The media is quiet on Iraq... too quiet

[Eozenig]

Guys, this accountant argument about monthly casualties is just disgusting. You are talking about dead people for God's sake...

 

[GenMarshall]

I'm tired of hearing the bad news comming from Iraq with the casualties and the insurgent attacks.

I wonder if there are any Good News comming from there.

 

[Neomega]

By all means explain to me if all those attacks are successful, and, as you have repeated many, many times ONLY against coalition forces, then why are not our casualty numbers going up exponentially as well?

I was agreeing with you, and I didn't claim they were all successful, that's you putting words in my mouth.

Sure it does. It indicates that one of several possibilities. 1. Our forces are getting much better at reacting to attack (positive thing).

yes, they are

2. The definition of what an attack is has somehow been relaxed so that the numbers have risen.

i doubt it

3. The ability of our enemy to mount successful attacks have been eroded (positive).

No, they are getting more sophisticated, but so are American tactics and armoring.

4. Our enemy has run out of competent insurgents and are now really scraping the bottom of the barrel (positive).

see 3

Which do you think it is?

1

But....your the guy with the 'Iraqi PHD' remember?

yes... what's your point?

I ponder if this post is not self evident as to the meaning within or whom it may apply to?

exactly who I said it referred to. That does not give you the right to call me a wanker.

Again, it proves that even the left thought there was WMDs in Iraq. That is something you have said, and thus you have been disproven. I can get more quotes from more left wing politicians if you'd like

It proves some democratic politicians thought there were WMDs.... not "the left".

Perhaps not, but it seems that "booming" apears to be a commonplace word used to describe the changes in the Iraqi economy recently. For all your condescending posts regarding how MobBoss should do his own research, you don't seem so well inclined to do the same, eh?

I already have, you can reference the Iraq Study Group for the answers. I am not about to start going through the whole argument again with another reactionary debater. It is a waste of my time, and off topic. I am tired of providing numbers and evidence to people who never provide their own.

 

[Neomega]

Guys, this accountant argument about monthly casualties is just disgusting. You are talking about dead people for God's sake...

and?

Realistically the debate is about the "number of attacks", not necessarily "dead people". furthermore, the second part of "Iraq War" means there are going to be dead people by the definition of war. I am not going to stop talking about the Iraq war out of some supposed disrespect of the dead.

 

[Eozenig]

and?

Realistically the debate is about the "number of attacks", not necessarily "dead people". furthermore, the second part of "Iraq War" means there are going to be dead people by the definition of war. I am not going to stop talking about the Iraq war out of some supposed disrespect of the dead.

I don't question the usefulness of talking of the Iraq war, I question the use of death toll in an argument about a policy...

First, because as said, it does not necessarily indicate the efficiency of the said policy. The drop of the death toll can have multiple other reasons...

Second because the efficiency of a policy is to be taken in a global context, not only in the tiny window that the death toll is... There are terrorist attacks, the question is not to make them drop, it is to make them stop. Wether there are still attacks, the policy is a failing, no matter what you say. So making account arguments about the death toll is not only disrespectful but completely irrelevant. Would you also argue about the efficiency of a security policy on the basis of daily death tolls if it was about attacks on US soil ? I think not.

 

[Neomega]

Second because the efficiency of a policy is to be taken in a global context, not only in the tiny window that the death toll is... There are terrorist attacks, the question is not to make them drop, it is to make them stop. Wether there are still attacks, the policy is a failing, no matter what you say. So making account arguments about the death toll is not only disrespectful but completely irrelevant.

Irrelevant is a much different word than disgusting.

So I will cast aside the insult your tried to greet me with, and retort.

This threads OP article boasts a claim that insurgent attacks are down 80%, and murders are down 70%.

As I have stated, I guarantee, even in the period of February, this number is going to be false... and January was at an all time high, matched only by Oct 2004. (the source is in this thread, I am not posting a link again).

So the number of attacks are completely relevant.

This is one more "teh MSM is librul" attack thread.

I am sick of seeing all these cheap tricks by the right.

