Pantagraph.com | Letters | Iraq surge never worked; time for troops to leave

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

Robert Edward Johnson wrote on May 5, 2008 10:08 AM:

" To the allegedly "pragmatic" Democrat who calls herself Jimmy Choo Girl: if you'd care more about cleaning up the mess between your ears and less about your Imelda Marcos shoe obsession, perhaps you'd "get" that there's nothing pragmatic about continuing to support our presence in Iraq, and you'd "get" (if you read my letter) that if Iraqi Security Force and Civilian deaths have skyrocketed since December almost to their old levels, then no real "progress" in Iraq has been made. To reiterate: Since January, not only have our own deaths been higher than December each month, Iraqi Security Forces and Iraqi civilian casualties have been as follows: August, 1,674; September, 848; October, 679; November, 560; December, 548; January, 554; February, 674; March, 980. I'd give you the April figure, but neocon idiots have, since mid April, been hacking into the site I used as a source and bringing it down repeatedly. "

JimmyChooGirl wrote on Apr 23, 2008 3:00 PM:

" Thank you anchor, I really appreciate that. Enjoy the beautiful day! : ) "

anchor wrote on Apr 23, 2008 2:26 PM:

" to JimmyChooGirl - You are a rare (and wonderful) breed. A pragmatic Dem. I praise you for looking past the media spin and finding facts. "

johnd wrote on Apr 22, 2008 10:55 PM:

" They can not get the terroist anyway even if that is the reason were in Iraq?Besides Ben Laudin is not in Iraq and that prooves we can not get the terroist.They have no problem avoiding us.Its so easy even a Caveman can do it.Besides we have just as many Americans here that or more of a threat then what were trying to stomp out in sand land. "

VoiceInWilderness wrote on Apr 22, 2008 8:31 PM:

" To The Cats. Apparently, I do know more about it. No he has not revealed his plan and wouldn't. It's a SECRET. Battle, movement, advance, retreat and pullouts should never be revealed. McCain's job as a Senator, an American, a candidate and as president is to show(and he is) any enemy we'll fight them as long as necessary and if it takes 100 years, that's the way it'll be. The democrats are saying they'll start pulling out immediately and are setting deadlines for an end to our part in that war. That is ABSOLUTELY stupid and shows exquisitely the inexperience of both Obama and Clinton. They are more dangerous than our enemies. What would you do if someone were about to kill your kids? Well, someone IS trying to kill your children if they're not stopped. Where do you think all those higher fuel prices are going? Voting for Obama or Clinton is like having a 7 year old do your brain surgery. "

The Cat wrote on Apr 22, 2008 3:01 PM:

" Cats: Revisionist history and moveon.org current events again from the “progressive” left. Of the 18 benchmarks: 12 have been accomplished, 5 are in progress, and 1 stalled. While here with the Donkey controlled congress: trade deals are stalled, national security issues are put on the back burner as they go on repeated breaks, judicial appointments are blocked, and only 1 of their pet issues (a stupid minimum wage increase) was accomplished. Good record Class of 2006 (18% approval rate). For one who says anything before 2001 is irrelevant, bringing up Regan is a real stretch. Lebanon was a mistake but that was followed up with chastisements of Libya and actions against Iran for their aggressions. That was in contrast to Carter’s failed Mideast policies and Clinton’s avoidance of any meaningful anti-terrorist/anti-Saddam actions plus his Somalia bug out. Breaking news: Regan is dead, Carter is still playing President and “negotiating” with and supporting enemies of the US, and Bubba still has his triangulating nose in the political scene looking to regain power with the Bosnia Vet as President. "

JimmyChooGirl wrote on Apr 22, 2008 2:11 PM:

" anchor - you couldn't be more right. I am a Democrat and have been opposed to the war ever since it started. BUT after seeing the progress we've made in Iraq, my mind has changed completely. The reason most of us think the war is going bad is because the media is based on libertarian viewpoints (I am a liberal thank you). They tell everyone of the deaths, the rapes, the tortue but they don't tell us about the Iraqi children that are now able to go to school, the new embassy in Iraq, etc. If you really want to know exactly how this war is going, look up the facts yourself because the media will not give them to you. My brother in law and some friends are serving in Iraq and I pray for them every day but they know they are there for a good reason. I don't think we should send more troops and I don't think we should have stop/loss's going on either but we should maintain control as much as possible for the sake of Iraq and the US of A. : ) "

The Cats wrote on Apr 22, 2008 10:46 AM:

" To The Cat...just ignoring me now? Obviously you did not respond to my post because you would have to admit that Reagan (besides being in charge of the most criminal administration in history and authorizing criminal acts personally while President) was a coward for pulling out of Lebanon...the same things you castigate Democrats for. By not objecting it is obvious that you agree with my posts. You are making progress. BTW when will you actually stay on topic? Vietnam now? Try reading the book "Vietnam: A History, by Stanley Karnow. You will learn many things including the fact that your rants about the subject are totally without a factual basis. "

