No Wonder Libs Are Upset - The Surge Is Working

[red states rule]

http://icasualties.org/oif/

those numbers are all verified by the Department of Defense....

do you believe them or not?

Try asking for your deposit back from the caterer, and hope the war takes a turn for the worse and you can have your party at a laetr date

The numbers are from Multi-National Force -Iraq Combined Press Information Centre and they show a saharp decline since the surge started

At least try to somewhat conceal your disappointment over the good news, please?

 

[maineman]

Try asking for your deposit back from the caterer, and hope the war takes a turn for the worse and you can have your party at a laetr date

The numbers are from Multi-National Force -Iraq Combined Press Information Centre and they show a saharp decline since the surge started

At least try to somewhat conceal your disappointment over the good news, please?

why did you post this site?

http://icasualties.org/oif/

what am I supposed to see on that site that proves your case?

Are the numbers on that site that YOU posted inaccurate?

Is the DoD not giving out the correct casualty figures?

quit spinning and running away from your own link.

 

[red states rule]

why did you post this site?

http://icasualties.org/oif/

what am I supposed to see on that site that proves your case?

Are the numbers on that site that YOU posted inaccurate?

Is the DoD not giving out the correct casualty figures?

quit spinning and running away from your own link.

I see libs still hate to see any goond news on the war

After all, libs have placed their political future in the failure of the US military and a loss in Iraq

They want to use their dead bodies as stepping stones to more political power

 

[maineman]

can you answer these questions?

why did you post this site?

http://icasualties.org/oif/

what am I supposed to see on that site that proves your case?

Are the numbers on that site that YOU posted inaccurate?

Is the DoD not giving out the correct casualty figures?

quit spinning and running away from your own link.

 

[red states rule]

can you answer these questions?

I set you up knowing you would run to the first site listed on google. I knew you would leap at any link showing the surge was a failure without doing the reasearch needed to sift out the truth

I have posted several links showing the surge is working, and I can tell by your anger you hate to see any progress being made in Iraq

 

[red states rule]

Guaranteeing Defeat
BY DONALD KIRK
April 4, 2007
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/51793




Cries for a deadline for withdrawal of American troops from Iraq conjure bitter memories.

I was a young reporter in Vietnam on April 30, 1970, when President Nixon ordered American troops across the border into Cambodia. I jumped into a helicopter for a low-level ride from a base on an old French rubber plantation to Cambodia on the first day, then flew back on the same helicopter an hour or so later — enough to justify the dateline, "The Fishhook, Cambodia," for the story that I filed from the U.S. military press center for the next day's edition of the old Washington Star.

The next day, I rode with American troops on an armored personnel carrier, then made my way on the backseat of a motorcycle to the capital of Cambodia, Phnom Penh.

Those were heady days. I remember vividly what some of the GI's were saying — "about time" was a comment I heard more than once. The tide of the war was turning, and American forces were no longer hamstrung by bureaucratic nonsense from Washington that had kept them from overrunning North Vietnamese base areas just across the border.

We saw the stacks of Soviet arms inside the border, and we walked out with souvenirs — evidence of Soviet support of the North Vietnamese, who were still denying any role in South Vietnam. A U.S. military policeman confiscated the Soviet-made SKS rifle that I was carrying the moment he saw me. But the story was not over.

So great was anti-war pressure across America that Nixon, soon after announcing the foray into the communist base areas, placed a strict limit on the presence of American troops in Cambodia — no more than 60 days. Nor would they go down much beyond the Ho Chi Minh trail network which Hanoi had been sending supplies to for years.

That wasn't all. Just to pin down American forces still more tightly, the next January, our Congress passed the Cooper-Church amendment barring military operations inside Cambodia as a condition for the military budget.

The North Vietnamese suffered devastating blows while American troops were there but had plenty of time to regroup and mount a full-scale invasion of South Vietnam two years later — the Easter offensive — in which they were again thrown back, only to recover and return one last time in the winter and spring of 1975 when all American troops had gone.

