Comments on: Daily attacks in Iraq hit new high in June

By: caroline

caroline — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:41:32 +0000

John,
The situation is like squeezing jelly. You calm one area down and the insurgency just moves to another.

By: Bill

Bill — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 03:44:41 +0000

Al
You’re absolutely right. There’s a chain of command here and we’re not supposed to participate. It starts with the “unitary executive” and flows downhill. (like sewage)

By: Al Swearengen

Al Swearengen — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 03:15:50 +0000

I’m talking to Tony Snow right now and he thinks you’re all full of sh*t!

To even debate these things is tantamount to willfully producing propaganda for our enemies. Everyone here…you’re on notice!

Each word you write equals a US soldier dead and ten new terrorists.

By: JohnKonop

JohnKonop — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 22:37:43 +0000

hoads

That is one of the points of the post! “It seems as we control one area we are just pushing the violence to another area”

That is because we are short troops!

By: hoads

hoads — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:49:30 +0000

John,
you didn’t read my post #1——-the white house DID NOT say attacks are down in general. They were referring to 2 provinces.

Cite your experts please.

By: JohnKonop

JohnKonop — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:28:19 +0000

sgtmac

The White House said attacks are going down not me. The facts are attacks are not going down just moving to other areas.

The reason the strategy is not working is because we are short somewhere between 120,000 to 322,000 troops according to military experts.

I find it strange that you guys who call for everyone to listen to military experts are not.

The experts called for 300.000 to 500,000 troops we have 180,000 do you see the problem.

That is why military experts said we need a political solution to bring in other troops via the region because one we do not have that many. Also most experts believe our military on Muslim soil is creating a recruiting ground for terrorist. So the more Muslin troops by sect the better.

It is ok if you disagree with the above but understand you disagree with most military, intelligence and scholars in the region.

Both sides want to debate a surge with not enough troops and a withdrawal with no plan. As I said both are tactics and not a real plan.

Do you not see both sides cherry pick what they want to hear and spin it.

One must deal in fact to fix a problem.

The fact is the Iraq Parliament does seem motivated to form a strong sectarian government and work out their differences via the month long vacation they want on before the deadline in September while our troops are dying.

By: sgtmac

sgtmac — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:03:18 +0000

John

You’re kidding right? You mean to say you thought there would be fewer attacks now that there’s a surge going on? You can’t possibly be serious…….

Bart Brannon for U.S. Senate – It’s time to balance the budget!

By: hoads

hoads — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 17:04:35 +0000

This is typical of MSM ’s attempts to paint the administration as being liars. Tony Snow does NOT make the statement that “attacks are down” what he refers to is attacks are down in Anbar and Diyala –both provinces where counterinsurgency preceded the current surge and both produced desired results—handicapped the insurgency. Snow is giving examples of how a “surge” has produced results in Iraq in the recent past-he is not making claims about the current surge.

And honestly, what a joke Reuters is trying to pull. This is a SURGE–we are surging with larger forces and greater use of force, hence—–SURGE. Of course, one would expect attacks/battles to increase. Does anyone believe we are sending in more troops so they can act as “security guards” and the insurgency is just going to run away?

Just more “spin” to discredit the administration and unfortunately, effective in the proliferation of propaganda within our media.