The Cats wrote on Apr 22, 2008 10:39 AM:

" To The Cat...continuing in your quest to always deflect a negative letter about our Liar In Chief I see. Now you are writing about the 70's. At least you didn't blame Clinton for it. The surge did not work by anyones standards including the benchmarks as laid out by boy George. 28%er is what you are. "

ThosSpence wrote on Apr 21, 2008 11:12 PM:

" To "the cat": your posts about Korea and Vietnam demonstrate your eagerness to push the boundaries of your ignorance to ever greater lengths. It is rare indeed to see such nonsensical renditions of history. I hold my head in unsimulated pain after reading your tortured mangling of the past. Your idiotic rhetoric in response to my post likewise marks you as a true ideologue and fanatic, oblivious to reality. Do you actually believe that in conceiving their war against Muslims that the Bush administration bowed to "political correctness"? And trillions were wasted in the war on poverty? What horror that the elderly and small children were provided with simple sustenance! You exemplify a great deal that is horrifying about our society. "

The Cat wrote on Apr 21, 2008 9:07 PM:

" Dog: Congress cut aid by 30% in 1974 and then refused Ford’s request for emergency aid in 75 when the NVA began attacking the South in earnest. The legislation in 1973 (when Nixon was under fire in congress for much less a political dirty trick than Bubba’s misuse of FBI files/IRS/NSA) prohibited any military response to NV aggression against SV. As a result the “progressives” in the Donkey party with a few RINOs bugged out and failed to enforce a ceasefire agreement. Bugging out seems to be their pattern if the opponent is either marxist or islamic. ThosSpence: It is a war against aggressive islam not a war on terror but we must be PC and not offend anyone by telling who the real enemy is. Perhaps we should also rethink our idiotic ‘War on Poverty” that has wasted trillions and killed many more than Iraq via government benign neglect and mismanagement. "

LOL Liberal (:-D) wrote on Apr 21, 2008 7:56 PM:

" The world sure appears different when you wear red-colored glasses, doesn't it Cat? "

Anchor wrote on Apr 21, 2008 7:30 PM:

" To Good old boy - Your grasp of international commerce is breath taking. Your idea to turn the U.S.A into an island... Brilliant! After we build that great big wall to keep everyone else out we could start rouding up all the brown people and throw them over the wall too, eh? You should start raising money to fund this idea. Maybe a Concert...call it Hay-Seeds Across America (HSAA for short). "

Anchor wrote on Apr 21, 2008 7:25 PM:

" I agree we need to stop the war as soon as possible. I don't think any reasonable person is a FAN of war. But what do you people think is going to happen if the U.S. just pulls up and leaves with out settling up Iraq? How long do you suppose it would be before we are back to the middle east with a bigger problem than before? Maybe the reason for going there are suspect, but we are there now. The stone has been pushed down the hill. More lives are at risk by leaving a infant Iraq alone. That means our lives here at home, our military abroad, U.S. friendly nations and the like. "

Robert Edward Johnson wrote on Apr 21, 2008 5:41 PM:

" There are two reasons why pulling out will actually make an end to the violence more likely: 1) by continuing to stay, we're the poster child for Al Qaeda ("the Infidels want to be the new UK colonists! They've built 14 PERMANENT bases and an embassy bigger than the Vatican!"); 2) Iraq's Shia List party has already said that we're actually holding the government BACK and that without our interference ("you can't torture that guy just because he slaughtered your FAMILY! You forgot to say 'mother may I?'!!"), the infidels would already be crushed, and they're RIGHT. If we will simply get out and let the government there RUTHLESSLY slaughter the insurgents, the violence will end and oil prices will plummet. By the way, since our involvement in this has ALREADY been longer than our involvement in WWII, wouldn't you say we've TRIED the "stay the course" "finish the job" strategy? "

dirkdavebigalow wrote on Apr 21, 2008 3:28 PM:

" Good ole boy... Do we give out more money as foreign aid or do we borrow more from China? (That actually pays for the Iraq war and the surge) The surge never had anything to do with terrorism or the safety of the United States. I hope China never says “you owe us trillions of dollars. Start living our way or we will invade you” We could never win a war against China. Iraq and Afghanistan have weakened are military so much we are now recruiting former felons
"

Independent? wrote on Apr 21, 2008 2:56 PM:

" Good ol boy... I completely agree we need to stop the war, obviously responsibly and well managed because I do not think we are safer because of it, and I don't think a military solution is the answer. However, if you think stopping foreign aid is going to balance our budget I think you are dreaming seeing as we only spend about .05% of our budget on foreign aid. If .05 can somehow balance the rest of our 99.5% of spending then I'm all for it but I really can't see that happening. "

good ol boy wrote on Apr 21, 2008 1:58 PM:

