How do know that Maliki is doing a good job? Because Bush said so!

Bush: "..he's the right guy for Iraq.."

And when has Bush ever been wrong?

Well Barney, by that form of testing you shouldn't bother posting since you've been more wrong than right.

Who do you trust? Wouldn't be the frequently wrong media would it?

Another way you know is that Bush and his administration think he isn't. But then who better to recognize a lousy government then the folks who run ours? They've kinda changed thier tune - but then what's surprising about that.

The latest NIE is telling, once again.

Talk about premature ejac....exclamation by the author of this thread. Read this.

Once again the right get it wrong.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/23/nie/index.html

JFO and BarneyG2000, I'll vote for your comments any day!

(Well I'm programmed to do so, but I prefer the illusion of choice.)

Funny how any good news from Iraq draws out the left to immediately poo-poo it, isn't it?

As always, good news for America is bad news for left, and they know it.

Jim,

I think it's been made plainly obvious that the usual suspects cannot stand even cautious optimism, especially when they've spent all their political captial on an American loss.

In this tread:
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2007/08/22/obama-nails-another-one.php#comment-637445

Lovie has come-up with the solution for the quagmire in Iraq. Lovie argues that the war was lost in Vietnam not because Nixon withdrew all the troops, but because Congress cut-off funding. He points out that "Military historians seem to be converging on a consensus that by the end of 1972, the balance of forces in Vietnam had improved considerably, increasing the prospects for South Vietnam's survival."

Therefore, the lesson to be applied is to pull all our forces out of Iraq, but to continue the funding (including advisers and logistical help). What is even better is that since Iraq has all that oil money we wouldn't need to supply much monetary support at all.

Thanks Lovie

You know, the lovely thing about BDS is that it is just such a reliable litmus test of leftist hypocrisy. All sorts of things a liberal, even a progressive, is supposed to support they twist into unrecognizability simply because Bush is executing it.

Why hasn't Carter declared that deposing a tyrant and bringing elections is a good thing?
==============================================

Absotootly, yep, a bang up job.

That's why the right wing machine is paying the powerful Republican lobbying group of Barbour Griffith & Rogers to supplant Maliki with ex PM Allawi.

Of course it has nothing to do with WP op ed in which Allawi argued that Iraq will descend into chaos unless Maliki is replaced as prime minister.

Naw, nothing like that. Even Bush doesn't know what is going on behind the closed doors of his own insurgent group of republicans working hard to try and keep everyone off balance by moving the chairs around on deck.

Whew, you guys are really in it for the long haul and must really like being played for chumps, or, or, is that chimps??.....

Mission Accomplished.
We're in the last throes,
Progress is being made.
We're turning a corner.
The surge is working.

Tee hee hee..........

BarneyG2K said:

"Therefore, the lesson to be applied is to pull all our forces out of Iraq, but to continue the funding (including advisers and logistical help). What is even better is that since Iraq has all that oil money we wouldn't need to supply much monetary support at all.

Thanks Lovie"

He forgot that the US had military advisors in South Vietnam training their forces for eighteen years
(http://www2.skidmore.edu/uww/vietnam/issues_american%20presence%20I.htm)
and had been involved in offensive ground operations for eight years
(http://www2.skidmore.edu/uww/vietnam/ia_drang_valley.htm)
at the time of the 1973 peace treaty, which left the country at peace with its northern neighbor.

So, if BG2K is also offering to keep a US military presence in Iraq until both (a) Iraq's military can stand on its own or (b) Iraq is at peace with those at war against it, then I'm firmly behind him. If not, he apparently has drawn spurious conclusions from historical facts.

(Sorry, I couldn't get the links to set up correctly)

Wizbang.

if you want to be taken seriously as a blog, please stop doing this idiotic remarks.

Your "sources' for Al-Malaki's job effectivnes are the Democrats in Washington !!! Are you nuts?

You want sources why don't you go to the National Intelligence Estimate released just today. The put al-Malaki's Government near collapse, and compleately ineffective..... Kind of like your spin.

Are you five years old by any chance?

I watch this show Mosaic that shows clips from Middle East news shows. Some state run and some not.
It's funny the way they reported this. The mouthpieces of dictators (Syria and Iran) were just as excited about people bad-mouthing Maliki as the coterie of leftish trolls above.

