<p>Sounds like the surge is working. <a href=“http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4558904.html[/url]”>http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4558904.html</a>
</p>
<p>The flight of Al Sadr to Iran makes me hopeful. Of course, if funding is cut, we may never know.</p>
<p>Why not just get back the 10billion that is unaccounted for form the contracters…all that profit could help the war effort</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/02/16/iraq.main/index.html[/url]”>http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/02/16/iraq.main/index.html</a></p>
<p>It is hard to tell what is truth anymore when it comes to Iraq</p>
<p>Why anyone would believe ANYTHING that comes out of “unnamed” U.S. government sources in Iraq is beyond me. But that would go for a lot of the “named” ones as well.</p>
<p>What have they done to earn your trust recently? :eek:</p>
<p>CGM, what does your link have to do with anything? People in this country can’t even figure out what happened to Anna Nicole Smith, or who is the father of her baby. Why should you expect that everything is clear about who’s been injured or killed in Iraq? In fact, my link specifies that US commanders say it’s unclear what’s happened to al-Masri
</p>
<p>I wish people could just acknowledge that sometimes things in Iraq are going well, as indicated by my original link. People are so quick to focus on the negative – it’s like you are afraid to admit things might actually improve.</p>
<p>
They wear uniforms and get shot at for us.</p>
<p>636</p>
<p>Give it another week – “overnight” seems a little illusory.</p>
<p>“They wear uniforms and get shot at for us.”</p>
<p>Sorry, but NONE of them have been shot at for me, thank you.</p>
<p>(U.S. government officials in Iraq usually DON’T wear uniforms, and DON’T get shot at - they live full-time in the Green Zone, munching on pork.)</p>
<p>mini, unless you decide to move to Canada (where I think you’d be happier) any member of the US armed forces is most definitely being shot at for you. Unfortunately, the military doesn’t get to choose which Americans for whom to fight.</p>
<p>She doesn’t mean the military, she means the govt officials. The govt officials aren’t getting shot at for us, the military is. The military does what it’s told to do by the govt officials; they say what the govt officials tell them to say; if they get off message they get replaced.</p>
<p>Sorry. The soldiers volunteered to get shot at. They chose, for themselves, to get shot at. I’m sorry that they made that choice, especially since many of them were lied to, deceived, and cheated, and are the subject of such malfeasance.</p>
<p>But they aren’t doing it for me, thank you.</p>
<p>Meanwhile the pork munchers in the Green Zone are living it up. They aren’t getting shot at. You believe 'em if you choose. I’ve got a bridge to sell you - made by Halliburton. </p>
<p><a href=“HAL Interactive Stock Chart | Halliburton Company Stock - Yahoo Finance”>HAL Interactive Stock Chart | Halliburton Company Stock - Yahoo Finance;
<p>Then you are just in favor of anarchy.</p>
<p>If there is anarchy, it is anarchy for which we as Americans are responsible.</p>
<p>Considering that there was no civil war prior to the US invasion, I think we can place the blame for the anarchy and sheer mess, squarely on the shoulders of the US government. And all of us are complicit, I suppose, for not demanding that this horror end.</p>
<p>(Well, voters in this past election did indicate wanting a change of course, but Bush refuses to listen.)</p>
<p>my link shows that we aren’t being told the truth and for them to sudden’y say, oh looky, fewer people were killed last night, and claiming someone big was injured, and that Al Sadr “ran”, and then you look a b it deeper and see, well, not so factual</p>
<p>you site the Iraqi government sources abut fewer deaths and claim that shows the “surge” is working, and I am pointing out we have no idea if hat they are reporting is even true</p>
<p>your title is “sounds like the surge is working” - well, that information is coming from sources that even our own leaders don’t know are factual</p>
<p>anarchy? let me see, we have been fighting for longer than WW2, we have created this anarchy and yet we are supposed to keep giving the deciders more chances</p>
<p>do you sjmom, trust what you are being told, do you trust the people that made this giant mess to have the judgement to fix it, who at this very moment say its not a civil war?</p>
<p>so, are you saying that we should keep this up forever, or that when we stop, all will be just fine</p>
<p>a couple of years ago when an oppostion leader was killed people oohed and aahed, saying, well, see, we got him so it will get better</p>
<p>and gee, it just got worse</p>
<p>with major combat over two or more years ago, what the heck is this? </p>
<p>and you trust the information we are getting when over and over again what we were told turned out to be “unfactual”</p>
<p>good thing those Iraqs troops are taking care of business like we were promised…and our troops would just be used for support, can’t remember who told us that in a major speech and yet we are NOW supposed to think that THIS time their policy will work</p>
<p>From your link
You are talking about the question of whether or not one person has been killed or captured – I can understand the uncertainty in determining that info. But the fact remains that civilian deaths are down, and you can’t summon up anything good to say about that. </p>
<p>And you wonder why conservatives sometimes feel that liberals are only happy when things are going badly for the US.</p>
<p>I don’t trust the numbers, sorry, we have been not been given accruate nunbers during this whole war, and what numbers we have been given are under the real ones, so for me to suddenly trust, well, its going to take more than a report like that to convince me </p>
<p>As well, we had a President who is making claims about Iran and weapons, which have pretty much been refuted by most intelligence agencies, so pardon my scepticism and not trusting the reporting to the media</p>
<p>after all, these are the same people that said it wasn’t that many civilians killed in the first place, that its not chaos, that things are getting better, then suddenly they need to send it 50000 more troops to fix it</p>
<p>and what happens when the surge stops</p>
<p>you seem to think this is like a cure, this is a bandaid…</p>
<p>I DON"T TRUST THE NUMBERS we are being given…they have been bad all along and now, volia, we are supposed to believe what is being reported</p>
<p>I love our soilders, but they aren’t and haven’t been supported by this administration, and that is sad</p>
<p>We are to trus the plan now, when all along the leadership on both sides- Iraq and USA has made bad decisions, made claims, said things were going just swell, and now we are supposed to go, okay dokey, we believe you now</p>
<p>How naive do you think people are</p>
<p>I think that people don’t read the factual reports.
You say you have trouble believing the US reports, but you also don’t believe the reports from the Iraqi’s on the ground. I think you dismiss any facts that don’t support your political position. </p>
<p>It often seems to me that those on the far left mourn any US victory and celebrate each defeat.</p>
<p>The most interesting news is that the major neighborhood sweeps yesterday were conducted by US forces alone, with little or no participation by the Iraqi forces. This contradicts the strategy outlined for the escalation by the admininstration. The soldiers on the field say that the insurgents have clearly done exactly what they did before previous surges – gone to ground to wait us out. Our troops conducting the sweeps are finding nothing.</p>