I found this interesting. (http://thinkprogress.org/2007/11/28/poll-journalists-believe-iraq-conditions-have-gotten-worse/)Instead of surging troops, I would like to see a surge in job creation in Iraq.

In a new poll, journalists in Iraq describe conditions there “as the most perilous they have ever encountered.” Fifty-eight percent say that “at least one of their Iraqi staff had been killed or kidnapped in the last year alone,” and “eight out of ten, feel that, over time, conditions for telling the story of Iraq have gotten worse, not better.” Additionally, journalists dispute right-wing attacks that their coverage is too negative, with 15 percent believing it actually paints too rosy a picture.

Now I am confused. I thought the media was controlled by the right-wingers that sided with President Bush. Yet, here are that the same media contradicting with what the President says. What Machiavellian plan is being hatched now?

The thing that concerns me most about Iraq at the moment is this new policy of hiring Sunni henchmen to patrol and defend areas of Baghdad and beyond.

Although it makes for good headlines recently-long term-this is only guaranteeing major conflict between rival factions and civil war.

Far sightedness is once again-lacking.

Yeah the civil war is gonna happen whether we are there or not. These Sunni and Shia's have been killing each other for hundreds of years, why would they stop now?

Thats great news for the Get out now crowd.

Im thinking that Democratizing Iraq-is being given a back seat here.

If the US starts using and arming one side-the Sunnis-then its going to end up like Afghanistan or Pakistan,were war lords rule the roost.

Given that the US continues to train and arm iraq's armed forces, including the navy and air force why would you think that?

You mean-the same armed forces,including the navy and air force which was needlessly disbanded-you forgot about the Police also.

Simply-the US is training and arming in favour of one side of the sectarian divide-that is a recipe for disaster in the future.

Now I am confused. I thought the media was controlled by the right-wingers that sided with President Bush. Yet, here are that the same media contradicting with what the President says. What Machiavellian plan is being hatched now?

Note the lack of reporting of this on the corporate media.

A lot of people make the mistake of confusing the Journalists with the Media.
Journalists are just employees of the media.

Im thinking that Democratizing Iraq-is being given a back seat here.

?!?

A "back seat"...........ROTFL.

'democratizing' Iraq is not and never has been a goal of the inhuman PNAC types who fomented this oil war.

All this talk of "democratization" was hatched purely as a backup excuse by the neo-Con faction after the farcical *Weapons of Mass Destruction* scam was exposed for the damnable lie that it was.

The LAST thing those vultures on the Right want is to create stability in Iraq and wind up having no excuse to stay. They are going to milk that cash cow to the end, no matter how many more hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq --not to mention how many more thousands of American troops-- get killed in the process.

After all.....there are many more hundreds of billions -perhaps trillions- in war profits (and oil profits) ripe for the taking.

You mean-the same armed forces,including the navy and air force which was needlessly disbanded-you forgot about the Police also.

Simply-the US is training and arming in favour of one side of the sectarian divide-that is a recipe for disaster in the future.

Same but different. So which side are they arming and training to the exclusion of the others?

The sunni militias are starting to come onto the side of America,wheras the shiites arent.

The sunni militias are starting to come onto the side of America,wheras the shiites arent.

Which is an interesting situation considering that the government is dominated by the Shiite majority in Iraq and police and military have been accused of participating in the sectarian violence.

It seems the Sunnis just looking to us for protection from their own "countrymen"

Well-the US military are paying sunni militias to protect their own neighbourhoods.

This does a number of things.

[1]It shows these gunmen that infact crime does pay.

[2]It undermines an already weak and corrupt Iraqi government.

[3] It makes it impossible for the Iraqi Police to operate normally-creating
NO GO areas.

[4]Long term it gives the sunnis a distinct advantage over their shiite neighbours.

The sunni militias are starting to come onto the side of America,wheras the shiites arent.

That doesn't tell us which side the US army is training and supplying?

Well-the US military are paying sunni militias to protect their own neighbourhoods.

This does a number of things.

[1]It shows these gunmen that infact crime does pay.

[2]It undermines an already weak and corrupt Iraqi government.

[3] It makes it impossible for the Iraqi Police to operate normally-creating
NO GO areas.

[4]Long term it gives the sunnis a distinct advantage over their shiite neighbours.

1) hardly, people are vetted before being allowed to joined the clc's.Particularly bad actors are taken into custody.

