HomeIraqProgress Progress Lorie Byrd August 31, 2006 Iraq 16 Comments RedState has news of progress in Iraq (including the chart below) that you might not see on the nightly news. (There is still such a thing as nightly news, right?) A couple expensive cups of coffee For The Ladies Related Posts Republicans successfully prevent vote on the anti-surge resolution Nancy Pelosi Booed at AIPAC "Saddam's Shopping List" About The Author Lorie Byrd 16 Comments epador September 1, 2006 Pretty maps that show where the bad guys still have so much sway that US troops are in charge. What might be more telling is violence rate maps superimposed upon these maps. RobLACa. September 1, 2006 Good Idea. Then we can laugh and compare those with similar maps of New Orleans, Los Angeles , Washington DC, and good old Comptom Ca. , Grape Street Watts baby locs and don’t forget 18th street. They’ll blast yo ass just for not mentioning them. Scrapiron September 1, 2006 Actually there is no such thing as nightly news on the antique MSM outlets. They simply puke up what the DNC provided for them weeks ago and terrorists propaganda can’t be classified as news. Mitchell September 1, 2006 We need Olbermann’s take on this. epador September 1, 2006 Rob: I haven’t heard of the indigenous gangs here targeting folks with IED’s and suicide bombers yet. Have I missed something? docjim505 September 1, 2006 “Might not see on the nightly news”???? How about “see on the nightly news when hell freezes over”! LJD September 1, 2006 ‘Have I missed something?’ Where to start… P. Bunyan September 1, 2006 Those maps are distortions! We haven’t made any progress in Iraq! This is just a big steaming pile of Bushitler-Rovian Propaganda! Iraq is a quagmire! America is loosing! You cannot fight terrorism with military force- we can only stop terroisms by being nice to the terrorists so they won’t hate us anymore! “Stay the course” is such a stupid idea! We need to pull out now! /socialist-moonbattery off Sorry ’bout that. I just had an overwhelming urge to fill in for the secular socialist troll crew (Lee, Hugh, et. al.) who have been mysteriously silent on this thread. Could this be another one of those “inconvenient truths” that they’d just rather pretend doesn’t exist? salvage September 1, 2006 BAGHDAD, Iraq — Rescue crews pulled bodies from the rubble of bombed buildings Friday after a barrage of coordinated attacks across eastern Baghdad neighborhoods killed at least 64 people and wounded more than 280 within half an hour, police said. Yup, things are just fine. Don’t be bothered that the terrorists can set up and co-ordinate and launch multi-ordnance attack in broad day light in the capital, the desert part, y’know the bits where there aren’t a lot of people, are well under control. You should show that map to the families of the 100 or so Iraqis who will die violent deaths this weekend, should cheer them right up. I have to wonder, how far are you going to take this fantasy? How high does the pile of bodies have to be before an inkling of the reality of Iraq seeps in? Lorie Byrd September 1, 2006 Savage, who said everything is “fine”? I certainly didn’t. Progress is being made though. That is, if replacing American forces with Iraqi ones is progress to you. Yeah, Salvage, people are still dying in Baghdad, and 3,000 people were killed in NYC and DC almost five years ago. Thousands were killed in Iraq when Saddam was in power, but they disappeared quietly and those with any sense knew better than to ask where they had gone. Some of them were raped and torn apart by dogs before being allowed to die. But that is a reality those on the left will not acknowledge because the fantasy of kite flying children is just too comforting. Terrorists can strike anywhere and that is not likely to change anytime soon, especially if the great plan the Democrats have for fighting terrorism is adopted. Oh, yeah, I forgot. They don’t have a plan. It takes one lunatic with a bomb vest to take out hundreds of people and that one person can try a hundred times and be prevented 99 of them, but it only takes one time for them to get it right and us to not catch them first. Are you saying that as long as there are terrorist attacks that it is impossible to acknowledge any progress in the training of Iraqi troops? Just what is it? Democrats bitched and moaned for the past couple of years that Iraqis were not being trained fast enough and that they were not doing enough to provide for their own security. So now, when the number of Iraqis taking control of their own future is rising you dismiss it as nothing because there are still terrorist attacks? Because that sure sounds like what you are saying. I guess by your standard, since 9/11 took place, then America must be one big failure of a country. Add to that the other terrorist attacks that have taken place on our soil. I guess that following your logic, George Bush deserves enormous praise since the lack of terrorist attacks since 9/11 is proof that we have made progress here. Or does that only apply to Iraq? Sorry, but I am just not following your logic. What would it take for you to say that progress is being made? Maybe if you could define that now, we would have a way to measure it a year from now. salvage September 1, 2006 Progress is not being made, things are worse than the year before and the year before that. The attack described above was not a “terrorist” attack in the sense you describe. It was a military style assault well co-ordinated and launched. It is not the only attack of its kind nor will it be the last. Try and think about it for a moment, the terrorists were able to set up, launch and leave a populated area, no one came close to stopping or catching them. In the capital city no less. Now, ask yourself, if the Iraqi forces were anywhere near ready do you think they’d be able to do that? Is there any where on this planet that insurgent forces can attack with such impudently? Is there any nation that suffers as many terrorist attacks? What I find fascinating is how quickly you brought Bush into it. Who said anything about him? My point is that map is meaningless, completely and totally. Talk about progress when