Now Congress is playing the same game. Forgetting the lesson of 1970, the House and Senate want to set a limit on the duration of U.S. military operations inside Iraq.

The voting on this maneuver has broken down largely along party lines — the Democrats shouting down the Republicans, but you don't have to be a card-carrying conservative or a Republican to recognize this bid for legislative command of the armed forces as a betrayal of our troops.

We are not going to win a war, or get out with any semblance of honor, by telling our enemy to just lie low for a while and next month or next year we'll be gone. America lost in Vietnam as a result of anti-war opposition at home.

We had to fight a "limited war" in which American troops were largely barred from going into North Vietnam, Laos, or Cambodia. Members of Congress — and an overwhelmingly anti-war press — bayed in unison when American forces were revealed to have conducted "secret" bombing missions over the jungles of Laos and Cambodia.

The bombing of base areas and supply routes through North Vietnam was carefully manipulated by bomb "halts" in which the North Vietnamese were supposed to sigh in gratitude and come to terms, knowing the horrific fate that awaited them if the bombing resumed. There was no way this strategy could work, of course, no way to win that war, or any war, without going into the enemy heartland with infantry troops on the ground.

Those who think, "fine, but now Vietnam is a peaceful place," should remember the aftermath of America's defeat — the flight of hundreds of thousands of refugees who had placed their faith in the American commitment and the deaths of thousands more all in "re-education" camps, not to mention the killing of two million people under the Khmer Rouge rule in Cambodia.

American commanders in Iraq no doubt miscalculated what was needed to win in the current long run after the defeat of Saddam Hussein's regime four years ago.

Nonetheless, Senator McCain is right when he says it's elementary not to place a deadline on our military commitment in that tortured land of Iraq, just as it was foolish to pull out of Cambodia by the 60-day deadline or to call bombing halts in negotiations that could only end in failure.

If we think the war in Iraq is bad now, there's no telling how much worse it will get if Congress is free to hamstring our armed forces.

The most likely scenario in the event of a premature withdrawal dictated by politicians and pundits in Washington is that Sunnis, Shiites, and others will go on killing each other in ever rising numbers until another bloodthirsty strongman rises and imposes his own cruel peace.

If the critics think that's okay, as long as the slaughter is confined to Iraq, what about the consequences for the whole Middle East?

The critics, in their eagerness to thrash the Bush administration, forget the dangers of an artificial time limit that will guarantee defeat — and much greater dangers for those we leave behind.

Mr. Kirk spent nearly a decade as a correspondent in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos, covered the first Gulf War from Baghdad, and reported again from Baghdad in 2004.

http://www.nysun.com/pf.php?id=51793

 

[maineman]

I set you up knowing you would run to the first site listed on google. I knew you would leap at any link showing the surge was a failure without doing the reasearch needed to sift out the truth

I have posted several links showing the surge is working, and I can tell by your anger you hate to see any progress being made in Iraq

I went to the link that YOU suggested I go to. It shows that the actual casualty figures from the department of defense for every month of the war. We have NOT experienced a 60% decrease in American casualties because of the surge.... American casualties remain constant. American casualties for the last six months - according to DoD figures - are nearly 40% HIGHER than they were in the six months before that. How can you say that such a death toll is good news?

 

[maineman]

http://icasualties.org/oif/

this was YOUR link. Please show me where we have seen a 60% DECREASE in American casualties.... these are the numbers verified by the DoD. Show me from your own link where we are decreasing our casualties. PLEASE.

83 dead in January
80 dead in February
81 dead in March
10 dead already in four days of April

Where IS this 60% reduction?

If you say "Baghdad", I ask you...do Americans killed in Iraq outside Baghdad city limits not matter?

 

[LuvRPgrl]

excuse me...but I really have yet to read anyone's reasonable justification why AMERICAN boys have to die to bring safety OR security to a bunch or arabs who don't particularly give a shit about US one way or the other.

