|  | ||||||
| Useless Blabber Talk about anything here. |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | ||||||
| Useless Blabber Talk about anything here. |
|
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
03-13-06, 11:10 AM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
 .....ssshhhhh....just get back on the "special" bus, and never, ever leave it again without adult supervision....silly little retard...Otherwise, they will be forced to curb your Michael Moore ball rubbing privileges for a week, and you know how much you need that!
__________________ "ONE MIGHT CONCLUDE, from his conduct over the past three years that George W. Bush was put on this earth to do two things: First, to lead the United States into the third millennium, with all its terrifying challenges and wondrous opportunities. And second, to drive liberals insane. He's succeeding brilliantly at both." -John Podhoretz  |
|
03-13-06, 11:37 AM
| |||
| |||
|
March 13, 2006, 8:15 a.m. John, Meet Jack We do have reliable information about how things are going in Iraq. By Richard Nadler In his article "You Don't Know Jack," John Derbyshire answers the critics of his thesis that the democratization of Iraq will fail who cite his lack of firsthand knowledge of Iraq. Derbyshire points out that visits to foreign countries provide scant evidence for forming foreign-policy decisions, even when the observer is knowledgeable, experienced, and honest. On the same day his article was published, a group of Iraq War vets, speaking in the Murrow Room of the National Press Club, made the case that the democratization is succeeding — and they explicitly endorsed Derbyshire's caveat in making that case. "I saw the good and the bad in Iraq — cooperation and hostility, war and reconstruction," said Lt. Lawrence Indyk, who was awarded a Purple Heart for his service. "But this war isn't about my personal experience. U.S. policy in Iraq aims to replace an ultra-aggressive, terror-harboring tyranny with a constitutional democracy, at peace with its neighbors. And to assess our progress on that track, we need metrics that are impersonal." Look Who's Coming to Dinar For the next hour and a half, Lt. Indyk, Marine Corporal Richard Gibson, and Marine Sergeant J. D. Johannes laid out their case. Lt. Indyk reported Iraqi growth in GDP and personal income. He contrasted the dinar's stabilization under the Coalition with the savings-wrecking inflations under the Baathist regime. He chronicled the increase in electrical supply, and the doubling of oil revenues in the post-Saddam era. He put numbers to the enormous increase in cell phones, cars, and satellite TVs. Indyk discussed advances in services as well: the 60 percent decline of infant mortality in post-Saddam Iraq, and the improved access to schooling and medical care. And he described the explosion in business formation that has followed in the overthrow of one of the most regulated economies on earth. Next he laid out metrics of democratization. First among these is surging participation of all segments of the Iraqi populace in elections, not only in the national government, but in Iraq's city and state elections as well. He enumerated, too, the growth of political parties, and proliferation of a free press in print and broadcast. Then he admitted that facts like these, taken on their own, were insufficient for forming an accurate assessment of progress in Iraq. "If material and institutional circumstances are really improving," he said, "this will be reflected in the attitudes of the Iraqi people themselves. The polls will either confirm what the official statistics tell us, or they will contradict those statistics." Indyk then proceeded to describe the findings of the most extensive and scientific polls of Iraq opinion, performed by Arabic speakers for Oxford Research International near the beginning of 2004, then at the end of 2005. These polls covered all of Iraq's major regions and demographic groups. Asked to compare their current lives with their lives under Saddam, Iraqis reported an improvement in availability of necessities, and an improvement in overall economic wellbeing. They reported superior access to clean water, health care, and education. Iraqi respondents believed that their local governments had improved. Asked what form of government they hoped to live under going forward, democracy won handily: four-to-one over the rule of one-man, and ten-to-one over totalitarianism. Iraqis list security as their most pressing problem. But a plurality of Iraqis feel safer now than under Saddam, and a majority feel safer from ordinary crime. Moreover, better than 60 percent feel personally safe in their neighborhoods. Marine Corporal Gibson's presentation sorted out these seemingly contradictory findings. The problem most Americans have, he said, in understanding Iraqi opinions on security, is that we operate from a different baseline. Iraq under Saddam was an incredibly violent place. Iraq Body Count, an antiwar group that keeps a running tally of Iraqi civilian deaths, reports that the daily toll under the occupation falls in the range of 25 to 28 per day. But under Saddam's rule, the death toll averaged three times that, including 600,000 civilian executions recorded by the Documental Center for Human Rights, and the 100,000 Kurds killed during the Anfal operation. A violent day under the coalition would be just a routine day under Saddam. "History is being written by the losers." "Today," Gibson said, "the terrorists attack the government. In Saddam's day, they ran it." Using the same methodology as Lt. Indyk, Corporal Gibson assessed the decline of the insurgency, first in hard numbers, then in the opinions of Iraqis themselves. Coalition casualties declined by 27 percent in 2005. They have declined by 62 percent in 2006, measured against the comparable period of 2005. The insurgent strategy of targeting Iraqi police and army units peaked in July of 2005. Since then, casualties among those units have declined by 33 percent. Attacks on other soft targets are also down. For instance, there were 146 strikes against the oil infrastructure in 2004, compared to 101 in 2005. The tipping point, Gibson contends, occurred last March, when the number Iraqi boots on the ground — police and army units — surpassed those of Coalition forces. From that point on, the new Iraqi government has proved increasingly able to hold and garrison areas that have been cleared on insurgents. But more subtly, the growth of native Iraqi security shattered the coalition of Baathist recidivists and Sunni jihadists. The last thing the Baathist factions want is all-out sectarian civil war. "The tactics used to provoke it — mass slaughter of civilians — not only strengthens popular support for the government," said Gibson, "but threatens to turn that government into a blunt instrument of retribution against them." From March of 2005 to September of 2005, the number of civilian tips informing on insurgents increased from 483 to 4,700, as numerous Sunni tribes declared outright war on al Qaeda. "The insurgency in Iraq," said Gibson, "is being dismantled by the equivalent of a Tips hotline." Gibson cited polling of Iraqi opinion to support his thesis. Fifty-eight percent of Iraqis feel threatened by terrorists, compared with 10 percent who feel threatened by Coalition troops. And by 71 percent to 9 percent, Iraqis believe that their own security forces — Iraqi security forces — are winning the fight against terror. "It is fascinating to contrast the triumphant face of the insurgency in our nightly news to the pessimistic assessments of its leaders in their intercepted correspondence," said Gibson. "My assessment of their prospects varies little from their own." Former Marine Sergeant J. D. Johannes was a soldier during the first Iraq war. He returned to his old unit as combat reporter in the second. He offers this assessment: Everyone knows that the history of war is written by the victors. But the war in Iraq has shattered that truism. In Iraq, history is being written by the losers. Baathist kidnappers and jihadist bombers are planning their operations not to win the war in Iraq, but to win it in America. To that end, they are assessing what American news organizations are willing to cover, and what American reporters are willing to risk. As an immediate result, many of the feeds on the nightly news are coming from Arabic sources that are either non-professional in their journalistic standards or hostile to American policy aims. As a long-term result, the American public is broadly misinformed on a war that Coalition arms and Iraqi democrats are, in fact, winning. To summarize what the Iraq veterans said on March 9: We do "know jack" about Coalition progress in Iraq — and we know it the same way that we know other trends in social science — by hard numbers where they are available, cross-checked against the attitudes of those most directly affected by those numbers. "If Iraqis listened to American media," said Lt. Indyk, "they'd hear that their economy is wrecked and that their services are in shambles. They'd hear that they are less safe now than before the war, and that they are religious fanatics who demand a theocracy. But they don't get their news on Iraq through the Western media. They live there. And they say the opposite." — Richard Nadler is president of America's Majority, the 501(c)(4) policy group that sponsored the March 9 press conference of Iraq war veterans.
