MERGED-> the surge goes flaccid + Iraq successful: Cheney + US nears 4000 dead - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-17-2008, 12:53 PM   #16
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 38,315
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Poor Cheney, he just wants to be heard. He's probably one of the most irrelevant VPs we've had in awhile. The only time you ever heard about him the last 6 years(for he was somewhat "vital" in the beginning) is when he was being hospitalized or when he was supporting torture.
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 03-17-2008, 12:53 PM   #17
Blue Crack Addict
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 29,682
Local Time: 09:22 PM
http://forum.interference.com/t185140.html
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 04:38 PM   #18
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,305
Local Time: 06:22 PM
Anyone that wants to get

Out of Iraq

there is only one candidate to support.

Quote:
Clinton says "we cannot win" Iraq war
Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:32pm EDT

By Jeff Mason

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Hillary Clinton charged on Monday the Iraq war may cost Americans $1 trillion and add strain to the sagging U.S. economy as she made her case for a prompt U.S. troop pullout from a war "we cannot win."

This week marks the fifth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, but the economy's woes competed for attention as the top issue facing voters when they choose their next president in November.

Clinton, the former first lady who is trying to convince Americans she has foreign policy gravitas, hurled criticism over Iraq at her two rivals, Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama and Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain.

New York Sen. Clinton pointedly noted that while Obama insists he will withdraw U.S. troops in Iraq within 16 months of taking office, his former foreign policy adviser, Samantha Power, had said he might not follow through on the pledge.

"In uncertain times, we cannot afford uncertain leadership,"
__________________
deep is online now  
Old 03-17-2008, 04:43 PM   #19
Blue Crack Addict
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 29,682
Local Time: 09:22 PM


silly defeat-o-crats!
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 05:26 PM   #20
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 15,612
Local Time: 09:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
Anyone that wants to get

Out of Iraq

there is only one candidate to support.

SOME of us

knew back in 2003

that we cannot win this war.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 03-17-2008, 05:33 PM   #21
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Poor Cheney, he just wants to be heard. He's probably one of the most irrelevant VPs we've had in awhile. The only time you ever heard about him the last 6 years(for he was somewhat "vital" in the beginning) is when he was being hospitalized or when he was supporting torture.
What about when he dropped the F-BOMB on Pat Leahy or accidently shot his friend?

But, if your point is that you're tired of Dick Chaney as vice-president and can't wait for Mitt Romney to take over the office...then I agree.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 06:01 PM   #22
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 38,315
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500


What about when he dropped the F-BOMB on Pat Leahy or accidently shot his friend?

But, if your point is that you're tired of Dick Chaney as vice-president and can't wait for Mitt Romney to take over the office...then I agree.
How could I forget those? My point is I actually think Cheney's legacy will be worse than Bush's...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 03-17-2008, 06:57 PM   #23
Blue Crack Addict
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 29,682
Local Time: 09:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500

But, if your point is that you're tired of Dick Chaney as vice-president and can't wait for Mitt Romney to take over the office...then I agree.



let it be known.

i would prefer Mitt to Dick.

(that almost sounds heterosexual).
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 10:10 PM   #24
Refugee
 
Infinity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,188
Local Time: 07:22 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080319/...r_wh/bush_iraq

Here is Mr. Bush saying how he thinks Iraq has been successful.

__________________
Infinity is offline  
Old 03-19-2008, 02:33 PM   #25
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,837
Local Time: 10:22 PM
(CBS/AP) On the eve of the five-year anniversary of the start of the war with Iraq, Americans continue to think the results of the war have not been worth the loss of American lives and the other costs of attacking Iraq, according to a new CBS News poll.

Today 29 percent of Americans say the results of the war were worth it; 64 percent say they were not.

In August 2003, less than six months after the beginning of the war, Americans were divided as the whether or not the results of the war were worth it. Opinion reached a low point in March 2006 - when only one in four Americans said the war was worth the costs.

Support today breaks heavily along partisan lines. Sixty-two percent of Republicans say the results of the war with Iraq were worth the costs, while only 10 percent of Democrats and 25 percent of Independents agree. In fact, belief among Republicans that the war was worth it has risen 11 points since March 2006, while support among Democrats and Independents has remained largely the same.


Meanwhile, in Iraq on Tuesday, Vice President Dick Cheney played the part of backroom power broker for two days and came away with pledges from Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds to firm up a new blueprint for U.S.-Iraq relations that will stretch beyond the Bush presidency.

Cheney flew in a cargo plane to Iraqi Kurdistan in the north to finish two days of private meetings with powerful politicians in Iraq. On Monday, he had talks with officials in Baghdad - even venturing outside the secured Green Zone to dine and have private discussions.

Topics ranged from security in Iraq to Iran's rising influence in Mideast, but a key item was about crafting a long-term agreement between the U.S. and Iraq, plus a narrower deal to define the legal basis for continued U.S. troop presence.

