX's posts"

Really? Is that true? Let's check this thread to see if you responded to any of my posts. Well looky here! This would make you a liar, but we already knew that.

As frequently happens in this forum, you offered some lame opinion in broken Spanglish, and then I smacked it down with ease because it was completely devoid of logic and reason. 

¿Quizá si usted escribe en español, usted sonará más inteligente?

by KenTX on 05/24/2008 07:34:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Chupame esta enchilada (none / 0)

There is more than one way not to respond to Ken's baiting.  One solution is to always talk about Ken in the third person, as if he's a little kid that doesn't understand grown-up talk.  I can't remember the last time I addressed him directly.  Regarding him as an underfoot toddler whose opinion doesn't matter in the slightest is the way to go.

Quizás, si lo ignoremos, Ken desaparecerá.

by OneHitKill on 05/25/2008 05:26:26 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Let me help your memory. (none / 0)
"I can't remember the last time I addressed him directly."

Take a look at the history of your comments in this forum. You address me directly with nearly every post. You've been doing it for years. I'm not kidding. Look how many of your posts are about me, or directed to me. Dude, you're freakin' me out a little here.

It's like you have an obsession, but it doesn't bother me for a couple of reasons: The comments are amusing and I know you're not a gay stalker, because you're getting married this summer, to a lady. That's a good sign.

by KenTX on 05/25/2008 11:30:13 AM EST

[ Parent ]
HUMOR! (none / 0)
I never thought I'd have to crack this package of "HUMOR!" stickers, but for you, I will.  (And the wedding is next year, not this year.)

by OneHitKill on 05/26/2008 10:40:32 PM EST

[ Parent ]
speaking of humor (none / 0)
Japanese humor is pretty good.

I love this Japanese massage chair.

by KenTX on 05/26/2008 10:46:54 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Strong words (none / 0)

From a man who compulsively tries to uncover where I live and work.

Freakshow. 

by ProfRich on 05/27/2008 10:24:49 AM EST

[ Parent ]
imbecile (none / 0)
"From a man who compulsively tries to uncover where I live and work."

Who needs to "uncover" anything? You post every boring detail of your life in excrutiating detail. We already know much more about you than we want to.

I used to try to make polite conversation with you, but I'm through with that. Now I simply ridicule your many erroneous comments. Like this one.

by KenTX on 05/27/2008 09:21:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
@desertpear (none / 0)
Note also the baseless, irrational racism...so this is KenTX. His America is a hell-hole of fascist reactionism, racism, mass sterilization's, mass delusions, ruled by a plutocracy. A very perverted Kallipolis where the man in the cave, KenTX, lives thinking the puppets shadows he sees against the wall is reality. This is the America, the living scum bucket of human life, KenTX is and his America. 

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 05/24/2008 07:50:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
"irrational racism" (none / 0)
Time to list the surnames of a few of my ancestors:

Leal, Carvajal, Rodriguez, Fuentes, Ximenes

by KenTX on 05/24/2008 08:54:58 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Funny (none / 0)
You don't LOOK Jewish...

by MedfordTim on 05/25/2008 12:54:05 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Su árbol de familia esta quemando (none / 0)

Seems to me this isn't the first time Ken has tried to use his ancestors' diversity to excuse his own racism.

He's done it before.

 

by OneHitKill on 05/25/2008 05:41:57 AM EST

[ Parent ]
He's the worst kind (none / 0)
of racist, a self-hating racist! He's is a pelotudo, end of story. 

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 05/25/2008 11:14:36 AM EST

[ Parent ]
So... (none / 0)

So after five years of war in Iraq, the acomplishment you're most proud of is subduing a ragtag, ad-hoc band of tribesman that came into existance because of the war?

For a projected 3 trilion dollars, that's pretty pathetic, even at today's exchange rates.

By the way, Ahmadinejad sends generalisimo Petraeus his thanks for removing yet another treat to it's puppet regime in Iraq. Good job!

 

by Cogitor on 05/24/2008 02:12:18 PM EST

Oh Ken (none / 0)

You need to take some time off because you are getting pathetic.

First off, read your own article. Does it say that we will be withdrawing significant forces from Iraq? No. What it says is that they are fairly sure we will be able to withdraw 30,000 troops in July (I believe that) and come October we think we can announce further troop withdraws somewhere in the future. Same shit the American people have been hearing for 4 years +. No one is buying it considering McCain has made the 2013 prediction.

"Thanks to the Surge, Al Qaeda in Iraq was destroyed."

Didn't you get the memo with the elephant letterhead? The Republican line that states that it is us against al Qaeda over there and it is not the Iraqi people who are fighting us. It is a much easier position to defend and even Bush is smart enough not to make the "we defeated al Qaeda in Iraq" claim because the next logical question to as would be "Oh really, then tell me who the hell we are spending American lives and billion dollars a month fighting now?". Stick to the play book.

"The decision is now unanimous. The Surge worked."

Really? Here is a more recent assessment by a real expert on the surge strategy. Argue with him.

One more thing Ken, if you are going to link to articles, please read them first and find ones that are up to date.

by z1p101 on 05/24/2008 02:27:21 PM EST

Optometrist time again! (none / 0)
You need new glasses so you can see the difference between "if", "maybe", "says he wants to", and what the facts actually show.

The escalation brought the troop level up to 165,000. Petraeus previously said he wanted to pull out 30,000 of the additional troops sent, which would bring the level back to 135,000 - higher than the allotted force, pre-escalation.

Except their math is still a little fuzzy because the withdrawals announced by the White House for July (the last of the announced withdrawals) is for 3500 to come back - leaving a total of 140,000 in Iraq. Even HIGHER than the troop level prior to the escalation.

"But on Thursday Petraeus suggested additional cuts to the 30,000 already withdrawing.”

Suggested to who?? In the same article, it states,
"Petraeus... told the Senate Armed Services Committee Thursday that he expects in September to recommend additional reductions in U.S. troop levels in Iraq before he takes over Central Command...He did not specify how large the cuts would be"

So, the good little Republican mouthpiece General will give some McCain-friendly number in September, which won't mean a goddam thing.


A quote from Ken's 'unanimous' link: "Things are improving slightly," he said. "But not as much as we hoped."  So, as long as Ken's - and everybody else's - expectations for the "surge" was a "slight improvement" the champagne should be flowing.

Except...it's not quite so "unanimous"...Sis tani may be moments away from authorizing 'jihad' against the American occupiers, Al Sadr could easily stop being 'diplomatic,' and if Iraq wasn't enough, now we have the leader of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood praising Bin Laden as a "holy warrior" and says he supports its attacks on occupying forces.

Having turned yet another corner with President Bush, Ken and the rest of the sheeple again find themselves right back where they started, with no future plans except to turn another corner, and remain oblivious to the death, destruction, ill will, cost, and long term ramifications of our refusal to end our occupation.

Oh, and let's not forget that when Petraeus talks about the 140,000 men and women who actually wear the uniform, he neglectfully leaves out the other 180,000 or so privately hired armed forces personnel also in Iraq, bringing our true presence closer to 300,000 troops.

Wonder what the American people are going to do if they ever realize how bamboozled they've been?

by MedfordTim on 05/24/2008 03:40:34 PM EST

Tim, this is a bit of a stretch. (none / 0)
"Oh, and let's not forget that when Petraeus talks about the 140,000 men and women who actually wear the uniform, he neglectfully leaves out the other 180,000 or so privately hired armed forces personnel also in Iraq, bringing our true presence closer to 300,000 troops."

If an American contractor is working on a pipeline or a pumping station or a refinery process or a road or a school, I would hardly refer to him as a "troop". I have a cousin who is a team leader for Blackwater, Inc. and he's been in Iraq since 2004. I wouldn't even call him a "troop". I would call him a "rich guy who doesn't pay taxes".

I would love to see 300,000 American contractors working in Iraq, and zero American military personnel stationed there. I think that's the direction we're heading.

by KenTX on 05/24/2008 07:49:11 PM EST

[ Parent ]
A stretch limo VW (none / 0)

Not that far a stretch, Ken, it's all in how you look at it. I see the forces of an occupying country as 'troops' whether they are hired in camis or blue jeans, and just because Rummy decided to use civies instead of military for these projects so they could artificially keep the real numbers of our presence hidden, it doesn't mean they are lost puppies - they are our Dogs of War. This remains true as long as we invaders occupy the country.

Now, the other subect on that line. If all 300,000 were civilians working to better the country, not only would I be happier, but I think the Iraqis would appreciate our presence more than they do when we bomb their husbands, wives, and children.

You might remember I have suggested many times over the years to get the troops out and start dropping DVD players and microwave ovens (I would now add toilet paper to the list) instead of bombs, we would go a lot farther in winning their hearts and minds. Of course, by now, we would have to drop half the load at the Syrian border where the two million refugees are trying to stay alive until we fininsh our little exercise in futility.

 

by MedfordTim on 05/25/2008 12:51:19 AM EST

[ Parent ]
love it (none / 0)
I have the same strategy in mind--if we spent all this war money on actually rebuilding Iraq, how many terrorists would we take out of service?

by desertpear on 05/27/2008 12:49:13 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Ken's dream (none / 0)

"I would love to see 300,000 American contractors working in Iraq, and zero American military personnel stationed there. I think that's the direction we're heading."

Gee, imagine how many Houston girls would get raped then....

good times. 

by ProfRich on 05/27/2008 10:19:35 AM EST

[ Parent ]
VICTORY!!! (none / 0)
The war in Iraq is clearly a success because the branch of Al Qaeda that existed solely to driving us out of Iraq has been defeated!!!!

Also, we replaced a Sunni, secular, anti-Iran regime that oppresses the opposition with a Shia, Islamic, pro-Iran regime that oppresses the opposition!!!!!!

SUCCESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!

That is if your definition of success for the war in Iraq is having a war in Iraq.

VIVA LA CIRCULAR LOGIC!!!

Palin in 2012? Bitch, please! No, really, please run in 2012, bitch. ;)

by richardshort2001 on 05/24/2008 07:55:59 PM EST

Whence AQI? (none / 0)
If Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Osama Bin Laden, Inc, and the organization is comprised of foreign fighters throughout the Middle East, who were attracted to Iraq to fight the Great Satan, and Iraq is like a giant Roach Motel for Islamic Jihadists, then how much more perfect could you want the mission to be?

Remember this guy? Here's a before and after photo.
zarqawi
In the words of John McCain, "I have news for Senator Obama. Al-Qaeda is in Iraq. And that’s why we’re fighting in Iraq, and that’s why we’re succeeding in Iraq."


Q: How many Islamic Jihadists have been killed in Iraq?

A: Try 19,000.

Now if 19 Islamic Jihadists were able to do a trillion dollars worth of damage to the U.S. economy in 2001, how much damage could 19,000 terrorists do? What is one thousand trillion? A quadrillion?

A couple of years ago, one of the favorite story lines promoted by the mainstream media were the overwhelming number of foreign fighters invading Iraq to battle American forces.

These fighters were being recruited from as far away as Europe.

The press breathlessly maintained headcounts describing who these people were and where they came from.

They were sneaking across the border from Saudi Arabia and Syria by the thousands.

Iraq was becoming a magnet for jihadists from across the nation of Islam.

Al Qaeda was conducting a giant campaign to recruit young fighters and insert them into Iraq to battle the infidel.

The origin of foreign fighters was analyzed in excruciating detail.

And then a miracle happened. The liberal press quit talking about foreign fighters in Iraq. In fact, they started going out of their way to ignore and even deny the presence of foreigners operating within Iraq. What happened? Did we finally kill all of the foreigners? Did we seal the borders to prevent the influx of additional fighters?

Or did the story line become inconvenient and counter-productive to the goals and objectives of the liberal dinosaur media? Did the press finally figure out that Americans believe killing Islamic jihadists in Iraq is a good way to keep them from coming to America?

So American forces have killed almost 20,000 militants in Iraq. How many of the dead fighters came from outside of Iraq? It’s difficult to develop an accurate number because we can’t ask them. However, a good estimate might be something like “one hell of a lot”.

You have to hand it to the press. They are as adaptive in battle and committed to their cause as al Qaeda. In fact, their objectives are not that far removed from those of al Qaeda.

But here’s an article that appeared a couple of months ago. As hard as you might try to google on the subject, you will not find a more current assessment of the situation on the ground.

“The Army's Combating Terrorism Center at West Point, the analyzed and made public last month documents that have led the U.S. military in Iraq to reassess some of its earlier assumptions about the insurgent group and those who carry out most of the suicide missions that are its signature method of attack.

[They studied] individual records of 606 foreign fighters who entered Iraq between August 2006 and August 2007. The cache of documents was discovered last fall by U.S. forces in the northern Iraqi town of Sinjar.
Based on the Sinjar records, U.S. military officials in Iraq said they now think that nine out of 10 suicide bombers have been foreigners, compared with earlier estimates of 75 percent. Similarly, they assess that 90 percent of foreign fighters entering Iraq during the one-year period ending in August came via Syria, a greater proportion than previously believed.”

