They want to be seen as acting to end the war. But they dare not be seen as not funding the troops.

That truly is a "dilemma". Kinda reminds me of the TV ad where the female bank employee sits down with her boss and tells him she's decided to go with Lending Tree for her mortgage, and he says "but Karen, you work here; to which she responds, "yeah, a little awkward, isn't it?"

BAGHDAD - Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said the ongoing increase of nearly 30,000 U.S. troops in the country has achieved "modest progress" but has also met with setbacks such as a rise in devastating suicide bombings and other problems that leave uncertain whether his counterinsurgency strategy will ultimately succeed.

"..he explained in extraordinary detail all the progress being made and the undeniable improvements resulting from the troop surge, they would be forced to either lie about they have been told, or concede they they've misrepresented what is actually happening in Iraq."

I really don't think that would be a problem.

Quite a dilemma indeed. Its interesting to see them claw for everything they can to villify Bush & Co. They're like trapped rats. They're like...trapped..ahh..trapped democRATS!! HAHA, now I get it.

They may have the upper hand, Spook--did you get Jim's e-mail with the Peters column?

Mark. the state of denial you have reached is absolutely monumental...Thousands of people continue to die violent deaths every month, their was an attack in the heavily fortified green zone just a week or so ago, and today ~10 Thousand people took to the street protesting the wall that the US is building - AND the Prime Minister is outraged that it is being built. But we seem to have no changes in plans ..

Its a total disaster - and yet you tell me how much progress is going on. And you tell me its not an occupation - yet the supposed democratically elected leader of Iraq doesn't want the wall built and we will do it anyway? Something doesn't add up Mark...
And you are outraged that Pelosi missed ONE meeting... OUT OF THIS WORLD

"And you are outraged that Pelosi missed ONE meeting... OUT OF THIS WORLD"

Kblack- Please explain why Pelosi had time to go to Syria and meet with Assad but not time to meet with our leaders on the ground? Otherwise shut your piehole.

Let me just say this for everyone that seems to not be paying any attention to what the American occupation actually HAS accompllished in Iraq:

The United States military has armed and trained a Shia majority to engage in ethnic cleansing against the Sunni minority. The Iraqi people have spoken in their democratic elections and the Shia majority that is now in power is committing terrorist-like acts against Sunnis. Bush supporters seem to think that Democrats want to see our military fail and the troops to give up in the face of the terrorists. But what happens when the very Iraqi army and police force that you've spent billions to train and equip to "restore order in Iraq" become terrorists themselves? Not terrorists in the sense of Al Queda, but terrorists in the sense of Saddam Hussein, murdering their own people. Let me just pose that question to you. If you're as well informed as you claim to be, if you are following the war as you should then you know this to be the TRUTH. We've armed and trained and given authority to Iraqi DEATH SQUADS. That's what we've accomplished in Iraq. We've also, through free elections, placed into power a Shia majority with close ethnic and political ties with Iran.

So who are these terrorists that you're speaking of? Do you know? The very Iraqi police that our troops are patroling with have more allegiance to local Imans and clerics than they do to any Western-centric nationalistic idea of Iraq. We've not only inspired terrorists by our invasion of Iraq, we've trained them, given them weapons and given them the authority to go out and murder their own people. I don't think that Bush supporters really understand what a terrorist is in Iraq. I think that they don't bother to read the newspapers because newspapers are evil bastions of liberalism. Thus they have some childish idea that the terrorists in Iraq are all anti-American, Osama Bin-Laden lovin', Al Queda happy radical Islamics bent on destroying the United States and that they must be tamed by good ol' all American democracy. This is a crazy, babyish idea of what's going on over there, an almost silly reduction of what were facing and a complete fallacy.

Many times the one's that are commiting the worst atrocities in Iraq are the one's who's hands WE put a gun into. The one's who have been put into government offices by elections that WE'VE made possible. We went into Iraq with the very Western notion that Iraqis would all rally around a flag like we do the Red, White and Blue. The truth is their loyalties are very different, they come from a long history of division (remember that the borders of Iraq are relatively a recent creation) and their religion isn't about protecting the right to consume as our capitalist democracy is. I'm sorry but that's the long and short of it.