2) Another assertion without proof or explanation.

3) There aren't enough police to go around. The ISF stands in with the coalition.

4) Hardly, the ISF is predominantly shiite and has infinitely more firepower than the clc's.

Instead of surging troops, I would like to see a surge in job creation in Iraq.
Nahhhhhhhh.....BUSHCO's saving that (early) tactic for the African Oil-War (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/03/AR2007120300014.html?hpid=moreheadlines).

*

"Currently there are about 1,900 U.S. troops in Djibouti, including those attached to the joint task force and those at the base at Camp Lemonier. Officials in the past have also acknowledged that there are special forces in the area."

*

Shades of Vietnam '61.....with advisors-and-all, huh? :rolleyes:

I found this interesting. (http://thinkprogress.org/2007/11/28/poll-journalists-believe-iraq-conditions-have-gotten-worse/)Instead of surging troops, I would like to see a surge in job creation in Iraq.
that's funny! Murtha says the surge is working! (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07333/837824-100.stm) :lolhit:

Now I am confused. I thought the media was controlled by the right-wingers that sided with President Bush. Yet, here are that the same media contradicting with what the President says. What Machiavellian plan is being hatched now?

Actually it became known that CBS had a staff office that had
an agreement with Saddam that if they didn't report much in
the way of negative stuff about his Dictatorship,than they'd
have a pretty cushy future in Baghdad.
Same with CNN and the Lackey traitor Peter Arnett.
And double same with those Graft UN Delegates that got
oil vouchers from Saddam in lieu of NOT strenghtening {voting for}
further sanctions.

Nahhhhhhhh.....BUSHCO's saving that (early) tactic for the African Oil-War (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/03/AR2007120300014.html?hpid=moreheadlines).

Welcome back, Mr Shaman.

But please be careful about saying anything in any way critical of our saintly, virtuous, guiltless and righteous-in-the-eyes-of-Gawd Conservative leaders.

I don't know if i could go though another week long whine-fest and temper tantrum.

would it be possible to ban freethinker too? The guy is a broken record. I am familiar enough with his typical response to mimic it just so it seems like he never left.

If being a *broken record* is grounds for banning, allow me to share with you the primary response that Travh20 favors when he posts here;

"STFU!"

"STFU!"

Take your own advice pal.

Take your own advice pal.

I was not saying that to anyone, genius. Including you.

Unlike you, I do not insist that everyone "Shut up!" when they say something that I am not in agreement with.

I was simply saying that that is YOUR preferred form of response.

I don't know if i could go though another week long whine-fest and temper tantrum.
I don't know; you seem to be keeping up your end of that very well, so far.

Unlike you, I do not insist that everyone "Shut up!" when they say something that I am not in agreement with.


NO...dat Poster wood be - Imp - !

I don't know; you seem to be keeping up your end of that very well, so far.

Whatever you think, little martinet.

Whatever you think, little martinet.

THat's an awfully Big word for a Journeyman Marxist.

Whatever you think, little martinet.
Uh huh. How do you believe that I, as one of the admins involved in this whole fiasco, fit into your little scenario of a right-wing cabal who believes that everyone must praise our "saintly, virtuous, guiltless and righteous-in-the-eyes-of-Gawd Conservative leaders"? Keep in mind that I've been critical of Bush ever since I joined this forum five years ago, and I consider him probably the second-worst president since 1900, just barely better than Harding, and moreover I'm an atheist. Your paranoid delusions of some sort of cabal really don't befit someone as obviously intelligent as you are, but more to the point, they're getting rather irritating given that you trumpet this hypothesis all over the forum. Now, I'm going to ask a crucial question here, so pay attention. Do you have any evidence that Shaman's three-day ban was politically motivated?

1) hardly, people are vetted before being allowed to joined the clc's.Particularly bad actors are taken into custody.
''Local fighters recruited by the Americans as a kind of neihbour watch''.

''many of them fought alongside the insurgents''

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7116717.stm

I was not saying that to anyone, genius. Including you.

Unlike you, I do not insist that everyone "Shut up!" when they say something that I am not in agreement with.

I was simply saying that that is YOUR preferred form of response.

I have nothing against people who disagree with me. I do have a problem with condescending assholes like you though, even if we did agree on certain issues.

