Isn't this kind of like a news story about the sun rising in the east?

Unless the 2008 elections are cancelled, we will have troops started home by early next summer. For one reason or another, with one excuse or another, the troops must be started home to save the Republican Party from a deserved disaster. Polititians are pretty good at saving their hide. You can count on them selling out anything to save their jobs.

Watch the Loony Left begin attacking Admiral Mullen.

The Left mantra: The U.S. Must Lose, The U.S. Must Lose, The U.S. Must Lose.

Why should we believe anything from this Republican administration when it comes to Iraq?
They have not been right about one single thing on Iraq and we are already almost 5 years into it.

Posted by John D July 31 PM 5:14 PM

Little Johnny D'Squawkbox,
You need to clap louder, our troops in Iraq can't hear you.

Alternate Caption:

"No Senator, I'm not exagerating when I tell you that I caught a fish this big in Iraq. It's further proof the surge is working."

This part is the kicker:

"Security is better; not great, but better. I believe security is critical to providing the government of Iraq the breathing space it needs to work toward political national reconciliation and economic growth, which are themselves critical to a stable Iraq. Barring that, no amount of troops in no amount of time will make much of a difference".

Well, the Iraqi Parliament has shown it's sense of urgency by adjourning for the next month. That, despite the fact that they haven't made progress on a single critical issue regarding the country's future.

Remind me again why we should continue to spill blood and treasure in Mesopotamia?

Watch the Loony Left begin attacking Admiral Mullen.

The Left mantra: The U.S. Must Lose, The U.S. Must Lose, The U.S. Must Lose.

In other news...

More than half of Americans – 55% - think the U.S. should have stayed out of Iraq (the highest figure to date)

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/10/opinion/polls/main930772.shtml

I guess 55% of the country are members of the loony left (of which I count myself a proud member). I guess that's why the republitards lost last year, and will lose again, and again, and again....

Oh yeah, I forgot, if any media reports news that's bad for republicrites, it's just an example of liberal bias, so it doesn't matter. Never mind.

Well, there may be better news coming from Iraq in the near future, but House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said today that good news would be "a real big problem for us." The Dems want to lose in Iraq!

Oh, I'm sorry for overreacting. After reading this piece in the Post, I feel much better (NOT):

White House National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe, said the adjournment did not mean reconciliation work would halt.

"The process of reconciliation will not go on recess. Iraqi leaders will continue to work towards a political accommodation where Sunni, Shia and Kurd can all work together in the unity government."

Years, not months.

How many of our sons and daughters and brothers and sisters are we willing to sacrifice so the Iraqi parliament can take a vacation?

That's an irrelevant poll, anonymous. 75% of Americans supported the invasion in 2003 - when it mattered. This isn't a Playstation game where we can hit reset when things aren't going well.

"The process of reconciliation will not go on recess. Iraqi leaders will continue to work towards a political accommodation where Sunni, Shia and Kurd can all work together in the unity government."

Will this reconciliation occur in Dubai or elsewhere? From what I have read, many of the elected government do not live in Iraq.

Parliament went on vacation bc al-Maliki who is battling Iraq politics within his party (being challenged for his inability to unite or make progress after 14 months in gov) and the Accordance Front (largest Sunni block) who has said it would completely withdraw without its demands being met (including moderate Sunnis in gov and security forces and disbanding militias)has not submitted anything to vote on. His predecessor is interested in reworking the government. Like giving up the Kurdish presidents job to a Sunni in order to gain legitimacy with Arab states, and in exchange giving Kiriku to the Kurds who would like to annex it (that they want to vote on this December); rich in oil and disputed over bc of Saddam's antics of displacing Kurds and repopulating the area with his ethnically favorable people.

Al-Maliki very much affected by the brutal Baathist rule is unwilling to consider the Fronts demands, and bc of the Sunnis killing squads who killed Shia and displaced families in response to Shia militias. The issues taking place, and sadly have been taking place, are largely do to al-Maliki's inability to submit meaningful stuff to vote on during his 14 moths(to be fair a lot of the problems are a result of the Sunnis lack of representation in gov way back). I should also say that he doesn't need to bc his party holds majority in Parliament and can rubber stamp anything, but obviously not considering the demands and dismissing the Sunnis Front would put a dent in the national reconciliation, and might exacerbate violence. The issues will continue, and should they get their s@&! together Parliament has agreed to come back to hold an "emergency session" to vote. Meanwhile, the US is planing for 20,000 replacement units for combat brigades(not surge) in Dec, and eyeing better bomb resistant vehicles. Why couldn't our military be sent with the best from the get go??