" To ThosSpence : OK great, quit spending money over in arab land, bring our troops home, use them to beef up border patrols around the U.S., and cut off all foreign aid immediately. I'm all for stopping this war and while were at it lets worry about keeping America free, safe, fed, housed, and under control (as far as immigration). If we do this all that war and give away aid money should have the budget under control shortly. ( check out the amount of money we send out of country every year to some of these other countries, it's crazy !!) "

jj2 wrote on Apr 21, 2008 12:27 PM:

" Stay (I know there is cause to stay) or leave (I'd love to see our people home and safe), I think it's time to send the country the bill.
"

ThosSpence wrote on Apr 21, 2008 11:54 AM:

" To "good old boy": has it ever occurred to you that supporting America might entail ending its occupation of an arab country, rethinking its idiotic "war on terror" (how does one wage war on a military tactic? how about a war on aerial bombing?), renouncing torture and preemptive war and attempting to observe what are supposedly American ideals and principles? Are you aware that every penny spent on military operations in Iraq (roughly 600 billion dollars) has been borrowed money? "

good ol boy wrote on Apr 21, 2008 10:50 AM:

" Support the troops and the US or move to another country!! It's that simple people. Also a side note : any country not assisting us in the war on terror, your aid from the US should stop today. The war will be paid for alot sooner with all that extra money we'll have!! "

ThosSpence wrote on Apr 21, 2008 10:25 AM:

" Even if the Iraqi factions manage in the next few years to reach some sort of fragile accomodation with each other, which is highly unlikely, the U.S. has no intention of leaving the country. The Bush administration has been busy negotiating a treaty (although it will call it something else so that it won't need Senate approval) with its client in Iraq to allow for a large permanent U.S. military presence there. Of course, you won't read one word about these negotiations in the American media. But Bush's intention is clear: Iraq will join the American empire of military bases. "

illini-dog wrote on Apr 21, 2008 9:52 AM:

" Cat the funding was stopped in 73 after the last troops came home but the so called ''promised''funds you must be referring to in 75 was voted down with some republicans on board also.Goldwater and Kissinger both said it was imminent that South Vietnam would fall regardless so wasting more money would not have helped and the South Vietnam govt. was beyond corrupt at that time. "

dirkdavebigalow wrote on Apr 20, 2008 10:27 PM:

" Send the troops home. The government gives the impression we must stay there until every bad person in the middle east is captured or killed. It will never happen. Bad people are a part of life. In our great country we have prisons overflowing with criminals. The surge will never permanantly solve anything but will only put our country deeper in debt. "

middle of the road wrote on Apr 20, 2008 9:51 PM:

" yes the surge is working quite nicely.... if your goal is to cause more death and destruction. oh and of course hatred "

The Cat wrote on Apr 20, 2008 9:25 PM:

" ES: A couple of observations on your “logic” from one who worked with the ARVN. After Tet the VC was not a viable fighting organization with most attacks coming from the NVA (actually an invasion by one country of another). If the bug out (as always), anti-war Donkeys had not had control of congress in 1975 and cut off the promised funding and air support, South Vietnam would likely not have fallen. Of course, if you had had a competent CIC and SECDEF in 1965-66 the war would have ended sooner with North Vietnam in rubble. “Measured response” and picking bombing targets and routes in the White House was not only dumb but the usual incompetent way liberal (“progressive”) Donkeys do everything.
"

LOL Liberal (:-D) wrote on Apr 20, 2008 8:49 PM:

" But Wat was spit on. He also came up with the smiley face and the saying; "$hit happens". Wat is one worldly dude. "

ES wrote on Apr 20, 2008 3:34 PM:

" This surge is working about as well as Viet Nam. Having said that, I expect the Nam vets who at one time hated the buggers who started that war, to jump my case. Wat will falsely claim that he was spit upon, and the rest will claim some altrusitic notion that Nam was somehow justified: which it was not. Let it go, guys. You republicans backed the wrong guy. "

The Cats wrote on Apr 20, 2008 12:29 PM:

" To The Cat...again deflect, spin, and outright lie. Seems to me the last big "bug out" was Reagan in Lebanon. Nice try though. I am not sure most military historians will agree that engaging China and Russia in Korea would have resulted in a good situation for the US. What a factually challenged person you are. Again I ask what does Korea, etc, have to do with our Liar In Chief's build up (not a surge as we will end up with more troops in theater after "the surge" has ended that when it started). Try sticking to the facts in the letter instead of your hate filled diatribes about irrelevant issues...sorry I forgot you are defending the indefensible. "