I know I would be embarassed if you could gauge my position on an issue by modeling it on how dictators felt.
Notice I don't say surprised, I watched the left side with the commies for most of my life, they've just moved to Islamists. I am a little surprised that they aren't more embarassed by that, considering that the Islamists are against pretty much everything the left is for (except for defeating the U.S.).
I know I'm not the first to note it, but it's really funny that the left's best friend these days actually act the way the left pretends Christians act.

Hooson:

In Vietnam, President Nguyen Van Thieu helped to assure U.S. failure. Shiite partisan Nouri al-Maliki is doing the same thing for the inevitable U.S. failure in Iraq. A bad government partner with poor public support destroys U.S. foreign policy hopes every single time.

"If the Americans do not want to support us anymore, let them go, get out! Let them forget their humanitarian promises!"

JFO, no, you're wrong again. It's getting to be a pattern. Do you like being humiliated??!! I love to watch you be humiliated.

Love the one about the NYT hating him. All you need to do is watch watch the NYT says and thinks and you know the opposite is true. How simple is that!

Whoooo hooooo!

I understand the logic you used to conclude that Maliki us doing a good job, Paul, and usually that's true, but I'm not so sure in this case. The Captains Quarters post was very interesting and I hope it does come to pass as he sees it, but the reaction of the terrorist supporter you've listed in your post could be explained another way.

Since the US's military successes in Iraq are finally getting to the point where even the terrorist supporters can't hide them any more, those who want the terrorists to win have to find something else to misrepresent. When I heard the news about the new NIE I knew immediately that the terrorist supports would jump on it and ignore all the good signs in it and instead use it as propaganda in their efforts to demoralize the good guys and help their terrorist allies defeat the US.

We've already seen it in this very thread. (#4)

Funny how any good news from Iraq draws out the left to immediately poo-poo it, isn't it?

Well, a) it wasn't "news". It was a childish taunt that the media and Dems calling Maliki ineffective means he's doing a good job. (Though that does shed some light on Paul's skill at factual reasoning.) And b) it wasn't "the left" who immediately poo-poo'd that assertion, but the White House's NIE. So your comment works wonderfully as a partisan insult, but has no relevance on any other level.

They're worming, squirming and weasling to get out from underneath the subject of this post Brian. Pretty funny wouldn't you say?

Those damn traitorous Democrats!! Oh wait, I think this guy is a republican!! ooops.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- One of the Senate's top Republicans has called on President Bush to start bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq by Christmas, telling reporters Thursday that a pullout was needed to spur Iraqi leaders to action.

Sen. John Warner of Virginia, the influential former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he has recommended that Bush announce the beginning of a U.S. withdrawal in mid-September, after a report is released from the top U.S. officials in Iraq.

"In my humble judgment, that would get everyone's attention the attention that is not being paid at this time," said Warner.

Warner met at the White House on Thursday with Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, the White House official responsible for coordinating Iraq issues.

Warner said the president and other leading Bush administration officials have repeatedly said the American commitment to Iraq was not open-ended.

"The time has come to put some meaningful teeth into those comments -- to back them up with some clear, decisive action," Warner added. E-mail to a friend

I suppose people can be swayed negatively based on the news source. Bush would not say he was backing Maliki's efforts without sensible reasoning:

"I support him," Bush said a day after he acknowledged frustration with the Iraqi leader's inability to bridge political divisions in his country. "It's not up to the politicians in Washington, D.C., to say whether he will remain in his position. It is up to the Iraqi people who now live in a democracy and not a dictatorship."

How does it feel to get crapped on, Paul, a few hours aftert posting BS?

Isn't Mr....er Captain Ed just prescient?

Latest NIE report: Intelligence Report Finds Iraqi Political Leaders 'Unable to Govern Effectively' and CIA Said Instability Seemed 'Irreversible

I wonder how many terrorist supporters are going misrepresent the NIE in the next few days?

Two have on this single thread so far.

I wonder how many war-hugging blood-letters will deny the import of this NIE.

P. Bunyan:

If I'm a terrorist supporter you're a terrorist/america hater who loves death and destruction. Try something more original will ya?

