Rnc

1journeyman

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2753327
Journey, you could have simplified this response by telling the Poster to just look up the definition of PROMOTE, then look up the definition of PROVIDE.
lol, true.
I was on vacation last week. I suppose I missed these posts a little too much
 
rylan1

rylan1

Active Member
I've been taking a more critical look at their plans... Economy and Healthcare..
Obama needs to stop addressing the GOP attacks and trying to counter Palin... and base his attacks on McCain... and policies that will contiune the Bush Admin.. and that will make healthcare worse... and do nothing in the creation of jobs or improvement of the economy.
One other comment... have any of you followed the recent press release detailing a new counter terrorism project that is the main reason for the killing of terrorists in Iraq... and not the Surge which some are boasting was the real reason for gains made in Iraq... they are comparing it to the Manhattan project
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2753426
I've been taking a more critical look at their plans... Economy and Healthcare..
Obama needs to stop addressing the GOP attacks and trying to counter Palin... and base his attacks on McCain... and policies that will contiune the Bush Admin.. and that will make healthcare worse... and do nothing in the creation of jobs or improvement of the economy.
One other comment... have any of you followed the recent press release detailing a new counter terrorism project that is the main reason for the killing of terrorists in Iraq... and not the Surge which some are boasting was the real reason for gains made in Iraq... they are comparing it to the Manhattan project
Haven't seen it care to post a link?
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2753435
Haven't seen it care to post a link?
There is no doubt the surge has led to the decrease in violence but those who have so much invested in failure in Iraq will attempt to spin it into the surge didn't make the difference (As witnessed by Obama's pathetic showing in the Oreilly interview part I)
The surge did allow other things to happen, like the counter terrorism operations and the support of the Sunnis who decided to kick Al Qeada out.
 
geridoc

geridoc

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2753435
Haven't seen it care to post a link?
Rylan1 is probably talking about a segment on 60 Minutes Sunday night in which Carl Bernstein said that there was a highly secret project in Iraq that was very successful in targeting terrorist leaders, and that a large number of them had been killed. The methods are said to be secret.
 
jerthunter

jerthunter

Active Member
I'm going to break the secret of how they dealt with the terrorists! They use.....
HOPE!!!
They track down a terrorist and smoother her/him with a healthy dose of hope... Works great.
 
1journeyman

1journeyman

Active Member
Careful Rylan, since Obama admitted that the surge was wildly successful you run the risk of going off the reservation by now attributing the success to anything else.
 
rylan1

rylan1

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2753445
Yes, link please, I am very curious.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/...ref=newssearch
Take what you want from it.... I found the article to be pretty interesting.. My co-worker and I even came up with a theory of what it could be. I'll also mention that the person who is responsible for sharing this info is a writer... and has been criticized as being too close to Bush Admin... so his book is not a slam IMO of the Surge.. but is saying that it wasn't responsible for the reduction in violence.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2753679
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/...ref=newssearch
Take what you want from it.... I found the article to be pretty interesting.. My co-worker and I even came up with a theory of what it could be. I'll also mention that the person who is responsible for sharing this info is a writer... and has been criticized as being too close to Bush Admin... so his book is not a slam IMO of the Surge.. but is saying that it wasn't responsible for the reduction in violence.
Bob Woodward?
The people you give credence to. Very close to the administration...
 
rylan1

rylan1

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2753520
Careful Rylan, since Obama admitted that the surge was wildly successful you run the risk of going off the reservation by now attributing the success to anything else.
He said the Surge exceeded expectations, but that it did not accomplish what it intended to do, and that Bush/McCain are not giving credit to the Anbar awakining which were more repsonsible for the reduction of violence and elimination of terrorist.
 
rylan1

rylan1

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2753680
Bob Woodward?
The people you give credence to. Very close to the administration...
I am not judging one way or the other... but it does seem he is a journalist who is able to dig up facts... he has also interviewed Bush more than any other journalist... Again, its a story I find intersting..
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2753683
He said the Surge exceeded expectations, but that it did not accomplish what it intended to do, and that Bush/McCain are not giving credit to the Anbar awakining which were more repsonsible for the reduction of violence and elimination of terrorist.
Anyone else find it ironic, a major presidential candidate will not concede that we had a major military victory? And equally ironic that he is recommending similar action in a different "theater".
Who was I talking to questioning the motives of politicians.
 
1journeyman

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2753683
He said the Surge exceeded expectations, but that it did not accomplish what it intended to do, and that Bush/McCain are not giving credit to the Anbar awakining which were more repsonsible for the reduction of violence and elimination of terrorist.
The "Anbar Awakening" is a direct result of the locals having faith that we weren't going to cut and run...
 
robbin

robbin

Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2753714
"developed by the military to locate, target and kill leaders of al Qaeda in Iraq and other insurgent leaders..."
Rylan, does this mean you admit Al Qaeda is in Iraq?
My GOD journeyman...you are relentless. Give up already!
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Did you see what Charlie Gibson's first question of palin. It was downright insulting. They should really sit down and ask obama that question.
 
1knight164

1knight164

Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2753683
He said the Surge exceeded expectations, but that it did not accomplish what it intended to do, and that Bush/McCain are not giving credit to the Anbar awakining which were more repsonsible for the reduction of violence and elimination of terrorist.
The Al Anbar Awakening succeeded in pushing Al Qaida out of the big cities, primarily Ramadi. However, it did not rid Al Anbar Province of Al Qaida. Al Qaida just went to do their dirty deeds in other cities like Amariya just south of Fallujah and 30 miles west of Baghdad, where 300 Al Qaida attacked the city in March 07 in an attempt to kill one of those Anbar Salvation Council members. The Iraqi's took care of them with help from US air support. And Al Karmah where in Feb, a Marine Ch-46 was shot down and in March where 100 Al Qaida attacked the city.
Keep in mind that the Awakening started in Sep 06 and as Journeyman said it only happened with the assurance that we weren't going to cut and run (ie post Desert Storm). Al Qaida made a mistake and killed a prominent sheik and hid his bodies for 3-days which pissed-off all the Iraqi's and needed our help to clean up their cities.
Multi-national forces had enough forces on the ground to keep the now secure cities secured, but they didn't have enough to go after Al Qaida where they ran to, East, West, North, and South of the Ramadi area. The Surge was necessary to hunt them down and was highly successful. Surge operations went into full swing June 07 with counter-insurgency operations that could not have happened without the surge in troop numbers. Operations include those mentioned in Woodward's book.
As part of the surge, I know we went to places north of Baghdad where we knew the bad guys were running to rearm and regroup, but just didn't have the manpower to hunt them down. Surge operations wiped out all those hideouts and captured tons of caches and bomb making materials.
I would say that the surge wouldn't have worked without the Anbar Awakening, but I would also say that the Anbar Awakening wouldn't have been successful without the surge. The bad guys would've regrouped, re-armed, and continued to attack.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top