The deal would take the place of a U.N. Security Council resolution that expires in December, the same time Bush will be packing up to leave office. The administration says the deal will not seek permanent U.S. bases in Iraq or codify troop levels, nor tie the hands of a future commander in chief as some Democrats fear

Administration officials say they probably will not seek Senate approval of the plan because the agreement will not be a treaty that provides Iraq with specific security guarantees. This position has prompted a backlash in Congress, where Democrats have proposed legislation that would render the agreement null and void without the Senate's blessing.

Democrats and some Republicans have questioned whether the 2002 authorization of force in Iraq still applies legally because it referred to the need to get rid of Saddam Hussein and eliminate the threat of weapons of mass destruction. Since the 2003 invasion, Hussein has been captured and executed, and no weapons of mass destruction were ever found.

Cheney advisers said that President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, made clear on Monday that even though the Kurds have a seniautonomous region in northern Iraq, they were completely committed to making the area work within an Iraqi state.

Cheney was warmly greeted in Irbil by Massoud Barzani, head of the regional administration in the semiautonomous Kurdish area. "We are certainly counting on President Barzani's leadership to help us conclude a new strategic relationship between the United States and Iraq, as well as to pass crucial pieces of national legislation in the months ahead," Cheney said.

Barzani said the Kurds are committed to being "part of the solution, and not part of the problem."

"I would like to reiterate our commitment that we will continue to play a positive role in order to build a new Iraq - an Iraq with a foundation of a great federal, democratic, pluralistic, free Iraq," Barzani said.

Cheney spent Monday night at Balad Air Base, northwest of Baghdad. On Tuesday morning, before he headed to northern Iraq, he spoke at an outdoor troop rally, saying that as long as freedom is suppressed in the Mideast, the region will remain a place of "stagnation, resentment and violence ready for export."

Later in the day, Cheney flew to Oman, continuing his 10-day trip to the Mideast, which will include visits to Saudi Arabia, Israel, the Palestinian territory and Turkey.


This poll was conducted among a random sample of 844 adults nationwide, interviewed by telephone March 15-17, 2008. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus three percentage points. The error for subgroups is higher.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 03-19-2008, 09:19 PM   #26
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Flyover country
Posts: 12,776
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
(that almost sounds heterosexual).


I disagree with your statement that Cheney is the most irrelevant VP ever, BVS. In terms of impact on policy, Cheney may actually be one of if not the most relevant VP we've had. Unfortunately.
__________________
My business! | My hobby!
Diemen is offline  
Old 03-19-2008, 09:19 PM   #27
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Flyover country
Posts: 12,776
Local Time: 08:22 PM
oops, double
__________________
My business! | My hobby!
Diemen is offline  
Old 03-20-2008, 08:35 AM   #28
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,837
Local Time: 10:22 PM
Normal

By Farah Stockman
Globe Staff / March 20, 2008

WASHINGTON - On the fifth anniversary of the Iraq war, President Bush delivered a speech yesterday at the Pentagon warning of "serious consequences for the world's economy" if the United States were to withdraw from Iraq and Al Qaeda were to seize control of the country's vast oil resources.

Later in the president's speech, when addressing the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Bush talked not only of the Americans who lost their lives, but of the large number who lost their jobs.

"More than a million Americans lost work" following the attacks, he said.

Bush's speech, which otherwise dwelled on the importance of military victory and the cost of defeat, was a quiet attempt to link Al Qaeda to America's economic woes, some analysts noted. They said the president was seeking to reshape his case for staying in Iraq in a way that would resonate with an American public that is increasingly worried about high oil prices and the likelihood of a recession.

"I think he's trying to make a case that the Iraq war is integral to resolving our economic difficulties, which he knows the public is weighing more heavily now than they have in the past five years," said Kenneth Katzman, a Middle East specialist with the Congressional Research Service, the research arm of Congress, who just returned from a trip to Iraq.

Antiwar protesters also sought to link the war to the economy by blockading the offices of the Internal Revenue Service to draw attention to the high cost of the conflict. Dozens were arrested outside IRS headquarters in Washington, and hundreds protested across the city.

Bush, in his speech, contended that estimates of the war's costs have been overblown. But he also acknowledged that the "battle in Iraq has been longer and harder and more costly than we anticipated."

He said security gains made by US troops over the past year are "fragile and reversible," signaling that he is unlikely to order further troop reductions in Iraq beyond those already planned. He said the war, which has cost nearly 4,000 US lives and roughly $500 billion in direct expenses, is poised to give the United States a major strategic victory against Al Qaeda.

"We're witnessing the first large-scale Arab uprising against Osama bin Laden," Bush said, referring to Sunni tribes who have sided with the Americans. "The significance of this development cannot be overstated."

But some of Bush's strongest words were when he described what he said would be the consequences for pulling out of Iraq: imperiling the world's economy and putting the country's oil wealth in the hands of terrorists.