Look JFO & FF,

You may not want to support the terrorists. You may have convinced yourselves that your not supporting the terorists. But you are and all your childish retorts will not change that fact.

The NIE shows that the Iraq government still needs our help. That's to be expected. Pulling out at this time would be the worst possible thing and only someone who supports the terrorists would use the NIE to support a premature pull out.

To use it as if it proves you and Al Qaeda were right is exactly what Al Qaeda would want you to do. And it supports them. And I'm sure they appreciate your support even if you refuse to acknowledge it.

The left backed the communists in the Viet Nam war. I guess it would be inevitable that they would back Al Qaeda, The Baathists and oher terrorist groups in this war.

In the same article FF posted,

"Our leaving Iraq would make the situation worse," Hayden said. "Our staying in Iraq may not make it better. Our current approach without modification will not make it better."

Bunyan.

Are you suggesting that the NIE supports the terrorists because they happen to give an Intelligence assesment about Iraq that is contrary to your views, as well as the Right Wing views?

The National Intelligence Assesment is the report that all 10 of our Intelligence Agencies get to the desk of Bush, so that he can make decisions based on reality, not bull shit....

So if the NIE for the hundred time, tell's you guys that you are creating more terrorists in Iraq that we are killing, that the al-Malaki Government is near collapse and inefective into the future, that the terrorists (al-Quaida) were created by our invasion, that Iran is the big beneficiary of our staying in Iraq, etc, etc.....

If You interpret that NIE information as "supporting the terrorists"!!!! let's see then Mr. patriot, how do you kill the terrorists then? By following Cheney's advice that the terrorists are in their last legs maibe???

Terrorists? What terrorists? Remember??????

Or how about Rumsfeld's Dead-enders advice when talking about the Insurgents that you guys count now as a sign of "progress" in our latest "surge" in places like the Al Ambar province. How ironic is to see the same dead- enders marriage of convenience with the Army now being praised by the Right as "progress" while Rummy, and all Neo-Cons rot away in some hole.

You people are clowns.

"Are you suggesting that the NIE supports the terrorists...?"

P Bunyan actually said:

"only someone who supports the terrorists would use the NIE to support a premature pull out. "

I read no such suggestion there at all.

Nikolai.

"The Left backed the Cimmunist inthe Viet Nam war".

I would suggest you go back to school and re-take History. To be against an idiotic idea pushed by cowards that only "fight" from their lap tops is not supporting the enemy, is helping our troops.

Or maibe you can Nikolai tell us where is your "victory", and why in hell after five years of bull shit we are supposed to continue to support the crap you guys continue to try and sale?

Face it Nikolai you have no credibility left. All you have is a bunch of contortions of the truth.

"I would suggest you go back to school and re-take History. To be against an idiotic idea pushed by cowards that only "fight" from their lap tops is not supporting the enemy, is helping our troops."

Oh, you mean these laptop cowards?

Wow... I see the lefty troll are terrified that we might win the war.

Can they be any more blatant?

If anyone ever doubted the lefty thugs wanted the US to lose this war, this thread proved it. Again.

Wow... I see the righty trolls and blog authors are terrified that Bush might not be winning the war.

Can they be any more blatant?

If anyone ever doubted the righty thugs wanted to pretend Bush isn't losing this war, this thread proved it. Again.

(Now, are you you interested in working any actual facts into your analyses? Or are your abilities limited to vacuous insults?)

Brian, I'm not the one hyperventilating trying to deny reality.

The right on this comment thread is saying we, the USA and Iraq is going to win the war. The lefty trolls, lead by JFO our resident hypocrit, says Bush is losing Bush's war. The left doesn't even hide their distaste to be for America. That is how bad their BDS and hatred is. The left is willing to make meaningless the sacrifices of our military in this endeavor so they can score a political point. How very pathetic. ww

"Are you suggesting that the NIE supports the terrorists because they happen to give an Intelligence assesment about Iraq that is contrary to your views, as well as the Right Wing views?"

No, not at all. I'm saying using the NIE to push the "pull out now or at some anounced date in the near future" argument helps and supports the terrorists. I believe that's been the leftists attitude from the start and all the B.S. you misrepresent from the NIE is just more grasping at straws to find a reason to do what would amount to surrendering to the terrorists. That supports them. You can pretend it doesn't, but it does.

