"Spread across the top two-thirds of the front page is John Burns' latest dispatch from Iraq. The subject is the U.S. campaign to win back the city of Ramadi and al Anbar province from al Qeada and other Sunni extremists."

Wait a minute. There is NO al-queda in iraq according to the lefties. Are they finally admitting now that there is? Rolling on the floor laughing at the idiotic press.

We're going to lose if the liberals have their way in supporting the terrorists in congress. And if freedom loses, the whole world loses.

And this is what Novacula wrote in today's paper:

"Worse yet, they see the president running out the clock until April, when a depleted U.S. military can be blamed for the fiasco."

Class act that Bush

Boy, there really is no pleasing the right when it comes to the NYT. Even when they report the good news they are still all wrong. Lorie is actualy faulting the paper for not showing enough bias by giving voice to both sides of the debate. If that train of thought isn't dissonant, then I don't know what is. Incredible.

BBC:

An extra 30,000 US troops have been deployed in Iraq, mainly in and around the capital Baghdad, since the launch of the security drive or "surge" in February.

The BBC World Service is monitoring its effects, week by week, by looking at military casualty figures, the pressure on hospitals and quality of life for ordinary civilians.

The graphics and analysis are based on figures from the US and Iraqi authorities, Baghdad's hospitals and three families from different neighbourhoods in the capital.

The build-up of US troops in Iraq is now complete. The level of violence has not decreased, with attacks shifting away from places where US forces are concentrated, such as Baghdad and Anbar, into other, less defended provinces, says the BBC's Defence and Security correspondent Rob Watson.

During the seven-day period ending on 4 July, there were 617 violent deaths compared to 299 for the week before. As in the previous two weeks, most of those killed were civilians - 365 of them. There was also a big increase in the reported deaths of insurgents, up from 98 dead last week to 175.

These figures are from the Iraqi Interior Ministry, whose figures are consistently lower than anyone else's estimates of casualties.

The US military suffered 19 dead, bringing the total US toll to 3,586. More than 5,800 Iraqi police and recruits have been killed in the same period since 2005 - including 65 this week, according to the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, which quotes Pentagon figures.

We said 'the surge' would be yet another version of Whack-A-Mole, and we were right. Now we have members of the right wing blogosphere spinning the facts as they try to tell the good people of the United States that the surge is succeeding. Pathetic...

Frank,
That comment makes no sense whatsoever. You say I am criticizing them for giving voice to both sides. No, I am not. I am criticizing the editorial board for not believing what their own lead Iraq correspondent is reporting. I hope you aren't really that clueless.

barnerGRUBBLE:

Class act that Bush

Correct which places him so many steps above you that you can't be seen swimming in the gutter below.

Just goes to show that if you read the NYT from cover to cover, you'll step out at the exact same point as the one you'd entered.

It Al Queda and the terrorists want us out of Iraq, why don't they just stop the violence, and we would leave a secure Iraq? I know why, but do your liberals? ww

Lee, I try to ignore you, but ignorance like that cannot go without some comment. I know I have said it a million times (possibly an exaggeration, but not by much) but I will say it again -- not that it will make any difference. When you fight wars, people get hurt and even die. When you step up operations and increase pressure on your enemy the result is seldom less violence, but more in the short term. The goal is to crush the bad guys, destroy their bases of operation and make it difficult for them to chop off heads and blow people up. It is not such a hard concept to grasp, but to those on the left it is as alien as the idea that tax cuts stimulate the economy.

What is pathetic is the way those on the left keep casualty counters in their heads and get so excited (some even jubilant) when they can point to an increase in U.S. deaths.

Lee quoted: "The BBC World Service is monitoring its effects, week by week, by looking at military casualty figures, the pressure on hospitals and quality of life for ordinary civilians."

How about they look at how many terrorists are being killed and how the Iraqi communities are now (finally) working with the Iraqi and U.S. soldiers to identify and roundup members of al-Qaeda. No, instead let's look and see how many more deaths result when fighting increases and what a strain that puts on hospitals. Let's look at the "quality of life" for those civilians in the middle of a war zone. (I think they said they relied on the accounts of three families from different neighborhoods in the capital.)