The Cats wrote on Apr 20, 2008 12:22 PM:

" To DK...could you please provide the factual basis for your comment that a Democrat would pull out the "minute they took office." That is not a true statement so where is your proof. It does, however, sound a lot like Rush. You are one of his sheep...baaahhh. "

The Cats wrote on Apr 20, 2008 12:19 PM:

" To Voice...McSame hasn't "voiced" anything about that pullout plan...what do you know that we don't? More of the same from him...after all he said it could be a "100 year" war and he supports our Liar In Chief right down the line. "

VoiceInWilderness wrote on Apr 19, 2008 6:42 PM:

" The enemy needs to be convinced McCain won't take any crap, specially when he says we'll fight them and chase them down for 100 years if we have to. Now, that's the way to handle an enemy, unlike my fellow and far more left-wing Democrats. McCain has a plan to bring our troops home, but doesn't want the enemy to know anything about it. Tell them and they'll grandstand as we're pulling out and claim victory. That will encourage every other enemy we have to continue attacking us and our allies & the war will continue. I have a little more faith in the mental health and intelligence of China, Iran and other erzatz harassers that they won't commit national suicide. I think they'll continue to recruit those they make desperate and crazy to die one or two at a time or 16 or so at a time with another "big thing coming" as they like to describe it. No pullout, no blinkin', no holds barred. I'd love to see this war end, but we have to show we'll hit back as long as they're there. "

Moon Mullins wrote on Apr 19, 2008 6:18 PM:

" Can anyone tell me why George and Barbara's idiot son(Bush 43) couldn't see the Shiite militia leaders crossing the border from Iran in the days after the fall of President Saddam? It was reported by all of the news outlets. Oh yeah, that's right, GW doesn't read. Why all the concern now? The Sunni's boycotted the election and in the process turned the government over to the Shiites. Iran must be thrilled to be in control of Iraq. Nice job, Pres! You should have listened to Colin Powell and your Daddy and stayed out of Iraq! "

110100100 wrote on Apr 19, 2008 7:50 AM:

" Every Iraqi, on every side, knows that if our troops leave, Iraq will make Ruwanda look like a picnic. It would be an all out 4 way civil war between the Mahdi Army, the Badr organization, the Sunnis, and the Kurds. This author likes to sound dramatic by copy & pasting notes from CNN, but these numbers would jump 10 fold if we were to pull out, and Iran would virtually run the country. We've asked so much of our brave soldiers already, how can we tell them to tuck tale and run now? If Obama or Hill-dawg gets elected, the colors over the white house will no longer be the red, white, and blue of Old Glory, but the white flag of surrender. "

johnd wrote on Apr 19, 2008 7:11 AM:

" The surge is working just as planned.Bush and gang caused a real surge in oil prices just as they planned.The War in Iraq is all about oil I do not care what you Republican war lovers say. "

Mike wrote on Apr 19, 2008 6:35 AM:

" The surge is not only effective its WINNING. That's the real problem.

"

BN REPUBLICAN wrote on Apr 19, 2008 1:58 AM:

" oy gevalt. If you've already written one letter to the editor about this, please spare us your verbal diarrhea this time around. Thanks. "

illini-dog wrote on Apr 16, 2008 5:16 PM:

" I don't like spending 2 billion a month in iraq anymore than the next guy but to pull out now would send the wrong message and would really make all that money be wasted. Maybe 3 years from now that might change but not now. "

DK61727 wrote on Apr 15, 2008 7:37 AM:

" "LOL Liberal", what made you need to go vomit? Did bad thing trip your gag reflex, twinkle toes? Let's analyze your current outburst of insanity. You and your ilk have been screaming for years to cut and run from Iraq. Adding to that, your Liberal political candidates swear to end the Iraq War the minute they take office. After all that, you suddenly rebuke your former advocations and properly characterize retreat from Iraq as a "LOSS" to be pinned on the next president. The solution is simple, don't cut and run, then we won't lose. My empathy to you..........you are so confused. "

VoiceInWilderness wrote on Apr 12, 2008 9:22 PM:

" Johnson says: " I'm anti-war AND NOT a tree-hugger and went to Princeton and U of Chicago and am potentially 'CONNECTED." hmmmm and whah! I'm impressed! And what are your degrees? What was your thesis and dissertations?
And what does "potentially connected" mean? You listed off casualties that look like a gang fight in South Chicago on the side of real wars we've been in. Granted, it's time Iraq paid it's own way considering it's oil income and time it fought its own battles as is Israel. If Iran or any other country crosses their border as Saddam did in Kuwait, it's kick ass time again. He didn't comply with the terms of the winners who chased his troops out of Kusait. We just cannot be bullied or attacked any more. "We" includes our allies. If you don't see the "time of war" and the "time of peace" your impressive alma maters need revamping. "

VoiceInWilderness wrote on Apr 12, 2008 9:03 PM:

" I would like to know Robert Johnson's qualifications in the Art of War. Perhaps some of us can teach him some things so he doesn't make a fool of himself next time. Ever hear of the crusades and why, in an eon of "take it, it's mine, mine, mine!!!?" How about the truth about Islam's rise to "power" and the 800 years or so they held half of Europe? Meantime, we're buying oil from our enemies. If they weren't they wouldn't be punishing us with inflated oil prices. We've been in an economic war for decades and yet our leaders, Democrat and Republican, were too stupid to keep us independent and without a clue about dealing with Communists and radical religionists. I wish I knew how to get our factories back and chase the foreigners buying out our land, businesses, stock market and particularly, our leaders...Democrat AND Republican. Every hear of the "hundred years" war? That's what McCain meant, you know...you just don't, as Clinton and Obama, tip the enemy you're willing to turn tail and run! "

Candid wrote on Apr 10, 2008 3:33 PM:

" The surge was a Cheney plan to get through their term without changing anything or taking responsibility. It was a reaction to the Baker-Hamilton commission. To think that it will achieve anything of substance is delusional. We took an already stretched military and stretched it further. As part of the surge we began paying tens of millions to the Suni so that they would temporarily not shoot at us. We had Sadr and his Shia sect declare a temporary truce. When the Green Zone government tried to move in on Sadr, there were heavy Iraqi army desertions and many turned over their weapons. Sadr sayd he's not turning in his weapons unless the invader leaves. The government in the Green Zone has made zero progress, and as General Odom recenlty noted, it will not be the Green Zone government that eventually rules Iraq anyone. We're at square one at $12 billion per month. "

The other Dave wrote on Apr 10, 2008 3:15 PM:

" Robert, your thinking is that the surge created more US casualties when the prior time casualties were declining or at least stable. I would agree with you there. But your conclusion is for all of our troops to leave and let the Iraq government go "Saddam" on everyone that objects to them. In other words, the mass killings, genocide and rapes from the Saddam era would return and you would be satisfied?

And I need to grow up? "

Robert Edward Johnson wrote on Apr 10, 2008 1:59 PM:

" buckeye/The Other Dave/ktlin/illini fan 5, grow up, the stats are on icasualties dot org slash oif. landlord, offensive or not, the Iraqi government agrees with me that we're holding us back. McCain WILL win due to racists keeping the White House WHITE - but an even more DEMOCRAT Congress and Senate supermajority will force McCain out of Iraq by April 2009. BigBrother, the OPPOSITE is true, we're the biggest poster boy for recruiting for Al Qaeda and when we're out, the CENTRAL GOVERNMENT will wipe out all insurgents. anchor, I'm anti-war AND NOT a tree-hugger and went to Princeton and U of Chicago and am potentially 'CONNECTED.' Wat Tyler, if you ACTUALLY HAD a BS detector, it would be on constant BEEP mode from the constant stream of neocon moronisms coming out of your mouth on this website. LOL Lib is right, the whole point of the war was to drive up oil prices as long and as high as possible for Bush/Cheney/Conartista's OWNERS, the Saudis. Hopefully these treasonous traitors will be executed for treason someday. Ventura/Paul/Barr for Prez!!!! "

The Cat wrote on Apr 10, 2008 1:06 PM:

" The (ultra leftwing, factually challenged) Cats: Korean War: Started by USSR and Chicoms to take more territory because the Truman administration signaled Korea was not in the US sphere of influence. Truman was forced to react but afraid to win because he overestimated the USSR and China and listened to his communist advisors in the government. The UN then provided a “face saving” ceasefire loss. As to your “hero” Bubba, it was OK that he and the Dems believed the “lies” Iraq had WMDs because they just sat on their hands and blustered? The same tactics he used on OBL and the terror gangs. Dems seem to be bellicose when it comes to “real” enemies like South Africa, Rhodesia, and Serbia (all those sure worked out well) but never when US interests are at stake. Their foreign policy model is Somalia: con the Senior Bush into intervening for “humanitarian” reasons; change the mission without providing proper resources under Clinton; and then bug out in humiliation when there is minor opposition. Clinton is the incompetent “Liar in Chief” not Bush. "

Ekim wrote on Apr 10, 2008 12:43 PM:

" I love the way the self righteous speak in absolute truths. As if everything they think and say is the absolute truth just because they think it. Thanks Robert, I needed a good laugh today. "

Greed wrote on Apr 10, 2008 12:17 PM:

