Grave and Deteriorating

[Dhunter55]

Originally Posted by eleanor

"President Bush's war policies have failed in almost every regard, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group concluded Wednesday."

Well, thank you, Iraq Study Group.

Now that's a freakin revelation!



How much did it cost the tax payers for those bozos to cypher that?

[Broadside]

I know when the Dems get into office I would like to see our foreign policy change. Like stop giving our tax money away to other countries aka. buying our friends off which isn't working.

As to the US involvement in Iraq that's great everyone has an opinion and strategy or idea. I don't care what the Iraq Study Group thinks, says or does. I'm more interested in what the people of Iraq say, think and are going to do. It's their country after all because at some point in time we being the US are going to leave no matter if it's the right or wrong decision. What are we going to do to help the Iraq goverment move forward? Ask Iran to please play nice? I think Clinton did that with North Korea and guess what they got nukes now.....

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by Dhunter55

Well, thank you, Iraq Study Group.

Now that's a freakin revelation!



How much did it cost the tax payers for those bozos to cypher that?

That's the problem with eleanor's original post to start the thread. She summarized it so much that (not only does it conform with her own internal bias) it makes it look like that is the only thing that the ISG discovered!

To be fair, there are 79 reccommendations and well as many opinions about the conflict (some positive and some negative). To sum the entire ISG book up with "Bush's policies have failed in almost every regard" is misleading and cheapens the ISG's work and the discussion of this thread. The liberals want you to see "failure", "grave", "bush failed" etc, so that you think the entire ISG report was a "bush Bash" and that it backs up their opinion that Iraq is bad and that we should get out. As I have pointed out, it was nothing of the sort.

Very misleading, I must say.

Leave it to the partisans of this board to take a BI-PARTISAN report and try to twist it into supporting their own partisan opinions. The whole point of the ISG was to try to get everyone to come together and work on a solution to Iraq. It was not meant to become a politican football or be used to claim that any one side is right or wrong. I know that is what will happen though....

Originally Posted by eleanor

Oh Dear. I ask for a discussion, and all I get is accusation. This is not about me. I'm not even going to take part. I posted two QUOTES from "The News", gave a little opinion -- and, I'm now the focus. My opinion doesn't matter -- I'm not going to change your mind -- you will not change mine. I started what I thought might be a discussion. I WILL STAY OUT OF IT.

Have at it guys.

I didn't try to make it about you. I made it about how you unfairly characterized the findings of the ISG in order to somehow justify your views on the matter. You tried to summarize the entire report with "grave", "deteriorating" and "bush failed". Intentional or not (I'm going with intentional), that is what you did. I'm just trying to be fair here. If we are going to start a discussion about the ISG, post a neutral summary of the ISG (not cherry-picked facts that seem to validate your viewpoint) and let people decide.

Frank

[sjp2452]

Frank, good posts.

Eleanor, you cannot drop a bomb like you did to start this thread and then expect people to start tearing into each other, leaving your opinion alone. That's not the way it works. You post something that's CLEARLY politically motivated (your own motivation), and you invite critique. It IS about your view, since you're the one that started the thread with YOUR view. I think Frank's right on the money. The left seems to love to accuse the right of fostering such a negative tone and calling for bipartisanship (at least before they took over congress...we'll see how they do).

[robinsre]

Originally Posted by eleanor

Well, since I politely requested a discussion, I guess your best bet would be to read a newspaper, check out TV news, do a little independent research.

I really do not think it's my place to lead the class, do the research, assign the reading -- we are out of high school (I hope), and beyond undergrad. years (in age). It's O.K. if you don't care, aren't interested, think it foolish. I'm sure many others feel the same way. Of those many will vote based on the ABSOLUTE FACTS fed them by either left (or what passes for left these days) or right.

Discuss or not -- it matters not to me. It was just a passing thought.

Now...this was not a direct assault on you...more of an imploration to the general community to THINK about the source of their information...but since you're going on the offensive I will gladly counter...

No your right, its not your job to "assign reading" but if you're going to make a claim be prepared to substantiate it with some real facts, not just a snippet of information you may or may not have pulled from any given source.

[Nerves]

Originally Posted by robinsre

Let me start by saying don't flame me.

I'm not going to say that I do or do not support the current president, or the war in Iraq...I'm going to leave my own political believes completely out of this topic because they belong elsewhere...but information like this needs more substance to make it viable.

First of all what defines a "grave and deteriorating" situation. How much worse is this war now than it was at the start of the war? How bad is this conflict in relation to other conflicts the United States has been involved in? Don't use abstract terms, give me numbers...I don't need anyone spoon feeding me their perception of a situation...give me the facts I'll draw my own conclusions thank you.

Second...who are the "Iraq Study Group"...a congressional oversight committe? a group of private investors and industrialists? a group of third grade students from Mrs. Fark's class? What qualifies them to make this conjecture? Do they have a monetary, social, or political agenda?

I would suggest to read the report.

Here are fact about the group itself: http://www.usip.org/isg/isg_fact_sheet.pdf

The group is who's whos of both party line and best minds this country has.

and here's a copy of the actual report. I again suggest to please do reading before speculations.

http://www.usip.org/isg/iraq_study_g...206/index.html

[eleanor]

By the way, "Grave and deteriorating" was in the very first sentence of the report. Not exactly "cherry picking", is it?

[Frenchy]

To quote my dearly departed father..."You made this damned mess, now you can clean it up?"
Have at it, George...

[jdavionic]

Silly to post an opinionated statement (your second statement) & then get all bent because someone calls on you out for being biased. For a 60 yr old, you still have a lot of growing up to do.

With that aside, I want to see how GWB handles the idea of working with Iran and Syria. If we have proof that they are furnishing arms & training to kill our troops, I would strongly disagree with that approach.

I agree with the report that the idea of "staying the course" is not a good one. When Bush changed the goal to building a democracy in Iraq, we went from a decisive victory to defeat. I don't see this key issue being addressed by the commission and I don't see how we turn this thing around until it is addressed.

[bd]

Originally Posted by Blackwater

And the obvious answer is: Wait for the Democrats to save the day!
Only problem with that is, they won't really propose anything new or different, because then they'll have to look in the mirror when they really just want to point fingers.

How can anyone come up with a plan when they are repeatedly being told lies?

On page 94 of its report, the Iraq Study Group found that there had been "significant under-reporting of the violence in Iraq." The reason, the group said, was because the tracking system was designed in a way that minimized the deaths of Iraqis.

"The standard for recording attacks acts a filter to keep events out of reports and databases," the report said. "A murder of an Iraqi is not necessarily counted as an attack. If we cannot determine the source of a sectarian attack, that assault does not make it into the database. A roadside bomb or a rocket or mortar attack that doesn't hurt U.S. personnel doesn't count."

I think everyone involved knew they weren't getting the straight facts from the Bush administration. Now that the Democrats have control and can demand facts and get them - a plan will be laid out.

Of course Bush has been froced into a corner now and I foresee a plan coming from him soon that will closely resemble what was once called "cut and run".

He's got a legacy to look out for now.



bd