Bush has a childlike idea of what it meant to invade Iraq and now that it's failing he continues to approach the problem like a small infant.

Mark Christopher
New York, NY

Is the situation getting worse?

Andrew North is the BBC correspondent in Baghdad. Remember this guy LIVES THERE at the moment. His reports are going to be more accurate than anyone giving an opinion here. This is what he says:

Trying to get into the centre of Baghdad earlier this week offered one view of how far away the Americans and Iraqi authorities are from gaining control here.

We were at the airport. Just before we were due to leave, the entrance car park was hit by a car bomb.

US troops and private security forces who guard the perimeter locked the whole area down for the next four hours. No traffic was allowed in or out.

While we waited with scores of other vehicles, mortars were fired at the airport. Fortunately for us they landed on the other side of the runway, plumes of smoke shooting into the air.

You won't have heard about any of this because at the same time a series of other far more serious attacks was taking place.

One was at the Sadriya market in the city centre, where a massive car bomb killed more than 140 people.

It was placed at the entrance to a set of barriers put up around another part of the market where a previous single bomb, in February, claimed more than 130 lives.

The market blast "did not penetrate the emplaced barriers" a later US military press release helpfully pointed out, ignoring the fact that the bombers had yet again adapted their tactics with vicious perfection - setting off their device at the point where crowds congregated outside and at the very moment when they were busiest.

The Sunni extremists held to be responsible for these attacks seem to be making a mockery of the US and Iraqi security plan, which is now into its third month.

So far, their surge seems to be having more effect than the American one.

Last month alone there were more than 100 car bombings, and the number of attacks has continued at a similar rate so far this month. This indicates a high level of organisation.

This despite the fact that there are many extra US and Iraqi troops in the city now. There are more raids and patrols.

On our drive into the city, we encountered several Iraqi army checkpoints. But almost every vehicle - including ours - was being waved through.

Just a month ago there was a cautious - very cautious, but still real - sense of optimism among many Baghdadis that the plan was starting to work.

The daily count of bodies found around the city - mostly Sunni victims of targeted sectarian killings - had dropped off significantly.

The Shia militia of Moqtada Sadr, which was blamed for most of these murders, was largely obeying orders to put away its weapons and co-operate with the security plan.
But there is a deadly and familiar equation here.

With official security forces apparently unable to protect Shia communities, pressure is growing on the militias to do so again.

And there are signs their death squads have returned to work. The body count is creeping up again. Twenty were found yesterday.

An average of 80-90 Americans die each month. And US personnel have just had their tours extended by another three months.

But, as it has always been since the 2003 invasion, it is the Iraqis who suffer most.

No-one knows the exact figures, but at the end of another week of unspeakable, random carnage, hundreds more Iraqi families are grieving.

Exhaustion and despair hang over the country.

And there are no signs of change.

You can read his full report at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6575717.stm

Again, I would reiterate - This is a reporter on the ground, a man who lives in Baghdad This isn't a democrat or a republican. This is a man calling it how he sees it.

Yes, the political situation in Washington IS a mess. Democrats so far have showed a distinct lack of guts when it comes to bringing the troops home. But keeping them in Iraq to get slaughtered is NOT supporting them. The kind of support that leads them to come home in body bags is the sort of support they could very much do without.

To suggest that the Democrats don't care about what's going on is stupid and a smoke screen. With dozens being killed in car bombs and other violent attacks every day--read the headlines--it's just silly to suggest that there's been anything like a victory or resolution.

While it might be amusing/ego-building to you to create specious arguments that you think cleverly deflect from the main issue at hand, the fact is that soliders are dying, Iraqis are dying and the U.S.A. is spending tons of money that could be used to help our own citizens--not to mention the soliders who did their duty and have come back from war damaged and without proper health services. Change your tune--fight for the right side.