__________________ "ONE MIGHT CONCLUDE, from his conduct over the past three years that George W. Bush was put on this earth to do two things: First, to lead the United States into the third millennium, with all its terrifying challenges and wondrous opportunities. And second, to drive liberals insane. He's succeeding brilliantly at both." -John Podhoretz |
|
03-13-06, 11:44 AM
| ||||
| ||||
|
your not as smart as i thought, as the reason i gave the lil wheels on the bus quip was to imply that you my son are on the lil yellow bus , So either your too stupid to pick up on that , or you out of material AND YOU STILL HAVE NOT GIVIN ME THE DEFINITION OF CIVIL WAR!!! please do not cut and paste Negropontes definition ] Last edited by bxbomb; 03-13-06 at 11:47 AM. |
|
03-13-06, 12:33 PM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
 ....mental midget, your existence is enough material to laugh a lifetime......Just watching you continue to bury yourself makes it easy....fucking tool...And just to refresh your memory, either because you can't read, or you are simply dumber than I even thought, or actually, both.... Here is a thread about the fact that the American people do not hear enough about the progress in Iraq...how do you respond?...post bad news.... Here is a thread about the fact that the mainstream media only goes with "if it bleeds, it reads" material...how do you respond..a bombing in Iraq.... Here is a thread about the fact that the media, and us, OWE IT to those who serve to get and hear the full picture for perspective....how do you respond--violence in Iraq Here is a thread about the fact that both the GOOD and the BAD must be heard--how do you respond--just the bad., ignore the good Here is a thread with plenty of information and facts about progress and accomplishments in Iraq we never get to hear about, and that this stuff should not be ignored...how do you respond--you ignore it. Here is a thread about the fact that those in the military are disappointed about how the war is portrayed in the U.S.....how do you respond...they should not be there anyway (this is is the Imbecile Hall of Fame).... Here is a thread saying that no matter what side of the divide you are on, you should want a balanced view of the war, and shoudl root for success....how do you respnd...neo-con, Bush sucks, civil war, blah, blah, blah... Here is a thread exposing your stupidity, a thread where you are exactly what is being described...how do you respond--civil war. Here is a thread calling out those who only seek the bad news, who are il informed and uneducated, who root for failure (the civil war drumbeat as the latest), can not put anything in perspective, etc how do you respond--with more mind boggling, no self-esteem stupidity.... Here is a thread that you are not embarassed about, after clearly making a fool of yourself, clearly demonstrating that you are EXACTLY the underlying meaning of the thread, and clearly avoiding the points and facts of the thread-even when getting called out about it...how do you respond--what is the definition of civil war (wow---a new definition of idiocy being born before us) Like I said, I have come across some real imbeciles on this board, but you are clearly right there....and the pace to which you have no problem continuing this idiotic spiral of yours is unreal......... Jerkoff.....let it go little leaguer......Not only are you just another Bush hating blowhard with the IQ of a rotted cunt, but you are not even good at it....Like I told you earleir, go back to your manual and at least get some better talking points.....at least pretend to be somewhat past a 3rd grade level..... Back to the bus franks and beans
__________________ "ONE MIGHT CONCLUDE, from his conduct over the past three years that George W. Bush was put on this earth to do two things: First, to lead the United States into the third millennium, with all its terrifying challenges and wondrous opportunities. And second, to drive liberals insane. He's succeeding brilliantly at both." -John Podhoretz |
|
03-13-06, 01:32 PM
| ||||
| ||||
|
your right smegma breath , i have never seen a threead on this board go off onto other topics within thread what was i thinking? I humbly apologize dickless NOW WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF CIVIL WAR??? |
|
03-13-06, 02:07 PM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
Keep ignoring and trying to spin out of your ass kicking by "definition of civil war".....that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this thread...NOTHING...and no matter how you try to force the issue, it won't work.... And the definition of civil war???.........what is the point, so you can say "see, I told you so, Iraq is in a civil war, things are bad, ".......wow, great point schmuckboy.....really solidifies your status as a jerkoff...... There will be some who debate civil war is raging now...some will argue that there is no civil war....some will argue that civil war began early on (by technical definition, I believe 1000 deaths is the technical benchmark)....some will argue this is more like a mafia gangland fight than a true "civil war"........Again, what is the fucking point.....the specter of civil war by any definition is real jerkoff--thanks for pushing the obvious simpleton..... My guess is this is simply the anti-Bush bandwagon topic of the moment for you, and jerkoffs like you who root for failure simply spew the headline without knowing what the fuck you are talking about anyway, whether it is real or not.... How about Pakistan--is there civil war going on there douchebag, by the same standards you think you are setting here......how about the fact that Iraqi's , SUNNI IRAQIs, are waging war against Al Qaeda...does that mean anything to you mental midget.... Once again you displayed you are a clueless blowhard with a remarkable ability to spew endless idiocy with no shame..........you would be better served to simply shut the fuck up......stick a Halliburton annual report in your cunt, and chant "no war for oil" a few times to ease the pain of displaying your horrific stupidity on this thread.. Show some pride son and melt away......embarassing....