The estimate is hardly "contrary to my views". I've never claimed Iraq was a bed of roses, but unlike you leftists I am willing to acknowledge the good as well as the bad. If you want the US to win, you will be optimistic about it and see the good as well as the bad in the NIE. If you want the US to loose you will be pessimistic about it and see only the bad side of things like the NIE.

We are trying to do something that's never been done before. Some things work, other things don't. We have been learning and changing all along. I'm sure we will learn from the NIE and adjust our strategy and tactics accordingly.

You have to look at the big picture not the small fraction of the story that is the most you leftists are willing to acknowledge.

sadly, this lefty can say with near 100% certainty that Iraq is so f'ed up that it is completely beyond redemption. No surge can fix this...way too little, way too late.

The campaign to demoralize the good guys has been very successful.

"Iraq is so f'ed up that it is completely beyond redemption."

Again with the generalization. You can say it with near 100% certainty, but can you prove it?

A glimmer of hope in Iraq, and at home

Signs of success in Iraq

"Iraq is so f'ed up that it is completely beyond redemption."

Again with the generalization. You can say it with near 100% certainty, but can you prove it?

A glimmer of hope in Iraq, and at home

Signs of success in Iraq

Oops, sorry for the double post. I hit refresh by mistake.

"The campaign to demoralize the good guys has been very successful" P Bunyan

Yep, that damned NIE assessment, demoralizing the war-huggers and armchair generals. Must be some real lefty trolls and terrorist symps in the intelligence agencies.

Thanks "loose the war" supporters for giving us Al Qaeda's spin on the NIE.

Amb. Crocker and Gen. Casey say the MSM is correct and you are wrong about Maliki.

LINK

I'm saying using the NIE to push the "pull out now or at some anounced date in the near future" argument helps and supports the terrorists.

The people who are really helping the terrorists are all those who merely clap louder for failed and failing policies.

Brian, I'm not the one hyperventilating trying to deny reality.

Let's see... 19 posts on this thread from the left, 26 from the right. Not to mention the creation of the vacuous post to begin with.

You are hyperventilating trying to deny that you're hyperventilating trying to deny reality.

So, some of y'all didn't read Captain Ed.
====================================

>Let's see... 19 posts on this thread from the left, 26 from the right.

Duh! It's a conservative blog. Guess we should go too Kos and see the ratio there. Loser.

That's the one thing that so annoys me so about liberals. They will just say anything to have a talking point -- no matter how stupid it is. They learned that from Bill Clinton. At least he could sell it.

It'revelatory watching the left agitate against our presence in Iraq. All these years I thought we lost Vietnam because of the draft.

Worse than cowards; traitors.

Yeah, YOU.
===========

The internet this morning is rife with 30 year old quotes from presently prominent Democrats making complete horses' asses out of themselves talking about Cambodia.
======================================

>Amb. Crocker and Gen. Casey say the MSM is correct and you are wrong about Maliki.

Steve you read waaaaay more into that than you should. (or actually not reading enough)

"The top U.S. diplomat in Iraq on Tuesday called the country's political progress "extremely disappointing" and warned that support for the government of Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki is not unlimited."

Duh! That's called diplomacy. He's a Diplomat.

Notice he didn't say Maliki was "extremely disappointing" he said the "political progress" was. That's called diplomacy.

Of course he wants things to go faster... everyone does. This is his way of nudging Maliki.

Maybe you missed when Maliki went to Syria and then told the U.S. diplomat that Iraq could find other friends besides the U.S.

That's all called diplomacy. He fired a warning shot across the defeatists bow.

So you idiots want him to run to Syria... good idea.

===============

Of course you knew all this because you're so well read on the issue... right?

Here's a quote from one of those "moonbat", "traitors",
"terrorist supporters" from the Washington Post today. You know, that liberal rag The Wa Po. Charles Krauthammer is a "moonbat" and a "traitor" isn't he?

"We should have given up on Nouri al-Maliki long ago and begun to work with other parties in the Iraqi parliament to bring down the government, yielding either a new coalition of less sectarian parties or, as Pollack has suggested, new elections."

kim:

Get thee a rifle and get to the head of the column.