I guess once again you need to listen to the majority of the troops stationed there. They live there also, and are proud of, and believe in the job they are doing. The Iraqis are apparently fighting back against the terrorist.

The Iraqis are apparently fighting back against the terrorist.

Heard that of Fox News did you?

If you ask a Sunni in Iraq who the terrorists are, he'll tell you they're Shi'ite. If you ask a Shi'ite who the terrorists are, he'll tell you they're Sunnis. That's the main problem. BOTH are Iraqi, so who is right? Are they BOTH right? If one of them isn't, which is it and why?

This is the fundamental problem. Iraqis want to fight Iraqis. Sunni wants to wipe out Shia and vice versa. To each, the other is a terrorist, but each believes they - and often they alone - are acting legitimately.

The day the US invaded, we just gave them an extra excuse. Invading a country because of what it MIGHT do indicates it's fine for your average Sunni to go out and shoot his Shia neighbour because he MIGHT tomorrow come knocking on the door with a few mates of his own, armed and wanting to pre-empt an attack by shooting the other person first. And these are lessons both sides have been happy to embrace.

It's not enough. You can't simply name someone who doesn't agree with you as a terrorist and magically have it become so. Same goes for Gitmo. Sunni and Shia will continue to fight until one is victorious, and that's going to happen whether we're there or not. The only difference is, if we're there, we're going to get shot at and bombed by BOTH sides. And again, this is NOT supporting our troops, asking them to spend another 90 days getting shot at, bombed, mortared and God knows what else, just so that we can go on pretending the situation is getting better!

When the troops complain that they're becoming disillusioned people here complain about the "liberal media" reporting that. If they don't complain it's automatically assumed that they agree, when it isn't necessarily the case. If you join the army, you go where you're told, when you're told... but don't confuse that with wanting to be here, or supporting the war. If that was the case there wouldn't be cases of desertions and even troops harming themselves to avoid another tour of duty.

This is the fundamental problem. Iraqis want to fight Iraqis.

That makes the politicians responsible for the violence. These poeple have been fighting for thousands of years.

What consessions do you make to stop the violence?

Answer that and Iraq will be calm...

It must be weird being a democratic, praying everyday that al queda can succesfully blow up a car that day and kill as many people as possible. How do these people sleep at night.

It must be weird being a democrat, praying everyday that al queda can succesfully blow up a car that day in Iraq and kill as many people as possible. How do these people sleep at night. harry reid should resign.

Of course Democrats don't care what is going on inIraq. They only care about grabbing more power and gaining seats, as confirmed by Reid and Schumer last week;

"Harry Reid saidhe plans to continue an aggressive push for an early withdrawal from Iraq and does not particularly care that Republicans will try to paint that position as a lack of support for U.S. forces."

"Why? Because “We are going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war.”

"Echoing that sentiment is Charles Schumer as he said, “The war in Iraq is a lead weight attached to their ankle. We will break them, because they are looking extinction in the eye,” Schumer declared, making no attempt to hide his glee."

SOURCE: CQ Today

Bonnie, instead of projecting your feelings onto the Troops, why not listen to them?

Appeal For Courage

Many have felt the feigned caring and understanding shown returning Troops and Veterans as the view of 'deranged baby killers' moved to 'victimized deranged baby killers.'

We are on the RIGHT side, c'mon in any time.

We CANNOT afford to lose the war in Iraq!
Here's an update on the GWOT:

1) British Cultural Suicide Watch:
Lgf, "Britain is no longer facing “creeping” shari’a. Now it’s happening at a breakneck pace, as the UK government prepares to issue shari’a-compliant bonds: TimesOnline.co.uk: "Ernie could be taught to obey strict Islamic law"

2) UK Intelligence: Al-Qaeda ‘planning big British attack’.

TimesOnline.co.uk: Spy chiefs warn that one operative had said he was planning an attack on “a par with Hiroshima and Nagasaki” in an attempt to “shake the Roman throne”, a reference to the West.

3) Jihadis aspire to 'conquer France' (Via Jihad Watch): "The second stop of the Islamic conquest of Europe, France, after Andalusia, Spain." "Jihadis aspire to 'conquer France': Al-Qaeda forum calls for jihadis to 'complete' medieval war and take over France," by Yaakov Lappin for Ynet News, with thanks to the American Israeli Patriot.

I think the republicans are simply throwing thier arms up at the democrats on what is going to happen with the war on terrorism.

They simply are in denial of who are true enemy is and what they would do to us given the opportunity.

I guess 9/11 really just was not enough for them to stop looking the other way...

Bye the way I thought Sheryl Crows answer to conservation was a joke. World problems won't be solved from episodes of Seinfeld.

Matt

The dems are simply bowing to their base. The supplemental is a cornucopia of pork like ewe lamb replacement and such that wreaks of special interests.

MB states:
"The Democrats will face the same problem when George W. Bush vetoes their bill. They would like to end the war, but they dare not end funding to the troops."

How cowardly is this???
If they were true to their base, they'd send a bill to the President that says exactly what they mean, instead of pussy-footin around with half-assed supplementals that they know damn well will never see the light of day.

Talk about posturing....gimme a break!

On another note, if the dems were actually listening to those that really matter, i.e., our military, don't you think they'd be sending a bill to GW that completely cuts off funding? This tells us that they're fearful of losing the military vote come 2008. Otherwise, they'd pull the plug today.

Joel

I guess once again you need to listen to the majority of the troops stationed there. They live there also, and are proud of, and believe in the job they are doing.

We've talked at length, my soldiers and myself, and a term that comes up often is, 'this is our generation's Vietnam.' I don't think this can be won. We're caught in the middle of a civil war.

Expect Staff Sgt. Matt St. Pierre's reputation to be slaughtered by the 101st Keyboard Brigadiers

Willem, all I will ask about St. Pierre is why does he stay where he so adamantly disagrees with the mission?

Then again, we griped a lot when in Viet Nam, felt unappreciated and returned home to see we were.

Grumbling amongst the ranks isn't new. It is as old as the Military. However, 30 years afterwards, you would be surprised how many look back with a different attitude.

How St. Pierre looks back later on will be up to him. In the meantime, if he is so against it, I recommend he go ahead and ETS.

In the meantime, I invite you you to tell the 2385 (and growing) Active Duty Troops at Appeal For Courage how wrong they are and see what your reception is.

Willem van Oranje,
So, what is Norway doing about the threat of Islam, there? Answer: not much, obviously.

NORWAY: ISLAM CRITIC BEATEN UNCONSCIOUS -from Aftenposten in Judeoscope:

(April 15, 2007) Norwegian-Somalian Kadra, who became famous in Norway for exposing imam support of female circumcision, was beaten unconscious on Thursday. Kadra was attacked and beaten senseless by seven or eight persons of Somali origin, newspaper VG reports.

"I was terrified. While I lay on the pavement they kicked me and screamed that I had trampled on the Koran. Several shouted Allah-o-akbar (God is great) and also recited from the Koran," Kadra told VG. Kadra linked the attack to recent remarks in VG where she said that the Koran’s views on women needed to be reinterpreted.

Kadra said that the gang of Somali men attacked her around 3 a.m. in downtown Oslo on Thursday. A medical examination found that she had several broken ribs, NRK (Norwegian Broadcasting) reports. Kadra filed charges and was due to speak with police on Friday.

-via Jihad Watch

Also, Willem van Oranje, get used to Shari'a Law in Europe, because the EU and Germany are campaigning for it. This is SUICIDAL and beyond STUPID. Europe is surrendering to Islam without firing a shot!

EU Proposal To Bring SHARIA divorce LAW To EUROPE: (via Dhimmi Watch) "Opposition to EU divorce rules plan," from DPA, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

(April 21, 2007) Luxembourg (dpa) - A European Union proposal that would allow the laws of non-EU countries to be applicable in divorce cases ran into fierce opposition from Sweden on Thursday.

Liberal Sweden strongly resists the plan, which it says could force EU member states to dissolve marriages on the basis of foreign law, including traditional Islamic law, or Sharia.

"It is not acceptable that the planned rules would lead to Swedish courts having to apply foreign law," a Swedish diplomat told reporters at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg.

Germany is pushing for new rules under which international couples, prior to marriage, would be able to set out in a contract which country's laws will reign in a divorce court.

Germany currently holds the rotating EU presidency.

If you ask a Sunni in Iraq who the terrorists are, he'll tell you they're Shi'ite. If you ask a Shi'ite who the terrorists are, he'll tell you they're Sunnis.

Heard that on 60 Minutes, did you? Because I'm sure, Whispa, that you haven't encountered any Sunni's or Shi'ite's in mom's basement...

Willemena van Oranje Microdot,

Anybody can come up with the anecdotal incident or three, of soldiers who are not happy. I would wager that most of them aren't happy about events, but are dedicated to completing the mission successfully.

Keep trying, son, to demoralize our military. Does your sorry-ass nation even have a military, or does appeasement to the radicals preclude the need for one?

...their was an attack in the heavily fortified green zone just a week or so ago...

You know, Dr. Rerun, a real Phd, even if she were lazy enough to type phonetically, like you, would still take the care to use the words "there," "their," and "they're" in their proper context. You, OTOH, are a lazy, faux-PhD who can't even type cogent sentences when parroting talking points.

I'm beginning to doubt you even graduated high school, much less attended college at all. Why don't you just admit that you're--not yore or your--a moron?

Okay, I'll do it for you. You're a moron...

Willem van Oranje,

Yes, there are some in the military that don't support the mission, but it is my experience talking to the kids that have been there that far more support the mission than not. So no I didn't hear that on FOXNEWS, I heard it from troops.

That said, the Senate maj leader does not get up and surrender to the world while troops are endanger!!!! If you are an elected official you have to realize words have an effect on the troops and the enemy.

The libs are so confused in one breath they say we can only fight AQ, but in the next sentence they say AQ in not in Iraq. Do they even know who AQ is?

Joel

And before you libs jump on it "endanger" is the correct word. With the libs running the house and senate, and giving all thier support and encouragement to the terrorist, and playing political games with funding, American troops are endangered as well as in danger.

And before you libs jump on it "endanger" is the correct word. With the libs running the house and senate, and giving all thier support and encouragement to the terrorist, and playing political games with funding, American troops are endangered as well as in danger.

It must be weird being a democrat, praying everyday that al queda can succesfully blow up a car that day in Iraq and kill as many people as possible. How do these people sleep at night.

So, what is Norway doing about the threat of Islam, there? Answer: not much, obviously.

Since you obviously have absolutely no idea how Europe works, here is what we do:
When someone is assaulted, he or she files charges and then the police can try to catch the criminals. And guess what? Kadra's assailers in Norway have been caught!

When there are "conflicts-of-law" issues between member-states of the EU, like in divorce-law for instance, (a Czech-German couple, married in the Netherlands but now living in Belgium, decides to divorce, that could be an extremely complicated legal issue), we address them. Somebody makes a proposal, people can comment on it, we look at it some more, we see if these comments have merit. If they do, we address that too, if not than it's not necessary. That's how democracy works. Got a problem with that?

Shouting "DHIMMITUDE" everytime someone mentions Sharia in the press will probably impress your fellow littlegreenfootballers, we just think you're an imbecile.

Another silly poster

Anybody can come up with the anecdotal incident or three, of soldiers who are not happy. I would wager that most of them aren't happy about events, but are dedicated to completing the mission successfully.

From the Military Times annual poll conducted in November last year:

For the first time, more troops disapprove of the president’s handling of the war than approve of it. Barely one-third of service members approve of the way the president is handling the war, according to the 2006 Military Times Poll.