" Bob, You are right. Another thing is the rise in oil prices because of Iraq. Oh, I know all you Republicans with your heads in the sand claim the war hasn't driven the price of oil higher, but oil was $23 before Bush invaded Iraq. I would venture a bet that if we got out, the price of oil would drop to half. As far as our troops having died in vain, you can't change the truth. Our young men were wounded and killed because Bush wanted to control Middle East oil, and make the world believe he had a pair. If you believe all that crap propaganda about freedom and democracy, buy yourself a bridge. The Republicans didn't care about democracy in Florida in 2000, or Ohio in 2004. Let us get McCain to pledge: No pardons for war crimes. "

wat tyler wrote on Apr 10, 2008 12:10 PM:

" to The Cats:
1. I am the conservative YOU are the radical. You obviously don't like the connotations of the two words, but that doesn't change the facts. 2. Where do get this 19% figure you brandish like a sword? According to the latest New York Times poll, President Bushes approval rating is 28%, according tothe latest Fox poll it is 30%.
3.the war is based on the naked aggression of the Arab states (and Persia), the intemperate language that the despots and dictators in that reagion use, and their constant attacks. In other words, we were provoked. Your silly attempt to color the facts with meaningless rhetoric about lies does not change the fact that bin Laden, supported by and enabled bya multitude middle eastern governments, attacked us repeatedly. President Bushes plan to reduce the level of insanity in the Middle East is progressing nicely, and the surge is working fine. Don't take my word for it, ask the Sunni tribal leaders and al-Sostani, the top Shiite cleric, who all support the surge and continued presence of American troops in Iraq. "

mpr wrote on Apr 10, 2008 11:13 AM:

" It's going to be many years before we're able to determine if this war was worth the sacrifices that were made or whether Bush did the right thing while in office. Who would have thought that it would take just 10 years before Democrats started to see the Clintons for what they are.

From what I've seen, there is reason to be optimistic that a democracy will form in Iraq and we'll have a friendly ally in the Middle East. It won't hurt having a base in Iraq or access to Iraq's oil.

"

The Cats wrote on Apr 10, 2008 10:43 AM:

" To Wat...the difference about WMD's is simple...the Democrats did not invade based on the faulty CIA intelligence (?) information and boy George did. The Democrats showed leadership, restraint, and good judgment unlike President Cheney and his sidekick boy George. Whether Clinton should have gotten Bin Laden is a flawed argument and not the point (although the radicals such as yourself cannot have a post, it seem, without blaming him for something). Our Liar In Chief had his opportunities to get him as well without any success so on that score it is certainly even (again though, "W" had many more resources and situations to get him and all failed). Keep on believing Wat...you, The Cat, and the few on here who believe as you do join the 19% of Americans who believe in this failed administration. "

The Cats wrote on Apr 10, 2008 10:35 AM:

" Isn't it funny that the few Bush supporters on this site (19% of the public in the latest polls) always attack with insults rather than just look at the facts. It is simply because the facts do not justify their positions. The entire war was based on lies, that is proven...935 to be exact. "W" set up 18 benchmarks for the surge...4 have been met. The level of violence is exploding in the country, Basra, Sadr City, Baghdad, are all under 24 hour curfew and are battle zones. The Iraqi's are banking millions in oil revenue (thanks to boy George it is at $110 a barrel today) yet we continue to pay for virtually everything in Iraq. The surge is a failure by any measure. McSame is right about 1 thing...we will be there for at least a generation. "

The Cats wrote on Apr 10, 2008 10:00 AM:

" To The Cat...nice to see you stay consistent...blaming Clinton again for boy George's mess. Obviously you know nothing about The Korean War. Try reading sometime. This is about 935 lies to get us into this mess. This letter is about the surge which is actually a lie as well, considering we brought in 30,000 new troops but at maximum only 20,000 are going home. It was a buildup not a surge and it, by our Liar In Chiefs own benchmarks, is a failure. 4 of 18 benchmarks have been met. BTW, Wat never has any correct factual information and seems to be your only supporter now that you don't post as 2 people (what happened to your alter ego, YADA? Seems he doesn't post any more.) You are a member of the 19% club. Keep on believing and blaming this mess on past presidents...I know it makes you feel less foolish for your support or "W" and President Cheney. "

dwarf wrote on Apr 10, 2008 9:47 AM:

" For the folks who say the surge is working... What metrics are you going by? How are you measuring success? If incidents of violence aren't decreasing, and deaths are increasing, what else are you measuring it by?

By the same token, what criteria would have to be met for you to say that the surge isn't working? Is there a hypothetical way to disprove the surge's effectiveness? "

Wat Tyler wrote on Apr 10, 2008 9:18 AM:

" Who do you want to believe, your own uncertain memory or the former President of the United States, Bill Clinton? Here, in his own words:

In September 2006, during a famous encounter with Fox News anchor Wallace, Clinton erupted in anger and waived his finger when asked about whether his administration had done enough to get bin Laden. “What did I do? What did I do?” Clinton said at one point. “I worked hard to try to kill him. I authorized a finding for the CIA to kill him. We contracted with people to kill him. I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since.”