__________________ "ONE MIGHT CONCLUDE, from his conduct over the past three years that George W. Bush was put on this earth to do two things: First, to lead the United States into the third millennium, with all its terrifying challenges and wondrous opportunities. And second, to drive liberals insane. He's succeeding brilliantly at both." -John Podhoretz |
|
03-13-06, 02:28 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
AND YEAH FUCKFACE WE ALL TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!! |
|
03-13-06, 02:34 PM
| ||||
| ||||
|
your like a little spoiled 7 yr old kid who knows hes wrong and just tries to deflect everything with anger and "well he did this" and "she said that" Quite frankly Iggy i couldnt give two fucking shits if there are anymore "feelgood" stories to come out of the clusterfuck in Iraq CAse closed is the fact that we made a HUGE mistake by going there and some people have a hard time owning up to that , so i guess we have to blame the media for not backing up the mistake by letting everyone know that were turning baghdad into one giant reach-a-round fest. so sorry the press is hitting you in the head with cold hard facts of the total fuckup that your so proud to be behind |
|
03-13-06, 02:47 PM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
In sum, you got destroyed son....own up to that cunt
__________________ "ONE MIGHT CONCLUDE, from his conduct over the past three years that George W. Bush was put on this earth to do two things: First, to lead the United States into the third millennium, with all its terrifying challenges and wondrous opportunities. And second, to drive liberals insane. He's succeeding brilliantly at both." -John Podhoretz |
|
03-13-06, 02:50 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
your cunt has now been plowed how does it feel sally |
|
03-13-06, 03:10 PM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
Not that it was needed, but your last post was the perfect summary that truly grabs the essence of your idiocy......that is your "soundbite" for your performance on this thread... Dickhead...never reproduce......never
__________________ "ONE MIGHT CONCLUDE, from his conduct over the past three years that George W. Bush was put on this earth to do two things: First, to lead the United States into the third millennium, with all its terrifying challenges and wondrous opportunities. And second, to drive liberals insane. He's succeeding brilliantly at both." -John Podhoretz |
|
03-13-06, 03:21 PM
| ||||
| ||||
|
im impressed iggy whats this like the 14th post of you just calling me an imbecille , damn son your posts are chock full of substance either you cut and paste loooooooong booorrrrrrring necon tinted blog articles or you resort to name calling. Thats mighty impressive messageboard strategy. Are you sure RUmmy didnt give you a call to help out with the effort over there in the middle east man , woman or goat whatever it takes Iggy ...you need to get laid badly Ill even chip in a few bucks |
|
03-13-06, 04:13 PM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
And imbecile (again??), your crying about the name calling can not hide the ass kicking you got on substance (and that word is used lightly to describe your contributions)....you got destroyed, and easily....you look and sounded like the schmuck that you are, and nothing can hide that.... Post "long and boring" neo-con articles... ......."long" to you because you do not have the intellect to get beyond a Yahoo headline, and "boring" because it does not fit on a protest sign .....I know, you are used to Dr Suess books....I should keep that in mindAnother classic brainfart by you..... fucking classic bxbomb...you truly are an imbecile.......one fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish... jerkoff
__________________ "ONE MIGHT CONCLUDE, from his conduct over the past three years that George W. Bush was put on this earth to do two things: First, to lead the United States into the third millennium, with all its terrifying challenges and wondrous opportunities. And second, to drive liberals insane. He's succeeding brilliantly at both." -John Podhoretz |
|
03-13-06, 04:15 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| The Quiet Consensus on Iraq (another excellent read by VDH) | igloo | Useless Blabber | 5 | 10-18-05 07:13 AM |
| IRAQ VOTES: THE ISSUES (good read) | igloo | Useless Blabber | 1 | 01-27-05 09:21 AM |
| Interesting read on public opinion polls in Iraq | igloo | Useless Blabber | 13 | 09-26-04 10:09 PM |
| AMERICA & IRAQ and the need for RESOLVE (excellent read) | igloo | Useless Blabber | 6 | 09-23-04 04:49 PM |
| Please read, why i dont support a war in iraq right now | t0nythelover | Useless Blabber | 8 | 09-10-02 05:36 PM |
Linear Mode