Willem van Oranje

Reading the complete article explains alot. The libs and dems don't like the military because there are very few of them in the military. The military still supports Bush, but wanted something different in fighting the war. Now they have it and support and believe has gone up in the military.

So when the Dems complain that only the poor are going off to war and sacrificing they are lying because the military is mostly Republican conservative people, and everybody knows Republicans are all rich and only care about the money from oil and Haliburton.

Joel

Reading the complete article explains alot

On the contrary. The most reliable poll on support from the troops for the war in Iraq or for Bush points to the opposite: barely one-third of service members approve of the way the president is handling the war. That more people in the military traditionally vote Republican instead of Democrats is not the issue. In fact, it should worry you even more when Bush's approval rating in the military is that low.

In fact, it should worry you even more when Bush's approval rating in the military is that low.

I'm worried--Bush ain't gettin' the military vote in '08.

Is this the best you can do, Willemena? If I were still active duty, and were polled about the war, I'd give Bush low marks too. He and his planners made plenty of mistakes. But really, even if the war in Iraq had gone perfectly, you kook European leftists would've still bitched about it, along with the kook American leftists.

I don't know what it is with you Europeans--you sit back and watch your continent crumble under the weight of extremeism. When are you gonna wake up? And, as I asked before, do you even have a military, or does the appeasement of radicalism preclude the need?

DHIMMI Willem van Oranje,

Europe is SURRENDERING to ISLAM as we speak. Today's headline:

Danish Mindcrime Watch: via LGF, "Three Danish lawmakers who made remarks critical of Islamic headscarves have been reported to the police for violating 'racism' laws."

Denmark is following Shari'a Law which outlaws criticism of Islam. "Democracy" without freedom of speech! Bravo, Denmark! RIP Europe.

Enjoy your DHIMMITUDE, Willem van Oranje!

If the Democrats care so much about this country, why do they spend so much of their time and our money continuing these political games of "Gotcha". They would rather let this country fall into chaos and continue their "witch hunts" for Karl Rove and President Bush.

So far, I have not seen the Dems do anything they promised in the 2006 election. I do see more and more of their party beholden to George Soros. I do not want my country controlled by that man. Wake up and smell the socialism.

"That's how democracy works. Got a problem with that?"

Posted by: Willem van Oranje
********

Shari'a law is NOT democracy, imbecile. If the EU-spearheaded by Germany-has its way, democracy will be replaced by Shari'a law in divorce courts. So, there will be one law for Muslims in the EU and another law for non-Muslims in the EU. "Separate but equal"?!? Apartheid? Sexist and disgusting, for sure!

Shari'a Divorce Laws-(from the ReligionOfPeace.com)

"Under Islamic law, once a marriage is consummated, a wife has absolutely no right to divorce her husband, even though she may be cast out at will for any reason."

[Willem, it sounds like you support this sexist Islamic Shari'a.]

A Muslim man can divorce his wife simply by repeating 'I divorce you' three times. It's called the "triple-talaq." This is based on Hadith and on Qur'an Sura 2:229.

Hadith: Muslim (9:3493) - "This is one of several hadith in which it is clear that Muhammad practiced the triple talaq and approved of his followers doing the same."

"Women's rights groups in the Muslim world are waging an uphill battle to prevent governments from recognizing the triple talaq - and with some success in the more moderate countries - but it will always be honored by Islamic courts."

BTW, a woman's testimony is worth only HALF that of a man in an Islamic court. The EU's proposal is sexist, discriminatory The EU's proposal is also extremely dangerous because Islam allows men to beat their wives! Under Shari'a law, battered wives would have no legal right to divorce their abusive husbands!

Willem van Oranje, being the Euroweenie that I suspect that you are, you misread the dissatisfaction of the troops with the conduct of the war. The troops chafe under the restrictions, they want to kill people and break things... things they aren't allowed to do and were trained to do. They want to kick tail in a massive way and go home.