And listen sister.... if you can't refute it, don't claim you can....

Like I said, do a US Message Board search. The topic has been beaten to death. And tons of excellent, intelligent, logical explanations have been given. Im not going to do your homework. After you, there will be another ignorant, and I mean that in the classic sense, lib who will ask me the same question, then use the same old tired worn out, stupid, illogical responses.
Do a search, find the threads, and you can read what you and I would go through if we continued this, with you on the losing end,

 

[maineman]

Like I said, do a US Message Board search. The topic has been beaten to death. And tons of excellent, intelligent, logical explanations have been given. Im not going to do your homework. After you, there will be another ignorant, and I mean that in the classic sense, lib who will ask me the same question, then use the same old tired worn out, stupid, illogical responses.
Do a search, find the threads, and you can read what you and I would go through if we continued this, with you on the losing end,

whatever.... you have shown me zip... and I have countered every one of your ridiculous RNC talking points.

If you wanna refute me, go for it...if not, shut your piehole. OK?

 

[red states rule]

whatever.... you have shown me zip... and I have countered every one of your ridiculous RNC talking points.

If you wanna refute me, go for it...if not, shut your piehole. OK?

Still want to have your party, eh

Oh well, the US military will get the job done without any help from the left - and you bitch and moan about the poor terrorists bening denied their rights

 

[maineman]

Still want to have your party, eh

Oh well, the US military will get the job done without any help from the left - and you bitch and moan about the poor terrorists bening denied their rights

I mourn every death of an American...and it infuriates me when koolaid drinking illiterate Bush toadies like YOU try to minimize the extent of their sacrifice for cheap political gain.

YOU were the one who posted this website:

http://icasualties.org/oif/

SHOW ME from that website where we have had 60% less casualties in Iraq because of the SURGE.

Show me!

Just because fewer Americans are dying on one side of the street does not mean that fewer Americans are dying.

The surge is "working" in Baghdad because the insurgents have taken their fight against one another and against US to places were there are NOT 28K more of us than there were.... AMERICANS are dying at the same rate as they were BEFORE THE SURGE STARTED. And in the last six months - FROM YOUR OWN WEBSITE - our casualties are up almost 40% from the previous six months... but YOU would rather minimize the numbers of our dead and LIE about the number of OUR dead decreasing by 60% when that is clearly NOT the case... but you don't care for the truth as long as you have Bush jism dripping from your chin.

 

[red states rule]

Imourn every death of an American...and it infuriates me when koolaid drinking illiterate Bush toadies try to minimize the extent of their sacrifice for cheap political gain.

YOU were the one who posted this website:

http://icasualties.org/oif/

SHOW ME from that website where we have had 60% less casualties in Iraq because of the SURGE.

Show me!

Just because fewer Americans are dying on one side of the street does not mean that fewer Americans are dying.

The surge is "working" in Baghdad because the insurgents have taken their fight against one another and against US to places were there are NOT 28K more of us than there were.... AMERICANS are dying at the same rate as they were BEFORE THE SURGE STARTED. And in the last six months - FROM YOUR OWN WEBSITE - our casualties are up almost 40% from the previous six months... but YOU would rather minimize the numbers of our dead and LIE about the number of OUR dead decreasing by 60% when that is clearly NOT the case... but you don't care for the truth as long as you have Bush jism dripping from your chin.

Like Dickie Gepheart said smiling "every 100 point drop in the Dow is another House seas for Democrats"

To libs, every dead body of a US soldier is another political point for the Dems.

 

[maineman]

Like Dickie Gepheart said smiling "every 100 point drop in the Dow is another House seas for Democrats"

To libs, every dead body of a US soldier is another political point for the Dems.

will you EVER show us why you posted the website showing DoD casualty figures when the page clearly shows that YOU are LYING when you say the surge has brought American casualties down by 60%?

http://icasualties.org/oif/

show me.

go to YOUR website...cut and paste the numbers from YOUR website that show a 60% decrease.