The writer of this article is saying, that this february, when numbers are out, there will only have been average of 36 attacks a day. This is such utter mind mush disengenuous diarrhea. And it's about the 1000th time I have heard or read "everything is about to get better". And I saw a thread on here try to claim the same thing... and then a day later a bomb went off that killed 60 people, and that number was destroyed.

So, I will be back sometime in march or April, and say

I told you so

I am sick and tired of optimism and whitewashing of the fact that thousands of people, most of them good people, are being slaughtered.
I am sick of the right constantly passing lies. They pass so many off you forget about the one from yesterday because there is a new one from today.

And since you don't know me, you might as well now know I don't oppose war, and I don't oppose interventionalism, only in the most extreme of circumstances do endorse either.


And Iraq is not one of these circumstances,and lookie what we did... we might have sprung the trap for World War III. We sure as hell opened a can of worms we had no idea we were about to get into.

Would you also argue about the efficiency of a security policy on the basis of daily death tolls if it was about attacks on US soil ?

If the daily death tolls were actually rising on average, per day, I would definitely say there would need to be a re-evaluation of our security policy.

And overall, the death toll is rising, in Iraq*.



















*Iraqis are humans too.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

I'm tired of hearing the bad news comming from Iraq with the casualties and the insurgent attacks.

I wonder if there are any Good News comming from there.

Ok..

Iraqi officials say it's actually working

Despite what Neomega wants to believe...

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4586958.html

*Iraqis are humans too.

Then you can stop gloating over your predictions that, if your predictions are correct thousands of them will be murdured.

 

[Princeps]

It undoubtely will have an effect, putting 20.000 troops more to a relatively small area. However, I wont trust the Iraqi officials, I fear they say what Americans want.

 

[Neomega]

Then you can stop gloating over your predictions that, if your predictions are correct thousands of them will be murdured.

Just knock it off. I am not gloating over their deaths, no matter how many times you try to say I am. You think you are brilliant, and have me in some morally indefensible position. well pat yourself on the back, and give yourself a handshake. Doesn't make it any more true.

What I am gloating about is the soon coming opportunity to once again show how gullible you guys are, and how you will seize any piece of unsubstantiated news as proof to continue to believe invading Iraq was good for America, or Iraq, or the world for that matter, as long as it comes from some ****** on the right.

But in a month or two, you guys will be touting another piece of ignorant trash as some kind of proof things are going good... and I will be happy to shove it in your faces a month later, until you guys figure out that spreading lies and un-checked numbers is just dishonest. The sad thing is how many of you believe it is cherry pop tarts over there. And how many more of you believed it would be peaches and cream from day one, and are too proud to admit how dismally, pathetically, hilariously wrong you were.

Oh, and thanks for being part of the biggest screw up in American history.

I remember the war monkeys questioning my patriotism, accusing me of treachery for daring to ask if it was in the best interest of the country. I haven't forgot it. I will never forgive the insults. Now eat your crow.


And who wants to bet? Who wants to bet when the number of attacks on coalition troops are released for February, they will be less than 37 (80% down, as claimed in the original article) a day average.

Who wants to bet the number of murders are not down to about 300 for the month of February (70% down, as claimed in the article)

Any takers? didn't think so. Because deep down, you know it is too good to be true.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

Just knock it off. I am not gloating over their s, no matter how many times you try to say I am. You think you are brilliant, and have me in some morally indefensible position. well pat yourself on the back, and give yourself a handshake. Doesn't make it any more true.

I think that as overzealous as you have been clearly shows that you really care less for those who are dieing now then you do about proving the Republicans wrong. I knew you'd deny it. If you really are willing to have people die to prove you wrong, your not being very subtle. If you want success, then that's not the impression you have given me.

What I am gloating about is the soon coming opportunity to once again show how gullible you guys are,

At the expense of hundreds, even thousands of Iraqi lives

and how you will seize any piece of unsubstantiated news as proof to continue to believe invading Iraq was good for America, or Iraq, or the world for that matter, as long as it comes from some ****** on the right.

Actually, I no longer think we should have invaded and it would have been better if we didn't invade.

But in a month or two, you guys will be touting another piece of ignorant trash as some kind of proof things are going good... and I will be happy to shove it in your faces a month later, until you guys figure out that spreading lies and un-checked numbers is just dishonest.

