Durbin: Some progress in Iraq, but not enough

If "progress in Iraq" includes arming the Sunni warlords in Al-Anbar Province and vacation time for the useless Iraqi puppet government then I guess there is some "progress."

Yes, Deranged Johnny E., the Iraqi people voted in a puppet government.

If Durbin is saying there is "some" progress then thst means there is A LOT of progress.

Nice of Senator Durbin to compliment American troops. Much nicer than when he said about U.S. soldiers' treatment of prisoners, "...you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime..." He later apologized for that remark, so there are indications he is maturing in his views.

Yes, Deranged Johnny E., the Iraqi people voted in a puppet government.

If Durbin is saying there is "some" progress then thst means there is A LOT of progress.

Posted by: John D | August 8, 2007 2:02 PM

Little Johnny Jihad,

If the "Iraqi people" voted for this puppet government that W. has provided them with, why can't they (the Iraqi government) leave the "green-zone" in Baghdad?

Can any of you imagine if famed Nazi Hunter Dick Turbin were around during World War II?

"The Battle of the Bulge is simply taking too long."

"D-Day showed 'some progress' but not enough. And the rate of casualty was too high."

"The War in the Pacific is just plain unwinnable with our current fleet of ships," Durbin said after visiting the fleet.

If Dick Turbin had been around we'd be having annual Summits with the Chancellor of the United Provinces of the Third Reich. Or as we used to call it, Europe.

I think we would all like to see progress in Iraq. God bless America.

Can any of you imagine if famed Nazi Hunter Dick Turbin were around during World War II?

"The Battle of the Bulge is simply taking too long."

"D-Day showed 'some progress' but not enough. And the rate of casualty was too high."

"The War in the Pacific is just plain unwinnable with our current fleet of ships," Durbin said after visiting the fleet.

If Dick Turbin had been around we'd be having annual Summits with the Chancellor of the United Provinces of the Third Reich. Or as we used to call it, Europe.

Posted by: Hillaryis44 | August 8, 2007 2:45 PM

Numbnuts,
Why don't you tell us exactly what "winning in Iraq" means and how long it will take?

Spare us the WWII analogies, they're bogus. Iraq was a war of choice, and a bad one at that. Iraq was never a credible threat to us, Japan and Germany were.

Democracy in America will not cease to exist if we leave Iraq. We have nothing positive to show after four and a half years in Iraq and a political solution appears more remote than ever. The war in Iraq has evolved into a civil war, and our continued presence their cannot fix things, IMO.

"BUSH SENDS SMOKE SIGNAL" AFRAID OF OWN WIRE TAPPINGS"

IS THIS THE DUMBED DOWN REPORT BEFORE THE REPORT CARD IS BROUGHT HOME.

HEY MOM, I THINK I GOT AN B, WHEN YOU REALLY KNOW YOU GOT A F.

DON'T BELIEVE BUSH, EVERYONE IS ON VACATION. OUR MEN AND WOMEN ARE DYING AS WE SPEAK.

NOW AMERICA KNOWS THAT 1001 OF THEIR FRIENDS (CIVILLIANS) IN IRAQ DIDN'T COME BACK EITHER.

88,000 TO 100,000 TO DIE, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE.

SENATOR DURBIN STOP STALLING THE STALLERS. ITS ONLY AUGUST AND BELIEVE YOU ME, YOU KNOW THE THREAT COLOR STARTS TO CHANGE ABOUT THIS TIME OF THE YEAR.

WHAT ABOUT KATRINA, WHAT ABOUT KATRINA VICTIMS, WHAT ABOUT THE PEOPLE OF NEW ORLEANS THAT ARE STILL WAITING FOR A BOWL OF SOUP OR A BOTTLED WATER?

Numbnuts,
Why don't you tell us exactly what "winning in Iraq" means and how long it will take?

Posted by: John E | August 8, 2007 3:06 PM

That is fair- I DON"T KNOW- now do you feel better

BUT- I sure know what losing looks like- and that would be what your side of the aisle is pursuing vigorously- what do you want to pursue winning or losing?
Also- can you try to communicate like an adult?

The puppet Iraqi government is incompetent, corrupt and powerless. They are incapable of restoring law and order to their own country. Their security forces are reluctant to deal with the insurgents.
What is the exit strategy here?? It is long past time for the Iraqi's to step up and deal with their own problems.

Heartburn-

What losing looks like:

The Sunni bloc pulling out of the Iraqi Government.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22205839-15084,00.html

Shiites pulling out of the Iraqi Government.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18131236/

Iraqi security force readiness dropping.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/12/AR2007071202084.html

Basra being declared a "failure"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/07/warmy107.xml

Over half of the weapons supplied to the Iraqi government gone "missing"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20150013/

The Iraqi power grid collapsing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6934973.stm

Millions of Iraqis fleeing their country as refugees.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6916791.stm

That what losing looks like Heartburn.

