We'll aways do just well enough in Iraq to never leave
Check out this interview with Gen. Petraeus on the BBC.
In a BBC interview, Gen Petraeus said that recent security gains were "not irreversible" and that the US still faced a "long struggle".
Leaving his post, he said there were "many storm clouds on the horizon which could develop into real problems". Overall he summed up the situation as "still hard but hopeful", saying that progress in Iraq was "a bit more durable" but that the situation there remained fragile.
He said he did not know that he would ever use the word "victory": "This is not the sort of struggle where you take a hill, plant the flag and go home to a victory parade... it's not war with a simple slogan."
Long struggle, not irreversible, still hard, many clouds on the horizon... These aren't words of praise about Iraq being uttered by the General. Once again we hear the "fragile" word. Is that what success is, fragile?
As a resident of Georgia and native Southerner, I wish there had been a permanent Federal occupation here. The entire nation would have been much, much better off.
Kinda like bailing out Ike's surge in Houston with a teaspoon.
Betraeus makes it look like Saddam has his act together.
US Will never win in Iraq because in almost every Iraqi family there is now a member who was killed by US/"coalition" forces (or some private mercenary group like Blackwater) - So these people hate all those occupants (and they have a good reasons to hate them).
So the scenario which those bastards in your government are most likely to follow is to install there permanent military bases and claim to american public that "the situation over there is still fragile" and they will say it over and over - and this will allow to all those greedy bastards in Oil companies to milk Iraqi oil fields, in spite of Iraqi resistance.
El Cid @ 1:
I thought there was?
.
The success of an occupation IS fragile and depends upon the submissiveness of the occupied and the occupiers dissenters.
[/snark]
.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 6:
Who said it? That is pretty good and accurate.
Sept 14 Polling Update
.
Who wins an occupation?
.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 9:
corporations
But "change already happened in Iraq"
You know what would make that "fragile" success stable & turn those storm clouds into blue skies?
A Surge(TM)
.
Dear Gen Petraeus,
How do you define a victorious occupation?
.
VoteForAmerica @ 8:
thanks for the update(s)......no real surprises to me. some will say minnesota is closer than expected that will
change come election time.
constituent @ 10:
Oil companies are still fighting to win. Major setback while China scores.
Well, maybe not "never." McCain did say only 100 years. That's better than never, isn't it?
John McCain - NOPE
beltman713 @ 5:
It's an never ending surge from north of the Mason-Dixon line.
eastbay this morning, SF/Marin next.
here's from earlier:
http://freewayblogger.blogspot.com/2008/09/steinbeck-country.html
I can outlast this war.
Ron @ 14:
haliburton,KBR and many others are making multi millions with the ongoing occupation
Here's an idea, let's ask actual Iraqis if they want us to occupy their country. If they can't make that choice, they aren't all that free, are they?
I hope Obama, if he can overcome GOP voter suppression shenanigans, will thank Betrayus, and his DoD ilk, for his/their service, and ask for their resignation(s).
What we need is a horde of Xtain Amazons riding dinosaurs going into combat,
That will teach those pesky unamerican insurgents a lesson or two.
some along the lines of this
Bushie @ 20:
Clean house!
Jo @ 22:
rhythms with 'war crimes trials' :)
Abraham Jackemoff @ 19:
There was a poll on this way back And I think that more then 80 percent of Iraqis said they want US to leave.
But I am sure that all those "serious" politicians would say to you on this argument of yours that this decision cannot be made by the people itself (since they are just regular folks and not experts) They would claim that only politicians are qualified enough to make this call.
It's similar like that radar base and missile silo in Czech Republic and Poland. People are against it but the politicians in both governments are supporting it. (claiming that there cannot be referendum on this since regular people are not experts on questions of national defence, unlike them of course)
In Czech Republic, according to many polls - something about 65% to 70% of population is against the placement of US radar base on our soil. But our governemt doesn't give a sh.t.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 12:
possible quote from petraeus
"by letting cheney stick his hand up my big wide open ass.....
because i won't tell the American people the truth either."
as long as bush/cheney are in the whitehouse or alive
this general is just another blackwater employee.
dadams @ 25:
Is the economy that bad? Petraeus had to take a 2nd job too?