You told MobBoss he was stupid for calling that PBS thing propoganda in the other thread, but now you are calling any source that doesn't say Iraq is going to fail "lies" and the people who wrote those articles "retards".

The sad thing is how many of you believe it is cherry pop tarts over there.

I never said things are doing well in Iraq. I may have only said that they are improving on account of the new surge and offensive but I'm not 100% optimistic that will hold up for long.

Oh, and thanks for being part of the biggest screw up in American history.

thanks for gloating over our failures.

Who wants to bet the number of murdеrs are not down to about 300 for the month of February (70% down, as claimed in the article)

From the article I posted above:

The number of bodies found so far this month in Baghdad — most of them shot and showing signs of tоrture — has dropped by nearly 50 percent to 494 as of Monday night, compared with 954 in January and 1,222 in December, according to figures compiled by The Associated Press.

Since the crаckdown was formally launched Feb. 14, a total of 164 bodies had been found in the capital as of Monday, according to AP figures, which are compiled from police reports. The AP count showed 390 bodies were discovered in the same period in January.

That article was posted on February 27 so I don't think that last day - February 28 - made much of a difference. It's still significantly higher then 300 but it is a clear decline.

Any takers? didn't think so. Because deep down, you know it is too good to be true.

Oh wait, I already posted the article is it too late to take that bet?

I hope it's not just right wing "lies" or the arthor is a "******" again.

 

[MobBoss]

Oh, and thanks for being part of the biggest screw up in American history.

Until Iraqis come over here and burn the capitol down, I wont agree with you on that.

I remember the war monkeys questioning my patriotism, accusing me of treachery for daring to ask if it was in the best interest of the country. I haven't forgot it. I will never forgive the insults. Now eat your crow.

Again, a patriot isnt someone who, like you, takes delight in our doing bad, or not meeting our goals.

And who wants to bet? Who wants to bet when the number of attacks on coalition troops are released for February, they will be less than 37 (80% down, as claimed in the original article) a day average.

A couple of things. If indeed we have experienced a three-fold increase in attacks while not experiencing higher casualties, why would I even care about the number of attacks? People dont largely care about the number of attacks, people largely care about the number of people that die. Thus, the only thing that really matters is the number of successful attacks, not everytime an insurgent pops up like a gopher to take a potshot at a tank.

Any takers? didn't think so. Because deep down, you know it is too good to be true.

Sometimes, things that are too good to be true happen. I for one still carry hope that those numbers go down. You, being the concerned patriot that you say you are, should hope beyond hope that those numbers go down as well.

 

[Neomega]

Until Iraqis come over here and burn the capitol down, I wont agree with you on that.

Yeah, it was successful. even though Iraq is tipping on being the catalyst for WW III, adn a bloodbath is in the making, at least they ain't burning down Washington D.C.

Again, a patriot isnt someone who, like you, takes delight in our doing bad, or not meeting our goals.

I am a patriot. I don't take delight in it, thats why I want it to end. And I am an American too. An educated one at that, liek a good citizen should be.

A couple of things. If indeed we have experienced a three-fold increase in attacks while not experiencing higher casualties, why would I even care about the number of attacks? People dont largely care about the number of attacks, people largely care about the number of people that die. Thus, the only thing that really matters is the number of successful attacks, not everytime an insurgent pops up like a gopher to take a potshot at a tank.

Because the doofus who wrote this article made overoptimistic, outrageous claims, and you swallowed them, hook line and sinker.


And about that bet, or are you finally ready to conceded the writer of this article is actually trying to pull the wool over everyones eyes?

Sometimes, things that are too good to be true happen. I for one still carry hope that those numbers go down. You, being the concerned patriot that you say you are, should hope beyond hope that those numbers go down as well.

Yeah, every week you keep hoping the right wing garbage you read is true, and every week it proves to be false. Optimism ain't gonna cloud the fact that iraq is in a pretty messed up situation.

And about that bet, or are you finally ready to conceded the writer of this article is actually trying to pull the wool over everyones eyes?

