We are making progress in Iraq.

G

Gixx

Guest
#1
Bush has to be getting some apologies from a lot of politicians who didn't think his troop increase would work. It is working. Before this invasion the estimate was around 400,000 troops needed to be deployed before we could see victory. We are seeing progress with far less troops than 400,000. Our troops deserve a lot of credit. Bush deserves a pat on the back for standing firm and doing what needed to be done.
 

pro2A

Hell, It's about time!
#2
Has any one noticed the deafening silence from the left leaning media? I can't say I've heard much about troop deaths or major bombings. Aside from some nut blowing up a car here and there, there have been no major terrorist attacks in Iraq recently. This can only mean one thing... its not happening... which means we are making progress :yes:
 

Swiftstrike

Registered Member
#3
Has any one noticed the deafening silence from the left leaning media? I can't say I've heard much about troop deaths or major bombings. Aside from some nut blowing up a car here and there, there have been no major terrorist attacks in Iraq recently. This can only mean one thing... its not happening... which means we are making progress :yes:
No since the surge (which failed since all the troops are being pulled back) they have reclassified the attacks.

For example a car bombing would be listed as an act of insurgency before the surge of troops. However now it is not.

That is why you dont hear about them becaus ethe Bush adminstration started to discount past acts of insurgency...
 

CMK_Eagle

Registered Member
#4
No since the surge (which failed since all the troops are being pulled back) they have reclassified the attacks.

For example a car bombing would be listed as an act of insurgency before the surge of troops. However now it is not.
Regardless of how they're classifying attacks, total civilian deaths have dropped during the surge, and tribal Sunni militias are cooperating with the US to fight against Islamist militias. Both of these are positive developments, and probably couldn't have happened without the surge. Furthermore, the high troop levels were never intended to be maintained past January or February (IIRC) of next year, so plans to pull them back can hardly be considered an indicator of failure.
 

Swiftstrike

Registered Member
#5
Regardless of how they're classifying attacks, total civilian deaths have dropped during the surge, and tribal Sunni militias are cooperating with the US to fight against Islamist militias. Both of these are positive developments, and probably couldn't have happened without the surge. Furthermore, the high troop levels were never intended to be maintained past January or February (IIRC) of next year, so plans to pull them back can hardly be considered an indicator of failure.
I was simply points out the fact that the reclassification of insurgencies since the troop surge makes the "surge" seem more productive than it actually was.

Although the deaths that is good the amount of insurgencies and attacks stayed about the same.
 

CMK_Eagle

Registered Member
#6
I was simply points out the fact that the reclassification of insurgencies since the troop surge makes the "surge" seem more productive than it actually was.
I don't doubt that the Bush Administration is spinning the data as much as possible. However;

Although the deaths that is good the amount of insurgencies and attacks stayed about the same.
I don't have the numbers at the moment, but just about every group monitoring Iraq has recorded a decrease in insurgent attacks and sectarian violence. This includes governments and NGO's that don't rely on DOD stats or counting methods.
 
G

Godfearingsecular

Guest
#7
Bush has to be getting some apologies from a lot of politicians who didn't think his troop increase would work. It is working. Before this invasion the estimate was around 400,000 troops needed to be deployed before we could see victory. We are seeing progress with far less troops than 400,000. Our troops deserve a lot of credit. Bush deserves a pat on the back for standing firm and doing what needed to be done.
I hope for the best but with half of congress and a majority of the American people/press on the side of the enemy it will be almost impossible to win. If the Turkey starts war in the north due to the recent House resolution things are going to turn for the worse... Iran has to be dealt with as the Al Queada were dealt with in the Sunni hood... that could mean war with Iran? Congress is holding up the Defence budget and the Emergency War Funding... can't plan without money to plan with... When the Ramadon (SP) religious holiday ends bombs will be going off...

We have to kick Irans butt to win in my thinking... will congress let us... NO.
 

Corona

Registered Member
#8
The surge was not really a surge. He just brought troop levels back up to what they were a few years ago. Also, when Bush said he was pulling troops out because we're beginning to accomplish goals, he was lying. He's pulling troops out because their terms are expiring and he has to bring them home.

Also, Powell's prediction that 400,000 troops was necessary was still right in my opinion. We cannot win this war. We don't even have set, concrete goals. We don't have the majority of the occupied people's support. We can not win.
 

pro2A

Hell, It's about time!
#10
Since when did we become a nation of can not?

America has always defeated any enemy with pride and patriotism in the past...