Chickens cry about chickenhawks. bD excepted.
===================================

I suppose you agree, JFO, with everything Krauthammer writes?
======================

Check out what Representative Chris Dodds said in 1975 about cutting off funding to Cambodia. He said it would bring them peace. Well for a couple of million of them, it did.

YOU!
====

I just knew you'd bite Kim, you're so predictable and not as clever by a 10th as you think you are.

Rightwing goofball - traitor OK
Rightwing goofball - chickenhawk - wah, that's not fair.

Does us all a favor, get a rifle and get to the hell of the column.

Well, I know you are a coward and a traitor, but you don't know I'm a chickenhawk.
==========================

"So, some of y'all didn't read Captain Ed."kim

Oh you mean Mr. Ed, the pharting horse's ass?
====================================

By the way, this comment scoring system is a bad joke transferred from some nightmare blog elsewhere. It is so easily manipulable as to be meaningless.
===================

But JFO happily uses it, thinking he is adding meaning. How CLEVER of him.
=============================

"By the way, this comment scoring system is a bad joke transferred from some nightmare blog elsewhere. It is so easily manipulable as to be meaningless" kim

Oh, sorta meaningless, like your silly klever kanine komments?

In polite society, ff, we would take as much notice of your little contribution as if you'd exhaled it through your ass.
=======================

Cowardice on display here. First you run from Vietnam, now you don't want to talk about it.

Pound the table. Or something. Anything to make you feel better.
============================

Has anyone here noticed that kim and her sister, Anna Nicole were alter-egos?

How amusing. Some poor sap saw the double-underline in Freedom Fries 8:45 AM post and thought it was mine and voted against it.

How CLEVER of you.
==================

Keep digging saps; I've had my horselaugh for the day.
==========

" First you run from Vietnam, now you don't want to talk about it."

So, kim, I take it that we should have stayed in VN for the last 35 years, just as will be the quagmire of the Chimp's Iraq war? In that period of time, we could have depopulted all of SE Asia.

Strawman, and otherwise ignorant comment. We never killed people in Southeast Asia as fast as the Communists, and we haven't been killing Muslims in the Near East as fast as they are killing each other.
==================

kim:

If ever there was a chichen(hawk) it is you. Vietnam? Why not talk about the War of 1812 too, or the Revolution or the Civil War. Anything but the disaster you so ardently support (second only to supporting convicted felons from the WH). You'd have run your mouth all those times too and done nada, zip, zero, nothing to back up your ill wind.

kim

But wait!!! Just yesterday you saif Muslims don't kill one another. Shall I find the exact quote?h
You're losing it fast on hawk of chickewns.

How casual you are about the use of the word 'depopulating'. Cambodia is one of the topics of this thread. Are you trying to be CLEVER? Or are you just monstrously hamhanded?
==================================

Yeah, go look ignoramus. I said they don't like killing each other. That's a difference you have to be CLEVER to appreciate.
=======================================

You, JFO, are proving your cowardice and treason with every post; you are not proving I'm a chickenhawk.
=========================================

kim:

Now it's time to go back to this when you fart through your mouth Oh brave typewriting chicken(hawk).

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Incoherence does not become you, JFO. Take a nap.
===============================================

JFO dreams about 'flesh wounds'.
=============================

Quit while you're ahead Kim. It's become quite Jr. High-ish in this thread.

You know a guy's doing a great job when Bush praises you. Just ask Brownie, Rumsfeld and well... the list goes on. Heckuva job Maliki!

BTW Allawi (remember him) is paying a high falootin' Republican lobbying firm $50,000 a month to promote the idea that he should installed as Maliki's replacement. I wonder how that works? How do you think such a coup would make all those purple-thumbed Iraqi Shias feel about good ole American democracy?

That's the one thing that so annoys me so about liberals. They will just say anything to have a talking point

Like declaring that your opponents are "hyperventilating" when they point out how silly you are? You funny.

Notice he didn't say Maliki was "extremely disappointing" he said the "political progress" was.

No, they said a democracy was no longer achievable. How clever of you to ignore that fact. Weren't our soliders supposed to be dying to bring democracy to the Middle East?

