The Iraq “surge†is working, according to Sen. John McCain and President Bush. It’s true that violence is down and troop and civilian deaths are down.
But the test of the surge, Slate’s Michael Kinsley argues, is simple: “Has it allowed us to reduce troop levels to below where they were when it started? The answer is no.†That was, after all, Bush’s goal in justifying the surge: “If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.â€
Last year, the Bush administration said the goal was to reduce troop levels to 100,000 in the months after the surge. Now the administration says that troop levels will remain at pre-surge levels — about 130,000 — indefinitely.
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
85 Comments
Does this surprise anyone? Bush doesn’t know what he’s doing, and he has yet to utter an honest word about this war yet!
I thought the dems were elected in the mide-terms to get us out. They sure lied to you. Where is the outrage?
DUH! If we keep a zillion troops in country FOREVER they can keep things under control. But, the stated goal was to give the Baghdad regime time to get their act together. Have they done so? Is the several hundred thousand strong ARI ready to handle a few dead-enders in their last throes?
“weeks, maybe months, definitely not years”
We will have more troops stationed there after the draw down than we did before the surge. Al-sadr has gratiously granted an extension of his truce, in order that the U.S. may eliminate more of his opposition. When we do leave the Shite on Shite violence will resume, but not until the Shite/Sunni battle is decided.
Don’t ya just hate it when something is successful? :)
We can be proud of our troops for their sacrifice and service.
Anything else is potato peelings on the floor and peeled onions invoked tears.
It is becoming increasingly difficult for the democrats to stand and say republicans lost the war, while we are winning.
It must also be difficult saying you are against the war, yet continue to support it (with funds and with troops).
I don’t know how they do it.
Funny how the cease fire is doing more to reduce soldier deaths than any escalation. Funny how the Bush regime and the corporate media doesn’t care to mention that.
“We can be proud of our troops for their sacrifice and service.”
I agree. Now, when can we be proud of the ARI and THEIR service?
They sure lied to you
Yep, they got their Honorary Republican Replicate membership card in the mail.
If they didn’t mention “it” Doug, you wouldn’t know about it would you?
Perhaps 130,000 armed troops that are familiar with the territory and proper methodologies is working?
Of course Doug, you wouldn’t want to give too much credit to the troops, that would be against your ideologies. :)
Anybody know whether Blackwater is sending additional “employees” for each soldier that comes home?
“Yep, they got their Honorary Republican Replicate membership card in the mail.”
You people voted for their lies, not me.
fleet, who voted for what preceded them?
The Iraq War Resolution was bi-partisian.
The situation will be remedied this time with a super dem. majority, and a dem. president. We just underestimated the obstructionist repubs.
lindainks55,
Blackwater is mainly a Department of State employed contractor – not a Department of Defense Contractor.
Sure, phantom. Viva la McGovern!
Blackwater is mainly a Department of State employed contractor – not a Department of Defense Contractor
So how many sub-contracting forms do they have to fill out to kill one Iraqi citizen?
Regular, I am aware of who is responsible for hiring the American mercenaries.
“So how many sub-contracting forms do they have to fill out to kill one Iraqi citizen?”
Uh, none if it is the usual no-bid contract!
“Is the surge really a success?”
Why is it the DemLibs just hate to win? What is it about their psychological makeup that seems to make them want to lose all the time. Is it because it’s easier?
I hope they can get some therapy.
He may be a 25-year veteran of Washington politics, and he may be a two-time leading GOP presidential candidate, but John McCain apparently still needs to work a bit on his “message discipline” problem.
John McCain said Monday that to win the White House he must convince a war-weary country that U.S. policy in Iraq is succeeding. If he can’t, “then I lose. I lose,” the Republican said.
He quickly backed off that remark.
“Let me not put it that stark,” the likely GOP nominee told reporters on his campaign bus. “Let me just put it this way: Americans will judge my candidacy first and foremost on how they believe I can lead the county both from our economy and for national security. Obviously, Iraq will play a role in their judgment of my ability to handle national security.”
“If I may, I’d like to retract ‘I’ll lose.’ But I don’t think there’s any doubt that how they judge Iraq will have a direct relation to their judgment of me, my support of the surge,” McCain added. “Clearly, I am tied to it to a large degree.”