Bush's disasterous policies have led us to directly to that point.

How much more will it take for you dead enders to see that?

There are no real winners in war - only one savage act after another and differing levels of loss. This is ESPECIALLY true in a baseless war of aggression. It's not hard to understand!

Tony-

You are so shortsighted and predictable..

55 milllion iraqiis not woried about their family being put into a shredding machine- priceless

You missed the references to our congressional "leaders" falling all over themselves to declare the war lost when it was to their political advantage- thats losing! I am sure you can find a link to that as well.. or if you wanted to.

Now our favorite politico -
Mr Durbin is hedging his political future on the chance that we ( yes even you, my friend) might actually be successful- disgusting..

Doug R. and John E., what do you mean by calling the Iraqi govt. "puppet"?

heartburn-

"The focus of Multinational Force Iraq is, of course, on working with our Iraqi counterparts to help improve security for the people of Iraq in order to give Iraqi leaders the time and space they need to come to grips with the tough political issues that must be resolved. Resolution of these issues is the key to the achievement of reconciliation among the various ethnic and sectarian groups, political parties and leaders in order to achieve a lasting solution to Iraq's problems"

General David Petraeus April 26, 2007

Sorry, buddy, but this administration General Petreaus have said that the entire point of our military action is to give time for the Iraqi government to step up. That is not happening. By their own definition, we are getting closer to failure not success.

Your arguement is with the General, not me.

Show me some signs of that political solution and we can talk, but as I showed, every indicator on that front is going the wrong way.

Dickie Durbin went to Iraq just to get even with President Bush--he knows that General Petraeus did the job but, Dickies whole career is based on the Dems defeating America in Iraq-- kind of hard to do but, Dickie is resourcreful-- he believes America must lose for Dems to win. Guess what America led by Patraues is winning but, that can't be in Dickie's world so, he is regurgitating DNC mantra the Iraqi's don't have a political solution it's like when they used the words graviitas to let Cheney be VP--Dickie knows better but he'll always be for a political solution because he hates the military. Dickie has always hated the soldiers --because he is a pececnik. When the the Cold War was over Dickie wanted a peace dividend to use for social services let's face it-Dickie doesn't want to win the war in Iraq--surprised you shouldn't be he never has helped our soldiers hiding behind armor and other issues.The question is why would Durbin go to Iraq on his vacation but to kill the mission. Jerry White,Springfield, IL

dt is right, again.

So bc the political solution is going the "wrong way" then that should be enough to pull out our forces to leave the Iraqis hanging. That should be enough to exchange, once again, a lesser evil for a worse. British withdrawal is proof of this, and more to come if we withdraw percipitously.

The "surge" is to create a space for the government to be able to make political resolution or political reconciliation. To work on reducing the violence created by militias or insurgents or the "resistance" (whether 3% al Qaeda or disbanded Sunni army) (different ones arm and lock down different neighborhoods with civilians in them in the north east west or south.) our crack down WAS supposed to have begun six months ago. But the surge was only going to work with all the units there; to have a more united and uniform approach. This has only been in place one or two months. Compared to four years of poor military strategy I don't see how two months would avert four years of poor military strategy in Iraq. But, that doesn't mean that in the next six months they will not be able to make some significant military crack down progress. There is some progress to show this.

As far as the political solution. Since the memo's release Washington was forced to put pressure on the Iraqi gov. What you see now is what has been way over due. It would have come either way, but Bushes lackadaisical approach insisting he was winning (against “2/3" of al-Qaeda while the country was being overrun by armed militias or groups) snail paced our efforts and made it an uphill battle now. The gov (only 14 months old) fall out would have happened sooner or later. It happened later. The difference was when the pressure to switch to the Washington clock came. After the memo which meant pressure on the gov to work with our military and on their issues. Not safe guard certain neighborhoods, or interest of power. The pressure exposed motives for what they were, and showed al-Malik’s true face (and his compatriots).

Putting all this aside. It isn’t unreasonable to agree to get the country to a point where if they need to call on security forces they are there to respond, be logistically prepared, cover needed ground should they need to, and then move our army out of Iraq. Maybe the minimalist reconciliation should be pressed on. Get the Sunni's to be more involved in gov and Army. (Move more into the forces. They are experience in logistics instead of wasting time training and preparing noobies.) Disbanding the Shia militias. (Shia are already represented in the forces.) The complete political solution is not needed for us to pull out. The problem is saying there is no political solution so we should pull out and leave Iraqis with nothing to secure them to the lowest extent.

