What the NY Times doesn't want you to see...

[jreeves]

GETTING IRAQ RIGHT
By JOHN McCAIN


July 22, 2008 --
EDITORS' NOTE: The New York Times wouldn't print this oped from the GOP candidate.


AS he took command in Iraq in January 2007, Gen. David Petraeus called the situation "hard" but not "hopeless." Today, 18 months later, violence has fallen by up to 80 percent to the lowest levels in four years, and Sunni and Shiite terrorists are reeling from a string of defeats. The situation is full of hope - but considerable hard work remains to consolidate our fragile gains.

Progress has been due mainly to an increase in the number of troops and a change in their strategy. I was an early advocate of the surge at a time when it had few supporters in Washington. Sen. Barack Obama was an equally vocal opponent.

"I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there," he said on Jan. 10, 2007. "In fact, I think it will do the reverse."

Now Sen. Obama has been forced to acknowledge that "our troops have performed brilliantly in lowering the level of violence." But he still denies that any political progress has resulted. Perhaps he's unaware that the US embassy in Baghdad has recently certified that, as one news article put it, "Iraq has met all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress."

Even more heartening has been progress that's not measured by the benchmarks:

* More than 90,000 Iraqis, many of them Sunnis who once fought against the government, have signed up as Sons of Iraq to fight against the terrorists.

* Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has found the will to crack down on Shiite extremists in Basra and Sadr City - dispelling suspicions that he's merely a sectarian leader.

The surge's success hasn't changed Sen. Obama's determination to pull out all of our combat troops. All that has changed is his rationale.


and more at....
http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly.../opedcolumnists/getting_iraq_right_120904.htm

 

[editec]

The surges success makes pulling out possible.

This is a bad thing?

 

[Charles_Main]

GETTING IRAQ RIGHT
By JOHN McCAIN


July 22, 2008 --
EDITORS' NOTE: The New York Times wouldn't print this oped from the GOP candidate.


AS he took command in Iraq in January 2007, Gen. David Petraeus called the situation "hard" but not "hopeless." Today, 18 months later, violence has fallen by up to 80 percent to the lowest levels in four years, and Sunni and Shiite terrorists are reeling from a string of defeats. The situation is full of hope - but considerable hard work remains to consolidate our fragile gains.

Progress has been due mainly to an increase in the number of troops and a change in their strategy. I was an early advocate of the surge at a time when it had few supporters in Washington. Sen. Barack Obama was an equally vocal opponent.

"I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there," he said on Jan. 10, 2007. "In fact, I think it will do the reverse."

Now Sen. Obama has been forced to acknowledge that "our troops have performed brilliantly in lowering the level of violence." But he still denies that any political progress has resulted. Perhaps he's unaware that the US embassy in Baghdad has recently certified that, as one news article put it, "Iraq has met all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress."

Even more heartening has been progress that's not measured by the benchmarks:

* More than 90,000 Iraqis, many of them Sunnis who once fought against the government, have signed up as Sons of Iraq to fight against the terrorists.

* Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has found the will to crack down on Shiite extremists in Basra and Sadr City - dispelling suspicions that he's merely a sectarian leader.

The surge's success hasn't changed Sen. Obama's determination to pull out all of our combat troops. All that has changed is his rationale.


and more at....
http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly.../opedcolumnists/getting_iraq_right_120904.htm

hardly sounds like an attack piece on Obama to me. I mean he mentions him a couple times, but he is hardly just bashing him, he is making valid points.

 

[Charles_Main]

The surges success makes pulling out possible.

This is a bad thing?

Not at all it is a good thing, what would be bad is Obama Gaining politically from a surge he opposed, and still says he would oppose knowing what he knows now

 

[Chris]

The surges success makes pulling out possible.

This is a bad thing?

I always surge before I pull out.

 

[Charles_Main]

I always surge before I pull out.

Then you are doing it wrong!!! With the pull out method of birth control it really helps if you pull out then surge!!

 

[Shogun]

I called it days ago. If the NYT won't be fair then take it strait to their competition.


goddamn, im good.

 

[jreeves]

The surges success makes pulling out possible.

This is a bad thing?

It's a very good thing, the surge something that MCcain has long supported. While Obama stated it wouldn't make a difference, but now he says that he always thought that adding an extra 30,000 troops would make a difference.

 

[Charles_Main]

It's a very good thing, the surge something that MCcain has long supported. While Obama stated it wouldn't make a difference, but now he says that he always thought that adding an extra 30,000 troops would make a difference.

Yep, Yet Obama is not a flip flopper he just revises his positions. Wait NM he still refuses to say he would have supported the surge knowing what he knows now, thats not flip flopping, it is just plain DUMB! Frankly I would have respected him more if he just was man enough to say, You know what, I was wrong.