Clearly, he is tied to Iraq, which is possibly why he was right the first time.
I find it fascinating that McCain, even now, just blurts out the first thing that comes into his head. McCain has been on the campaign trail now for over a year — and that’s just this cycle — answering questions about, among other things, Iraq. But he can’t quite answer a question about what will happen if Americans reject his policy come November? As someone hoping McCain loses, it gives me hope that he has a habit of answering questions one way, and then wanting to give a different answer a few moments later.
— from crooksandliars.com
“…he has a habit of answering questions one way, and then wanting to give a different answer a few moments later.”
Is this about Mrs. Obama?
Why is it the DemLibs just hate to win?
Box, let’s play US-Iraqi tiddly winks. You’re US, I’m Iraqi. We both start with the standard dime-sized tiddly winks. I have you fought to a stand-still so you break out a handfull of 1/2 doller sized tiddlies and I stay with the std. I have you fought to a standstill. You break out the dinner plates and I keep the dime-sized. We’re still at a standstill. You break out manhole covers, I keep the dimesized tiddlies and I still have you at a standstill. YOU ARE NOT WINNING!
Is the surge really a success?
Sure, as long as the cease fire stands.
“YOU ARE NOT WINNING”
Are too.
By the by, old Al sadr isn’t doing this for fun. Anyone know what his cookie is for keeping his boys at bay?
“Anyone know what his cookie is for keeping his boys at bay?”
He gets to keep his cookies alive.
Fleet,
Tell me you are kidding. That is the dumbest thing I’ve heard you say.
Regular
Posted February 26, 2008 at 1:25 pm | Permalink
Don’t ya just hate it when something is successful?
Sigh…did you read the article Regular. It’s not successful. The surge’s purpose was not to reduce deaths, although that was an added bonus, it was so the Iraqi gov’t could get their sh*t together. They haven’t, and we will have more troops in Iraq after the surge than we did before.
When you constantly keep changing what success is, of course we will never have it.
Since day one, the liberals and left have been setting up different conditions for what success is everytime one of them is met.
Should I go over the list?
United States
about half the size of Russia
Population 301,139,947 (July 2007 est.
GDP – per capita (PPP) $46,000 (2007 est.)
GDP (purchasing power parity):$13.86 trillion (2007 est.)
Labor force 153.1 million (includes unemployed) (2007 est.)
This Population Bulletin will focus on these issues with regard to the 1.4 million active-duty uniformed personnel currently serving in the four military branches of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and their 1.9 million dependents
Iraq
Area – comparative slightly more than twice the size of Idaho
GDP (purchasing power parity):$100 billion (2007 est.)
GDP – per capita (PPP):$3,600 (2007 est.)
Labor force 7.4 million (2004 est.)
And if you believe the Shrubites, the enemy force it the total population of the world minus him, so your guess is as good as any other.
Compare the figures. And we’ve been at this HOW LONG????
Psssttt….we are not winning.
sol-
He knows his ass would be kicked. It’s called the US Military.
Population:27,499,638 (July 2007 est.)
oops forgot one
Since day one, the liberals and left have been setting up different conditions for what success is everytime one of them is met.
Success is being done! Getting the heck out of there! Not having to go back every 14 years to do the same shoddy job over and over no matter how much your buttbuddies are making!
fleettwood
Posted February 26, 2008 at 2:43 pm | Permalink
sol-
He knows his ass would be kicked. It’s called the US Military.
Question is, why is he still around then?
Follow the logic. He has the ability to stir up more trouble in Iraq than any single person. So if we could kick his ass, why don’t we? Why is his cease fire still a threat to us?
Ghotiphaze,
It depends on what you call winning.
“Success is being done! Getting the heck out of there!”
Viva la McGovern!
But the test of the surge, Slate’s Michael Kinsley argues, is simple: “Has it allowed us to reduce troop levels to below where they were when it started? The answer is no.” That was, after all, Bush’s goal in justifying the surge:
—————-
Oh. I thought the surge was what Bush said it was before it began.
“On January 10, 2007, President Bush announced changes in the administration’s political and military strategy in the Iraq War during a national television speech broadcast. The speech and underlying strategy had been crafted under the working title “The New Way Forward.” In the address Bush stated “America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence and bring security to the people of Baghdad.”–Wikipedia
“Should I go over the list?”
