enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
Page 1 of 2 (21 items)   1 2 Next >
The Surge: did it work?
by Anse

from a story on Yahoo.com about Bob Woodward's new book:

The book titled "The War Within: A Secret White House History 2006-2008," also says that the U.S. troop surge of 2007 was not the primary factor behind the steep drop in violence in Iraq, the Post reported.

Woodward reports "groundbreaking" new covert techniques, beginning in 2007, enabled U.S. military and intelligence officials to locate, target and kill insurgent leaders and key individuals in extremist groups such as al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Woodward did not provide much detail about the covert operations and wrote he was asked to withhold specifics because of national security concerns, the newspaper said.

"The book portrays an administration riven by dissension, either unwilling or slow to confront the deterioration of its strategy in Iraq during the summer and early fall of 2006," The Post said.

obama said it did...just last night...
by Abused
you didn't watch your god last night? I guess he can't raise the dead.....
Re: The Surge: did it work?
by LibLindy9

The troop surge was nothing but a cosmetic change. As the book suggests, the real change was in U.S. techniques and in the behavior and actions of the Iraqi people and their factions.

It's no surprise that the Bush people would take credit though, is it? :)

Since this is 2008
by Sgt_ROCK
I'd suggest Woodward get his clocks fixed.
Re: The Surge: did it work?
by WhatFacts

The actions of our Military in regards to security made huge gains. Violence is way down.

On the other hand, ethnic cleansing, endless blast walls, and a mass exodus of 2 million people helped a bunch!

On the Political front... well the Surge FAILED!

Iraq has 80 Billion dollars in Oil Profits sitting around and not one penny to the Good 'ol USA!

The purpose for the surge has not been met.

Re: Since this is 2008
by Anse

Thirty thousand additional troops is all it took to bring peace to a country the size of California?

I don't buy it.

Re: The Surge: did it work?
by HST-libertarian
Well it didn't HURT! So what if NOT GETTING OUT when Obama said it was lost is what won it? The surge let us stay there long enough for the new tactics to take effect (and you lefties can't stand that we're getting out without having to admit defeat)...
Re: The Surge: did it work?
by Anse

HST-libertarian:
Well it didn't HURT! So what if NOT GETTING OUT when Obama said it was lost is what won it? The surge let us stay there long enough for the new tactics to take effect (and you lefties can't stand that we're getting out without having to admit defeat)...

We have not been defeated. We won. We toppled Saddam. What the FUCK else are we supposed to be doing in that country?

Dammit, we cannot allow these dumbfuck morons in the GOP run this country anymore.

Re: The Surge: did it work?
by WhatFacts

HST-libertarian:
Well it didn't HURT! So what if NOT GETTING OUT when Obama said it was lost is what won it? The surge let us stay there long enough for the new tactics to take effect (and you lefties can't stand that we're getting out without having to admit defeat)...

Are you saying we have won?

Again... where is the Political gains. Iraq finally has Oil money flowing and what does Iraq do? They say " Leave now, and we'll do the Political stuff after you are gone".

Re: The Surge: did it work?
by RasputinsLiver

In a word.

No.

Sure, violence is down.

But the ultimate goal of the surge was to provide a window of opportunity for the Iraqi congress to get their act together, reconcile, and get their national government off the floor.

They failed miserably in this, even taking an extended vacation with nothing accomplished while our troops were doing their part and getting killed and wounded for them.

The violence is down. That's a good thing. But the Iraqi government has not done it's part and there seems to be no resolve in them to do so. And appears they never will.

But, I suspect that's what the neo-cons, BushCo, expect and want so America has to maintain a permanent presence, an occupation, there in perpetuity.

Re: The Surge: did it work?
by HST-libertarian

WhatFacts:

HST-libertarian:
Well it didn't HURT! So what if NOT GETTING OUT when Obama said it was lost is what won it? The surge let us stay there long enough for the new tactics to take effect (and you lefties can't stand that we're getting out without having to admit defeat)...

Are you saying we have won?

Again... where is the Political gains. Iraq finally has Oil money flowing and what does Iraq do? They say " Leave now, and we'll do the Political stuff after you are gone".

You are typical lefty - trying to spin victory as defeat! Why do you hate America (and the troops) so much...


Re: The Surge: did it work?
by LibLindy9

The "Surge" had nothing to do with how long we stayed there, and Sen. Obama was not in charge of our military or able to make such a decision.

We were "defeated" the moment we made the stupid mistake of invading. Your side can't stand to admit that, though.

Another hypocritical post of epic proportions
by ErictheRight

Lessee....this is "Bush's war", a "war of choice", and Bush's "failure" and/or "quagmire". The failings in Iraq, inability to follow through in Afghanistan, and weakening of our national security response were all his fault.

Now with the surge and more effective military techniques actually working and paying dividend, the "Bush people would take credit" for it?? How dare they!

Do you even realize what a duplicitous idiot you sound like?

You're absolutely transparent: things go badly, Bush gets the blame... things turn around for the better, how dare Bush take credit!

Re: Another hypocritical post of epic proportions
by LibLindy9

Do you even understand the meaning of the word "hypocrisy," Eric?

The invasion was a mistake, and should never have been undertaken. It's killed thounsands, displaced millions, and bogged our forces down in an occupation we can't win. The Georgia situation alone shows how badly damaged our credibility is as a result.

But given that situation, there has been a downturn in violence of late, due to a lot of things including better techniques in dealing with Iraqis and a change in Iraqi attitudes. The "Surge" is, as I said, mostly cosmetic and had little to do with what improvements there have been.

Do you understand my comments a little better now, little boy? :)

Perfectly, yes.
by ErictheRight

I understand the meaning of the word 'hypocrisy' and how you personify it.

You blame Bush for things not going smoothly, every misstep in Iraq (or globally apparently) is his fault.

Yet, when techniques in Iraq begin to succeed, al Qaeda is fleeing, and al Sadr would rather bargain than attack, you accuse the Bush Admin of "trying to take credit" for it.

That's Bizzaroworld hypocritical duplicity. and it's impossible for you to deny it, ya partisan flake.

Page 1 of 2 (21 items)   1 2 Next >
View as RSS news feed in XML