• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Rebuttal to fff jush how stupid post

hopalong

Well-known member
Politics Washington Education
Back to front page »

July 20, 2008, 11:39 am
The Early Word: Maliki Backs Off Support of Obama Plan
By Michael Falcone

As Senator Barack Obama continues his trip to the Middle East and Europe, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki has moved to clarify statements that he supports Mr. Obama’s plan to withdraw most American troops from Iraq over 16 months.
A spokesman for Mr. al-Maliki said that the comments the prime minister made to the German magazine Der Spiegel were “misunderstood and mistranslated'’ and were not “conveyed accurately.” The spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, did not elaborate on that explanation but did say that statements made by Mr. al-Maliki or members of the Iraqi government should not be taken as a sign of support for any presidential candidate.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/
 

fff

Well-known member
:lol: A "spokesman" says comments were "misunderstood and mistranslated" but doesn't elaborate on WHICH comments? And why in the frig is US Central Command (CENTCOM) issuing press statements by or for a soverign government? The magazine stands by its article. The transcript will be online soon. Not only do they stand by the article, they add some other interesting comments made by Maliki.

When asked about improved security in Iraq, did Maliki credit the surge or the US military? No, he said

There are many factors, but I see them in the following order. First, there is the political rapprochement we have managed to achieve in central Iraq. This has enabled us, above all, to pull the plug on al-Qaida. Second, there is the progress being made by our security forces. Third, there is the deep sense of abhorrence with which the population has reacted to the atrocities of al-Qaida and the militias. Finally, of course, there is the economic recovery."

Got that, folks, 18 months, $2 billion a week, and he doesn't even mention the surge! While you guys give the surge all the credit for success in Iraq, the Prime Minister doesn't give it a second thought, much less any credit.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,566914,00.html
 

Texan

Well-known member
fff said:
Got that, folks, 18 months, $2 billion a week, and he doesn't even mention the surge!
Is that a coincidence, or what? Your boy doesn't mention it much, either. :lol:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
fff said:
:lol: A "spokesman" says comments were "misunderstood and mistranslated" but doesn't elaborate on WHICH comments? And why in the frig is US Central Command (CENTCOM) issuing press statements by or for a soverign government? The magazine stands by its article. The transcript will be online soon. Not only do they stand by the article, they add some other interesting comments made by Maliki.

When asked about improved security in Iraq, did Maliki credit the surge or the US military? No, he said

There are many factors, but I see them in the following order. First, there is the political rapprochement we have managed to achieve in central Iraq. This has enabled us, above all, to pull the plug on al-Qaida. Second, there is the progress being made by our security forces. Third, there is the deep sense of abhorrence with which the population has reacted to the atrocities of al-Qaida and the militias. Finally, of course, there is the economic recovery."

Got that, folks, 18 months, $2 billion a week, and he doesn't even mention the surge! While you guys give the surge all the credit for success in Iraq, the Prime Minister doesn't give it a second thought, much less any credit.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,566914,00.html

Think for 5 seconds, Frankie - no make that 5 minutes. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, the surge allowed those things to happen? Maybe having more boots on the ground just possibly could of helped root out and kill more terrorists faster? Maybe that also allowed more time for the security forces to group instead of them getting killed themselves by the terrorists that were on the defensive instead of the offensive because of all the US forces on their asses? And do you think there is any possibility that the economy would of been helped because of a reduction in terrorist attacks that were being hamstrung by those extra soldiers and Marines who were hunting them down?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Texan said:
fff said:
Got that, folks, 18 months, $2 billion a week, and he doesn't even mention the surge!
Is that a coincidence, or what? Your boy doesn't mention it much, either. :lol:

Well, he did a while ago when he, being a "visionary" said it wouldn't work. That seems to be the last mention of it from the Llama herd.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
fff said:
:lol: A "spokesman" says comments were "misunderstood and mistranslated" but doesn't elaborate on WHICH comments? And why in the frig is US Central Command (CENTCOM) issuing press statements by or for a soverign government? The magazine stands by its article. The transcript will be online soon. Not only do they stand by the article, they add some other interesting comments made by Maliki.

When asked about improved security in Iraq, did Maliki credit the surge or the US military? No, he said

There are many factors, but I see them in the following order. First, there is the political rapprochement we have managed to achieve in central Iraq. This has enabled us, above all, to pull the plug on al-Qaida. Second, there is the progress being made by our security forces. Third, there is the deep sense of abhorrence with which the population has reacted to the atrocities of al-Qaida and the militias. Finally, of course, there is the economic recovery."

Got that, folks, 18 months, $2 billion a week, and he doesn't even mention the surge! While you guys give the surge all the credit for success in Iraq, the Prime Minister doesn't give it a second thought, much less any credit.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,566914,00.html

Frankie, sweetie, it was your source that Igot it from!! Published one day after your original post was made, :D :D :D :D
 

Texan

Well-known member
fff said:
When asked about improved security in Iraq, did Maliki credit the surge or the US military? No, he said

There are many factors, but I see them in the following order. First, there is the political rapprochement we have managed to achieve in central Iraq. This has enabled us, above all, to pull the plug on al-Qaida. Second, there is the progress being made by our security forces. Third, there is the deep sense of abhorrence with which the population has reacted to the atrocities of al-Qaida and the militias. Finally, of course, there is the economic recovery."

What a difference a few months makes. Back in February, you were upset because the surge hadn't allowed the Iraqis time to get their government together:


fff said:
The escalation (surge to you) was announced by George W. Bush against the wishes of most every military officer in the Pentegon. His top aide at the time has said 80% of the people who advised Bush, advised against this escalation. Bush announced it as a temporary increase in military strength to give the Iraqi government breathing space, to work out their differences and meet the benchmarks set out by Congress and agreed to by him.

Billions of dollars later, hundreds of lives later, the Iraqi government hasn't done squat to resolve their differences. They've met maybe one benchmark. No, the "surge" isn't working. It won't work. Bush will keep the number of military in Iraq about where it is through his term, continue to run up deficits, and print more money to throw at the slowing economy and people like you will pretend the "surge" was about killing terrorists instead of helping the Iraqi government. If we get a Democratic president next year, he/she will start drawing down our troops and the Iraqis will either get along or kill each other. But, for better or worse, they'll run their own country. The "surge" is simply postponing that inevitable result, whatever it may be.


fff said:
None of your responses address the fact that Bush announced the escalation as a short term move to allow the Iraqi government to get their act together. We've spent billions of $$, US soldiers have died and has the Iraqi government got its act together? No. As they say, "The operation was successful, but the patient died".

So spin and spin. Continue to live in your fantasy world along with Bush, but most people know the reasons put forth for the escalation and that it's another failure of George W. Bush's administration.

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=262443#262443

Now it appears that the surge has worked and given the government time to get it's sht together - just as you had wanted it to. I know you're really excited to get what you wanted. Quit trying to hide it. :lol:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Holy liberal lip flapping, Batman, Texan lands a combination followed by a crushing uppercut and Frankie is on the ropes!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

You can bet fff will support a surge in Afghanistan though, since Obama now wants it! As the left goes, goes Frankie!
 
Top