Why not go over the list of reasons for going to war in the first place?
Connection to 9/11.
WMD.
Al Qaeda.
A threat to America.
He was a BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD man.
A threat to Israel.
To spread Democracy.
Just ‘cuz we can.
Rape rooms.
Ever since 9/11……………….
To “free” the Iraqis.
Just ‘cuz we can.
Yada, yada, yada, 9/11.
How about THAT list?
”I think Sadr’s strategic self-interest is served by continuing the cease-fire in part because he’d take heavy losses in another fight with the U.S. military,” said Stephen Biddle, a senior fellow for defense policy at the Council for Foreign Relations.
Nate, back to the tiddly winks analogy. If you keep bringing out bigger and bigger clubs for a vastly smaller opponent and still get your (!) kicked, spin, gyrate, whirl, twist, and revolve it however you want, you’re still losing!
Tell me again, sol, just how stupid was my statement?
Good post Outlander.
Like I said, the liberals keep changing what success is to suit their anti-war political agenda.
sol. How do you like being surrounded by ws and capn and jr and ghotophaze and all the other losers?
Fleet.
Follow the logic. He has the ability to stir up more trouble in Iraq than any single person. So if we could kick his ass, why don’t we? Why is his cease fire still a threat to us?
”I think Sadr’s strategic self-interest is served by continuing the cease-fire in part because he’d take heavy losses in another fight with the U.S. military,” said Stephen Biddle, a senior fellow for defense policy at the Council for Foreign Relations.
“he’d take heavy losses in another fight with the U.S. military,”
You think he gives a rat’s ass about his foot soldiers? You may buy that, I don’t.
ghotophaze and all the other losers
to have you call me a loser really makes my day. That means I’ve failed once again to become a scum-sucking leach.
Al-Sadr is just biding his time. His culture is one of patience.
“Since day one, the liberals and left have been setting up different conditions for what success is everytime one of them is met.’
It was Bush who said the surge was to give the Baghdad regime and ARI an opportunity to take over. So let them. It was also the Bush administration that told os (weeks, maybe months, definitely not years.”
It is the RIGHT, not the left who keeps changing the definition as they continuously lower the bar for Baghdad’s performance.
The surge worked. The Iraqui government didn’t. Time to go home
“Now the administration says that troop levels will remain at pre-surge levels — about 130,000 — indefinitely.”
Told ya.
The surge is working like a cop camping on a front porch stops domestic violence.
But there was never any intention of leaving Iraq.
littlejohn
Posted February 26, 2008 at 3:12 pm | Permalink
The surge worked. The Iraqui government didn’t. Time to go home
Amen.
Hey Fleet,
Sadr is the admitted leader of a terrorist organization that targets the US military. Why is it he hasn’t been eliminated?
Sol, wondering if the answer to your question lies within the complex relationship between the Iranians, the Shiites who hold power in the current Iraqi government, and that al Sadr is Shia. Not to mention that it is my opinion that going after al Sadr at this point would really muddle things up there with increased “insurgent” attacks on the U.S. military present.
“Sadr is the admitted leader of a terrorist organization that targets the US military. Why is it he hasn’t been eliminated?”
Now sol you’re smarter than that.
The same reason bin Laden hasn’t been caught or killed.
The same reason Wile E Coyote never catches the road runner.
Do you also call this success? http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080226/ts_nm/afghan_usa_qaeda_dc_1
littlejohn
Posted February 26, 2008 at 3:12 pm | Permalink
Yes, succinct and dead on littlejohn!!
“The surge worked. The Iraqui government didn’t. Time to go home” littlejohn Posted February 26, 2008 at 3:12 pm
—————————
We’ve used all these words and never said it as well as you did!
littlejohn – well said
Until the Iraqi’s learn to wipe their own ass, we’ll be there doing it for them.
Until the Iraqi’s learn to wipe their own ass, we’ll be there doing it for them.
And you can bet that they never will learn. We helped put a dysfunctional government in power. To whose advantage is this?