 

[Neomega]

I think that as overzealous as you have been clearly shows that you really care less for those who are dieing now then you do about proving the Republicans wrong. I knew you'd deny it. If you really are willing to have people die to prove you wrong, your not being very subtle. If you want success, then that's not the impression you have given me.

I have to continue to prove republicans wrong, because their policies have been DISASTROUS, and yet you guys keep trying to tell us they know what's best. BULLOX. It has nothing to do with gloating and everything to do with keeping ignorant right wingers from ruining my birthright.

At the expense of hundreds, even thousands of Iraqi lives

Yeah, thanks to the neocons and their followers stupidity. Like the blood is on my hands. Nice try.

Actually, I no longer think we should have invaded and it would have been better if we didn't invade.

I told you so.

You told MobBoss he was stupid for calling that PBS thing propoganda in the other thread, but now you are calling any source that doesn't say Iraq is going to fail "lies" and the people who wrote those articles "retards".

No. Stop putting words in my mouth. I am calling this doofus' (who BTW is an admitted rigth winger) twisting of the fact lies... either that he's just ********.

I never said things are doing well in Iraq. I may have only said that they are improving on account of the new surge and offensive but I'm not 100% optimistic that will hold up for long.

Oh, for God's sake. Quit being dishonest.

thanks for gloating over our failures.

Thanks for making the failures a possibility. Thanks for cheering the failures. Thanks for believing in the failures. Thanks for defending the failures and calling those who pointed out the failures as traitors.

Oh wait, I already posted the article is it too late to take that bet?

I hope it's not just right wing "lies" or the arthor is a "******" again.

Take it, buddy. Writer said attacks down 80%. writer said "murders" were down 70%. Go on, take that bet. See if you can back it up.


Mission Accomplished, eh? Now stop being traitors and salute our leader!

 

[Neomega]

A gloomy haze has settled over the nation's prosecution of the War on Terror

Wait, this is abotu Iraq isn't it?

Nancy Pelosi and Jack Murtha

Boo boo traitors! Boo Boo!

size up new angles of attack for undermining the war effort.

traitors! Boo Boo! Murtha wants soldiers to have armor and trainign before going to Iraq! What a bastard!

The media is chomping at the bit the tell the story of an America, bruised and humbled and exhausted, heading for the exits in Iraq.

Yes, the EVUL MEDIA that cheerled the whole Iraq War is now the enemy!

It hasn't been reported on widely,

Yeah, they should be flying a mission accomplished banner by now!

but murders in Baghdad are down 70%, attacks are down 80%,

From when to when, Mr. Ruffini?

and many Baghdadis who had fled the violence now feel it's safe enough to return. The strategy that Congress is busy denouncing is proving to be our best hope for victory.

Oh yeah, two weeks worth is "proof", victory is just around the corner! Get your mission accomplished banners out!

In Iraq, there's a sense that change is in the air -- literally. Omar of Iraq the Model spots a B-1 Bomber in the skies of Baghdad for the first time since the end of the major combat.

Oh hooray! American bombers are flying in the air again! Finally peace and joy is upon us!

This turnaround in Baghdad is confirmed at home by the media's near-deafening silence.

Yes, because if the librul media isn't reporting it, it must be true!

Where does this ******** logic come from!

If it seems like you've heard less about how Iraq is spiraling into civil war in the weeks since the surge was announced, this is why.

Anna Nichole Smith is why.

Time magazine worries that it's "Quiet in Baghdad. Too quiet." That's right -- a dramatic reduction in violence is actually bad news.

I guess ruffini never watched a western.

It's too early to claim victory just yet;

and yet here he is, chastising the media for not claiming victory,

When the Army and Marine Corps are on offense, carrying out combat operations and clearing out insurgent strongholds, we win.

Oh? That's what we tried int he first place... and April 2004 showed what brutalizing a people does to their support for you.

When we lay back, carrying out routine patrols and playing Baghdad beat cop, we lose.

Yeah, being in Iraq is a real losing position. Got one thing right, Mr. Ruffini.

when all the holes are sealed, the game is over -- and the player, America, has won.

Except that we have to stay there forever.

