How about this
Civilian deaths down 36%
We are capturing Al Qaeda Militants 3 times as fast as ALL of last year
And we are killing more and more members of Al Qaeda every week.
Before you say the surge is "failing" why don't we wait to September when the report on the surge comes out?
2007-07-10 13:57:39 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Well cora you must have been looking at a liberal news source.
2007-07-10 14:04:13 · update #1
Hey it's been three weeks at the full strength, You can't expect Harry Reid to wait that long before surrendering... just another proof that the left is only out for the election.... and any support the throw for the military is only for soundbite benefit.
2007-07-10 14:02:32 · answer #1 · answered by garyb1616 6 · 5⤊ 6⤋
First of all, the death toll is once again starting to rise. In fact, the number of attacks overall is now starting to set records. It simply moves from where we are to areas where we aren't. The insurgents purposefully lie low until we are gone in a given area and then wreak havoc when we leave because Iraqis have been incapable of securing anything. This will be true now or 10 years from now. Iraq requires a political solution, not a military one. And they have made ZERO progress on the political goals. It's a disaster and we need to start getting out.
You're somewhat right about al Qaeda. However, it's not due to the surge. It's due to Sunni tribesmen turning against them. Oddly enough, many analysts think this could worsen the situation. Their increase in strength could actually fuel more sectarian tension, worsening the civil war. And yes, it is a civil war among insurgents, a war that actually has little to do with with the global war on terror.
2007-07-10 14:50:33 · answer #2 · answered by Jeff P 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Where are you getting this 36% drop number?
The only source I've seen for that is over a month old, and doesn't include the past two weeks --- which have had the highest civilian death count of any period in the past two years.
So, yes, there was a period of a few weeks when the rapid increase slowed down. And then it just went right back up increasing.
Or we can use the assessment of General Petraeus, who says the surge hasn't started yet -- so obviously it cannot be working if it hasn't even begun.
That's how they can say it's failing. Either it hasn't begun after five months of trying to start, or its its failed to stop the continually increasing casualty rates. Pick one.
2007-07-10 14:02:31 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 9⤊ 4⤋
The surge has been in place for a while now, and no, it isn't working. What really makes me scratch my head is that, despite all the outcry over soldier deaths and lack of progress and lack of homeland support for the war, Bush has succeeded in increasing troop levels and escalating the war. Iraq will fight a civil war, no matter what the United States does. It's time that you people accept that, and support a troop withdrawal.
2007-07-10 14:06:33 · answer #4 · answered by Liberal City 6 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Because of their blind hatred of President George W. Bush and for the US Armed Forces!!!
2007-07-11 02:34:37 · answer #5 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm perfectly willing to evaluate the effects of the strategy come September.
2007-07-10 14:28:04 · answer #6 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
What poppycock!
Unless you can provide a source for your information, it is all babble.
The major news outlets, newspapers, military and journalists in Iraq disagree with you.
Today they managed to drop mortar shells inside the Green Zone.
I don't know where you get your information but it is wrong, wrong, wrong.
2007-07-10 16:54:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
How can you say that? More Americans have been killed in the last calender quater and now the Iraqi leaders are telling people to arm themselves. Doesnt sound like its working to me!
2007-07-10 14:27:29 · answer #8 · answered by Gabe_the_Man82 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Politicians could care less about reality, except for the reality of what it takes to get elected.
2007-07-10 14:01:28 · answer #9 · answered by Roy 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Maybe the 205 deaths over the weekend.
2007-07-10 14:01:28 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
-Civilian deaths down 36%
In Baghdad, Iraq isn't just Baghdad. "Only" 1241 Iraqis were killed in Baghdad last month, or was it 1227?
http://www.abqtrib.com/news/2007/jul/02/iraqi-civilian-deaths-hit-low/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070701/wl_mideast_afp/iraqunrest_070701182137
"The accuracy of civilian death figures in Iraq has been in doubt since the start of the conflict and may reflect only a portion of the casualties nationwide."
http://www.abqtrib.com/news/2007/jul/02/iraqi-civilian-deaths-hit-low/
Also, American deaths have been on the rise.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003770726_iraq02.html?syndication=rss
2007-07-10 14:08:33 · answer #11 · answered by Liberals love America! 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