I’ll have the bumper stickers printed up immediately littlejohn. :D
If only life were so simple…
Regular-
Life is often not simple at all. However, in this case, the simplest solution is the best. We need to start drawing down our troops. If the Iraquis can fix their problems fine, but it is obvious that we have done all we can for them. It is time to leave.
it really is that simple. I did not support the preemptive strike in Iraq to start with, much to the chagrin of my conservative friends. However, once we committed boots on the ground, it was time to get the job done and go home. Militarily they got the job done. Politically, the Iraquis have languished in behind their wall of protection, the US MIlitary. They have not done what they needed to do, and make little progress.
Time for our boys to come home.
littlejohn,
Sort of like those scrawny Colonists way back then, who were getting their butts every which way but Sunday. Even after the French helped them, it took until the 1790s before they got the Constitution and Bill of Rights settled. Such incompetent people to take 15+ years to re-create a country eh! :)
Regular-
I understand your position. And in the past, I have defended such a posiiton, because I know what is likely to happen when we leave. Unfortunately, I don;t believe there is anything the US can do about it. The iraquis have not taken the necessary steps to reconcile with each other. Hell, perhaps it is not even achievable. In any case, We need to remove ourselves from this mess. Bring the boys home.
Then there was that Civil War thing…
“Then there was that Civil War thing”
And that was our war, not somebody elses. And it had it’s own travesties.
“Then there was that Civil War thing…”
Which the European powers of the time largely and WISELY stayed out of.
Hum,
Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds and Sufis.
In no particular order are kind of like Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and AGW-Greens.
At least that’s they way it seems by they get along on this blog most of the time.
Such incompetent people to take 15+ years to re-create a country eh!
___
Good Point, Regular
Thats why I’m sure we’ll be in Iraq for at least ten more years, we’d be stupid to pull out and let it all go to hell. I still don’t think we should have invaded in the first place.
War of 1812
Mexican War
Theres two options really on the table, pull out and start drawing down troop numbers, and watch Iraq spiral into their own civil war and watch hundreds of thousands of Iraqs, insurgents, and muslim extremists kill eachother. Or we could stay their and mop up the mess Bush got us into by keeping the peace until Iraq’s government can learn to stand on their own feet.
War with natives…
Mormon wars…
Boxer rebellion…
Well hey go join the occupation James!
I’m sure they need keyboard workers. Grab your gear!
Sure J R, they actually take people that don’t have a yellow stripe down their back like some on this blog.
Well let us hear from ya when ya get to Iraq James.
I didn’t lose anything there. And my kid isn’t looking for anything there either.
Iraqies have it tough, they have to settle their Civil War while trying to form their government. Mabe the just aren’t ready for democracy.
We had been the United States and had formed our govt. before the civil war.
Regular
Posted February 26, 2008 at 6:08 pm | Permalink
Sure J R, they actually take people that don’t have a yellow stripe down their back like some on this blog.
proving once again how really small you are
Actually, it should be spelled “uranidiot.”
“An” is used when there is a word following that starts with a vowel.
Deaths in Iraq…down. ALQ in disarray … read what the terrorists think about the surge… http://www.thespectrum.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080214/OPINION/802140339
The surge is working… our troops on the ground want to make this work… and are making it work… Stop the bitching abount reps or democrats… Our young Americans have made this effort turn around… I saw a Marine cry in Haditha on television last night saying this was worth it… No injuries on this deployment… not one fire fight… in the same town where he saw his budy loose both arms last year… BTW Iraqi chidlren were running around behind him playing
Regular,
“Those scrawny Colonists” wanted what they fought for. Can you say the same for the Iraqi people? The Iraqis who left their homeland didn’t leave to begin anew, they left because bush’s war of choice made staying too dangerous. Do they even understand democracy, let alone want to fight for it?
“If they didn’t mention “it” Doug, you wouldn’t know about it would you?”
Air America Radio isn’t corporate media, neither is Democracy Now! or the BBC. The American soldiers had absolutely nothing to do with the cease fire. However there is one sure way not to get blown up or shot, it’s to stop the illegal occupation but that would be bad for neocon business interests.
I still think it was amazing how we got all the troops out of Germany within just a few years after World War II. Wait a minute? You say they’re still there 63 years later? Has Michael Kinsley noticed?
One Trackback
[...] WE Blog wrote an interesting post today on Is the surge really a success?Here’s a quick excerptThe Iraq “surge” is working, according to Sen. John McCain and President Bush…. [...]