The canard, that the Republican Congress prevented Clinton from killing bin Laden, when he had a chance, doesn't pass the smell test. I could believe that of Pelosi, with her demonstrated antithepathy towards anything that her President proposes, but the Republican Congress under Clinton, was actually driving the administration on the issues of terrorism, welfare reform, spending reform and education. Sorry, but the "Republican Congress Stopped me" sounds like abit of dmocrat revisionist history to me. "

The Cat wrote on Apr 10, 2008 8:43 AM:

" Thoughts (Delusions?) a Million: North Korea would not be a problem if we had finished that war as opposed to settling for a draw in that conflict. Also, if you remember or even knew, it was the Clinton administration that aided and abetted NK’s nuclear program. From attacks in the DMZ, through the Pueblo, to playing with other terrorist states, NK has been a bad actor since the ceasefire. It was also the Clinton cabinet and advisors that put the brakes on any action on OBL. Gore supported Clinton on his Iraqi policy and statements and, as (shudder) President, probably would have no hesitation attacking any country that was not abiding by “global warming” sanctions with the full support of all “progressives”. Wat has the facts; you “progressives” have the fantasies. "

Paladin wrote on Apr 10, 2008 8:32 AM:

" ...just wait. To effectively withdraw your extant military forces from Iraq, you will need another "Surge". Get used to surges, from time to time. "

Not so Political wrote on Apr 10, 2008 7:11 AM:

" Question, has anyone counted the number of men running the iraq troops that have resigned, retired or turned the spot over to someone else because they knew it was not working and wanted out. "

LOL Liberal (:-D) wrote on Apr 10, 2008 12:08 AM:

" Actually Robert, the surge is performing exactly as designed, with the desired results of prolonging the war until our mental midget of a juvenile delinquent president leaves office and the wars loss can be pinned on the next president. Thousands of lives mean less than Lil Bush's legacy. Excuse me, I need to go vomit now. "

Thoughts a Million wrote on Apr 9, 2008 8:53 PM:

" Wat, I do care that the Dems have lied to me also. And Clinton shares some blame also, but as I recall, the Republican Congress kept telling him he couldn't take out Osama and others because it was a legal issue, not a war issue. And the Dems didn't invade Iraq, GW did. So I would be just as angry is Gore had been elected and taken down the same path. And since GW listed Iraq as "part of the Axis of Evil," why didn't we invade N. Korea first since we knew for a FACT that they do have WMD? Just curious..... thanks for your feedback! "

Kevin wrote on Apr 9, 2008 7:56 PM:

" re:anchor/ you have obviously bought into the republican propaganda. money beter spent here shoring up our borders. bring our troops home now. stop the senless killing "

wat tyler wrote on Apr 9, 2008 6:51 PM:

" Thanks a million brings up an interesting point. he infers that President Bush lied about weapons of Mass Destruction. I hear this all the time from Democrats. What I don't hear is that the same rhetoric was repeated ad nauseum by the Clinton White House, the Democratic leadership, Including Kennedy, Pelosi, Sen. Clinton, Reid and most of the rank and filers, at least the ones that were coherent (Sorry Maxine). TAM and other partisan writers give a hall pass to politicians, and that is intellectually dishonest. How can you trust a man (or woman) that applies one set of standards to her frineds and another set to her enemies? As far as I can see, Thanks a Million doesn't care that he was lied to by democrats. What's up with that? "

wat tyler wrote on Apr 9, 2008 6:45 PM:

" Let me get this straight, Patriot accuses me, poor old Wat, of of being pro-propaganda, and he backs up his claim by citing Representative Jane Harmon (D-Venice, as in Venice Beach, California) who was ousted from her committee by Nacy Pelosi and has been on a tear ever since. Harmon's shallow analysis, larded with unattributed, unverifiable personal experiences and ad hominen attacks is not exactly proof that a epidemic of rape has overwhelmed the military. I find this kind of attack reprenesible and disgusting, and Patriot, no patriot in my book, adds nothing to this report, he just repeats the partisan BS from an embittered and frustrated politician, trying to claw her way back into power. Patriot is wrong, I am not pro-propaganda, I look for the truth and expose the posturing and bad math of the liberals who are more interested in personal power than preserving the country. I am pro-American. "

anchor wrote on Apr 9, 2008 5:37 PM:

