They Want the U.S. Out - NOW

Parent Cafe
21

<p>democrat mole,nice assuming there…it could be anybody, considering most people haven’t seen the document</p>

22

<p>The leaker could just easily be a member of the administration. Which is not to President Bush’s credit. He should have cleaned house a long time ago.</p>

23

<p>Look, if you’ve got a problem with a State Department survey, confirmed by State Department officials, I suggest you take it up with Condi. I’m sure she’ll be happy to give you all the details.</p>

<p>The poll wasn’t leaked, but came from the State Department’s spokeman and press officer:</p>

<p>The State Department, meanwhile, has conducted its own poll, something it does periodically, spokesman Sean McCormack said. The State Department poll found two-thirds of Iraqis in Baghdad favor an immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces, according to The Washington Post. McCormack declined to discuss details of the department’s poll.</p>

<p>An Iraqi public opinion research firm with a proven record of conducting scientifically valid surveys conducted the department’s poll, press officer Janelle Hironimus said later."</p>

<p>What “I” believe is not the issue - what those of you who do support the Administration, when confronted with the Administration’s own information, IS the issue. Repeat after me: the STATE DEPARTMENT (NOT Mini) says Iraqis want the U.S. out IMMEDIATELY.</p>

<p>P.S. I don’t believe there are ANY conspiracies. I do believe they are, how shall we say, “mendacious”.</p>

24

<p>“Look, if you’ve got a problem with a State Department survey, confirmed by State Department officials, I suggest you take it up with Condi. I’m sure she’ll be happy to give you all the details.”</p>

<p>I misunderstood the leak to refer to the NIE document that Bush declassified yesterday, rather than the poll. I apologize for the error.</p>

25

<p>What a muddled mess we’ve made.</p>

<p>When the Bushlovers won’t even believe their own beloved US State Department, it’s a sorry state of affairs indeed.</p>

26

<p>I find the poll credible. I already mentioned that. In fact I believe EVERYTHING it says is credible. I believe what the people of Baghdad have to say. Again I am not arguing with what the Baghdadis want, I am saying what is better for them and us in the long run…When I say democratic mole i mean someone in the administration that for one reason or another does not like Bush or conservatism or whatever…But again what you failed to explain to answer is do YOU find this poll credible. We all know I do, but nevertheless it was conducted by the administration of the devil-horned President Bush. So I am wondering how can you reconcile a Bush administration poll right before midterm elections that could potentially be harmful to the republicans election chances with the fact that you mistrust the information “peddled” by this administration</p>

27

<p>LOL Golani, talk about the dog chasing its tail!</p>

28

<p>and like republicans aren’t playing the political game right now…if Rice could peddle any faster we would be going backwards in time</p>

29

<p>CGM, again you are simply avoiding the issue at hand. No one is denying that republican politicians are “playing the political game”, ofcourse they are. You are using this poll as if it has exposed something new, yet you do not focus on the whole poll. You do not proide insight as to what the American invasion means to the Kurds, for instance, not just the Baghdadis. You do not try to shine light on other statistics and so on. You suggest anything good that is happening to this country is merely a temporary ploy to help the republicans this novembers election. You dismiss any government documents and such that discuss good things happening in America and abroad as misrepresentations because of the upcoming elections, yet the Bush administration all of a sudden becomes trusty and dependable when it publishes information that is potentially harmful to itself. You then use this information without ascribing to it the doubt you would ascribe, to the documents discussing that reveal the terrorists that America has caught with their new physically coercive methods. Instead you choose to so beautifully state the obvious that republican politicians are doing their job and playing political games</p>

30

<p>well, to keep bringing up the timing of this “leak” is disengenuous</p>

<p>as for the statistices, they speak for themselves</p>

<p>most iraqs approve of attacks on americans in iraq…</p>

31

<p>The NPR reporter from Iraq was quite dubious of the poll’s results.</p>

32

<p>I am not just talking about the leak but about these Bush government statistics…Look no one is arguing about these polls i dont undertand what you are trying to prove to me that 60% of Baghdadis approve of attacks on Americans? or that 60% want america out within 6 months? No one is debating that. The poll is pretty clear. I am just curious about how you can talk of these statsitics without also talkign about other statsitics in the same poll and other documents and such the Bush administration has published. Also i do not see why it is disengenuous. In fact i dont undrestand what that even means in this context.</p>

33

<p>The State Department released NO other statistics from its poll, so I couldn’t talk about them. Got a problem with that - take it up with Condi. And the 65% didn’t want the U.S. out in six months - they wanted the U.S. out IMMEDIATELY.</p>

