English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

A few months ago they were say it wouldn't work it's a waste of manpower and money...blah blah blah...now they are all praising the surge and Murtha today, of all people, flipped....is this just to confuse people and to get votes from the pro military people?

2007-11-30 14:17:21 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

I didn't specify what was or was not working..it's obvious the spin about the Iraqi govt starts..I guess I needed to be specific word for word for people to understand what I was asking......simply...militarily....was that so hard to undrstand?

2007-11-30 15:57:43 · update #1

16 answers

Everything's about votes...the government is a big waffle iron....flip, flip, flip.

2007-11-30 14:21:43 · answer #1 · answered by Mizz SJG 7 · 2 0

I listened to Murtha today and he said that the surge had improved stability over there, but he plainly said THE GOVERNMENT leaders have to step up and get their act together. He said we can do this for awhile, but if the leaders don't step up and meet their responsibilities (Iraqi), then we will be there many more years unless the US brings the boys home. Murtha, I don't believe has flip flopped. He is stating the facts as they are. If the three tribes could agree to split the country into 3 partitions, and try to get along with one another, this would be the best route to go, but Iraq needs a strong teamleader to help them accomplish this. They've been fighting since biblical times, so that could be America's last best hope.

2007-11-30 22:51:44 · answer #2 · answered by Sunny louise 4 · 1 0

If the Escalation-I mean "Surge"- is "working" why are there still more Iraqi "insurgent" attacks on U.S. Troops than on Iraqi forces and civilians combined?

"Six months after the surge was actually launched, in mid- February, it has failed as dismally as so many First World War offensives. The US Defense Department says that, this June, the average number of attacks on US and Iraqi forces, civilian forces and infrastructure peaked at 177.8 per day, higher than in any month since the end of May 2003. The US has failed to gain control of Baghdad. The harvest of bodies picked up every morning first fell and then rose again. This may be because the Mehdi Army militia, who provided most of the Shia death squads, was stood down by Sadr. Nobody in Baghdad has much doubt that they could be back in business any time they want. Whatever Bush might say, the US military commanders in Iraq clearly did not want to take on the Mehdi Army and the Shia community when they were barely holding their own against the Sunni."

2007-11-30 22:48:18 · answer #3 · answered by Richard V 6 · 2 1

God did you actually read what Murtha said? He said the military portion is working but the Iraqi politicians have still NOT begun the political work it will take to bring the majority of the troops home, get informed you look foolish when you don't know what you're talking about, there are still 17 empty seats in the Parliament the Iraqi's, much like Bush, don't really want to govern, so the surge is just a stop gap

2007-11-30 22:38:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

Because the media is spinning the news to present a more positive picture. they did it during Vietnam to to keep Americans in a war they didnt want to be in. They are doing it now as well. Watch Ron Paul speak at the last debate, CNN/You tube debate . He addressed this very topic in the second to last question of the debate.

The media lies all the time. They are not concerned with anything other than selling papers. The Post is a total rag, with the Tabloid like headlines. It is Horrible.

2007-11-30 22:25:04 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

the naysayers of the Iraqi war as saying what they always have said. It should have NEVER happened. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. Iraq was not a threat to the U.S. They had no army, no navy, no air force. No missiles that could reach the U.S. They were not a threat.

The issue of the surge should never have been an issue.

4000 U.S. citizens/troops should not have died
as many as a million Iraqi citizens should not have died.

who will be held responsible??????

2007-11-30 22:22:47 · answer #6 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 7 2

I am saying the same thing that I've been saying--bring the troops home. Does the surge "working" mean that we'll be there forever, trying to keep Iraq from falling apart and spending money we don't have? It's ridiculous.

2007-11-30 22:43:03 · answer #7 · answered by relevant inquiry 6 · 1 1

That's good it is working, Does this mean the mission is accomplished and Iraq is safe and sound. Now our troops can come home and we can start spending our tax money to take care of America.

2007-11-30 22:30:28 · answer #8 · answered by Just my opinion 5 · 2 1

They?? You can't lump us all together anymore than you can say all people in the military forces are war mongers. I' ve never supported the war and never will.

2007-11-30 22:30:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

They are starting to take such a beating for being so invested in America's defeat they had to do something before they lose too much support come election time.

2007-11-30 22:31:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers