|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
Gen. Petreaus: US Only Controls 40 Percent of Baghdad
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| Gen. Petreaus: US Only Controls 40 Percent of Baghdad
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| otherone4life |
Mind you, this is 4 years and 3 months after we first invaded and now Petreaus and Odierno have told the media that the U.S. only controls 40 percent of Baghdad (wonder what that drops to if you don't count the GREEN ZONE) ....NCMike? Vacate?
U.S.: 60 pct of Baghdad not controlled
By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer 49 minutes ago
Security forces in Baghdad have full control in only 40 percent of the city five months into the pacification campaign, a top American general said Saturday as U.S. troops began an offensive against two al-Qaida strongholds on the capital's southern outskirts.
The military, meanwhile, reported that paratroopers had found the ID cards of two missing U.S. soldiers at an al-Qaida safe house 100 miles north of where they were captured last month, but there was no sign of the men. The house contained computers, video equipment and weapons.
Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno said American troops launched the offensive in Baghdad's Arab Jabour and Salman Pac neighborhoods Friday night. It was the first time in three years that U.S. soldiers entered those areas, where al-Qaida militants build car bombs and launch Katyusha rockets at American bases and Shiite Muslim neighborhoods.
The overall commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, said during a news conference with visiting Defense Secretary Robert Gates that the operation would put troops into key al-Qaida-held areas surrounding Baghdad.
Odierno said there was a long way to go in retaking the city from Shiite Muslim militias, Sunni Arab insurgents and al-Qaida terrorists. He said only about "40 percent is really very safe on a routine basis" — with about 30 percent lacking control and a further 30 percent suffering "a high level of violence."
The U.S. ground forces commander discussed the new offensive and the security situation in an interview with two reporters as he visited an American outpost near the main market in the capital's southern Dora district, a major Sunni Arab stronghold.
"There's about 30 percent of the city that needs work, like here in Dora and the surrounding areas," Odierno said. "Those are the areas that we consider to be the hot spots, which usually have a Sunni-Shiite fault line, and also areas where al-Qaida has decided to make a stand."
With Baghdad and Basra — the country's second largest city and gateway to the Persian Gulf — under curfew, violent deaths were down dramatically Saturday. Only three people were reported to have been killed or found dead in sectarian violence.
That did not include the discovery of 13 bodies of a tae kwon do team kidnapped last year in western Iraq while driving to a training camp in neighboring Jordan. The bodies were found 65 miles west of Ramadi, police and hospital officials said.
The U.S. military revealed that identification cards belonging to the two missing soldiers were found June 9 near Samara but said no one was in the safe house. Troops approaching the building came under fire from nearby trees, suffering two wounded before air support intervened, the statement said.
Spc. Alex R. Jimenez and Pvt. Byron Fouty were snatched in a raid on their 10th Mountain Division unit on May 12 near Youssifiyah. The body of a third soldier taken in the raid, Pfc. Joseph Anzack Jr., was found floating in the Euphrates River. Four other U.S. soldiers and an Iraqi translator were killed in the May 12 ambush.
The Islamic State of Iraq, a front group for al-Qaida, claimed in a video posted on the Internet this month that all three missing soldiers were killed and buried. The militants showed images of the military IDs of Jimenez, 25, of Lawrence, Mass., and Fouty, 19, of Waterford, Mich., but offered no proof they were dead.
Fouty's stepfather found hope in the ID find. "I take it as they keep moving him, and that he's alive," Gordon Dibler Jr. said. "I was happy that they found something tangible. I'm going to keep hoping."
Wendy Luzon, a friend of the Jimenez family, had a similar response. "It's better than not getting any news for weeks," she said. "Getting this news is something good. We keep hoping that he's alive. We have nothing that tells us differently."
The military announced that a U.S. soldier was killed by a roadside bomb in southern Baghdad and an Ohio National Guard pilot died when his F-16 fighter crashed shortly after takeoff from Balad Air Base in central Iraq. The two deaths Friday raised to at least 3,522 the number of U.S. personnel who have died since the Iraq war began in March 2003, according to an AP count.
In Baghdad, aides to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki told The Associated Press that talks Saturday between the U.S. defense secretary and the Iraqi leader were difficult.
Two top advisers to the prime minister said al-Maliki, a Shiite, objected vigorously to the new U.S. policy of arming and training Sunni militants in the fight against al-Qaida.
A third said Gates told al-Maliki that political and legislative action sought by the U.S., including a new law to share oil revenues among all Iraqis, must be complete by September when the defense secretary has to report to Congress on progress in Iraq.
Gates also met with President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, and expressed concern that the security situation nationwide might be spiraling out of control, a presidential aide said.
All the Iraqi officials agreed to discuss the talks only if not quoted by name because they were not authorized to release details. They said they were briefed on the talks by officials who attended the meetings.
The top U.S. commander in the Middle East, Adm. William Fallon, delivered a similar message to Iraqi leaders on June 10, and John Negroponte, the No. 2 State Department official, reinforced it in a visit at midweek.
Underscoring the challenges, Gates arrived in Baghdad on Friday to find a city all but shut down by a security lockdown imposed after the bombing of an important Shiite shrine north of the city. The explosion at the Askariya shrine in Samarra destroyed the mosque's minarets and prompted at least two retaliatory attacks — both in southern Iraq.
On Saturday, attackers blew up the al-Ashrah al-Mubashra mosque in Basra at dawn, residents in nearby houses said. As they were leaving, the bombers wrote graffiti on the complex's outer wall with the names of revered Shiite saints, witnesses said. No injuries were reported.
___ |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
I was just about to post this story in my "Bush...failure" thread...I'll wait until I have something else to post behind it, and slip it in just for the archival record... :)
So, anyway....