I'll wait.

 

[red states rule]

will you EVER show us why you posted the website showing DoD casualty figures when the page clearly shows that YOU are LYING when you say the surge has brought American casualties down by 60%?

http://icasualties.org/oif/

show me.

go to YOUR website...cut and paste the numbers from YOUR website that show a 60% decrease.

I'll wait.

Not that you care..................


KUN0014 4 GEN 0266 KUWAIT /KUNA-QVN0 MIL-IRAQ-US SOLDIERS Baghdad security crackdown seriously curbs killings of US soldiers BAGHDAD, March 14 (KUNA) -- The rate of killings of US troops in Iraq has been on the decline, down by 60 percent, since the launch of the new security measures in Baghdad, according to statistics revealed by the Multi-National Force -Iraq Combined Press Information Centre. Only 17 members of the US military in Iraq have been killed since February 14 till March 13, compared to 42 from January 13 to February 13; the rate was on the decline during the first month of the security crackdown, compared to a month before. Two of the 17 soldiers died at US Baghdad camps of non-combat causes. The remarkable decrease in killings among the US troops came at a time when more of these troops were deployed in the Iraqi capital, especially in districts previously regarded as extremely hazardous for them such as Al-Sadr City, Al-Azamiyah, and Al-Doura. Meanwhile, US attacks on insurgent strongholds north of Baghdad curbed attacks against helicopters. Before the new security plan, many such craft were downed leaving 20 soldiers dead. The US army in Iraq had earlier said that sectarian fighting and violence in Baghdad had dropped sharply, by about 80 percent, since the launch of the plan. The statistics excluded US troops killed in other governorates such as Al-Anbar, Diyala, and Salahiddin. As to the latest human losses, the US army announced Wednesday that two American soldiers had been killed, one in southern Baghdad and the other northeast of the capital.(end) ahh.msa KUNA 141130 Mar 07NNNN

 

[maineman]

do you understand that that press release was talking about Baghdad?

Do you realize that, throughout the rest of Iraq, things are worse...such that we still are losing as many men throughout the country even with a decrease in one city?

Did you even bother to LOOK at the website that YOU posted?

http://icasualties.org/oif/

Go look at it. Go look at the monthly dead....
March 81
February 80
January 83
December 112
November 70
October 106

the previous six months before that:

September 72
August 65
July 43
June 61
May 69
April 76


SHOW ME WHERE THIS WORKING SURGE IS REFLECTED IN OUR CASUALTY FIGURES!

 

[red states rule]

It is the same post since this morning MM

Please take your blood pressure meds - you are on the verge of a stroke

I never knew such good news about US casualities would put a lib over the deep end like this.

 

[maineman]

It is the same post since this morning MM

Please take your blood pressure meds - you are on the verge of a stroke

I never knew such good news about US casualities would put a lib over the deep end like this.

it is the same post...and it deals with Baghdad and Baghdad alone. Do you understand that the casualty figures that YOU provided prove you are a liar?

 

[red states rule]

it is the same post...and it deals with Baghdad and Baghdad alone. Do you understand that the casualty figures that YOU provided prove you are a liar?

The surge is IN Baghdad you twit - and the people in Baghdad are happy to see the troops there.

Not that any good news or support form the people mean anything to you

 

[maineman]

The surge is IN Baghdad you twit - and the people in Baghdad are happy to see the troops there.

Not that any good news or support form the people mean anything to you

I realize the surge is in Baghdad...and I realize that when we pumped 28K more troops into Baghdad, the insurgents took their fight to other areas of Iraq where we were not reinforced... our death rate is unchanged.

Just because the insurgents have left baghdad while our surge is there does not mean that the violence throughout the country is lessening any. We do not have the assets to be everywhere we need to be and the bad guys will just keep moving to where we are not...

you are the twit and your understanding of the middle east and the military is laughable.