America: fucking up the world, one day at a time
BennyP @ 27:
excuse me......maybe you are fucking up the world but not I
turn your myoptic opinion to bush/cheney administration
where it belongs.
the average intelligent American does not want war
and especially were against this criminal war
bush/cheney lied us into.
I am sorry, but David Petraus is no American hero, the man he is replacing is an American hero - Admiral William Fallon. Admiral Fallon is a man who had the guts to stick up to Dick Cheney, Petraus is a man who had the guts to steal others ideas and claim them as his own. General Betrayus is really fitting for a man of his low moral character. He is a man who sees war as his only shot at glory, and the longer the war goes on the more chance he has for glory. General Betrayus is the anti-Grant, the polar opposite of Ike, and the kind of scum that has infested the hierarchy of our military thanks to shrub and dick.
Winning this war was defined long ago as never having to say goodbye.
No matter the (false) reasons given for going to Iraq – the intent was to stay. Any other outcome would be seen as a loss to this administration. “Victory” as it is so often touted, means simply an endless occupation.
It didn’t work. This is a quagmire.
dumbstruck @ 16:
The South is now occupied by the same corporations that occupy the rest of the US.
That was the whole point of the American Civil War.
Sure, slavery was part of the issue, because slavery was the engine that ran the economic machine in the South. But slavery itself was certainly not the issue. The issue was which economic engine would spread into the West. The RailRoad Republicans won the war and trashed the South, much as they are doing in Iraq. Reconstruction anyone?
Then roughly a hundred years later (Second World War) the Republicans returned to the South in the form of the Military Industrial Complex and took over the reins of power from the Democrats.
Mission Accomplished!
Permanent Occupation.
Taarak @ 30:
China just closed the first oil deal with Post-Saddam Iraq.
After the Iraqis rejected all the contract offers made by half a dozen Western companies.
Heckuva a job GW !!!
MountainMan23 @ 32:
This was a deal Sadaam had with China in 1997. They’ve now kinda reinstated it. From my understanding, the real slap in the face is that the reserve currency will be in Euros not US Dollars. After all this time, money, and lives lost in this occupation, and they’re right back to where they were in ’97.
Allowing the Chinese in on the oil contracts is America's way of compensating China for financing the debt while major American financial institutions fail. In the process a Chinese middle class will emerge while Americans with inflation and prohibitive taxes will be forced out of consumerism and into manual labor and mandatory national service. The middle man bankers are doing just fine in the exchange. It's a slow and enormous process. Just my speculation.
When did the US military leave Japan and Germany after World War 2??? Oh ya, they haven't. Boy are they ever gonna withdraw fast from Iraq if only the other party is elected.
If we leave "we" don't get a share of the oil revenues.
(By "we" I mean the Military Oil Complex)
fastfeat @ 2:
It may take a while.
Restating the sentiment of others, it was not Bush's intention to even leave. This was obvious to me before we ever invaded the country. I was drawn to the reporting of the Mcclatchy Washington Bureau (Landay, Strobel and Walcott) very early on. Also, Christiane Amanpour and Walter Pincus (WaPo) were also writing some tough pieces against the Administration.