The Democrats can cover this as " not withdrawing too fast for the safety of our soldiers (who there will be less and less of to cover more and more ground with less and less), but I do see the Democrats possibly is pushed to agree wait till Spring 08. With WD started somewhere before that. Not before Dec. I think that the generals will make a perdition in this direction, but most will say that a real meaningful change in the security affairs will needed our assistance until until 09. WD starting summer 08. Even then "stabilizing" the country will not be complete but will be more substantial than today, or at any given point during the past four years.

General Petreaus is a highly educated, very bright guy. I feel for him being stuck in such a lost cause. Tony is right by their own definition, we are going nowhere with this so-called government in Iraq. Seems all these Iraq politicians care about is oil revenue and vacations.

[quote]
55 million Iraqis not worried about their family being put into a shredding machine- priceless.

Posted by: heartburn | August 8, 2007 5:02 PM

I like your Republican math, heartburn.

"The population of Iraq (1997 estimate) is 22,219,289."
source: http://www.arab.de/arabinfo/iraq.htm

It's been estimated that over 2 million Iraqis have fled the country, with an estimated 2,000 leaving every day to avoid dying in the sectarian civil war that Dubya unleashed by invading and occupying Iraq.

"About eight million Iraqis -- nearly a third of the population -- are without water, sanitation, food and shelter and need emergency aid and that more than half "are now without work." And Iraqis "without access to adequate water supplies" is now 70 percent."
source: http://digg.com/world_news/Report_43_percent_of_Iraq_s_population_endure_absolute_poverty

Yeah, I guess this means that Dubya's surge is "Mission Accomplished"!

BC- OK- lets take all of your assumptions at face value...

It is fairly well understood that Hussein did little or no investment in infrastructure- unless you count his palaces. So adequate food, water and health care was something many Iraqiis, especially non Baathis Iraqiis could count on before 2003..

It would also stand to reason that given opportunity more than 2000 Iraqiis would have left daily under Husseins dictatorship..before 2003.

Now- how does your data support us leaving Iraq.. do you think the opposing militias, Al Queda, or Iran will improve the situation in Iraq should we leave..

Mission was accomplished- since then a new more difficult mission has become our responsibility..

Unfortunatley- the Dem party and rabid left wing Bush hatin' folks have decided that this is too hard and are pursuing a strategy of " lets lose this thing, before we win" With the hope of success in '08. Durbin is an embarassment - his latest gig in Iraq is a purely political move..

Sorry- typo .. should have said ..

So adequate food, water and health care was something many Iraqiis, especially non Baathis Iraqiis could NOT count on before 2003..

thats an important NOT

Heartburn-

Again, the only win, is a stable, effective Iraqi government.

When nearly 10% of your population would rather live in a foreign refugee center than under that government, that doesn't show that the people have much faith in that government or that they believe conditions in the country will improve anytime soon.

Secondly, as to the best chance for success, the ONLY chance for the Iraqi government to step up and do it's job is for the US to announce a timetable for withdrawal. As long as we are willing to provide an endless supply of troops to fight Malicki's civil war, there is zero incentive for him to make the hard decisions required for a true political settlement. As long as American troops are required to maintain internal security in Iraq, the Malicki government cannot be considered anything but a week powerless farce.

We must put their feet to the fire.

Yeah, I guess so when the 2 million are the result of four years of poor military strategy (selective in nature); not the surge BC. The facts are all very well and some, but tell me what exactly pulling out would do for that country??? using your facts. How about make the situation worse. There are two options either we do what we can to help the situation; what is in our power. Or, we subscribe to the fantasy it was all a big mistake and therefore will all go away when we leave and the "Iraqis resolve these problems for themselves." The only resolving done will be at the end of one question "Sunni or Shiite?" in Iraq while millions more head for the border. When in Places like Syria they already are turned away back to Iraq. Where the surrounding countries will not allow them to apply for visas, and jobs. Where they don't enjoy the refugee status bc the US expects them to "go back to Iraq when it gets better." Where some wait months on end to get into European countries traveling from state to state. Where individuals and organizations scramble to compensate the overflow of children in need of continuing what has now become a discontinued education. Were it has become common place for women to turn to prostitution. As the Us refuses to admit Iraqis it promissed for fear of letting terrrirst. Don't think that will change.

I mean do we have to wait until all the late night and special editions programs come on about the disaster in Iraq, and the faces of Iraqis lost in the shuffle. There lives turned upside down to make it the next "darfur" cause.

The most disappointing thing about this is that people (including politicians) employ more energy to discredit any attempts to find any creative solutions to the problem, and are waiting for it to reslove itself and prove them right. And then what will the Democrats who refuse to get trapped by the problem of Iraq (begeezus during their term) bomb the chaos that will happen to peace. Why? When you are right now in a perfect position with all the tools at your disposal and all the leadership experience and all the information and technology and connection to turn some - what ever we can; is in our power at least - around.