Then again, read Allawi in last Saturday's WaPo 'A Plan for Iraq'. He doesn't think much of Maliki.

Thanks, PB, I needed that.
===============

Loser.

Hey, Paul thinks I'm a loser. Using "Paul logic", that means I must be right!

What kind of ass-backwards logic does this author have?

By saying that so-and-so hate him, must mean that he's doing a good job! Huh?

Okay, so according to this post, anyone who believes al-Maliki is doing a bad job is a traitorous democrat who hates America. Have I got that right?

You know what that means?

It means our intelligence community, those people who wrote the NIE claiming al-Maliki's government is "unable to govern effectively," and that improvements are "unlikely to emerge unless there is a fundamental shift in the factors driving Iraqi political and security developments," are in fact a bunch of traitorous democrats!
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/23/nie/index.html

It also means that the premier GOP lobbying firm Barbour Griffith & Rogers, who is lobbying the Bush Administration to replace al-Maliki with Allawi, are also a bunch of traitorous democrats!
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/23/major-republican-firm-lobbying-to-undermine-maliki/

Wow! Who knew? Turns out, these traitorous democrats can be found in every walk of life! It's probably time to start looking under your beds, guys.

By the way, I'm the author of post #84, not to be confused with "Paul the Bush Apologist".

Dear Right Wingers & Neo-Cons.

You game is very clear. To support Bush in his policies until the last second of his presidency. Any of you believe on any "victory" BEFORE Bush get's the hell out of the office he disgraced?

NO, right?

So who is going to contiue with Bush's policies once Bush is gone???? Giuliani is the front runner, and dear people HE WILL NOT support Bush's policies for one second if he becomes President.

As for the Hillary.... You already have your answer.

So what's your game Right WIngers, and Neo-Cons? Let me answer my own question if I can, because by now I noticed you guys don't answer much any more.

As stated before, The Bush Administration strategy in Iraq is to prolong the war until the end of his term, and let some other poor SOB deal with the aftermath. His legacy will be an exausted Military, a collapsed Iraqi infraestructure, a political mess in Iraq, a civil war convined with a free for all, and OH yes, another successful surge where "progress" is made. Your strategy dear Right WIngers, and Neo-Cons is to pretend you have an answer to the mess you created, until Bush lives and you are left weaseling Dixie. After that maibe some Democrat will come and "loose" the war you could never win.

Not a brilliant strategy.... But that's what is going to happen to you. Or do you actually believe that after almost 7 years ( In 2008) of a war of "progress" you are not supposed to actually show the fruit of that "progress"?

Do you take the American people for idiots, or are you the idiots.That is the question you need to ask yourselves.

I for one don't have to waith for your answer. In 2008 you'll still be talking about "progress" in Iraq. You remind me of the fossils in College that take 20 years to finish First Semester.

"Giuliani is the front runner, and dear people HE WILL NOT support Bush's policies for one second if he becomes President."

Oh, really? Wow, those caps looked so authoritative for a moment there! Do some reading, 'kay?

Giuliani supports troop surge

"You remind me of the fossils in College that take 20 years to finish First Semester."

At least those fossils knew how cool it was to learn how to spell and are not afraid to read, Supah-stah!

This Allawi thing is fascinating. Watch Maliki's coalition collapse, to be replaced by one led by Allawi. No new elections, but new Arab resolve against Persians. Sunni and Shia would far prefer to kill infidels than Muslims.
====================================

gil, your self-gratifying illusions remind me of onanism.
============================

'weaseling Dixie' forsooth. That's not mispelling; that's ignorance.
============================

kim

My bet is onanism is all you ever get or have gotten or will get -

ewwwwww
zzzzzzzzz

JFO puts his money where his mouth is.
=========================================

So - NY Times says anything it must be wrong. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Yessirree wonderful logic on which to base ones worldview.

Which means if Iraq and Iran are each others enemies, we must be friends... with both??!! Tell that to Bush! It all makes sense now - be my friend and I'll invade you.

I'm hoping JFO comes back here so I can make an amusing point about who has the political discourse well in hand. The left, these days, is bitter, venomous, and humourless.
==============================