the terrorists attacks stop till then you’re whistling past the graveyard. salvage September 1, 2006 More progress: Death squads and terrorists have ramped up attacks on civilians in Iraq, killing more than 1,600 people in cold-blooded “execution-style” slayings in July alone, a Pentagon report said Friday. ___ Sectarian violence is spreading in Iraq and the security problems have become more complex than at any time since the U.S. invasion in 2003, the Pentagon said Friday. ___ Baghdad – Fears about security are turning Baghdad’s once bustling streets into ghost bazaars.It’s something never seen since the establishment of the modern State of Iraq in 1921. You know what I think? I think that it doesn’t matter what actually happens in Iraq you have invested so much of your ego into the invasion that to admit the truth would be too much of a blow. That’s sad. P. Bunyan September 1, 2006 Comrade salvage, Yes things are still screwed up in Iraq. War does not fit well with the microwave society that we have today where if something takes time and effort to accomplish it is not worth doing. Progress is being made in Iraq. You can continue to point out areas where work still needs to be done, but to ignore all of the accomplishments and victories of the American military and to only focus on the terrorist victories makes me question your motives… If we do do what the democrats want and pull out prematurely that will be the ultimate victory for the terrorists. Why do so many of you on the left want to give the terrorists that victory? You know what I think, savage? I think that it doesn’t matter what actually happens in Iraq you have invested so much of your ego into your desire for Bush to be wrong that to admit the truth would be too much of a blow. salvage September 1, 2006 Ha! Ha! Yes, I am a communist! And yes I’m rooting for the terrorists, no other explination is possible. Now that we’ve gotten that bit of wingnut boilerplate out of the way… So how long do you reckon it’s going to take Iraq to be “done”? Did you think it was going to take longer than WWII? Please, what are these victories of which you speak? Saddam in jail and his children dead are the only two that come to mind. What is this progress? Please englighten me. And that’s worth the thousands and thousands of dead Iraqis? No, no, don’t tell me how Saddam was going to kill them anyway or other nonsense. Saddam is no longer responsible for Iraq so that is meaningless. Again who mentioned the Democrats? Facinating all the red herrings you guys like to throw. Say why did America invade Iraq again? James Cloninger September 1, 2006 Dobre Dyen, Tovarich Salvage! 😉 So how long do you reckon it’s going to take Iraq to be “done”? Did you think it was going to take longer than WWII? a) When the Iraqi Government says they have the full resourses to take care of it themselves. b)Bush has stated many times that this is an effort that could last years or decades (though, he was refering to the War on Terrorism, rather than Iraq specifically. Unfortunally, terrorists don’t have a government, so they cannot, unlike the Japanese, come aboard a boat to sign a surrender treaty. Please, what are these victories of which you speak? Saddam in jail and his children dead are the only two that come to mind. Zaqawi-dead Osama Bin Laden-No longer has effective control of Al-Q. Never seen on video anymore, only on audio. School attendance up 80% in Iraq More than 1,500 schools renovated Iraq has a functional government, and has had two country-wide free elections. The first ones in decades. The Kurdish North is thriving, the South part of the country is stable and few incidents happening there. In fact, most of the terrorist activity is happening in the so-called Sunni Triangle, of which Baghdad is part of. Infrastructure being repaired…not yet complete, but at least Saddam isn’t building more palaces with the aid. (Yes, I know, they still have power outages…it does take awhile to repair 20 years worth of neglect, and under Hussein they had even worse outages.) These are a few things that come to mind. And that’s worth the thousands and thousands of dead Iraqis? No, no, don’t tell me how Saddam was going to kill them anyway or other nonsense. Saddam is no longer responsible for Iraq so that is meaningless. Was the end of WWII in Europe worth the millions killed there? How about Japan? How about the millions killed by the Ba’ath party over the years before the War? How about the thousands of Kurds gassed to death under his regime, the hundreds of thousands? Try to cogitate on this: People die in war, even non-combatants. Happened then, happens now, will always happen. Tragic, yes. Unavoidable…no. You are correct, Saddam is no longer in charge…which means far fewer people will have died. http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/27000.htm http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/legacyofterror.html http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/13/iraq.graves/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3738368.stm Worth it? Yes. James Cloninger September 1, 2006 Say why did America invade Iraq again? http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/15016.htm http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1051684/posts “One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.” –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 “If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 “Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.” –Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 “He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.” –Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 “[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” Letter to President Clinton, signed by: — Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998 “Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 “Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.” — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 “There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” Letter to President Bush, Signed by: — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001 Any other questions? Good.