>i>The AQI installed Sharia court had sanctioned the amputation of the two “smoking fingers” for those who violated anti-smoking laws.

Now there's an incentive to quit!

I ran across this article in "Commentary Magazine" earlier this spring. It dovetails with your post, Mark, and is one of the most realistic assessments of the situation in Iraq that I've seen. It's a long read, but worth the time.

I would like to say something about the naysayers on this blog. My grandfather, who died in 1959 when I was 14, had a favorite saying, "can't never did anything." I, (and I suspect, all the other Conservatives who post here, especially those with military background), am getting more than a little tired hearing from our resident Lefties how we "can't" win, or worse, we've already lost, and we're just too stupid to realize it. As I think everyone can attest, I've been civil (even if sometimes a little snarky) with all the Lib posters, but I'm about at the end of my rope. My NRM (negativity reaction meter) is drifting dangerously into the red zone, and I just hope you won't ban me when the alarm goes off and everything snaps.

Doubtless many American lives have been saved by locals just saying “stop,” and pointing to bombs.

In doing so, the locals literally risk their own lives, not so much from the bombs themselves, but from AQI reprisals. It would be nice if some way can be found to reward the bomb-spotters (besides ridding their neighborhoods of AQI).

By siding with our troops, the locals appear to be blaming the terrorist violence on the actual terrorists, something that seems beyond the understanding of Reid, Pelosi, Murtha, etc.

I have a friend who is in Bayji, which is north-west of Bagdad. He wouldnt tell what he's doing, but he said things were starting to get wild.
Thats all I got.
-Zach

I've been civil (even if sometimes a little snarky) with all the Lib posters, but I'm about at the end of my rope. My NRM (negativity reaction meter) is drifting dangerously into the red zone, and I just hope you won't ban me when the alarm goes off and everything snaps. - spook

I admire your restraint. My NRM has already red-lined on more than a few occasions.

It really is beyond the pale, and borderline treason IMO, what Pelosi, Reid and the far left are up to. On one hand I would like to see them all sent to the brigade, on the other I think their efforts will eventually lead to their demise at the polls in '08.

My nephews currently serving in Iraq DO NOT want to come home and don't appreciate the far lefts "support" of the troops. I think if the collective military could speak up to Reid and Pelosi, we would hear: STFU!!!!

I would like to see them all sent to the brigade

Is that similar to the "brig"? LOL!

I agree 100% Neo. My nephew (Marine Corps)returns from his 2nd tour next week.

I guess you can add Sen. Lugar's name to that ever-growing list of defeatists.

This is what is called the path to victory to all of you lefty losers. Iraqi forces 350,000 strong and growing risking their life to defend their country from people like you. And incidentally, isn't it the left that keeps preaching to us how we need to build allies? I guess that excludes Iraq.

You all must feel very proud of yourselves

As of June 2007, 95 Iraqi Army battalions were in the lead in more than half of Iraq’s territory, with Coalition forces providing assistance in certain key roles such as logistical support. As shown in the included maps, the growth of the Iraqi Army in 2006-2007 has been significant.

Iraqi Forces Continue to Grow in Number.
In September 2004, there were only 96,000 trained and equipped Iraqi Security Forces. By November 2005, there were more than 212,000. As of May 30th, there were nearly 350,000 trained and equipped Iraqi Security Forces.

Count me as one of the many that doesn't know what to think. On the one hand, I think Reid's declaration that the war is lost was a hollow appeasement to the angry anti-war left... but on the other hand, there appears to be some increasingly difficult obstacles that appear to be oversimplified by the right-wing war supporters.

First, I find it hard to believe that everyone we are fighting is Al-Qaida. Now, I'm not pretending to be any kind of expert here, rather I'm just trying to understand the whole picture... So it seems we're up against not only Al-Qaida, but Al-Sadr, and former ba'athists. Our alliance with these Sunni tribal groups seems tenuous at best. One day they try to kill us, the next day we're arming them and they're fighting Al-Qaida.

Then there is the goverment which seems more like a loose, ineffective group of varying tribes with a largely ceremonial, yet useless figurehead in Al-Maliki. It seems that our presence there is the equivalent to plugging cracks in a dam with our fingers. What can we seriously hope to acheive in the short term?

I'm just asking these questions because as Senator Lugar just pointed out, there don't seem to be any real answers. With the growing instability in the middle east, my worry is that we are putting our national security in jeapordy by continuing to commit such a huge presence to a country that seems beyond our power to repair.

"my worry is that we are putting our national security in jeapordy by continuing to commit such a huge presence to a country that seems beyond our power to repair."

Thats just the problem, IMO we should've sent a much larger presence there in the first place. It seems like (no disrespect to military folk) we're pussy-footing around in Iraq. 150,000 troops to cover a country of 26 million is just ridiculous.
Aarontime, KB, and others, how would you have felt if Bush had reinstated the draft to surge the entire country to help stabilize the area. I know you're agaisnt the reasons for going to war and what not. But I'm looking for an honest response from you. If Bush and CO and planned a much better post-Sadamm-removal plan. What if we had left Iraq already, and Iraq was a democratic state capable of handling their own affairs. How would you feel about it. Would Bush get any credit?
-Zach

Zach,
I serviced my country voluntary and would not have objected to the draft say 3 years ago. An effective leader, rather Republican or Democrat, is just that and partisan aside.

Of course, that is in a perfect world and we are far from that these days.

I guess you can add Sen. Lugar's name to that ever-growing list of defeatists.

Dick Lugar is one of my Senators. He's had a long and distinguished career, first as a tremendously successful Mayor of Indianapolis and then as U.S. Senator. Today, he's a tired, senile old man who should have retired after his last term. Instead, he ran unopposed last fall, and he still didn't get my vote.

"Dick Lugar is one of my Senators. He's had a long and distinguished career, first as a tremendously successful Mayor of Indianapolis and then as U.S. Senator. Today, he's a tired, senile old man who should have retired after his last term."

So Spook, I'm curious, was he tired and senile for the last four years, when he supported the war, or did he just get that way now.

Casper, I'd have to say it's been at least the last 4 years. My comment had little to do with his recent comment about the war, a comment, BTW, with which I don't totally disagree. I've written to him regularly about a variety of issues ever since he was elected to the Senate. I could sense he was starting to lose it 6 or 7 years ago. I almost always get a response to my letters (snail mail), and they used to be quite reasoned and responsive. The last half dozen or so have rambled on without addressing the issue/s I wrote about. I realize responses to letters are not written by him personally, and the vast majority of them are form letters, but they should at least address the issue at hand or why bother? Or perhaps he just has a bunch of senile old men on his staff that answer constituents' letters, heh, heh.

Spook,
I know what you mean. I will miss Senator Thomas because he was acccessable. Even if you disagreed with him, you always felt there was some respect going both ways. I think our new senator will continue that tradition. Our House represenative however, is a party hack who is only responsible to the people who finace her campaigns.

BTW, both are republicans. I vote for people, not parties.

"I've been civil (even if sometimes a little snarky) with all the Lib posters, but I'm about at the end of my rope. My NRM (negativity reaction meter) is drifting dangerously into the red zone, and I just hope you won't ban me when the alarm goes off and everything snaps."

I know EXACTLY what you mean, RS. Why do you think I took a break from this blog? It made my blood boil to read all of their negative posts. However, now that I've had my brief reprieve, I realized that I shouldn't let their comments bother me so ... because it really must suck to be so negative. I don't hate them ... I PITY them. :-)