I went to Vietnam between 18-22 years old (3 tours). My whole life growing up, was centered around the idea I would travel to foreign exotic places and have adventures. Even though I was headed to war, it was still viewed by me as an adventure. So, I went with both eyes wide opened. I felt and independence and freedom, I had never known before. Every time, I was rotated to the rear, I spent as much time as possibly with an extended Vietnamese family. They befriended me, and I was soon just like another family member. From them, I learned the truth about the Vietnamese people and their country. It was completely at odds with the official line. For example, I learned the war they were fighting had nothing to do with communism. Theirs was a struggle, which had been going on for centuries, against the Chinese, Gengis Khan, Siamese, Chinese (again), French, Japanese, French (again), and now finally America. "We just want to be free", but we have not achieved it in hundreds of years. But we think the end is close and we have learned to be a very patient people. I asked if they hated Americans. He said some might; those who have been hurt badly, or lost loved ones. But most Vietnamese think Americans could be good friends with us someday. Then he said something which I was unprepared for. I asked why such a small country was wanted by so many enemies, and Leim said, "Food"! We can grow 3-4 crops here a year. Virtually, every acre of the Mekong Delta can be planted. "We can even feed most of China". That was the wealth of Vietnam.
I have been too lengthy creating the foundation for my point. Occupation armies are their for one main reason, to protect their countries interests. In Iraq, most know this is oil. However, their is a more sinister reason afoot. We wanted to create a pro-west/Israeli puppet state, to threaten the rest of the middle-east with. What we did not expect the Iraqi puppet government to stand-up to us and say, "leave". So, now we are listening to all of this "it's a very fragile peace", "war could resume any minute", etc. drivel. I think the masters of evil are planning a way to begin fighting anew. I absolutely do not trust the bastards. They do not think in terms of right/wrong, good/bad, legal/illegal. It is "What can we get away with"? I do not think they feel comfortable with doing this before the election. That is one main reason they are really engaged in such a low-life smear campaign. They must find a way to maintain the occupation.
dadams @ 28:
I was obviously paraphrasing/satirizing the headline to this thread.
Defensive much?
America's 'credibility' is barely running on fumes.
1993. A bombing at WTC leaves 6 dead.
1995. A truck bomb explosion killed 19 Americans at a military base in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.
1998. Two truck bombs detonated within minutes of each other at U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es-Salaam, Tanzania, killing 12 Americans.
2000. Attack on the U.S.S Cole leave 17 dead.
2001. Airplane hijackings lead to the planes being used as weapons to kill Americans, including 2 planes being flown into WTC. In all, approximately 3000 lives are lost.
2003. After the attacks on WTC and subsequent invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, Pres. Bush orders troops into Iraq. At that time, the combined death toll of the 1993, 1995, 1998, 2000, and 2001 attacks, plus the invasion of Afghanistan, was approximately 3,114 lives lost over a 10 year period. 54 of those lives were lost between 1995 and 2000
2008. Osama Bin Laden remains at large. The number of Americans killed in Iraq as a result of the 2003 invasion alone is 4,471 in 5 years, and climbing.
The top military Commander of our armed forces in Iraq sums up the situation as "...still hard, but hopeful..."
That should be of great comfort to number 4,472 and their family...
Seymour Hersh told us back in 2004 that:
Source (New Yorker)
Udon Nomee @ 41:
I'm sure the one MILLION + dead Iraqis, their families, and the 3-4 MILLION displaced Iraqis, are also greatly comforted.
the success has to be fragile because success to the Republicans is a constant presence (or at least until we secure the oil*) - Remember (as Olbermann would put it) the purpose of having a war in Iraq is to have a war in Iraq. So with this in mind how can it be anything but Mission Accomplished?
* the scary part is that the Republicans overwhelming desire to secure the Oil in Iraq for Exxcon and the gang, might just put us to war with China, since the Chinese are working out a deal with the Iraqi's for access to the fields.
These idiots go to war for Oil and they can't even get the Oil? can we now say, without ridicule, that the 4000 plus soldiers who have died there have died for nothing? We didn't secure the government, we didn't secure the civilians, and we didn't secure the oil rights. Mission Failure brought to you by Bushco.
or maybe not, Cheney probably has (somehow) a controlling interest in the Chinese oil market and he will still make his money. I'm just waiting for him to leave Monkeyboy Bush out to dry once he doesn't need him anymore. typical Cheney M.O.
We are 6 months from victory in Iraq. We have always been 6 months from victory in Iraq. We will always be 6 months from victory in Iraq.
Comments are closed on this entry