Even though Seal-a-Hole is not futile, it nevertheless requires a great deal of patience; there are many, many holes, and each hole has a mole who must be whacked. Some of the holes, such as Sadr City, are very big and will require many mallets to properly seal. But if we have the courage and fortitude of our American forebears, we will seal those holes... and we will win.

So where was ths advice 4 years ago?

Thankfully, the rules of engagement are changing. American troops are now freer to take on all comers, and the results are clear in both Sunni and Shi'ite areas.

Yes, we can quell the civil war by having everyone attack us! Brilliant!

Those intent on turning Iraq into a breeding ground for al-Qaeda won't be convinced of our seriousness until we confront the key sources of violence on both sides of the sectarian divide.

Waht does Sadr have to do with Al Queada? This is a very ignorant "all muslims are terrorists" statement.

The media will never acknowledge victories in Iraq, so we'll have to settle for an absence of bad coverage. But even in this relative lull in Iraq, it's important to understand and appreciate the short-term victories so we can create more of them.

OH, I seem to rememebr every station in the world braodcasting Bush on the Deck of the Lincoln. And what exact victories are you referring to?

Patrick Ruffini is an online strategist dedicated to helping Republicans and conservatives achieve dominance in a networked era. He has seen American politics from every vantagepoint — as a campaign staffer, activist, and analyst.

A right wing hack trying to spread misinformation.

 

[MobBoss]

Yeah, it was successful. even though Iraq is tipping on being the catalyst for WW III, adn a bloodbath is in the making, at least they ain't burning down Washington D.C.

Apparently the reference to the War of 1812 was over your head.

I am a patriot. I don't take delight in it, thats why I want it to end. And I am an American too. An educated one at that, liek a good citizen should be.

So you am edookated patreeot. Somehow I just dont get that vibe from you when you talk Iraq. And I directly disagree with you on one thing...you are extremely delighted to ram your point home here despite facts to the contrary.

Because the doofus who wrote this article made overoptimistic, outrageous claims, and you swallowed them, hook line and sinker.

I havent swallowed anything, and in fact have advocated a lets wait and see approach. At least my mind is open to good news everyonce in awhile.

And about that bet, or are you finally ready to conceded the writer of this article is actually trying to pull the wool over everyones eyes?

/shrug. The proof you gave in links earllier had a whole lot of 'authors estimate' in it as well. Do you condone only 1 type of wool pulling?

Yeah, every week you keep hoping the right wing garbage you read is true, and every week it proves to be false. Optimism ain't gonna cloud the fact that iraq is in a pretty messed up situation.

No one is denying that its a messed up situation....but I dont think it as bad as you make out either.

 

[GenMarshall]

Ok..

Iraqi officials say it's actually working

Despite what Neomega wants to believe...

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4586958.html

No need for the large text, I dont want to be in denial and running around with my ears covered. Which is why I honestly asked if there were any other news. But thanks for the info. I just need more information that makes the Iraq war Justified other than kicking out a genocidal megalomaniac.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

No need for the large text, I dont want to be in denial and running around with my ears covered. Which is why I honestly asked if there were any other news. But thanks for the info. I just need more information that makes the Iraq war Justified other than kicking out a genocidal megalomaniac.

Hey if you thought I made it large to make it "in your face" or anything, sorry. It's just a posting style I have adopted. I post the titles of articles at center at size 5 or so sometimes with underlining. Below that it may sometimes note the author in smaller text with bolding, and if I copy/paste the article on the forums it will either be in italics or in quotes.

 

[GenMarshall]

Hey if you thought I made it large to make it "in your face" or anything, sorry.

Not to get off topic, I just don't like it when people beat me when I am already on the ground defeated and crying that I give up. Its just not honorable IMO when a person realizes his or her mistake that the person is beaten with their own mistakes.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

Not to get off topic, I just don't like it when people beat me when I am already on the ground defeated and crying that I give up. Its just not honorable IMO when a person realizes his or her mistake that the person is beaten with their own mistakes.

I understand. Anyone can change and moderate their views but gloating over their mistakes is rather pathetic and reflects on a personal level of pitilessness on their part. In fact I agree 100%.

 

[Neomega]

resubscribing.

See you all in late march or april.