<p>(NPR didn’t talk about the State Department’s poll.)</p>

<p>My problem is NOT with the Republicans. They know clearly what their clients want, and are working hard to deliver for them. My problem is with the Dems, who claim to be offering an alternative, but is a pale shadow of what the people of Iraq want with or from us. They deserve to lose the next election (and, frankly, I hope they do.) Spend any significant time abroad, and it doesn’t matter whether you are in Europe or Asia or Latin America, and you find out that the only credibility that the U.S. government maintains is that which flows either from the government’s pocketbooks or the barrel of a gun. And, as far as credibility goes, the Dems don’t even stand behind that.</p>

34

<p>Have you ever wondered what the Iraqis think about our plan to " fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here?"</p>

<p>I wonder how we would feel if someone came to our country to fight their “enemy” but it wasn’t us.</p>

35

<p>Kluge, perhaps your eyes refuse to see words that don’t have the Pelosi stamp of approval on them. The report clearly states that to follow the Pelosi/Kerry/Murtha/Kennedy/(name your prominant Democrat here) plan would lead to an increase in terrorism. What part of “We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere.” is so hard to understand? How is that any different than what I said? Or were you out in the orchard cherry picking again and decided to leave that quote on the tree?</p>

<p>Here is a good perspective on the NIE which shows both sides quite fairly:
<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/27/AR2006092701749.html[/url]”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/27/AR2006092701749.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>A key summary point:</p>

<p>

</p>

36

<p>Regarding the State Dept. poll as reported in the Washington Post. It may be illustrative to know the though processes behind those who may want the US out. Here is what the Post says:

In the Muslim world, where truth is at a premium and conspiracy theories thrive (most think the US or Israel was responsible for 9/11), it is not surprising that the above conspiracy theory has taken root and has saped the man-on-the-street view. However, the leaders see it completely differently:

</p>

<p>So, anyone claiming to be a humanitarian or a pacifist neads to think long and hard about what they may be proposing. The pacifists of the Vietnam era failed to acknowledge the law of unintended consequences and were responsible for the ultimate slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Do they want to have the blood of as many Iraqis on their hands as well?</p>

37

<p>More dog chasing tail here. Let’s see…the US is responsible fo the murder of untold thousands of Iraqi and NOW you are worrying about the “blood of as many Iraqis on their hands as well”?</p>

<p>Um…we are already responsible for the blood of thousands and thousands of innocent Iraqi. The longer we stay, the more blood we spill.</p>

<p>And at such an expensive rate too. According to today’s news, our little adventure in nation building is costing the US taxpayers about $2 Billion a week. That’s a lot of school books, health care costs, geriatric care, veterans’ benefits that are NOT receiving funding, so that we can have permanent bases.</p>

<p>Cost of Iraq war nearly $2b a week
By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | September 28, 2006</p>

<p>WASHINGTON – A new congressional analysis shows the Iraq war is now costing taxpayers almost $2 billion a week – nearly twice as much as in the first year of the conflict three years ago and 20 percent more than last year – as the Pentagon spends more on establishing regional bases to support the extended deployment and scrambles to fix or replace equipment damaged in combat.</p>

<p>The upsurge occurs as the total cost of military operations at home and abroad since 2001, including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, will top half a trillion dollars, according to an internal assessment by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service completed last week.</p>

<p>The spike in operating costs – including a 20 percent increase over last year in Afghanistan, where the mission now costs about $370 million a week – comes even though troop levels in both countries have remained stable. The reports attribute the rising costs in part to a higher pace of fighting in both countries, where insurgents and terrorists have increased their attacks on US and coalition troops and civilians</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2006/09/28/cost_of_iraq_war_nearly_2b_a_week/[/url]”>http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2006/09/28/cost_of_iraq_war_nearly_2b_a_week/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

38

<p>

</p>

<p>So, in other words you are saying that your view of the situation from Boston is better than that of the Iraqi leaders? You also must believe that your intel is better than that of the NIE … or is it OK with you that our leaving will spawn more terrorist activity?</p>

39

<p>No, I have no intel at all, nor do I purport to. I am merely parroting the intel provided by our very own state department. The Iraqi want us out…now. And our being in Iraq has been cause of the growing jihadist movement in the region.</p>

<p>I just present facts, as they are presented.</p>

40

<p>“So, in other words you are saying that your view of the situation from Boston is better than that of the Iraqi leaders?”</p>

<p>I am saying the view from Boston is not from someone whose “official” income is between 100 and 240 times the income of the average Bostonian worker, and makes it only through the good graces of the U.S. government.</p>

<p>The WAR is over (3 years ago). The only question is WHEN the OCCUPATION will end.</p>