Nov 02 2007

Why Avoid Claiming Success In Iraq?

Published by at 5:20 am under All General Discussions,Iraq

I am not saying we are done and can go home now from Iraq. But the fact is there are going to be more and more claims that Iraq is going to be a success, or in some cases IS a success. Take for example this piece from an Australian Paper:

THERE is a reason Iraq has almost disappeared as an election issue.

Here it is: The battle is actually over. Iraq has been won.

I know this will seem to many of you an insane claim. Ridiculous!

Violence is falling fast. Al Qaida has been crippled.

The Shiites, Kurds and Marsh Arabs no longer face genocide.

What’s more, the country has stayed unified. The majority now rules.

Despite that, minority Sunni leaders are co-operating in government with Shiite ones.

There is no civil war. The Kurds have not broken away. Iran has not turned Iraq into its puppet.

And the country’s institutions are getting stronger. The Iraqi army is now at full strength, at least in numbers.

The country has a vigorous media. A democratic constitution has been adopted and backed by a popular vote.

Election after election has Iraqis turning up in their millions.

Add it all up. Iraq not only remains a democracy, but shows no sign of collapse.

In any case, whatever you may think of the arguments put in 2003, the argument today is whether Iraq will survive as a democracy, and whether we should help it.

The answers must be yes, and yes. Mustn’t they? Hello?

But if Iraq is “won”, why are so many Iraqis still dying?

Because some of the killers are just criminals, or are trying to kill their way to a piece of the action, or are – inevitably after so much cruelty and oppression – settling scores.

Others are agents of Iran, which wants to make America pay and Iraq obey.

It is a long and very convincing piece of logic. And I suspect more will be coming out. We cannot pack up and leave without making damn sure the situation will not backslide. But there is no problem in congratulating ourselves and the Iraqis on the progress so far. And there will be some times where al-Qaeda gets a punch through here or there. But the point is we keep striving for more success.

BTW, you can tell things are going well when Bush can go out on the stump and likens the Dems to the Neville Chamberlain’s of WW II with fervor and confidence:

President Bush compared Congress’ Democratic leaders Thursday with people who ignored the rise of Lenin and Hitler early in the last century, saying “the world paid a terrible price” then and risks similar consequences for inaction today.

Bush accused Congress of stalling important pieces of the fight to prevent new terrorist attacks by: dragging out and possibly jeopardizing confirmation of Michael Mukasey as attorney general, a key part of his national security team; failing to act on a bill governing eavesdropping on terrorist suspects; and moving too slowly to approve spending measures for the Iraq war, Pentagon and veterans programs.

“Unfortunately, on too many issues, some in Congress are behaving as if America is not at war,” Bush said during a speech at the Heritage Foundation. “This is no time for Congress to weaken the Department of Justice by denying it a strong and effective leader. … It’s no time for Congress to weaken our ability to intercept information from terrorists about potential attacks on the United States of America. And this is no time for Congress to hold back vital funding for our troops as they fight al-Qaida terrorists and radicals in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

There were many like Chamberlain who stuck their heads in the sand to avoid the threat that faced them – just like the Dems do now. The world paid a price for listening to them has Hitler took over Europe and we lost millions of lives in fighting him and his partners in Japan and Italy. But today there was a different story. Only the Democrats went out on a limb and declared America a failure against al-Qaeda. Only they tried to stop America from stopping Bin Laden. And now Bush is painting the picture of defeatism around them (deservedly so) since he knows the chances are Iraq will be a success long before he leaves office. And he wants the Dems to wear their label of defeatists all the way to the polls in 2008.

29 responses so far

29 Responses to “Why Avoid Claiming Success In Iraq?”

  1. crosspatch says:

    Three dead reported in Baghdad yesterday. My guess is that there are probably more bodies found on an average Friday night in the Metro NYC area.

  2. crosspatch says:

    And this is worth reading too.

    BAGHDAD — Coalition forces saw a possible glimpse of the future in Hawr Rajab recently, when they observed Concerned Local Citizens (CLC) at a checkpoint come under attack from insurgents, defend themselves, and then receive reinforcements from Iraqi Army troops, Oct. 31.

    It is just good news story after good news story.

  3. Soothsayer says:

    Keep drinkin’ the Kool-Aid, fellows, the more you drink the better it tastes.

    Can you give a time table on when you expect he ME to be “free” Macker, ya moron?

    1. Iraq will devolve into a three-sector state: Sunni, SHia and Kurd.

    2. Afghanistan will fall to Islamic fundamentalists

    3. Pakistan will either become a total military dictatorship, or more likely, be taken over by Islamic fundamentalists.

    4. Neither Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the Emirates, Egypt, or Jordan will become “democracies” and their people will never be freed by the present regimes – what is this imaginary “freeing the ME” you babble so ignorantly about?

  4. The Macker says:

    A serious study of a “three state” solution in Iraq indicates more problems than answers. Besides, it’s for Iraq to decide.

    Regarding timetables: When will we be out of Germany, Japan, Italy and South Korea?

    For more on freedom in the ME, see:

    Pessimists must rely on the optimists to get things done.

  5. Philadelphia Steve says:

    Re: “Regarding timetables: When will we be out of Germany, Japan, Italy and South Korea?”

    Are you declaring that neoConservates WANT the US to spend the next two generations inIraq?

    Is that what Donald Rumsfeld promised when he said in 2003 that, if we were in Iraq for six months, that would be “too long”.

    Or are Conservatives, asl always, required to forget everything that the Bush Administratin said and did yesterday, and start each day fresh, as though incompetence of he past never happened?

    The fact is that President Bush botched the occupatin of Iraq, a country that, unlike Japan never attacked us or, like Germany did not declare war on us.

    But, of cousre, as part of 100% loyalty to George W. Bush, not one Conservative is ever permitted to even once admit that The Bush Administratin is anything other than absolute perfection.

    I, for one, see no chance that the money and lives wasted by the Bush Administration in Iraq will ever be considered a bargain. Dick “I had better things to do” Cheney likely belies so, but then he is still collecting payments from his tenure as CEO of Haliburton.

    When Iraq descends into three countries: A Shia south under the thumb of Iran, a Kurdish north at war with Turkey, and a Sunni center, supporting Saudi fundamentalist Islamic schools, recruiting future Osama bin Ladens, is that the “glorious future” that Bush ordered his invasion to create?

    If you are a Conservatives, please tell me what the successful Iraq will look like. Or is that part of the shifting objectives that we will see, as the loyal Conservatives continue to redefine “success” in order to pretect George W. Bush from accountability>

  6. RE: the above…

    More Nutbag Anti-American/Pro-Jihadi Leftist Traitor Moonbat Crap from “Bootlicker’s” Doppleganger Sock-Puppet!

    Nice one, “PhilaBELLphia Cheesesteak”!

    Hey, how about that pounding that the Dallas Cowboys put on your team?

    Good stuff, huh?


    PS: been a Cowboys Fan for 40 years!

    Let’s count those Super Bowls, shall we??

    Ah, Cowboys….FIVE!


    OH YEAH!



  7. The Macker says:

    Phili Steve,
    I doubt that you will recognize “success” when it comes.

    You ignore that Iraq was in violation of the terms of the 1st Gulf War and was constantly firing on our planes.

    Might the Bush haters have a measure of jealousy because they couldn’t find the courage to take a stand during their eight years and now are forced to watch someone with real courage do the job?

  8. Philadelphia Steve says:

    Two responses.

    One a gradeschool taunt (but, Darn! the Eagles do suck this year! And I wish we had kept TO and let Donovan go.)

    The other just a declaration that I would not “know” success when I saw it (or had it defined for me by the White House).

    Neither one described the success that President Bush’s invasion of Iraq was meant to deliver. Exactly as I predicted.

  9. Neither one described the success that President Bush’s invasion of Iraq was meant to deliver. Exactly as I predicted.

    Left by Philadelphia Steve on November 6th, 2007

    Ah, WRONG, and ah.. er. WRONG!

    But then again, what else do I expect from an Anti-American, Pro-Jihadi Leftist Nutbag Lying Moonbat Traitor, who’s only source of information and “facts” is reading the “Daily Cus-Omac” every day, and regurgitating the so-called “Talking Points” and whose nickname is “Philadelphia Beefsteak”??