I don’t care what name you want to give to “Al Qaeda in Iraq”, but it appears that the terrorists who are blowing people up were foreign jihadists. Fortunately, it looks like they're all dead.

by KenTX on 05/24/2008 08:15:45 PM EST

[ Parent ]
well (none / 0)

Even most republicans agree that BushCo. has done a poor job at fighting "terrorism" (in quotes because you cannot win a war against a tactic), so how are we supposed to be impressed, six years later?  I expect we will see a lot of "progress" before the election, no doubt. After all, we call it "corporate media" for a reason.  It seems premature to be claiming there is any success in Iraq.  Even if there is, it has been at a HUGE expense--ruining Americans' trust in the government, squandering international goodwill towards the USA, the lives of the soldiers, the innocent Iraqis, running up a gigantic national debt in a poorly managed and unnecessary war.  Not much to celebrate and we are sadly divided as a nation to boot.

But even more than Iraq, I am quite offended at the propensity of the current Administration to flat out lie to the American public.   Oh, and then there is torture.  oh, and ....

Every jihadist killed probably spawns 10 more.  Isn't that the point of being a martyr for the cause?

 

by desertpear on 05/24/2008 08:45:18 PM EST

[ Parent ]
God, Ken, your sourcing sucks! (none / 0)
"According to a U.S. military press briefing"

This is your idea of "mainstream Liberal press"?

No WONDER you have so many facts wrong.

You believe the fucking GOVERNMENT!!!!!

(add your own numbers up - by your reckoning, we have killed 4 times as many "foreign jihadists" as the military says came into the country. Neat trick, that....

by MedfordTim on 05/25/2008 01:13:35 AM EST

[ Parent ]
LOL (none / 0)
I laugh every time Ken recycles this post.

First, read his claims and then read the links he provides to back them up. They don't line up at all.

Then the drama. The "liberal press" was so focused on all these "foreign fighters" entering Iraq and then dropped the story to advance their "liberal agenda".

Truth is that 600 "foreign fighters" entering Iraq over the course of a year and less that 2000 "foreign fighters" entering Iraq over the course of 5+ years is what they call in the news biz a non f$%#ing story.

Now watch Ken make the 19 terrorists did trillions of dollars worth of damage in America (none of them were from Iraq or supported in any way by Saddam BTW) so it is worth spending billions of dollars to kill 1800  "foreign fighters" (whatever that means) in Iraq.

Then watch me link to stories about how al Qaeda has rebuilt their organization in Afghanistan/Pakistan right where we left them and a video clip of Bush admitting that al Qaeda is most likely planning their next attack on the US from that location.

by z1p101 on 05/25/2008 02:52:13 AM EST

[ Parent ]
The World According To Cheney (none / 0)
Here is a list of the world's top oil producing countries. Note that we've achieved improved relations with nearly every country on the list, with the exception of Iran and Venezuela.
oil guys
The only problem with Venezuela is Hugo Chavez, and despots like him have a way of pushing the envelope far enough to seal their own fate.

Now imagine if Saddam Hussein had been allowed to achieve his lifelong dream of annexing Kuwait, UAE, and Saudi Arabia? Look at the graphic again.

I don't know why it is so difficult to explain to liberals that Saddam was a destabilizing force in a critically strategic region of the world. Historians will label Democrats as morons.

by KenTX on 05/24/2008 08:44:12 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Drawing a picture for liberals. (none / 0)
Bush in Kuwait
kuwait

Bush in UAE
uae 

Bush in Saudi Arabia
saudi

Bush in Iraq
iraq 

Bush in Russia
russia

by KenTX on 05/24/2008 09:11:04 PM EST

[ Parent ]
You forgot the balloon of the Saudi's head (none / 0)
that says "No"

Palin in 2012? Bitch, please! No, really, please run in 2012, bitch. ;)

by richardshort2001 on 05/24/2008 10:57:47 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Heh (none / 0)

I didn't know we had all kinds of problems with most of those people in the first place. That explains the cheap gas prices Bush has brought us. I mean hell, those sky high prices we were paying at the pump before Bush came into office and worked his diplomatic magic really sucked.

Thanks for the info Ken. 

by z1p101 on 05/25/2008 02:57:09 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I love (none / 0)
Putin's thumbs up, "thanks for propping up my regime for the last 8 years, freaking tard!"

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 05/25/2008 11:16:40 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Wasn't a thumbs up (none / 0)

supposed to mean you wanted to see the gladiator killied in ancient Rome?

by Spencer on 05/26/2008 08:45:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Why this is useless (none / 0)

This is what happens:

Ken states a point, throws some nearly random articles at it, combined with some random pictures and facts.

Responses follow, reducing his view to rubble by using pointed arguments. In response, Ken just repeats his point and random facts, regardless of the arguments presented by the opposite side.