2) Another assertion without proof or explanation.

from

http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/rm/2007/93587.htm

On the record briefing,Senior Advisor to the Secretary and Co-ordinator for Iraq.

via Conference Call
Washington DC
October 16 2007


David Satterfield: ''First the issue here,Corruption in Iraq,public corruption,is a major issue.It is a very serious concern to us because of our concerns for the future of Iraq.It is a very serious concern to the people of Iraq,who are the first to suffer from it''.

you know a poiltician is serious when they use serious and concern together.

''Local fighters recruited by the Americans as a kind of neihbour watch''.

''many of them fought alongside the insurgents''

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7116717.stm

So? I'll repeat it again. The particularly bad actors are taken into custody.

I may be wrong-but I see a start to growing frustration within the Administration to this Iraqi Government.

Corruption is NOT a dirty word in the Muslim world.

So? I'll repeat it again. The particularly bad actors are taken into custody.Ive answered this satisfactorily Waldo-what ya want-blood.

from

http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/rm/2007/93587.htm

On the record briefing,Senior Advisor to the Secretary and Co-ordinator for Iraq.

via Conference Call
Washington DC
October 16 2007


David Satterfield: ''First the issue here,Corruption in Iraq,public corruption,is a major issue.It is a very serious concern to us because of our concerns for the future of Iraq.It is a very serious concern to the people of Iraq,who are the first to suffer from it''.

Paul, you need to explain how and why bringing the fomer sunni fighters into the arms of the US undermines the iraqi gov't.

Paul, you need to explain how and why bringing the fomer sunni fighters into the arms of the US undermines the iraqi gov't.
Waldo-as I already pointed out,these sunni henchmen [who used to fight the US forces] work for their own warlords/religious leaders.

Meaning they answer to them and them alone. This new Iraqi Government will have problems with armed factions if and when the US withdraws.

Lebanon comes to mind.

Ive answered this satisfactorily Waldo-what ya want-blood.

Paul, the sunnis recognize they've lost. They know they can't/won't win. Their neighbourhoods have been destroyed. They want an end to it. The easiest way to do so and rebuild their neighbourhoods is to join the yanks. They have a bottomless money pit. If you are going to exclude everyone who's ever fired a bullet or laid a bomb or acted as a pair of eyes for the bad guys you'll never have any 'reconciliation' in iraq. Complaining that they used to be bad guys is rather pointless or intended to mitigate the accomplishmentst of what the military has done.

Waldo-as I already pointed out,these sunni henchmen [who used to fight the US forces] work for their own warlords/religious leaders.

Meaning they answer to them and them alone. This new Iraqi Government will have problems with armed factions if and when the US withdraws.

Lebanon comes to mind.

No they won't because the shiites outnumber them about 7:1. They've driven them into a corner of bagdhad and if it weren't for the US they'd've driven out of bagdhad completely. They'd be off in the anbar rump.

Not so sure in the case of Iraq waldo.

I can understand bringing bombers in from the cold,

they done it in the north of ireland-I think the ex chief of staff of the IRA is visiting the Nasdaq as we speak,but

I think these factions views of the future will not be the same as Washingtons.

Washington would envisage a demcratic nation-in western style.

These factions religious views wouldnt tolerate such a state.

You cant put a square peg in a round hole.

I think its storing trouble for the future.

i don't doubt that iraq's and washington's views of what needs to happen next and in what order would differ. One good thing that bush has done is apart from encouraging them to get on with the important stuff he's left them alone to sort it out their way.

As to the type of state they want it sounds like you make the common mistake of thinking that every shia is part of the Kom school when in fact they are not. Most iraqi shiites are part of the najaf school. They prefer a separation of religion and state. That's not to say that some iraqis aren't kommists but most of them are 'quietists' and that majority will hopefully prevail.

If it can happen in ireland in can certainly happen in iraq.

I wish I shared your enthusiasm.

Keep trying. It doesn't come all at once. :)

No indeed, it doesn't "come all at once".

It takes many years of dedicated effort to achieve the level of willful blindness that you have reached.

One good thing that bush has done is apart from encouraging them to get on with the important stuff he's left them alone to sort it out their way.
....And, start prepping for The African Oil-Wars (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/03/AR2007120300014.html?hpid=moreheadlines).

*

"Officials in the past have also acknowledged that there are special forces in the area."

