Maybe because the "Surge" hasn't really worked? But then again so many in the Govt. & Media are saying that it has worked? But what does "worked" mean? Victory for the US in Iraq? Obviously not because if the US was victorious most US troops would be coming home ASAP & Bush would be planning parades all over Washington/NYC.
But then again does anyone even follow the Iraq war anymore?
2007-12-01 07:27:56 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
To answer your question:
Yes, lets get you up on current events?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1107/Murthas_comments_on_surge_may_be_a_big_problem_for_House_Democrats.html
Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), one of the leading anti-war voices in the House Democratic Caucus, is back from a trip to Iraq and he now says the "surge is working."
Pelosi, who is scheduled to speak to a Democratic National Committee event in Virginia on Friday (yesterday), will surely face tough questions from reporters regarding Murtha's statement on the surge.
"This could be a real headache for us," said one top House Democratic aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "Pelosi is going to be furious."
2007-12-01 07:34:52 · answer #1 · answered by T-Bone 7 · 7⤊ 3⤋
I think in some areas the surge has worked in quelling the violence. But I feel what the various groups are really doing is laying low until the U.S pulls out most of the troops under whatever new administration takes over in 2009. Then all, you know what, will break out.
2007-12-01 08:10:50 · answer #2 · answered by Robert S 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think Bush has now learned his lesson about trying to make any broad commentary.
He's a slow learner, but he does learn.
As far as whether the surge has worked or is working, it's simply a matter of vision and faith.
If you believe in trying your best to make Bush's policies turn into a positive - you will be encouraged by the surge.
If you believe that the war was all wrong from the getgo and it's better to just reshape everything after November of '08 then you're not going to have a "half full" outlook on things.
As couch potato Americans, we can't really know what's going on in Iraq... I won't pretend I do...
I listen to some of the most informative news broadcasts available and I still can't make heads or tails of it. It's still a matter of opinion for even the highest decorated officials.
2007-12-01 07:39:43 · answer #3 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Its not Bush's surge, its Americas. When our troops are fighting, they are fighting for America.
The mission isnt declared accomplished because its not over yet. The Iraqi security force needs to be ready. Until then, we would just be handing the country to Al Queda if we cut and run like the democrats have wanted for a while now.
2007-12-01 08:28:44 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Because it has not worked... try as they might to convince us otherwise. People are still dying daily.. there are no free elections.. and the country is falling into civil war. So just what has worked. Lets see.. halibruton and Bushie friends are getting very rich.. that's about it.
Oh yeah, and there are thousands of young military who will not be home for Christmas.. but Bush doesn't care about that... he has a wedding to plan.. and he is busy playing peacemaker with Israel. What a joke, the biggest war monger in history and he thinks he can bring about peace..
2007-12-01 07:47:33 · answer #5 · answered by Debra H 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
At this point the surge has not played itself out. I will stick to the prediction I made back when it started, which was:
>the increased troop presence would lead to a temporary reduction in violence
>no fundamental progress would be made regarding stabilizatioon fo the country (so far, almost all of the "benchmarks" have not been met, nor does that appear likely to change)
>when the "surge" ends, the violence will resume--with increased casualties for American troops, unless we get out and let the Iraqis have their country back.
There are already signs the violence is beginning to escalate again. In short, it's following exactly the pattern I thought it would.
2007-12-01 07:41:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
Must be true as someone posted a link where Murtha came back the other day from over there and said it is working. Then he was chastised by Rep Nancy Pelozi, Democratic House Majority Whip and they said she was HOT about it. Would not think so much party fighting if not true. Take care.
2007-12-01 08:01:28 · answer #7 · answered by R J 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
HIs surge will work as long as we keep forces in place.
What is missing is a political solution.
Bush's occupation will continue for as long as they can loot and plunder Iraq AND the American people.
It never WAS about " victory " .
2007-12-01 07:41:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
No. The Republicans would like to forget that GW Bush really was the last Republican president. They would also like to forget the incredible screw ups that he was responsible for, like attacking a sovereign country under false pretenses, namely Iraq.
2016-05-27 03:23:13 · answer #9 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes the surge worked. Since the media doesn't care about Iraq because there isn't daily bloodshed, that alone should tell you that it has.
Plus, even some of the most harsh critics, such as Murtha, have even come out and admitted the Surge worked.
He hasn't said mission accomplished, because he looked like an *** when he did that last time. heh.
2007-12-01 07:30:59 · answer #10 · answered by falcon 4 · 7⤊ 4⤋