No Wonder Libs Are Upset - The Surge Is Working

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by red states rule, Mar 16, 2007.

  1. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    MIL-IRAQ-US SOLDIERS
    Baghdad security crackdown seriously curbs killings of US soldiers

    BAGHDAD, March 14 (KUNA) -- The rate of killings of US troops in Iraq has been on the decline, down by 60 percent, since the launch of the new security measures in Baghdad, according to statistics revealed by the Multi-National Force -Iraq Combined Press Information Centre.

    Only 17 members of the US military in Iraq have been killed since February 14 till March 13, compared to 42 from January 13 to February 13; the rate was on the decline during the first month of the security crackdown, compared to a month before.

    Two of the 17 soldiers died at US Baghdad camps of non-combat causes.

    The remarkable decrease in killings among the US troops came at a time when more of these troops were deployed in the Iraqi capital, especially in districts previously regarded as extremely hazardous for them such as Al-Sadr City, Al-Azamiyah, and Al-Doura.

    Meanwhile, US attacks on insurgent strongholds north of Baghdad curbed attacks against helicopters. Before the new security plan, many such craft were downed leaving 20 soldiers dead.

    The US army in Iraq had earlier said that sectarian fighting and violence in Baghdad had dropped sharply, by about 80 percent, since the launch of the plan.

    The statistics excluded US troops killed in other governorates such as Al-Anbar, Diyala, and Salahiddin.

    As to the latest human losses, the US army announced Wednesday that two American soldiers had been killed, one in southern Baghdad and the other northeast of the capital.(end) ahh.

    http://www.kuna.net.kw/Home/Story.aspx?Language=en&DSNO=961365
     
  2. Paul Revere
    Offline

    Paul Revere Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    374
    Thanks Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Fayetteville, PA.
    Ratings:
    +25
    So 17 US troops killed is cause for you to cheer?

    I have a link to a yahoo photo that seems to dispute your claim, but I am not yet privileged to post links on this forum.

    Now that you make the claim that the surge is working in your educated opinion, then I expect that you will not see any need to escalate beyond this point. I expect that you will oppose all future calls for more escalations, surges, piling on the cannon fodder, etc. Any future increases should be met by calling back the coalition members (such as the British) that have pulled out, right?

    You quote a Kuwati source, weren't they the ones that gave us the "Iraqi soldiers were throwing babies on the floor to steal the incubators" story?
     
  3. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572


    Even NBC's Brian Williams reported on the NBC News the surge is working and prgress is being made, even though the area is still dangerous

    If the Dems get their way, how will handing Iarq over to the terroists make the US safer and help the US win the war on terror?
     
  4. ErikViking
    Offline

    ErikViking VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    904
    Thanks Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Stockholm - Sweden
    Ratings:
    +107
    Hi, would you mind commenting on this?
    http://www.usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?t=46577
    I started the thread but it didn't draw much attention.
     
  5. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572

    9-11 changed the rules. There was no doubt Saddam had WMD's and was a threat. He ignored the libs beloved UN and continued to fund terrorist groups

    To the Bush haters, Saddam was worth having around, and no matter what Pres Bush supports the moonbats oppose
     
  6. ErikViking
    Offline

    ErikViking VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    904
    Thanks Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Stockholm - Sweden
    Ratings:
    +107
    The bottom line is:
    The debate about troops in Iraq is bothersome. USA has a job to finish there. The glamourous victory might be won, but leaving now would be very disappointing.
     
  7. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    Oh boy, now the moonbats will target you and call you a lapdog for Pres Bush


    Even the liberal media is starting to report some of the good news from Iraq


    Williams in Baghdad: New Pockets of Peace, Iraqis Don't Want to See Americans Go
    Posted by Mark Finkelstein on March 6, 2007 - 12:14.
    Talk about your inconvenient truth . . .

    Reporting from Baghdad this morning, and continuing a theme that MRC's Brent Baker spotted last evening, NBC Nightly News host Brian Williams let a cat out of the bag that could leave some serious scratch marks on MSM/DNC calls for stopping the surge and withdrawing US troops from Iraq. Williams said that US troops:

    "are also aware, especially in the outposts, that it's the Iraqi people who are very reluctant to see the Americans go, because in many cases that's what's keeping the peace in town."
    View video here.

    Earlier, and even on a day in which he reported on nine American troops having been killed in two separate explosions, Williams also suggested that the security situation in Iraq is improving in some aspects:

    "Six [US troops killed] in Salahuddin province and three in Diyala province. But note what we're not reporting this morning. We are not reporting another car bomb or suicide bomber, IED has gone off in central Baghdad or in Sadr City, the usual locations where the sad drumbeat of news on morning's like this one normally comes from. This conflict is changing . . . We have a conflict where the tempo may be changing and we have pockets of new peace, but it is still a very dangerous war."

    Whoops! Will Williams' observations make it out of NBC, into the MSM at large and onto Capitol Hill?


    http://newsbusters.org/node/11217
     
  8. ErikViking
    Offline

    ErikViking VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    904
    Thanks Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Stockholm - Sweden
    Ratings:
    +107
    Why? I mean, it isn't about liking war. It is about fullfilling comittments. The cost in lives would be a complete waste if things are left like this. And I talk about the hunderedthousand innocent civilians.

    I actually get a bit upset thinking about it.

    If USA pulls out of Iraq without stability in the country I suggest you hand over the armed forces to a nation with a higher feeling of responsabillity too.
     
  9. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572


    The moonbat libs will never join and fight the war on terror - they are to engaged with their war on Bush

    Where was all the liberal compassion when Saddam was filling the mass graves, firing on US jets in the NFZ during the cease fire, funding terrorist groups, and stealing hundreds of million from the UN's Oil for Food Program?

    Libs have a very rigid set of rules of engagment. If Pres Bush is for it - they will be against it. logic, truth, and facts be damned
     
  10. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    Pelosi hears boos at AIPAC
    By Ian Swanson
    March 13, 2007
    Members of the main pro-Israel lobbying group offered scattered boos to a statement by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) that the Iraq war has been a failure on several scores.

    The boos, mixed with some polite applause, stood in stark contrast to the reception House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) received minutes earlier. Most of the crowd of 5,000 to 6,000 stood and loudly applauded Boehner when he said the U.S. had no choice but to win in Iraq.

    Pelosi and Boehner were speaking at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) annual meeting. AIPAC has not taken a position on the war in Iraq or the supplemental spending bill to be considered this week by the House Appropriations Committee, but much of Boehner’s speech was about the future of the Iraq conflict.

    Boehner sought to link the fight in Iraq to the future of Israel, as he said a failure in Iraq would pose a direct threat to Israel.

    Pelosi said the U.S. military campaign in Iraq had to be judged on three accounts: whether it makes the U.S. safer, the U.S. military stronger and the region more stable.

    “The war in Iraq fails on all three counts,” Pelosi said. Some of the crowd applauded before catcalls and boos could be heard. A spokesman for AIPAC argued the boos were in response to those clapping for Pelosi.

    AIPAC leaders have said about 6,000 of their members are in town for this week’s annual meeting, which ends today. Members are set to lobby individual lawmakers on the Hill for the rest of today. A priority for the group is to convince Congress to approve tougher sanctions on Iran, which is seen as a growing threat to Israel.

    http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/pelosi-hears-boos-at-aipac-2007-03-13.html
     

Share This Page