Letters to the Editor
-
Body count
Why is everyone so focused on counting dead bodies, theirs or ours, without CONTEXT. Context = not enough doctors, not enough medical facilities, a huge refugee crisis, ethnic cleansing of Baghdad, children unable to go to school, unemployment, public health crises of insufficient clean water - no trash pick-up - no electricity, a country in ruins. What is the success? Iraq was a beautiful country filled with intelligent, productive people, living under the thumb of an aging, self-deluded dictator. Time would have resolved the problem of the dictator; no one lives forever. And the beautiful country would have survived and changed over time. We destroyed the entire infrastructure of a nation. I don't know how we can even use the word "success" without gagging on it.
-
There will be no report
It's worse than you think, Joe.
First, we learned that the long-awaited "Petraeus Report" on the status of the Iraq occupation would be written, not by Gen. David Petraeus, but by Bush aides in the White House.
Now, in a truly astonishing turn of events, we learn that the report will not be written by White House aides. It will not be written at all.
The Washington Times is reporting that there will be no written report presented to congress on the status of the occupation. There will be charts and there will be oral testimony, but there will be no report.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070907/NATION04/109070053&template=nextpage
A senior military officer said there will be no written presentation to the president on security and stability in Iraq. "There is no report. It is an assessment provided by them by testimony," the officer said.
The only hard copy will be Gen. Petraeus' opening statement to Congress, scheduled for Monday, along with any charts he will use in explaining the results of the troop surge in Baghdad over the past several months.
That testimony will follow the meeting of the president, Gen. Petraeus and Mr. Crocker at the White House.
Gen. Petraeus is expected to tell the president the surge is working but that more work is needed. He is not expected to recommend withdrawing significant numbers of U.S. troops, as the U.S. troop presence is still needed to bolster the slowly growing Iraqi security forces' capabilities.
The picture presented by Mr. Crocker will be critical of the new Iraqi government for not doing more to foster political stability.
There is no report.
After months of expectations, it comes to this. There will be no written report on the status of the occupation. The long-awaited Petraeus Report turns out to be nothing more than another repetition of the same old talking point - we're makin' progress.
The Magical Month of September was never anything more than another delaying tactic. Bush is laughing all the way to January 20, 2009.
Meanwhile, the Democrats in congress still can't summon the courage to bring this nightmare to an end.
-
What it takes to "win" in Iraq
A million troops on the ground!
Charlie
-
NOW you clarify!
Oh DON'T believe the hype. Well here I was getting all ready to BELIEVE it all. Thanks for the heads up!
-
gotta wonder how this "no report" report is going to play with our boots on the ground .... and with the Iraqi army ...
not to mention the families of those killed and wounded in the stepped up hostilities that apparently constituted "the surge" ...
There "must" be other valid parameter besides to casualty counts that go "up" or "down", no? What about "identified and disarmed IEDs?" or "thwarted car bombs?" What about electricity and clean water?
It certainly looks like more "whack a mole on steroids" to me.
-
In a few months, even the gullible will have forgotten the report.
Bush might get a temporary political bump that he wanted from this report among the very gullible, but in a month or two, his support will be back where it is and probably worse. This isn't much different than the much hyped Iraqi election of early 2005 (conveniently scheduled just after the American election). That is now remembered as little more than a sad joke. If anything, in the long run it hurt Bush's credibility even more.
-
the point of all this
let's not for a moment forget what's going on here. The Bush Administration's entire purpose now is to kick the war down the road for another 18 months, leave office smelling sweet to the Base, and then they can all turn around and blame the Democrats for losing the war.
Bush, Cheney, and their henchmen and women, are focused solely on avoiding blame from the Base. That's it.
That's the sum-total of what's going on here. These guys all should have been impeached, convicted, and imprisoned a year ago or more. We had plenty of evidence to impeach both the President and Vice President, whatever trolls and enablers may say about impeachable offenses. There are plenty. Just look at the public record.
The GOP wouldn't allow it, and once the Dems took over, all they could think about is taking power in 2009. Bah.
This period in our history will go down as dark indeed. As dark as the McCarthy witch-hunts. Probably a lot worse.
-
Attacking the troops
Why do draft dodgers like Joe Conason find it necessary to attack the troops? What has he ever done in his live to contribute to his country? Petraeus is 100 times the man that Conason is.
-
The "surge"
I heard that Petraeus has been working extra hard training his dog and pony. Rumor has it that the most difficult part is getting the dog to stay on the saddle.
-
I cannot think of any endeavor in which redefining your parameters AFTER the data has been collected is acceptable ...
hell, from reports, these folks attempted (and may have been allowed) to even cherry-pick (or "redefine") the data...
it's called cooking the books, whether it's in accounting, drug trials, or quality control.... to EVEN suggest doing such a thing casts a dark shadow over all participants.
by most accounts, Petraeus is both too smart and too ambitious not to understand the consequences of such impropriety.
-
"Summon the Courage?"
What Democrats need is the VOTES to end the war, and their slim majorities in the House and Senate wont do the trick. Having those votes could have prevented the "Surge" in the first place.
Unfortunately, the only thing that may trump the Bush administration's shell game is an Iraqi insurgent attack (in the Green Zone or elsewhere) that kills a large number of U.S. troops. Then, even Republican constituencies will be screaming bloody hell. Heck, some of 'em might even start joining the LaRouchies, Socialist Party workers and the other fringe groups that now typically dominate anti-Iraq war rallies. When the Joe Six-Packs start marching with "Peace" placards, there may be some hope for the future.
Until then, everyone--Bush, Congress, even voters--will keep moving the goal posts and rationalizing the situation with "what if we leave?" scenarios.
Why is it so hard to admit we're in Iraq forever to establish a foothold in a volatile region that contains the world's largest oil reserves, as well as (thanks, neocons!) strengthening the security of Israel?
Knowing the real truth is going to make it awfully hard for me to endure next week's General Petraeus dog-and-pony show. Im simply going to have to tune it all out.