Wednesday, July 16, 2008

The Good Guys are Winning in Iraq

Political and military gains in Iraq have been substantial and real since the surge. But they can be reversed if American troops are pulled out too quickly or too soon.

UPDATE: The best reporter in Iraq says the war is pretty much over:

Money Q:

"The war continues to abate in Iraq. Violence is still present, but, of course, Iraq was a relatively violent place long before Coalition forces moved in. I would go so far as to say that barring any major and unexpected developments (like an Israeli air strike on Iran and the retaliations that would follow), a fair-minded person could say with reasonable certainty that the war has ended. A new and better nation is growing legs. What's left is messy politics that likely will be punctuated by low-level violence and the occasional spectacular attack. Yet, the will of the Iraqi people has changed, and the Iraqi military has dramatically improved, so those spectacular attacks are diminishing along with the regular violence. Now it's time to rebuild the country, and create a pluralistic, stable and peaceful Iraq. That will be long, hard work. But by my estimation, the Iraq War is over. We won. Which means the Iraqi people won."

22 Comments:

Anonymous r said...

Poor LibDems. This is terrible news for them. :(

July 16, 2008 at 4:39 PM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

July 17, 2008 at 1:39 AM 
Anonymous r said...

Saying it doesn't make it so.

This is a lesson you need to learn DDD.

And try not to be so upset about America winning a war.

July 17, 2008 at 10:31 AM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

July 17, 2008 at 10:54 AM 
Anonymous r said...

Nothing like rooting against your own country, Dave.
Dry those tears. Maybe another war will come along that we will lose and this will make you happy.

Why don't you just leave America if you hate it so much? Seriously.

I really hope you no longer wonder why no one take you guys at all seriously anymore. You've done it to yourselves.

July 17, 2008 at 11:52 AM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

July 17, 2008 at 12:26 PM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

July 17, 2008 at 12:28 PM 
Anonymous dingo said...

R, I think since you use Dishonest Dave (DD) when referring to diano its only fitting to come up with some initials for you. RB, radical buttlick. You write
"Why don't you just leave America if you hate it so much? Seriously."
Where does Diano state that he hates America? It is possible to disagree with the war and also love your country. If you can't agree with that statement maybe you should leave America!

July 17, 2008 at 12:30 PM 
Anonymous r said...

It's not that he's just against the war, Dingo, but that he's always rooting against America and for anything that undermines our military -including treason, disertion and slipping national security secrets to our sworn enemeis -ANYTHING to undermine our military and Bush. His hurt feelings dissent crosses to treason. And he despicably uses our brave soldiers as fodder in his cowardly Lib anti-war games. Good thing Dishonest Dave is a nobody and his words are just words.

July 17, 2008 at 4:53 PM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

July 17, 2008 at 7:44 PM 
Anonymous r said...

Did I touch a nerve, Traitor Dave?

July 18, 2008 at 12:39 AM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Spencerblog

You can't be serious. I can see the headlines in this Sundays Times "Spencer Declares Victory in Iraq" Maybe we can get a photo of you decked out in a bomber jacket and goggles, standing on the deck of a house boat at the Ridley Park Marina. But seriously, if you really believe this, write a column declaring victory in Iraq.
I dare you. Hey! I double dare you!

Once again, I have to ask, can you be victorious in a war that was based on a false premise? A war that by the presidents own admission, was based on bad intel.?Here's the quote from Dec. 2005 "It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong," Mr Bush said. "As president, I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq."
Yep, he's the "decider" alright.

Did we find and destroy weapons of mass destruction that Saddam had planned on using against the U.S.? If we had, then we could have called this a victory, but we obviously didn't. Did we prove and eliminate a close link between the Iraq government and Al-Quada? Again no. Did we take our eye off of Afghanistan and give Al-Quada and the Taliban a chance to regroup in Afghanistan? You bet. Did we provide a training ground in Iraq for future terrorists? One could make a reasonable argument there. Did our invasion and occupation of Iraq lead to greater anti American sentiment in the Arab world? I don't think you could reasonably disagree with that. Is the overthrow of a secular government that ends up being replaced by a government leaning towards a theocracy with close ties to Iran, a victory?
And here's one that's often overlooked. Womens rights in the new Iraq. Many women claim that they had more rights under the secular government of Saddam than they do under the current religious leaning government. Do you think there's any truth to that? Our cost so far - a projected 3 trillion dollar price tag,over 4000 dead and over 30,000 seriously wounded.
Is this what victory looks like?

July 18, 2008 at 8:57 AM 
Anonymous r said...

How much ya wanna bet that no matter the outcome, the Bush-hating Lib Media will NEVER print the headline “WE WON!” ?

July 18, 2008 at 11:47 AM 
Blogger Spencerblog said...

"I dare you. Hey! I double dare you!"

Bob, what are you? 9?

I've been saying what I think of this war for some time.

Whatever you want to say about the war's origins and its prosecution in the earlier years, we are winning it today thanks to Bush's change in strategy and the brilliant efforts of Gen. Petraeus.

Even the liberals at the Brookings Institution understand this. Only left-wing ideologues married to the idea that it would be terrible to see Bush vindicated on the surge, refuse to admit its success. Or that serious political progress that has been made by the Iraqi government.

A new state dept. report says that 15 of 18 of the benchmarks set for the Maliki government have been met.

Hopefully, during his trip to Iraq, Obama will keep an open mind when talking to military and political leaders. The way to get out of Iraq to leave behind a stable and friendly government and no I don't believe any significant number of Iraqis would be better off if Saddam were left in power.

BTW, I got the piece about your son. He's an impressive young man. No wonder you're so proud of him.

July 18, 2008 at 1:33 PM 
Anonymous r said...

Only left-wing ideologues married to the idea that it would be terrible to see Bush vindicated on the surge, refuse to admit its success.

Yep. But you're too nice about calling them on it, G.

July 18, 2008 at 1:58 PM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Spencerblog

LOL. Ah to be 9 again! Thanks for the compliment about my son. He's pretty amazing. I don't know how he does it. I sent the article to the person you suggested, but I haven't heard anything. Back to the subject at hand. All I can say is, I really hope you are right. It would be an incredible shame to have nothing to show, for all of the pain and sacrifice. But is hoping for something good to come out of a bad situation, considered a victory? And wouldn't declaring victory right now be premature? My hope is that we end up with a secular democracy in Iraq, friendly with western powers. That would be the preferred result. But the question at hand is, what will the face of the new Iraqi government look like when the dust settles? For example, before the invasion, women in Iraq were considered to be the most liberated in the middle east. Will that be reversed? Will we see a change from a secular to a Shiite based government? Would that be progress? After we leave, will we see continued religious infighting and cleansing? Will Al-Sadr remain an influence? Tell you what, Gil. You want to declare victory now? I'll hold the pig still. You apply the lipstick.

July 18, 2008 at 4:10 PM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

July 19, 2008 at 1:34 AM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Dave

When I told Gil to write a column declaring victory, with my "I dare you. I double dare you", I was being silly. Because Gil declaring victory in Iraq is silly. We all know that if the war was over for real, and we somehow came out ahead of the game, Gil would be one of the first to write a victory column.
I'm still amazed by the right wing's ignorance of the real life conditions in Iraq prior to American involvment, or for that matter, Iran. Ignoring history and fact, because they have this need for some form of moral justification. How often did we hear of car bombings in Saddams Iraq? Yea, Saddam gassed the Kurds. While we were doing business with Saddam, and at the time, the CIA was trying to convince the world that the gassing of the Kurds was the work of Iran. And now the twisting and turning of phrases to save face. A time line now becomes a time horizon. It's laughable. Lipstick on a pig. As I was trying to point out. There realy can be no such thing as victory in Iraq, because the reasons for going to war were bogus. To win in Iraq, we would have had to have found WMD's and proof of a plan that Saddam had devised to attack the U.S., and a connection between Saddam and Ad-Quada.

July 21, 2008 at 9:18 AM 
Anonymous r said...

There realy can be no such thing as victory in Iraq, because the reasons for going to war were bogus.

See, it is for reasons like this that I don’t usually bothering reading your childish, weepy hurt feelings, anti-America offerings, Boring Bob. Get over it already, sheesh.

You owe me a minute of my life back.

And stop stabbing your brave soldier son in the back. Do you plan to spit on him when he returns home, too, as you anti-war Libs are known to do?

July 21, 2008 at 12:03 PM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

July 21, 2008 at 12:12 PM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Dave

Just do what Gil does. Ignore him.

July 21, 2008 at 1:23 PM 
Anonymous r said...

Tell us, BB, will you spit on your boy upon his arrival at the airport or will you wait until you get him home? And will you hug him first and then spit, or spit first then embrace him? Maybe spit on him while you’re hugging him? And when will you take that knife out of his back you put there while he was away?

July 22, 2008 at 11:30 AM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home