This Admiral Mullen has already flip flopped on his Iraq positions. Why should anyone believe this administration or this tool Mullen when it comes to Iraq. The American people have been lied to and mislead since the invasion in March 2003. It's past time for U.S. forces to withdraw and let the Iraqi's handle their own problems. Ambassador Crocker is a joke and so is the corrupt and powerless puppet Iraq government.

Open request to the left-

Please forward the name of anyone whose opinion you would accept as legit if that opinion was counter to your hope and dream that we lose this war?

Quit hiding behind your "save the troops and poor iraqi civilians" smoke and mirror debate- you are willing to allow Iraq to slip into a Rwandah-like ethnic cleansing bloodbath to support your I hate Bush psychosis..

Open request to Heartburn-

Please forward the name of one person who's opinion that you would accept that the Iraqi government we are propping up will never be able to fulfill it's commitments.

Because that the name of the game, and the game is pretty close to be over. The Sunni block walking out of the government yesterday makes it highly unlikely that there will bw any sort of real political solution in Iraq in the near future. Without that political solution, military progress is meaningless.

That's not a hope, that's not a dream, that's reality.

"Please forward the name of anyone whose opinion you would accept as legit if that opinion was counter to your hope and dream that we lose this war?"

First off, one should always take anyone's opinion on any subject with a grain of salt, no? But as for your question, how about a real war skeptic, not cheerleader, whose not running for public office such as Colin Powell? Before he blew a significant portion of his credibility with the anthrax presentation, he is the Republican I respected most, as well as a realist whose views on when and how to go to war have been almost exclusively vindicated by this war.

The problem is, as evidenced by the Michael O'Hanlon discussion of late, is that most of the people who are saying they've had "changes of heart" in favor of the Iraq War were ALWAYS cheerleaders for the war, and have thus had no such epiphany, simply a new spin. Its self-serving to the extreme, but cloaked in a veneer of "truthiness."

As for the Joint Chiefs, they've done such a bang-up job so far, do keep up the good work. Unfortunately, I doubt this new head will be able to clean up the mess.

Tony-

don't answer a question with a question. Thats rude.

The new poster child for the Defeatocrats is Rep. Nancy Bodya of KS, who walked out of an Iraq briefing by Gen. Jack Keane because she wasn't hearing what she wanted to hear:

"As you may know, Iraq isn’t going quite as badly as our friends on the Left would like it to. Most of them would just as soon up and quit the war and cede that region to the terrorists.

But freshman Rep. Nancy Bodya (D-KS) is leading her colleagues by example. According to the transcript of the July 27th House Armed Services Committee hearing, Rep. Bodya just up and walked out of the committee room because retired Army General Jack Keane was allowed to profile some of the positive stories coming out of that long-suffering part of the world.

"And I just will make some statements more for the record based on what I heard from — mainly from General Keane. As many of us — there was only so much that you could take until we in fact had to leave the room for a while. So I think I am back and maybe can articulate some things — after so much of the frustration of having to listen to what we listened to.""

from anklebitingpundits.com.

Like most rubber-stamp Defeatocrats, she only wants to listen to people who agree with her.

Heartburn-

Not as rude as accusing others of being psychotics who don't care about genocide and desire that the US lose a war.

Tony- You are avoiding the question...

So you don't know the answer- or don't want to answer?

heartburn, your post is right on. You have to understand that the left has backed itself into a corner in Iraq by declaring that the war is "lost". They now feel that they have to rebut any semblance of good news, such as by claiming that any positive development is "spin" brought on by a "cheerleader".

herbie h & like minded,

I have seen the light. Iraq is indeed a success.

Now can we leave?

Heartburn-

There's no answer because it's the wrong question.

Military progress is worthless in Iraq without political progress. The Malicki government is getting weaker by the day. No amount of postive news from our Generals changes that simple fact.