And then what will the Democrats who refuse to get trapped by the problem of Iraq (begeezus during their term) bomb the chaos that will happen to peace. Why? When you are right now in a perfect position with all the tools at your disposal and all the leadership experience and all the information and technology and connection to turn some - what ever we can; is in our power at least - around.
Posted by: AR | August 9, 2007 2:27 PM

You sure write a lot but, seriously, what are you trying to say? Your posts are all over the place and it is nearly impossible to decipher what your point is, despite your use of many, many words.

"Win." Define Win Tony. I hope you don't think that the US pulling out will put the Iraqi gov into a position to care about the people, or the legitimacy of gov with the people and the faith they have for it. When all of them are more hungry for the power they didn't have under Saddam, and would rather not let it go. Remember the people voted in weren't seculars. The seculars were threatened on vote day, or got one or two seats in gov. If the gov has acted snail pace when we were there what makes you think they will hustle to make progress, and resist the temptation of calling on or giving more room to the Al-Sadar Shiite and Iranian militias?

There will be no "win" either way so there is no point of trying to sound like our withdraw is going to bring more progress; is the answer.

You right Tony IF your aiming for ULTIMATE stable Iraq and government the win is way off in the distance and will only percipitate once we withdraw. But, withdrawing now as things stand will not bring us any closer to that win, and as things currently stand will take the turn for the worse bc no one will be concentrating on Iraq or the fate of the Iraqis. But, their own self interests. All the secular people have made a mass exodus for the border Tony. All threatened to leave, or unable to face death bc of the armed groups displacing cities and regions. Who will care about Iraq or its people inside and outside. Who will speak for them, and be heard. Not security forces. Not the religious zealots. Not the suspicious and power vice grip held. And please don't frame the Iraqis exodus by using the phrase "would rather live in a different country" like they have a choice. Or, better still give them one if we left.

Yes our military might be the tool of that monkey and his political banans in government.

At the same time our military is standing in for the Iraqis. Our men are not dying for the government they are dying for the Iraqis knowing that the military is the only thing the Iraqis have left to keep the gov on cue. Our military is a reminder to the officials in Iraq on behalf of the powerless with no voice in their Iraqi government to care for them and on behalf of the powerless with no voice in our US government to care.

IT IS NOT IN VAIN. As a matter of FACT the idea of our military being put between a rock and a hard place on behalf of those Iraqis - who have no one else - is the most moving and honorable thing for our military to provide for them.

You may think that our military hinders the process, and I am telling our military is aiding the right party all along; without it militias and the "resistance" and proxies would be doing the talking not for the Iraqis in the long run but for themselves: all supported by some official thinking of himself and what he wants. Waging for power not reconciliation. Not for Iraqis blood spilled, but with their blood spilled. As long as we are there and as long as Washington sits on their backs to preform Iraq can not completely ignore its citizens and turn to its own interests. Without us the most certanitly will. There is hope and hope..that is the greatest thing the our fine military could give them. Without them they have no one to remind the Iraqi government what they are there for.

My coherence is fine. The difference is maybe that I'm not speaking from a talking point you recognize. Since I don't think that using either ready made form offered by the media and political sides is the whole picture. It is a bit of both.

But if it is clarity for that part you need I'll go slow.

Each political side is going with what they want to see in Iraq, what that means for them politically, and none of them is actually addressing the problem. Meaning when we withdraw one side will see victory and the other vindication, but neither has really taken the time to solve the problem; bc they both are draped in politics to past their own politically (Rep or Dem) derived solution for Iraq.
The Deomcrats are reluctant to inherit Iraq, and would prefer to prevent it from being passed on to them. So they will declare vindication. However, the problem of Iraq will not be addressed. It will become worse, and what will the Democrat's do about the issue once it starts appearing as a humanitarian crisis in between fighting forces. Will they bomb the chaos into peace? Why would they opt for such a path - leave Iraq - leave it possibly worse off then now - and then come back to bomb it into order. Especially, when EVERYONE in Washington is in the position to guide Iraq less like a political issue with politically originated solutions irrelevant to the fact on the ground (or the possibility of the facts on the ground should we leave). Everyone in Washington is a "leader" and has access to technology communications...but how pathetic that the world first super power has to visit the country to get an "accurate" point of view. Which isn't thorough or accurate. It skewed to the person. What they want to project unto Iraq, and the limited contact they get from a selective group of people.

The leaders in Iraq have to be the final solution to this mess.

So far as I can tell this just seems to be making allot of money for KBR. They only care about money and not the troops. I would suggest you watch "Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers." Beware the industrial military complex. More true words were never spoken!!!