VaCunt and DikeyCunt are MIA.
Typical... |
|
|
| otherone4life |
| Kool Aid dispensers are at a premium these days, there's only so much bullshit the R's can shovel when the walls are closing o\in ... |
|
|
| Stickman |
Here, I'll give you how they'll spin this.
What the driveby media isn't telling you is the successes that are taking place in other regions of Iraq, particularly the Al Anbar province, where leading mullahs are asking their followers to cooperate with US forces. Of course you don't hear this in the liberal media ( I heard it on NPR, does it get anymore left than that?).
Just thought I'd get that out of the way. |
|
|
| otherone4life |
Fuck the spin, consider this from Odierno:
He said only about "40 percent is really very safe on a routine basis" — with about 30 percent lacking control and a further 30 percent suffering "a high level of violence."
Think about that. 30 percent "lack control" and 30 percent suffer a "high level of violence." Basically, that says that 30 percent is lawless and the rest is total fucking anarchy and this is the MEDIA's fault? 51 months, 3500+ dead americans, 25000+ wounded, 100000s dead Iraqis and $500 billion plus and this is all we have to show for it!!!??? |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
That was 40% in full control.... you seem to have left out a key word in the phrase. Its so like you.
And there was this:
| Quote: "There's about 30 percent of the city that needs work, like here in Dora and the surrounding areas," Odierno said. "Those are the areas that we consider to be the hot spots, which usually have a Sunni-Shiite fault line, and also areas where al-Qaida has decided to make a stand." |
SO the defeatocrat plan is to cut-run from the fight with Al Qaeda. Wonder where they will go then??? hmmmmmmm |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by otherone4life
Fuck the spin, consider this from Odierno:
He said only about "40 percent is really very safe on a routine basis" — with about 30 percent lacking control and a further 30 percent suffering "a high level of violence."
Think about that. 30 percent "lack control" and 30 percent suffer a "high level of violence." Basically, that says that 30 percent is lawless and the rest is total fucking anarchy and this is the MEDIA's fault? 51 months, 3500+ dead americans, 25000+ wounded, 100000s dead Iraqis and $500 billion plus and this is all we have to show for it!!!??? |
"...but, but,...take and hold?...but, but...new strategy...??? Divisions?...but...."
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Oh gee, the final brigade just arrived and is setting up - why haven't we taken complete control of Baghdad yet?
:rolleyes:
More timelines, deadlines and defeatism from the usual suspects here and in the media.
How about we give a chance for the new strategy to work? 40% in control is better than where we were last year, which probably consisted of a scant few neighborhoods and the Green Zone.
NCMike - in regards to your reference from the article, there is this -
http://www.breitbart.com/article.ph...&show_article=1
From the article:
"Gen. David Petraeus said the operation began in the last 24 hours and will put forces into key areas surrounding Baghdad that, according to intelligence, al-Qaida is using to base some of its car bomb operations."
Also, General Petraeus is giving his first Sunday morning interview since taking command tomorrow on Fox News Sunday.
http://www.foxnews.com/fns/
With all U.S. troops now in place for the surge strategy, General David Petraeus speaks exclusively with Chris Wallace in his first Sunday show interview since taking over U.S. forces in Iraq.
So General Petraeus will fill us in on where we are and how he sees the new strategy progressing.
As far as the naysayers, NCMike brings up a great question. For months now all we have heard from liberals and democrats is the doctrine of Cut and Run. So let's say we retreat from Iraq completely and leave the country in the hands of Al Qaeda and other terrorist elements.
(Note: Here comes the question that leaves Liberals with the deer-in-the-headlights blank stare)
After retreating, how do we go after the terrorists? What is the plan? |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
(Note: Here comes the question that leaves Liberals with the deer-in-the-headlights blank stare)
After retreating, how do we go after the terrorists? What is the plan? |
Nice post :)
Let me take a shot at the question since I am not a liberal. The liberal plan is to appease the terrorists, never fight for or support freedom/freedom fighters anywhere. Close Club Gitmo and never give a captured terrorist anything except full constitutional rights, during the time that they are held, they are NEVER to be asked a question in a threatening manner. In fact, the preferred method of questioning is to give each person (we would never want to call them detainees, or anything that derogatory like that) a recliner, steak and lobster and see if they would be willing to give us some information. If not, then we can send the little darlings on their way. Essentially, the liberal plan is to invite and wait for the inevitable attack, and then claim its our fault we were attacked, because we have no understanding of the horror those poor kids had to live through during these past 2 Centuries of American imperialism. |
|
|
| zimmie |
 |
|
|
| zimmie |
 |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Harry Greed speaks to the troops !!
 |
|
|
| Reverend Tyler |
So you guys are completely happy that we dont have control of even half of the biggest city in Iraq after 4 years? You really do want to stay there forever dont you?
"could be 6 weeks....I doubt 6 months" |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by Reverend Tyler
So you guys are completely happy that we dont have control of even half of the biggest city in Iraq after 4 years? You really do want to stay there forever dont you?
"could be 6 weeks....I doubt 6 months" |
Not a day longer than it takes to win. Why would you ever want to leave sooner? |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
Nice post :)
Let me take a shot at the question since I am not a liberal. The liberal plan is to appease the terrorists, never fight for or support freedom/freedom fighters anywhere. Close Club Gitmo and never give a captured terrorist anything except full constitutional rights, during the time that they are held, they are NEVER to be asked a question in a threatening manner. In fact, the preferred method of questioning is to give each person (we would never want to call them detainees, or anything that derogatory like that) a recliner, steak and lobster and see if they would be willing to give us some information. If not, then we can send the little darlings on their way. Essentially, the liberal plan is to invite and wait for the inevitable attack, and then claim its our fault we were attacked, because we have no understanding of the horror those poor kids had to live through during these past 2 Centuries of American imperialism. |
Thanks.
Yeah, that's basically the Democrats/Liberals' plan in a nutshell.
As far as what happens if we just pack up and leave, I think the coverage from Gaza the past few days would pretty much sum it all up. The terrorists would be climbing over the walls of the Green Zone and then you'd see footage of Al Maliki dragged out, tied to the back of a pickup truck and dragged through the streets of Baghdad. Then you'd see a picture of a guy in a ski mask sitting in his office on the phone. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
|
It would be a funny picture if it wasn't 100% accurate. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Reverend Tyler
So you guys are completely happy that we dont have control of even half of the biggest city in Iraq after 4 years? You really do want to stay there forever dont you?
"could be 6 weeks....I doubt 6 months" |
Speaking for myself, I fully admit that there weren't enough troops on the ground when the regime fell and things got out of control. The idea was that a small footprint would deflect from the notion that we were taking the country over, but that turned out to be a mistake.
Forget the past 4 years because debating it is as relevant as debating WMD and whether we should have invaded to begin with - the fact remains that we are where we are, so what are we going to do?
No, I'm not happy that it's taken this long but we are doing far better than we were this time last year, and all signs point to our efforts going in the right direction (Anbar Province, drop in violence in Baghdad).
Let me ask you this - what is this obsession on the left with timelines and deadlines? How are we to fight a war based on a timeline? Sure, we can have goals, but setting dates certain that if objectives aren't met by said date we are out of there is a completely irresponsible way to conduct this war. Wouldn't you agree, or do you think we should set a firm deadline and leave regardless of conditions on the ground? |
|
|
| ChaseDC |
| What is the republicunt plan? Besides stay the course? :rolleyes: |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| Quote: What is the republicunt plan? Besides stay the course? roll eyes (sarcastic) |
Stay and keep no bid contractors stock prices up ( at the taxpayers expense ) |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by ChaseDC
What is the republicunt plan? Besides stay the course? :rolleyes: |
Well if you consider the reinforcements and the adjusted strategy (clearing and holding positions, as opposed to the "whack-a-mole" situation in the past, working with tribal leaders to battle Al Qaeda, etc.) as "stay the course," then the plan is to keep doing what is currently being done and assessing the effectiveness as the strategy moves forward.
Alright, genius, let's hear your grand alternative.
GO. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by RetardTheWord
Well if you consider the reinforcements and the adjusted strategy (clearing and holding positions, as opposed to the "whack-a-mole" situation in the past, working with tribal leaders to battle Al Qaeda, etc.) as "stay the course," then the plan is to keep doing what is currently being done and assessing the effectiveness as the strategy moves forward. |
:lol:
You tell 'em, RetardTheWord...!!! :ce:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
What a DUPED SUCKER!!!
Go (fuck yourself)! |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Fdubya247
:lol:
You tell 'em, RetardTheWord...!!! :ce:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
What a DUPED SUCKER!!!
Go (fuck yourself)! |
Thank you for proving the point - Liberals have an abundance of insults and criticism, but lack any sort of alternative plan for victory.
The prophetic words of President Bush:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhnvUnRmowQ |
|
|
| ChaseDC |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
Well if you consider the reinforcements and the adjusted strategy (clearing and holding positions, as opposed to the "whack-a-mole" situation in the past, working with tribal leaders to battle Al Qaeda, etc.) as "stay the course," then the plan is to keep doing what is currently being done and assessing the effectiveness as the strategy moves forward.
Alright, genius, let's hear your grand alternative.
GO. |
Gee, since when was I in charge of fixing the bush cunt mess?
But since you asked, I'd have put more troops in baghdad from day one.
These fucking pricks underestimated the insurgency, even though they were TOLD it would happen. And now men and women are still paying for their colossal mistakes with their lives. The FACT that most republicunts don't give a shit about their lives as long as the war is prolonged under the guise of national security. How the fuck can we expect the Iraqi's to "stand up" if we don't force them to? |
|
|
| ChaseDC |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
Thank you for proving the point - Liberals have an abundance of insults and criticism, but lack any sort of alternative plan for victory.
The prophetic words of President Bush:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhnvUnRmowQ |
Neither does bush. You are extremely high if you believe that clearing and hold bullshit. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by ChaseDC
Gee, since when was I in charge of fixing the bush cunt mess?
But since you asked, I'd have put more troops in baghdad from day one.
These fucking pricks underestimated the insurgency, even though they were TOLD it would happen. And now men and women are still paying for their colossal mistakes with their lives. The FACT that most republicunts don't give a shit about their lives as long as the war is prolonged under the guise of national security. How the fuck can we expect the Iraqi's to "stand up" if we don't force them to? |
You didn't answer the question. The point that was brought up was that liberals offer a bunch of insults and criticism, but when asked what their alternative is to the current strategy they have nothing to say. What we should have done "from day one" is pointless at this point - but if you look back a few posts you will see that I brought up the lack of an adequate force after the regime fell.
Then you proceed to make baseless accusations about the Republicans, but you do ask a good question about getting the Iraqis to "stand up."
So I'm going to give you another shot to redeem yourself. You can bash the President, his administration and the Republican party here until your fingers fall off, but unless you have a viable alternative plan (one that you've heard uttered from a Democrat in Congress would suffice), then all you are spouting is useless, empty rhetoric.
So one more time, what would be your grand alternative for victory? |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by ChaseDC
Neither does bush. You are extremely high if you believe that clearing and hold bullshit. |
Huh, and to think that the President says that all the Democrats offer is endless second guessing.
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| otherone4life |
| So we just ignore the past 51 months b/c some additional troops showed up? This is such bullshit. "FULL" control ...all depends on what your meaning of "full" is I guess? 30 percent total chaos, 30 percent significant violence and 40 percent 'full' control ..of which 50 percent is the Green Zone ..heckuva job W |
|
|
| otherone4life |
| the wack a mole is still in effect ..all the violence has headed into the north and now south (basra) .... and yet we still only control 40 percent of Baghdad ... |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by otherone4life
the wack a mole is still in effect ..all the violence has headed into the north and now south (basra) .... and yet we still only control 40 percent of Baghdad ... |
OK, let's go with your premise that the current strategy isn't working. Your criticism and insults (see prior thread) are noted.
So what is your alternative strategy for victory? |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| Quote: So what is your alternative strategy for victory? |
Send every single solitary one of you Bush lovers over there to relieve some of the guys on their 4th or 5th tour..................and please don't take that as a joke because I mean every fucking word. |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
Quote: OK, let's go with your premise that the current strategy isn't working. Your criticism and insults (see prior thread) are noted.
So what is your alternative strategy for victory?. |
Cocksuckers are all for Bush's war with other peoples lives, go put your ass on the line for a change big mouth |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by harley-davidson
Cocksuckers are all for Bush's war with other peoples lives, go put your ass on the line for a change big mouth |
Yeah, every now and then the deflection - if you support the war then why haven't you enlisted yet - pops up.
You're a moron, because you are asserting that for a person to support something they should be an active part of it - a person can't have an opinion for the sake of having one.
Alright, "big mouth" - do you support a low crime rate in your town? If so, then you better get your ass down to the police academy and sign up.
Do you support the best education for the children in your neighborhood? If so, then you better go get your teaching certification and put up or shut up.
Starting to see where this argument goes, genius? I hope so. |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| :lol: In other words you are a fucking coward that needs the Bush war to feel like the man you really aren't at all |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| Tell us again vacatetheturds........> IRAQ had what to do with 911? |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| 5 years no Bin ladin ? |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| 5 years we have 40% control of 1 count it 1 city |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| And we spent how much money ? only 1/2 a trillion |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| VICTORY IS NOT NO VIOLENCE......... RIGHT? |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
1. Moronic Response - does not grasp analogy.
2. Deflect.
3. Deflect.
4. Deflect.
Well, you've shown the ability to fire off Liberal talking points, so you're not a complete idiot. |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| Quote: Well, you've shown the ability to fire off Liberal talking points, so you're not a complete idiot. |
You are.....nice how you consider things like the fucking "truth" talking points, but then again I can't remember the last time a right winger telling or accepting the fucking truth |
|
|
| Reverend Tyler |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
Speaking for myself, I fully admit that there weren't enough troops on the ground when the regime fell and things got out of control. The idea was that a small footprint would deflect from the notion that we were taking the country over, but that turned out to be a mistake.
Forget the past 4 years because debating it is as relevant as debating WMD and whether we should have invaded to begin with - the fact remains that we are where we are, so what are we going to do?
No, I'm not happy that it's taken this long but we are doing far better than we were this time last year, and all signs point to our efforts going in the right direction (Anbar Province, drop in violence in Baghdad).
Let me ask you this - what is this obsession on the left with timelines and deadlines? How are we to fight a war based on a timeline? Sure, we can have goals, but setting dates certain that if objectives aren't met by said date we are out of there is a completely irresponsible way to conduct this war. Wouldn't you agree, or do you think we should set a firm deadline and leave regardless of conditions on the ground? |
We seem to have this obsession with not wanting to be in a war we have no business fighting. Thats why we wanted to leave Vietnam, and why we want to leave now. I also dont think that "staying there" is going to ever win. We are throwing away 2 billion a week. And yet you guys insist on not even counting it. |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| Here I'll give you a hand with the first question........Iraq had nothing to do with 911....see how easy that was |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| Quote: We are throwing away 2 billion a week. And yet you guys insist on not even counting it. |
Vacattedbrain considers that an irrelevant talking point....even if it bankrupts the country |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by harley-davidson
You are.....nice how you consider things like the fucking "truth" talking points, but then again I can't remember the last time a right winger telling or accepting the fucking truth |
No, your problem is you are stuck in the past and keep bringing up issues that are no irrelevant. We are there - it doesn't do any good to debate how we got there. But if we have to go around with this nonsense one more time, so be it.
No one in the Bush administration or the Pentagon said that Saddam Hussein ordered the 9/11 attacks. What concerned the Bush administration and the Pentagon (as well as intelligence angencies around the world) was that Iraq had WMD stockpiles and the capacity to mass produce WMD and that Hussein's regime would provide terrorist groups like Al Qaeda WMD to use against the United States and our allies. That's it in a nutshell - the "truth." Now, if you want to go off the deep and and start the "Bush lied about WMD" then have at it, but there has been no evidence to support such a claim (the lack of WMD in Iraq does not constitute a "lie").
The problem we have right now is that we are there and what are we going to do.
Now to be more specific, perhaps you could at least offer an alternative, even if its cut and run. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Reverend Tyler
We seem to have this obsession with not wanting to be in a war we have no business fighting. Thats why we wanted to leave Vietnam, and why we want to leave now. I also dont think that "staying there" is going to ever win. We are throwing away 2 billion a week. And yet you guys insist on not even counting it. |
Well, I don't put a price tag on the security of the country, but if that's what you want to do then that's your perogative.
Alright, you've stated you want to leave Iraq immediately. Would you be willing to accept the power vaccuum that we'd leave behind? The sectarian genocide that would take place? A permanent base in Anbar Province for Al Qaeda? Iranian hegemony in Southern Iraq? The real possibility of a regional war? |
|
|
| Reverend Tyler |
| Quote: Well, I don't put a price tag on the security of the country |
The Iraq War has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the security of our country. |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| Quote: Alright, you've stated you want to leave Iraq immediately. Would you be willing to accept the power vaccuum that we'd leave behind? The sectarian genocide that would take place? A permanent base in Anbar Province for Al Qaeda? Iranian hegemony in Southern Iraq? The real possibility of a regional war? |
Its going to happen regardless if we leave in a day, week,month,year or 50 years, your fucking hero opened up this Pandora's box, a lot of us with half a brain knew it before he ever dropped the first fucking bomb, its not worth one more American life ....it's a done fucking deal...period |
|
|
| otherone4life |
| let the arabs fight it out amongst themselves ... |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Reverend Tyler
The Iraq War has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the security of our country. |
:lol: |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| Quote: :jj: :hw: :lol: If we don't fight them over there we'll fight them here |
 |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
:jj: :hw: :lol: If we don't fight them over there we'll fight them here
 |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by harley-davidson
5 years no Bin ladin ? |
When's the last time you saw him on video? |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by harley-davidson
5 years we have 40% control of 1 count it 1 city |
Maybe you should ask the Kurds who controls that area, and maybe you should look at Anbar province...
In other words, get your head out of your ass, and wake up. |
|
|
| ChaseDC |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
even if its cut and run. |
Keep repeating the outdated propaganda talking points, bushbot. |
|
|
| ChaseDC |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
When's the last time you saw him on video? |
Typical spin from their "leader" who no longer considers bin laden a priority.
If he was dead/in US custody, why wouldn't the republicunt leader come out and say it?
Fucking gullible jackass. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
Maybe you should ask the Kurds who controls that area, and maybe you should look at Anbar province...
In other words, get your head out of your ass, and wake up. |
Lets see, 160,000 troops and 40,000,000 Iraqis.
I guess we will prevail........ in about 2 million years you dolt. Taking bets on what will happen after 1/20/09????? |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by ChaseDC
Keep repeating the outdated propaganda talking points, bushbot. |
Look at what the democrats were trying to push through with the last spending authorization (dates certain for withdrawal regardless of conditions on the ground) and tell me that that phrase, however politically charged, is inaccurate. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
Lets see, 160,000 troops and 40,000,000 Iraqis.
I guess we will prevail........ in about 2 million years you dolt. Taking bets on what will happen after 1/20/09????? |
:lol:
40,000,000 Iraqis?!?
With all due respect, you need to stop now because you have no idea what you are talking about. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Staying on topic, here is the transcript of General Petraeus' interview on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallice.
(I know someone is going to post that Colin Powell "I'm not reading all that" image, but it's worth the time.
FOX NEWS SUNDAY" HOST CHRIS WALLACE: Joining us now, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus.
General, let's start with the latest news. It was announced yesterday that U.S. forces found those two military I.D. cards of the missing American soldiers. Do you have any new leads on where they are?
PETRAEUS: Chris, we are evaluating the materials that we found in the house with those cards. I would not characterize any of those, however, as particularly hot leads.
We continue the effort in that particular area and in some other areas in Iraq, and we will not give that up.
WALLACE: This week you finally got your full complement of forces in Iraq. How is the surge working so far? And to some degree, do you feel as if the operation is only now beginning?
PETRAEUS: We actually do. In fact, a lot of what we have done to this point has been so-called shaping operations for what we have just recently launched in the last 48 hours and some additional operations that we'll launch over the next 48 or so hours.
That's not to say that we have not used those forces as they have come in, but we just recently got the fifth and final Army surge brigade, the Marine Expeditionary Unit, and our combat aviation brigade, which add considerable combat power.
And they are enabling us now to launch operations into sanctuaries, areas in which we have had very little coalition force presence other than raids in recent years.
These are areas where Al Qaeda has established car bomb factories and other bases from which they have issued forth and then moved into Baghdad to attack targets, often indiscriminately.
WALLACE: But how is the surge working so far? General Odierno, your number two, said this weekend that he believes that you have control over only 40 percent of Baghdad. Is that accurate?
And how do you feel it's going in terms of clearing out and securing Baghdad and Anbar province?
PETRAEUS: Well, I think, Chris, as I mentioned to the press yesterday, we're ahead of where we thought, I thought, we would be at this point in time, and then we are behind where we might have been in some other areas.
Anbar province is an area that, as you'll recall, was assessed to be lost less than a year or so ago by the military intelligence folks that were in Anbar province.
There's been a stunning reversal out there as tribes have said that whoever opposes Al Qaeda is with us, "We want to fight Al Qaeda. Will you help us, coalition forces?" And we have, indeed, done that.
And then they have been tied into the ministries of interior and defense so there's a linkage to the Iraqi government.
In Baghdad, there are certainly some neighborhoods — as General Odierno said it yesterday, there's about 30 percent of the neighborhoods about which we have real concern. These are the areas of the fault lines between Sunni and Shia.
We are focusing on them quite intently, and the additional forces will enable us to conduct additional operations in those areas.
Outside of Baghdad, the Baghdad belts, as they're called, south and north of the city, are areas into which we are now going in much greater force, again, areas in which Al Qaeda has had some sanctuary in the past.
And then in Diyala province, an area to which some of the Al Qaeda fighters have moved as they have been pushed out of Anbar and out of some of the Baghdad neighborhoods, is an area that requires considerable additional attention over the coming weeks, and it will get that as well.
WALLACE: General, the Pentagon issued its quarterly report this week, and it indicated that there has been no measurable progress so far. Let's take a look.
The Pentagon said the total number of weekly attacks on Iraqi civilians, Iraqi forces and U.S. forces actually went up from the last month before the surge to the first three months of the surge.
And the Pentagon report concluded the aggregate level of violence in Iraq remained relatively unchanged during this reporting period.
General, why shouldn't we back home view that as disappointing?
PETRAEUS: Well, the aggregate level is about the same. We actually have borne the brunt of much more of that, as have Iraqi security forces, and civilians a good bit less.
In fact, one of the metrics that we track, which is sectarian murders and executions in Baghdad, went down — by months, it was down to about a third — by the end of April, it was down to about a third of where it was back in January.
It did come back up as we announced in the month of May a little less than half. That is trending back down again.
The fact is that as we go on the offensive, the enemy is going to respond. That is what has happened. Car bombs have been coming steadily down. And as I mentioned, sectarian executions in Baghdad in particular have come down.
So again, certainly it is a mix, and that is what I've tried to convey with my assessment, that we're ahead in some areas and we need to do some serious work in others.
WALLACE: Senate Majority Leader Reid this week questioned your credibility after you gave an interview in which you said you saw, quote, "astonishing signs of normalcy in Baghdad such as soccer games and open markets." And here's how Senator Reid responded. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HARRY REID, D-NEV.: We're now back up to 1,000 attacks a day in Iraq. And for someone, whether it's General Petraeus or anyone else, to say things are great in Baghdad isn't in touch with what's going on in Baghdad, even though he's there and I'm not.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: General, the argument seems to be that we're getting spin out of Baghdad and not the straight talk as to what the situation is there. Your response.
PETRAEUS: Chris, I've tried hard to be forthright all along in this endeavor. My testimony before the Senate in January, again in April, when I did a VTC in the middle of that as well, with every congressional delegation and with the press, I have tried not to pull punches.
I base my assessments, what I offer, on personal observation, walking around Baghdad, driving around it, flying around it. The fact is that there are signs of normalcy throughout a good bit of Baghdad. There are tens of thousands of kids that will be out there tonight playing soccer.
In fact, we flew around the city on the way over here today, since they'd lifted the curfew, just to see how things were going. There's traffic all over the streets. The markets are reopened and so forth.
That is not to say — and in fact, in that interview I followed and also warned, for example, that the mosque bombing could spark new violence. I have tried hard to present both the good and the bad.
But I will not shrink from announcing that there is some good out there, if you will, that there is some normalcy, nor will I shrink from acknowledging that there is plenty of bad out there, as I did with the fact that we have to really focus on 30 percent of those Baghdad neighborhoods.
And there's certainly not much normalcy in some of those neighborhoods which are under the threat of both Al Qaeda and then extremist militias.
WALLACE: So how do you feel when you hear a senator here in Washington say that you're out of touch with what's going on in Baghdad?
PETRAEUS: Chris, as I said, I am just going to present what I see. I am going to provide a forthright assessment. That's the same thing that we'll do in September.
And frankly, we've got more than enough work out here to keep us occupied and to keep us focused and busy.
WALLACE: Let's talk about who's responsible for the situation in Iraq. In recent weeks, the president has been emphasizing the role of Al Qaeda. Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: The primary reason for the high level of violence is this. Al Qaeda has ratcheted up its campaign of high profile attacks.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: But again, the Pentagon quarterly report tells a very different story, and let's put that up. It says, "Much of the violence is attributable to sectarian friction."
And as you pointed out, there was a substantial jump in sectarian violence in May. Isn't the Sunni-Shiite conflict much more responsible for the violence in Iraq these days than Al Qaeda, sir?
PETRAEUS: I'm not so sure about that, Chris. In fact, Al Qaeda is the Sunni violence. Al Qaeda is the face of what is happening on the extremist Sunni side.
They are carrying out the bulk of the sensational attacks, the suicide car bomb attacks, suicide vest attacks and so forth.
This is, I think, all of the individuals in the intelligence community — General McCrystal, the head of our Joint Special Operations Command — all of us feel that the central front of Al Qaeda's terror war is focused on Iraq.
So I think it is appropriate to emphasize the role that Al Qaeda Iraq is playing and the role that they play in provoking and giving excuses to the extremist militias of the other side, of the Shia side, as a justification for what they are doing, ostensibly, to protect the Shia people, but then in their own turn carrying out violence of their own.
There is no question but that there is sectarian violence between, again, Al Qaeda, certainly between some other Sunni insurgent groups and these extremist militias.
And that is, in fact, what we are trying to try to break the cycle of, the cycle of violence that can really damage a neighborhood, the cycle of violence that, in fact, tore the fabric of society in Iraq and particularly in Baghdad, and especially in the mixed neighborhoods, during the latter part of 2006 and into the early part of this year, with really enormous damage as a result.
WALLACE: General, you talked briefly before about the fact that you're trying to split off some of the Sunni insurgents from Al Qaeda, especially out in Anbar province, and in fact, you've even gone to the lengths of arming some of the Sunni insurgents to fight Al Qaeda.
How do you know — or do you worry that they are going to end up using those weapons to either attack U.S. forces or to fight their civil war against the Shiites?
And how do you respond — we understand that aides to Prime Minister Maliki objected strongly about arming Sunni insurgents to Defense Secretary Gates yesterday, so how do you respond to that concern?
PETRAEUS: Well, those are legitimate concerns, and we have the same concerns. We have a good discussion going with the government of Iraq.
As I mentioned, the process really is to identify these individuals, try to vet them as best we can. By the way, we do biometric data on all of them. We link that to serial numbers of weapons and so forth.
And then what you want to do is you want to get them linked into legitimate government of Iraq institutions, starting out perhaps as what are called police support units; then, as they prove themselves, getting a ticket to the police academy so they can become full-fledged police, or volunteering for the Iraqi army.
The fact is that over time in any of these conflicts, individuals at some point have had to end up sitting across the table from those who at best tacitly were aware of what was going on against their adversary, and that we perhaps aided and abetted it.
Interestingly, we have a British three-star general — my deputy is the head of our particular effort here, the engagement and reconciliation cell that we have established in part because they've had some pretty tough experience in this regard themselves, having sat down at tables in northern Ireland and other places with individuals who, say, 10 years earlier were swinging pipes against their lads.
That's been instructive for us. We think that it has been carried out with sufficient safeguards in Anbar province. It has certainly completely changed the dynamics of Anbar province.
And now, by the way, you see a bottom-up political activity that is also ongoing, where city councils, neighborhood councils and so forth are getting elected and are gradually tying into the provincial council which, of course, ties into the government of Iraq.
We're even seeing that in some of the neighborhoods in Baghdad where neighborhood councils had ceased to exist because of the security threat, and they are now coming back to life as well.
Again, those are legitimate concerns. They are legitimate discussions with Prime Minister Maliki. He supported strongly what was going on in Anbar province.
It gets much tougher when you get into the mixed neighborhoods near Baghdad in the Baghdad belts, and we're all working together to try to ensure that there are safeguards so that we're not arming individuals who eventually take up arms against the government.
WALLACE: General, we have to take a quick break here.
But when we come back, the September deadline for a progress report on the surge. What can we expect? And can we rely on the Iraqi government to hold up its end of the bargain? Back with General Petraeus in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WALLACE: And we're back now with more of our exclusive interview with General David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq.
General, let's turn to the political situation in Baghdad. Back when you were being confirmed by the U.S. Senate, you said the point of the surge was not to win a military victory, but to give the Iraqi politicians time to reach out in national reconciliation. Let's take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETRAEUS: The objective will be to achieve sufficient security to provide the space and time for the Iraqi government to come to grips with the tough decisions its members must make to enable Iraq to move forward.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Now, that was five months ago, and since then the Iraqi politicians have failed repeatedly to meet benchmarks for political reform.
Hasn't that part of your surge strategy, trying to give the Iraqi politicians some breathing space — hasn't that failed, sir?
PETRAEUS: Well, there certainly have not been real substantial achievements in that regard so far.
However, the oil framework law and also now the oil revenue law are pieces of legislation in which the Iraqi leaders are very much coming to grips right now.
In fact, we helped bring down from the Iraqi Kurdish region last night the top negotiator, and we're at the stage where supposedly there are two sentences that must be resolved.
So I think it's time to see now if these important laws can go forward, in addition to some of the other smaller achievements that they've had in terms of the higher electoral council, the budget and so forth.
WALLACE: We understand that Secretary of Defense Gates basically gave the Iraqis a September deadline. He said we really have to see some measurable political reform by September. True?
PETRAEUS: Actually, not quite so blunt. In fact, Secretary Gates had a very good session with Prime Minister Maliki.
In fact, he started off by complimenting the prime minister and the other leaders with whom he met on their response to the Samarra mosque bombing. They were united in that effort. They were decisive.
And we think their response in ordering rapid steps to be taken has, in fact, helped hold down the level of violence to well below what took place in the wake of the February '06 bombing.
And in fact, I should know that yesterday there was an agreement with UNESCO and the government of Iraq to rebuild that Samarra mosque.
WALLACE: I mean, I understand that, sir, but you know, we here back in the states look and we see the oil law has not been passed, the constitution has not been amended, they have not held provincial elections, they have not brought Sunnis back into the government.
I mean, really, the glass is not half full.
PETRAEUS: Chris, I don't think anybody's satisfied with where they are, and the Iraqi officials are foremost among them. They're grappling with really basic issues here. We're talking about issues that will set the course for this country for years and decades to come.
Our own experience as a country, in fact, shows how difficult it is to resolve some of these very difficult issues.
They recognize fully that our ability to help them in the future depends on the progress that they show over the course of the next few months. They're keenly aware of that.
And I think they are going to do everything they can to try to inject hope into places like Washington and elsewhere to show that the Baghdad clock can indeed move a bit faster so that you can put a bit of time back on the Washington clock.
WALLACE: Well, let's start talking about the Washington clock. Less than a month ago, President Bush was talking up the importance of this progress report that you're going to be delivering to him and to Congress in September.
Let's put it up on the screen. Mr. Bush said, "I see it as an important moment because David Petraeus says that's when he'll have a pretty good assessment as to what the effects of the surge has been."
But now, sir, a number of top administration officials are downplaying the September report. Are you backing away from how much you're going to be able to say in September?
PETRAEUS: I am not. In fact, Ambassador Ryan Crocker, my diplomatic wing man here, and I will go back in September and we'll provide a snapshot of where we are at that time, and it will be a forthright assessment of what we've achieved and what we haven't achieved.
I'll talk, obviously, about the security aspects of the situation and he will address the political and economic ones.
We also owe it, we think, to the decision-makers at one end of Pennsylvania Avenue and those who provide advice and consent and resources for the policies at the other end some sense of the implications of the various courses of action that might be under discussion at that point in time.
There are some very serious centrifugal forces here in Iraq, and I think we all need to have very clear eyes about what can happen, what the implications of various options are and, again, just to assess those correctly.
WALLACE: Well, let's explore that. General Odierno, your number two, said this weekend that the Washington politicians need to give the surge more time.
Do you think by September you're going to have a reasonable and a realistic sense of how the surge has gone, whether, in fact, it is working or not working?
PETRAEUS: I think we will have a sense of that, Chris. I've said that all along. I started saying that back in January. I think we'll have had by then our forces in the mix for a good several months.
We'll have some sense of how we have done in these various sanctuaries that Al Qaida has had in the past that we are now entering for the first time in which we will endeavor to stay.
We'll have a sense of how we've done in some of these tough neighborhoods in Baghdad and how we are doing, also, all of this in partnership with our Iraqi security force counterparts in Diyala province and in some of the other areas of the country.
WALLACE: So you think by then that the policymakers in Washington — the president, his administration, members of Congress — can make a reasoned decision as to whether or not to continue with this strategy?
PETRAEUS: Well, what I've said, Chris, is that at that point in time, the ambassador and I think we can provide a reasonable snapshot of the situation at that time and how things have gone in the surge, both in the security and then in the political and economic arenas.
And it is, obviously, up to the policymakers and to the legislators to determine the course ahead.
WALLACE: Do you feel a sense of pressure? Do you feel that September deadline pressing in on you? And does it affect the decisions you make?
PETRAEUS: Chris, we've got a fairly heavy rucksack we're carrying out here, but thank goodness for all the tremendous troopers out here who, in truth, are really carrying the heavy burden of this.
We've got a lot of great help in taking this forward and we also have some wonderful partners on the Iraqi side.
But we do see that time staring us squarely in our eyes, and we're focused on it, and we're going to try to do all that we can with what we have between now and then.
WALLACE: There are reports that you and General Odierno would like the surge to continue until at least early 2008, that if it's going to work, it needs to continue into early next year. Is that true?
PETRAEUS: We've got a number of different options that we have looked at, Chris, and it really is premature at this point in time to try to prejudge that.
Again, I would suspect that late in the summer, early September, that we will provide some recommendations on the way ahead up our chain of command as well.
WALLACE: But you surely don't think the job would be done by the surge by September, do you, sir?
PETRAEUS: I do not, no. I think that we have a lot of heavy lifting to do. The damage done by the sectarian violence in the fall and winter of 2006 and early 2007, as I mentioned, was substantial. And this is a tough effort.
WALLACE: So then it would be fair to assume that the enhanced troop levels would continue for some months after that and into 2008.
PETRAEUS: Chris, again, premature right now. A number of options out there. And not about to announce what we might do here today, I'm afraid.
WALLACE: Well, you can't blame me for trying, sir. There are also some...
(LAUGHTER)
WALLACE: There are also some reports that you believe that we're going to need at least 130,000 troops in Iraq through the end of 2008. Is that true?
PETRAEUS: Chris, there's some wonderful mind-readers out there. I'd love to know who they are. But they seem to know what's in my mind better than I do.
Again, our first focus is on doing all that we can as we've truly now launched the surge and we have some reasonable expectations for what we can achieve.
Beyond that, we will obviously provide that assessment in September along with, I would suspect, at that time some recommendations on the way ahead. But you're looking out well beyond that, and we're not prepared to address that yet.
WALLACE: Well, let me look out even further than that, General. Some administration officials have talked about needing to make — and basically squaring with the American public, saying, "Look, this is going to be a long-term commitment," and even comparing it to the situation in South Korea, where we have had thousands of troops for decades.
Do you see this to stabilize and achieve what we want in Iraq as that kind of a long-term commitment?
PETRAEUS: Well, I think the real question, Chris, is at what level. I think just about everybody out there recognizes that a situation like this, with the many, many challenges that Iraq is contending with, is not one that's going to be resolved in a year or even two years.
In fact, typically, I think historically, counterinsurgency operations have gone at least nine or 10 years.
The question is, of course, at what level, how much will we have to continue to contribute during that time, how much more can the Iraqi security forces and the Iraqi government pick up as this goes along. And I think that's the real question. And I'm not sure what the right analogy is, whether it's Korea or what have you.
I think all that the folks in Washington were trying to indicate by that was that there is some possibility of some form of long-term security arrangement over time.
And I think in general that that's probably a fairly realistic assessment, assuming that the Iraqi government, in fact, does want that to continue. And of course, it is very much up to them, and their sovereignty is paramount in all of this.
WALLACE: General, we have less than a minute left. Let's get to the bottom line here. Do you feel that we can still win in Iraq, that we can leave behind a stable, democratic government?
PETRAEUS: Chris, if I didn't believe that, I wouldn't be here. I wouldn't be leading the finest of young American men and women who are putting their lives on the line every day.
In the last two weeks, I've gone to memorial ceremonies, one of which was for four soldiers lost in one unit, another for six soldiers lost in one unit. And I can tell you that as you sit there at that, you obviously reflect on that particular question.
And again, I think that there is good prospect for progress in the months ahead that hopefully can be matched by progress in the political and economic arenas here in Iraq and, again, can give us hope for the way ahead.
WALLACE: General, I can't think of a better way to end this conversation. We want to thank you so much for giving us a progress report today. And please stay safe, sir.
PETRAEUS: Thanks, Chris. Good to be with you.
http://www.foxnews.com/fns/index.html |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
:lol:
See what I mean about cockroaches always exposing themselves...?!?!?!?!?!
RetardTheWord,
You don't realize how that transcript EXPOSES what an ignorant hypocrite and DUPED SUCKER you and your ass-pals are, and how right us "lefties" have been all along???
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA-AAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!
DOUCHE-BAG...!!!!!!!
Vacate The Turd
Crappy Member
Turd Polishing
Posting Frequency__________________________
Shitting All Over the Board Like a MoFo... |
|
|
|
|
|