"An emboldened Al Qaeda with access to Iraq's oil resources could pursue its ambitions to acquire weapons of mass destruction to attack America and other free nations," he said.

The argument that US troops need to stay in Iraq to protect the country's oil is not new, but has gained potency as oil prices hit historic highs. As far back as 2005, Bush warned that if bin Laden gained control of Iraq, his group would "seize oil fields to fund their ambitions."

Around then, Melvin R. Laird, Richard M. Nixon's defense secretary, wrote an article in Foreign Affairs magazine arguing that the United States can't abandon Iraq, as it did Vietnam, because it depends on oil from the region.

"Picture those oil reserves in the hands of religious extremists whose idea of utopia is to knock the world economy and culture back more than a millennium to the dawn of Islam," Laird wrote.

But some specialists took issue yesterday with the idea that Al Qaeda would get control of Iraq's oil in the event of a US withdrawal, because the oil is in Shi'ite and Kurdish areas that are hostile to the group.

"The idea that Al Qaeda is going to gain control over Iraq and export oil is a fairy tale, James Bond stuff," said Ilan Goldenberg, policy director at the National Security Network, a liberal group of defense and foreign policy specialists.

Michael Makovsky, who served as special assistant on Iraqi oil in the office of the Secretary of Defense from 2002 to 2006, said criminal gangs and Shi'ite militias in southern Iraq pose a more significant threat to Iraqi oil exports than Al Qaeda.

Michael Rubin, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank based in Washington, said "the idea of Al Qaeda taking over the oil is stretch."

But Rubin said Bush's decision to raise the issue was probably an attempt to get the attention of Americans who are already anxious about today's record-high prices for gasoline.

"With oil going through the roof, it's a linkage which a lot of people will make," Rubin said.

White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said Bush's remarks about oil and lost jobs were meant to highlight the economic effects of a setback in the war on terror.

"We know what the kind of impact that the 9/11 attack had on our country," she said. "Our stock markets went into a turmoil, and we had to take significant action in order to help right our economy."

But Goldenberg said Bush's attempt to use economic concerns to bolster support for his war in Iraq was unlikely to succeed.

Citing a CNN poll released yesterday, Goldenberg said 71 percent of Americans believe the war is partly responsible for the country's economic troubles.

"That's not the kind of number that President Bush can turn around," he said.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 03-22-2008, 02:45 PM   #29
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,305
Local Time: 06:22 PM
Quote:
US air strike kills 'Iraq allies'
Awakening Council members at the site of the air strike near Samarra on Saturday 22 March 2008

Six people have been killed in a US air strike near the Iraqi town of Samarra, with some reports suggesting they were US-allied anti-al-Qaeda Sunni fighters.

The US denied claims by a police source and a militia member that those killed at the checkpoint were members of an Awakening Council.

The US-funded groups are credited with helping to curb the level of violence.

It came as four more US soldiers were killed in Iraq, bringing the death toll since the 2003 invasion close to 4,000.

of course you know this is a lie.




4000 really
how many American CONTRACTORS have died?
And if they were shipped to a Hospital in Germany and died 2 months later, they don't count.
and of course 4000 AMERICANS are all that matters
a human being of a different nationality "does not count
Rumsfeld "We don't count dead Iraqis."
__________________
deep is online now  
Old 03-24-2008, 12:40 AM   #30
Blue Crack Addict
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 29,682
Local Time: 09:22 PM
[q]
US Death Toll in Iraq War Hits 4,000
Mar 23, 10:45 PM (ET)
By ROBERT H. REID

BAGHDAD (AP) - A roadside bomb killed four U.S. soldiers in Baghdad on Sunday, the military said, pushing the overall American death toll in the five-year war to at least 4,000.

The grim milestone came on the same day that rockets and mortars pounded the U.S.-protected Green Zone, underscoring the fragile security situation and the resilience of both Sunni and Shiite extremist groups despite an overall lull in violence.

A Multi-National Division - Baghdad soldier also was wounded in the roadside bombing, which struck the soldiers' patrol vehicle about 10 p.m. in southern Baghdad, according to a statement.

Identities of those killed were withheld pending notification of relatives.

The 4,000 figure is according to an Associated Press count that includes eight civilians who worked for the Department of Defense.

Last year, the U.S. military deaths spiked along with the Pentagon's "surge" - the arrival of more than 30,000 extra troops trying to regain control of Baghdad and surrounding areas. The mission was generally considered a success, but the cost was evident as soldiers pushed into Sunni insurgent strongholds and challenged Shiite militias.

Military deaths rose above 100 for three consecutive months for the first time during the war: April 2007, 104; May, 126 and June at 101.

The death toll has seesawed since, with 2007 ending as the deadliest year for American troops at 901 deaths. That was 51 more deaths than 2004, the second deadliest year for U.S. soldiers.

The milestones for each 1,000 deaths - while an arbitrary marker - serve to rivet attention on the war and have come during a range of pivotal moments.[/q]
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com