That's not to say that some iraqis aren't kommists but most of them are 'quietists'.....
Ya' heard-about-that (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2220868,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront), huh? :rolleyes:

*

"Iraq's main Sunni-led resistance groups have scaled back their attacks on US forces in Baghdad and parts of Anbar province in a deliberate strategy aimed at regrouping, retraining, and waiting out George Bush's "surge", a key insurgent leader has told the Guardian."

No indeed, it doesn't "come all at once".

It takes many years of dedicated effort to achieve the level of willful blindness that you have reached.

Says the man with the special glasses!:@@:

Ya' heard-about-that (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2220868,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront), huh? :rolleyes:

*

"Iraq's main Sunni-led resistance groups have scaled back their attacks on US forces in Baghdad and parts of Anbar province in a deliberate strategy aimed at regrouping, retraining, and waiting out George Bush's "surge", a key insurgent leader has told the Guardian."

You debate like a :hula: give us some more of that brillant insight you're known for.

Ya' heard-about-that (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2220868,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront), huh? :rolleyes:

*

"Iraq's main Sunni-led resistance groups have scaled back their attacks on US forces in Baghdad and parts of Anbar province in a deliberate strategy aimed at regrouping, retraining, and waiting out George Bush's "surge", a key insurgent leader has told the Guardian."

I bet you are the type of guy who believed Baghdad Bob when he told the world in his news conferences that the Iraqi army was defeating the Americans and the Americans were nowhere near Baghdad.

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/l/U/iraq_denial.jpg

I bet you are the type of guy who believed Baghdad Bob when he told the world in his news conferences that the Iraqi army was defeating the Americans and the Americans were nowhere near Baghdad.

And I will bet that you are the type of dimwit who believed B*sh and Cheney and Rumsfeld when they lied to the entire nation in their news conferences that Iraq possessed nukes, that there was a mushroom cloud about to be unleashed, that Iraq possessed hundreds of tons of Weapons of Mass Destruction, that those weapons were located in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east and west and north, blah, blah, blah, yadda yadda, motherfucking yadda.

I tend to side with the country I live in , yes. that is normal though freethinker, of course you wouldnt know anything about that. You do everything but vow death to america and still somehow tell us how much you love the US. give it up man. You are like a guy who beats is wife then turns around and tells her he loves her.

And I will bet that you are the type of dimwit who believed B*sh and Cheney and Rumsfeld when they lied to the entire nation in their news conferences that Iraq possessed nukes, that there was a mushroom cloud about to be unleashed, that Iraq possessed hundreds of tons of Weapons of Mass Destruction, that those weapons were located in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east and west and north, blah, blah, blah, yadda yadda, motherfucking yadda.


The NIE which he now touts as the authoritative document said in 2002/3 (have a guess) ....http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd.html

You guys can't even get your story straight. You run from op-ed headline to op-ed headline without ever once demonstrating a modest ability to think for yourselves. And you wonder why i label you a bunch of kooks.

You know, there have been several posts in this forum about how the situation is "getting worse." Is it really any worse than when the first post was made, oh, about two years ago?

I tend to side with the country I live in , yes. that is normal though freethinker
It shouldn't be. We are a country descended from rebels and questioning the government is a proud tradition in this country. That's what separates us from countries like the nanny state UK and so forth.

It shouldn't be. We are a country descended from rebels and questioning the government is a proud tradition in this country. That's what separates us from countries like the nanny state UK and so forth.
I understand that, and I don't trust our government, but when it's a he said she said between Saddaam Hussein and the US government I lean towars the US government

I tend to side with the country I live in , yes.
Yeah....."My Country; Right or Wrong!" :rolleyes:

That really worked-out, well, from '61 to '73. They've got a big, black Wall, in D.C., in "celebration" of that Groupthink.

I tend to side with the country I live in , yes. that is normal though freethinker

That is where we differ.

I will not side with those who are acting in an immoral, unethical, murderous, greedy and antihuman fashion.....and in this case that would be those ConservaFascists who LIED this country into a disastrous pre-emptive war of aggression that has caused the deaths of close to a million people in a foreign country that has done nothing to the U.S..

But you go ahead and fucking *side with* them all you like.

.....of course you wouldnt know anything about that.

You're correct.

You are like a guy who beats is wife then turns around and tells her he loves her.


You and your ilk forever make excuses for the inhuman cabal that is running this country, who are robbing the national Treasury blind and destroying this nation from within.......I have long viewed all of you as being like the boy who is repeatedly raped by his own father, but still professes his undying love for him.