So we have Tony's non answer- anyone else? hello? is there anybody out there?

Bryan- Sorry i missed your post- I respect the Colin Powell response- he is becoming more and more vocal about the state of the Iraq war- i am not sure i agree with your premise that he is not running for office though. He is becomning pretty chummy with Mr Obama

zook, I never said Iraq is a success. I think it is a mess.

I have a question for you: Would you support an immediate pullout of all US forces regardless of the consequences that may have in Iraq?

Doug, if you think Iraq is a mess, then what do you think will happen if we invade Pakistan?
Would a civil war break out if we invade Pakistan?
Would our invasion of Pakistan become the new recruiting tool for Al Qaeda?

herbie h.,

I support our withdrawl from Iraq to the extent it compels Iraqis to be responsible for their own overall security, while protecting our own.

Let me elaborate:

I support leaving a residual force to train Iraqis and a covert quick strike force capability with which to whack terrorists. I trust our CIA will saturate that country with spies.

The current situation is that of al-Maliki and Company pissing, moaning, sniveling and whining 4 and one half years after the commencement of this debacle. This while they are on vacation. They will try anew when they get back in September.

Also f/y/i:

I'm a "brat." As such I grew up on secure military installations (fences, barbed wire, men with M-16s, etc.) within the US. Which has always made me wonder why we didn't establish these kinds of bases for the Iraqis to operate out of. On a base there are no blacks [Sunnis](insert pejorative term here), no whites [Shiites], no yankees [Kurds], no rednecks, just stripes and brass. On these bases are commisaries, theaters, bowling alleys, swimming pools and SECURITY FOR YOUR IMMEDIATE FAMILY.

So that when "Dad" went off to play war he knew that his family was taken care of.

It worked for us, it could of, should of, CAN work for the Iraqis.

Doug, if you think Iraq is a mess, then what do you think will happen if we invade Pakistan?
Would a civil war break out if we invade Pakistan?
Would our invasion of Pakistan become the new recruiting tool for Al Qaeda?

Posted by: John D | August 1, 2007 3:45 PM

John, are you really a hopelessly dense ignoramus, or do you just play on in blogs?

Al Qaeda IS IN PAKISTAN. I noticed in a later post you refuted the fact that Musharaf harbors terrorists. Again, do you just ignore "the news" and pretend to be educated, or are you actually unable to comprehend what it is you are reading? Here is just one of hundreds of article on the truce Musharaf signed with "militants" in Wazuristan. http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0906/dailyUpdate.html

The problem is Iraq lays a blanket over everything because it was totally unnecessary and counterproductive. This both hamstrung the original fight against Al Qaeda and negatively colors calls for further action toward that unfinished business.

Now, seemingly with no acknowledgement of irony, you are trying to use what you see as "the liberal" position to say why invading Pakistan is such a bad idea.

Well, if invading Iraq was a good idea, then there's no problem (you accidentally acknowledge that maybe just maybe Iraq wasn't such a great idea). If it was a mistake in the first place, than I suppose your logic stands. The rub is, risking everything in a can't lose situation in Iraq was unnecessary (being as it was devoid of Al Qaeda, as well as a geopolitical buffer against Iranian domination), whereas Pakistan poses an even greater threat (nuclear weapons and the harbored leadership of Al Qaeda).

I know its not going to happen, but it would be SOOO nice if just for a day, you could put down your inane partisan name-calling and counterproductive gotcha games, and actually lay out what is that you think should be done and how to do it. Then, you could actually listen to what people tell you instead of knee-jerking into "LOONY LEFT LOONY LEFT LOONY LEFT" madman Dyslin.

Johnny torture -

No one is talking about going into Pakistan, removing Musharraf and disbanding the Pakistani army as we did in Iraq. We are talking about US forces going into limited areas to attack Al Qaeda forces, areas already outside Musharraf's control.

What's your alternative Johnny? Wait for AQ to attack the US?

Great my post 10:34 from last night was left nameless. To update the Sunni block has withdrawn. This stinks. I understand that the Sunni Kurd and Shia reconciliation summit will take place, but come on this whole reconciliation mess is bc people are being left out and then they want in. Meanwhile the who place is poverty and unemployment ridden even after pumping so much money. It is criminal.