Example:

Ken: We kill many Al-Q in Iraq. Thus, Iraq war good.

Reply (by, say, richardshort): There was no Al-Q in Iraq before the Iraq war. There wouldn't have been Al-Q in Iraq if not for the war. Thus, Iraq war bad.

Ken: We kill 19000 Al-Q in Iraq. Iraq war good. <posts terrorist picture> 

Did he adress the question of no Al-Q in Iraq before the war? Nope. He just repeated himself. What a waste of time.

 

 

by Cogitor on 05/25/2008 08:03:51 PM EST

No AQI prior to the war. (none / 0)
I addressed that point in this post.

What you've failed to address is Obama's willingness to surrender Iraq to al Qaeda.

by KenTX on 05/25/2008 08:22:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]
But... (none / 0)
If it is so useless why is it that his threads usually generate the largest amount of attention? I sense a bit hypocrisy, you (and others) deride KenTX, yet like the house of Saud, you can never say no! I sense a sadistic pleasure in pain.

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 05/25/2008 10:05:56 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The Whole Friggin Thing Worked (none / 0)
Yes, the surge worked, the war worked, the coalition of the willing worked. All is peace and harmony and stablility in Crawford and the rest of Happyland. And what is the prize at the end of all this success?
 
What really worked, thanks to the vision of a civil rights attorney from Chicago, is that after 35 years of lotus-eating, the majority of the US citizens woke up from their political lethargy and are remembering a bit of their responsibilites as members of a representative government. But at what  price?

by Verified1 on 05/25/2008 09:41:16 PM EST

i want to stop with this iraq nonsense (none / 0)
Many of you guys (and Cenk) do an excellent job of pointing out what a disaster the Iraq War has been by citing facts and information. I applaud that. You do it much better than I do. Personally, I have reduced greatly the time I spend reading articles about Iraq.  I almost feel that to debate the merits of the war is preposterous. The Iraq War doesn't pass the sniff test.  The War, the Surge, the policy, the reconstruction - I mean, dude, it is plainly obvious that it's all been a complete disaster and failure. Note to these McCain people, Republican propagandists, KenTX - take a deep breath. Come on, get real.  It is a disaster on hundreds of levels.  It is a success on 3 or 4 levels, at best (I'm being generous).  

Did you read the New York Times story about the Pentagon report showing how many millions or billions of dollars of money have been wasted.  It's the Pentagon saying that.  I just don't get it. It's like me with debates about God's existence. I'm not interested. I think it's stupid beyond the level of intelligent discourse. Same with Iraq.

Read more about Brazil and Bolivia, Russia, the European Union, China, India and Mexico if you want interesting international stories.

David

by yturks on 05/25/2008 10:42:59 PM EST

Apologies to all. (none / 0)
Emotions and tensions are ratcheting up as we approach November. It was similar to this in Sept-Nov 2006, but this year will be much, much worse.

I'm taking a little bit of a beating, but it would be ridiculous for me to whine. I choose to blog conservative propaganda in a left leaning forum. That means that I must love the abuse, because there is nobody else to blame but myself for being here. (and even paying for the privilege)

Conservatives are greatly maligned in this forum, with words and accusations far worse than the ones I used. But that's the purpose of the website. It's a place where liberals go to blow off steam and vent their frustrations. They have the right to attack me, but I don't have the right to retaliate, and I fully agree that's the way it should be.

Henceforth, I will debate the issues, and I will take the abuse. I will prepare for vicious attacks. I will restrain myself when attacked. It's going to be a very long campaign season.

May God help the sanity of Leftwing America if Barack Obama somehow man ages to lose this election.

(By the way, I meant to type "corksuckers". Sorry about that!)

by KenTX on 05/25/2008 11:21:18 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Nice job Ken (none / 0)
You are a great fisherman!!!

Baited them hook line and sinker.

and while everyone bitched about the wherefore's and art thou's they missed the entire point

An announcement of victory and troop reductions prior to the General Election.

For those of you who thought this would be a clean election I offer exhibit A

Can't wait for the elevated terror warnings, time to break out my rainbow code card.

People wonder why I want a FIGHTER as our nominee.

by LORD FOUL on 05/27/2008 06:21:16 PM EST

LF reads me like a comic book. (none / 0)
The others are easier to manipulate. LF, please don't forget high oil prices. Those are also linked directly to Osama Obama.

by KenTX on 05/27/2008 07:16:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Petraeus is significantly reducing forces in Iraq. | 48 comments (48 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: