tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post833447904378343786..comments2008-05-04T21:11:29.639-05:00LTnoreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-75249733929703946372008-05-04T21:11:00.000-05:002008-05-04T21:11:00.000-05:00<I><B>Who the hell cares what people are "talking" about?</B><BR/><BR/>Fact is, whether anyone talks about it or not, the war is just as lost as it was a year ago, maybe worse.<BR/><BR/>Tom</I><BR/><BR/>The issue of who was talking about what is what spawned this conversation:<BR/><BR/><I>I don't believe that the majority of the people we are killing and the things were are destroying are non-Iraqi.<BR/><BR/>Jay, any time you are in an insurgency, you have to do it in a manner in which you kill insurgents at a rate greater than new ones are created by your policies. Certainly the Sadr army is made up of Iraqis, and we've been battling them for most of last month.<BR/><BR/><B>Notice that conservative pundits are no longer touting the fact that "the surge is working"?</B> Fighting's the heaviest it's been in years.<BR/><BR/>Tom Trumpinski</I><BR/><BR/>You still think the war was a catastrophic mistake and completely unsalvageable. That's fine. I think we agreed to disagree about that years ago. And now we apparently both agree that "what people are talking about" is not an accurate way to judge the success or failure of the war or the surge.kofi the what *i* am talking about is an accurate way to judge the success or failure of anythingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-63244608459102333422008-05-04T15:18:00.000-05:002008-05-04T15:18:00.000-05:00Who the hell cares what people are "talking" about?<BR/><BR/>Fact is, whether anyone talks about it or not, the war is just as lost as it was a year ago, maybe worse.<BR/><BR/>Tomtethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17948258343798697504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-75130507904507424832008-05-03T22:26:00.000-05:002008-05-03T22:26:00.000-05:00Indeed, Kofi, you've hit the nail on the head: the surge is a success because it has provided cover under which war proponents can hide while still having no clear overall strategic objective in sight.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15122739984463983527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-49299698597921988172008-05-03T20:52:00.000-05:002008-05-03T20:52:00.000-05:00The surge is work<I>ing</I>. Sure, it has not work<I>ed</I>, but its a function over time. The fact is before the surge everyone was talking about how we were doomed to absolute failure; that we would have to withdraw in retreat and leave the factions and neighboring states to pick up the pieces. Now even the Dems are talking about long term success. Notice that liberal pundits are no longer touting the fact that "the war is lost"?koif the you apparently would interrogate a college sophomore about why she had failed at collegenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-11833306042621964902008-05-03T15:26:00.000-05:002008-05-03T15:26:00.000-05:00What was the most important avowed purposes of the surge?<BR/><BR/>1) To give the Iraqi government breathing space to establish themselves in a secure position to take over running the country.<BR/><BR/>2) To use the extra troops to break the back of the insurgency and wipe out AQI.<BR/><BR/>Hsve these been met? General Petraeus, when he testified before Congress, said no not only to those, but to the less important benchmarks that were set. <BR/><BR/>This is why the US troops are not being reduced, as planned. I figure Petraeus ought to know.<BR/><BR/>Tomtethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17948258343798697504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-600664882777922082008-05-02T23:00:00.000-05:002008-05-02T23:00:00.000-05:00None of your points have any bearing on whether or not <I>the surge</I> is currently "working."kofi the overall results of the entire war are a different matter than "the surge"noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-61692986588328296542008-05-02T22:38:00.000-05:002008-05-02T22:38:00.000-05:00Highest American casualties in months, Kofi. By any measure, after five years, they should be minimal or decreasing.<BR/><BR/>It's now the fourth longest war in US history.tethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17948258343798697504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-51381398691822642482008-05-02T12:11:00.000-05:002008-05-02T12:11:00.000-05:00Tom,<BR/><BR/>Seriously man, where do you get your news? Every conservative thing I watch / listen to is still praising the surge. Obviously fighting is ongoing, but that's because the surge forces are moving into new areas not because the surge failed. If surge talk isn't as prevalent as it once was, it's not because the surge is failing but because the focus of the media right now is on the economy and the Dems. If the surge was failing all we would hear about - from Hill, Barack, and their cronies in the MSM - is the Iraq. But its working so we get to hear about the economy and gas prices. Don't worry, once the race shifts to Rep vs Dem the surge talk will resurface. Of course it will never be as intense as it once was, but that's only signifies the Dems and the MSM's reluctance to focus on something positive the Reps have done.kofi the no the daily show is not an adequate news sourcenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-52138902104137921862008-05-02T10:46:00.000-05:002008-05-02T10:46:00.000-05:00I don't believe that the majority of the people we are killing and the things were are destroying are non-Iraqi.<BR/><BR/>Jay, any time you are in an insurgency, you have to do it in a manner in which you kill insurgents at a rate greater than new ones are created by your policies. Certainly the Sadr army is made up of Iraqis, and we've been battling them for most of last month.<BR/><BR/>Notice that conservative pundits are no longer touting the fact that "the surge is working"? Fighting's the heaviest it's been in years.<BR/><BR/>Tom Trumpinskitethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17948258343798697504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-12837980483246742372008-05-01T21:11:00.000-05:002008-05-01T21:11:00.000-05:00<I>Jay, what percentage of the people we are killing and the things we are breaking are Iraqi?</I><BR/><BR/>Tom,<BR/><BR/>So you don't believe that a significant portion of the insurgency is made up of non-Iraqis?kofi the incredulousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-57164902701172697502008-05-01T17:05:00.000-05:002008-05-01T17:05:00.000-05:00Jay, what percentage of the people we are killing and the things we are breaking are Iraqi?<BR/><BR/>My guess is that it's quite high. It was a pre-emptive war and it was most certainly <B>on</B> Iraq. I plan on using the phrase henceforth, as a matter of fact.<BR/><BR/>Tomtethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17948258343798697504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-27267858044734092362008-05-01T08:24:00.000-05:002008-05-01T08:24:00.000-05:00Great post LT. I'm very glad that our Middle East Bureau is reporting on stories that no one has covered (at least to my limited knowledge). I hope this get some attention in the blogosphere, it is deserving.Billy Joe Millshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11143633347140016194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-86869437876627643692008-05-01T07:54:00.000-05:002008-05-01T07:54:00.000-05:00"War is peace" "Freedom is slavery" The "Department of Defense" conducts wars on foreign soil. We use all sorts of framing techniques to send a message.Hannohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13243676562527233230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32078264.post-33999555191586545912008-05-01T07:25:00.000-05:002008-05-01T07:25:00.000-05:00Well,<BR/><BR/>I'd take "on" to mean we are at war with or against Iraq, which we aren't. Technically, you could say that the war ON Iraq means it is simply taking place on Iraqi soil. The war is taking place IN Iraq against what many consider an amorphous blob of hostiles.<BR/><BR/>When I was in Asia last year, there were many little nuances of translation that were quite interesting to ponder. Very interesting post.JayBandithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08712359281641660335noreply@blogger.com