" I am thankful none of you anti-war cloud-hopping-tree-huggers are not smart enough to get any real power. To say we should pull up stakes in Iraq today and bring everyone home is short amazingly sighted. I shutter to think of the death and chaos America would suffer if you ever decided to put down your bong and actually get in the game. Here's an idea; lose your sock-tie, poke your head out of the teacher's lounge, and take a look around. The world is a dangerous place, Freedom is not free, and WE are a target. Maybe playing John Lennon records and hoping everything will be alright works for you, but here is the real world some wars MUST be fought. "

landlord wrote on Apr 9, 2008 5:00 PM:

" Patriot... you are anything but. So much for "support our troops". Haven't you found out yet that people are tiring of the liberal rhetoric. "

Patriot wrote on Apr 9, 2008 2:07 PM:

" Wat, as usual, is pro-propaganda. In regards to the rape issue, women in the U.S. military are more likely to be raped by fellow soldiers than killed by enemy fire. All you have to do to verify this statement is look for Jane Harman and rape. Ms. Harman is a official in our Homeland Security. I guess our boys who join the army are being all that they can be. Mothers, if you care about your sons, then don't let them join the army as they will pick up many "bad" habits. "

Thoughts a Million wrote on Apr 9, 2008 2:06 PM:

" Wat: I agree with you on the BS meter and "the first casualty is the truth." But, I'm sorry, I'm thinking about GW Bush and this folly he's gotten into with WMD and the like. "

Wat Tyler wrote on Apr 9, 2008 1:32 PM:

" Patriot makes a bold statement, based on his experience with Iranian and Iraqi students. You would think that a teacher would undertstand the cultural bias of the Middle easterner better. But I digress from my main complaint. Patriot says suicides in the military are at an al time high. My BS detector went off. The Army rate is 17 per hundred thousand. The civilian rate in America, in the similar demographic is 19 per hundred thousand. I blame the increase in Army suicides on the fact they have lowered their standards in order to meet their recruiting goals. One of the main reasons that it looks like there is a rising rape rate in the military is because the reporting formats are changing. 2 years ago the databases only represented soldier on soldier rapes, this year they include soldier on civilian rapes AND civilian on soldier rapes. You have to hand it to these liberals, they see an opening and they exploit it. The first casualty is the truth. "

Patriot wrote on Apr 9, 2008 12:21 PM:

" I'm sorry landlord, but you are naive. I've taught Iraqi and Iranian students and they respected Saddam Hussein. The surge is clearly not working and US troop suicides are at an all time high. In addition, our male soldiers are raping our female soldiers at an all time high. This was even mentioned in the LA Times. To kitlin, the surge has worked if you say it is killing innocent Iraqi citizens, but if you are speaking for humanity, then it is a dismal failure. By the way Kevin, I am a military genius, but I realize that, that is not much of a skill. Does it still impress you? "

illini fan 5 wrote on Apr 9, 2008 12:08 PM:

" Another person who does not keep up on the facts, and likes to write letters. "

BigBrother wrote on Apr 9, 2008 11:25 AM:

" Mr Johnson is correct when he predicts the outcome of a pullout. The Central government will be overthrown by the extreme Islamic Clerics and the country divided into parcels. A civil war will break out for copntrol of the country and democracy will be lost. The people of Iraq will suffer at the hands of terrorist from Iran, Syria and Afganistan interested only in siezing the oil fields for their own gain. Yes Mr. Johnson is right. Iraq will become a medievil war zone for control. "

ktlin wrote on Apr 9, 2008 10:00 AM:

" I do think the surge has worked. However, I also think we need an announcement as to what victory will look like so we will know when we have reached it and we can leave. We may be closer to victory than we think. We just need to know what victory is. And like Obama said yesterday it may not be the riddance of all Alqueda or complete absence of Iran's influence. It just needs to be close and acceptable. "

The other Dave wrote on Apr 9, 2008 9:00 AM:

" As all of the military minds in the world can quit their jobs now because Robert from Normal, Illinois has spoken. Thank God we have a military genius living in Normal. "

Kevin wrote on Apr 9, 2008 8:21 AM:

" of course the generals are going to say it's working. that's their job and they thrive on war. yes bring them home now!! no more wasted lives. "

landlord wrote on Apr 9, 2008 7:33 AM:

" According to reliable news sources I have seen the surge is working and troop morale is high, dispite critics like you who will never find anythng positive to say.
I find your last remark particulary offensive . I doubt the Iraqi citizens want to go back to "Sadaam style" anything. Oh, and by the way, I think you will find in November that a lot more people will vote Republican than the media will lead you to believe. "

buckeye wrote on Apr 9, 2008 6:02 AM:

" The serge has been effective , the generals on the ground are a mutch better source of military effectiveness than armchair commanders with word processers . All of the canadates for commander and chief know this and for sure we are staying in Irac . At least it will give you anti security folks somthing to complain about for the next 100 or so years . "

Ads by Yahoo!

Online Degrees

See Today's Mortgage Rates

Weekly New Car Bargains