I think that this administration believes that if they repeat something enough times that everybody will believe it whether or not there's any proof to back up their nonsense.
2007-10-18 16:21:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by Jeff H 5
·
1⤊
4⤋
The reality is the US is an army of occupation in Iraq. And a country that does not want to be occuppied is very costly to hold on to, both in lives and financially. And in the case of Iraq, Saddam has now been replaced with the ruling Shi'ite which is attached to Iran, al Quaeda and Hezbolla. It would have been far easier controlling Saddam.
As to Patreaus, he testified before Congress that there was no end in site. I din't think that a positive statement. And Hannity is simply an old Reagan writer and spin doctor. Trust little from his show.
2007-10-18 16:37:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by genghis1947 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Oh if Hannity said it it must be true. The reality things are not going great in Iraq! Though military deaths are down they are still at the same numbers they were in 2003 and there is no end to this war as there is no government to turn Iraq over to! In that regard we have totally failed, and civilian deaths are not down! This war has been going on longer than WW II with no end in sight.
I don't listen to Fox and people are still coming home every day in body bags as none were before we illegally invaded Iraq! I guess it depends on how you determine success! Bush said it was a success about 5 years ago. I guess he was wrong!
2007-10-18 16:35:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by cantcu 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Good Things happen everyday in Iraq, but it is unfortunate that the Liberal Media DOES NOT REPORT IT. If you want to HEAR THE TRUTH about Iraq, I recommend you to watch The 700 Club (Christian Broadcasting Network) or FOX News.
2007-10-18 16:43:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by Mr. Knowledgeable VI 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Success is NOT acheived! IT might be getting there slowly. But I don't think we're there yet. I think the generals haVe put a good spin on things. But the war is FAR from over...it won't happen in the coming years. HOpefully it'll happen before I turn fifty.
2007-10-18 16:22:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by Uncertain Soul 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
He did NOT say things are going great.
Please get your facts straight.
He basically said based on the resources given he was accomplishing specific tasks in the greater war.
HUGE different.
The fact any of it is used in some misguided greater political agenda is disgusting.
2007-10-18 16:20:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Things are better in Iraq but the blind bush haters will always see the glass as half empty...even when it's almost full.
The best way to support our troops is to support their mission.
2007-10-18 16:30:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
They were going great in February, 2003.
2007-10-18 16:22:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
If he said things were not going great, Bush would have him replaced in an instant.
2007-10-18 16:30:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I recall westmoreland saying that at some point about another country
2007-10-18 16:22:02
·
answer #10
·
answered by here to help 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Let us begin the lessons
in the
fine art of spin...
2007-10-18 16:37:55
·
answer #11
·
answered by roostershine 4
·
1⤊
1⤋