I am sorry, but that is laughable to the point that I now think I should have checked to make sure he was not quoting Scrappleface or The Onion. I know many of those on the left hate the military, but it does not take a military expert to understand such common sense concepts. If you think it stinks that we are killing terrorists, then just say that. If you think that killing and capturing them is not the way to go and you prefer diplomacy and making deals with them, then say that. Instead, now we are supposed to believe that the New York Times Iraq reporter is lying and spinning. Amazing how reliable all that NYT information was considered by those on the left when it was devoid of reports of progress. Yeah, and I am one accused of spinning.

It'd be usefull to point out to people less dumb than Lee that the "Surge" is a clear-and-hold operation, where we.. get this.. "clear" an area and then unlike before use the extra troops to "hold" it. So we force the bad guys out of places like Baghdad, Anbar and Diala, work with the citizens to fortify and rebuild these areas while continuing to chase al Quaida into less populated areas that get exponentially easier to clear and hold.

In other words, the "Surge" is doing exactly what Petraeus designed it to do, as Lee just proved.

The upside of bring the war home is that folks like Lee, Barney, and Frank will have an opportunity to face-off with terrorists on their home turf.

The upside of bring the war home is that folks like Lee, Barney, and Frank will have an opportunity to face-off with terrorists on their home turf. Mac Lorry

Bring it on! O-wait that line has already been used.

For general info and to counter Lee "The Thief" Ward:

The big news on the streets today is that the people of Baqubah are generally ecstatic, although many hold in reserve a serious concern that we will abandon them again. For many Iraqis, we have morphed from being invaders to occupiers to members of a tribe. I call it the "al Ameriki tribe," or "tribe America."

I've seen this kind of progression in Mosul, out in Anbar and other places, and when I ask our military leaders if they have sensed any shift, many have said, yes, they too sense that Iraqis view us differently. In the context of sectarian and tribal strife, we are the tribe that people can--more or less and with giant caveats--rely on.

As the soldiers clear Baqubah of the enemy and its deadly trappings, the people here are coming forward and talking. Some Iraqis worry that the US will leave Baqubah too soon, only to have al Qaeda return and start dealing retribution to "collaborators." That may explain why so many Iraqis here are offering useful information that helps save American lives and keeps al Qaeda out.

Lee "The Thief" Ward... when will you be moving to SanFran-ville so you can vote for Cindy Sheehag?

Cognitive dissonance is a symptom of the liberal mental illness, Frank. John Burns reported facts from Iraq ; the editorial writer, facts be damned, is straining at gnats and swallowing camels to justify a political belief and his obsessive hatred. The dissonance you hear, Frank, is the sound of silence, from the NYT collision of truth and fantasy, that stunned your brain. I know it made your head hurt. Take two aspirin and see your doctor if the symptoms continue.

"I know many of those on the left hate the military, .." LB

From Novacula's column: "Hadley increased latent fears of the U.S. military being made the fall guy -- a concern shared by many retired and some active senior officers, including a current infantry division commander."

Right on target as usual Lorie!

Marc, don't you know that people on the left do not believe Michael Yon, who just happens to be over there in the field and filing regular reports with some amazing pictures, by the way. Yon used to be in the military (special ops, I think) so he can't possibly be trusted. Unless, of course, you want to quote any of the bad news in his reports. Those parts are good as gold.

How about they look at how many terrorists are being killed and how the Iraqi communities are now (finally) working with the Iraqi and U.S. soldiers to identify and roundup members of al-Qaeda.

Body counts don't matter. The only thing that does matter is keeping the Iraqis safe from the insurgents. As General Petraeus said, that level of security is going to take a while to achieve: link

The US commander in Iraq says American troops could be needed in the country for a decade to battle insurgents.

General David Petraeus has told Fox News there is broad recognition that Iraq's daunting challenges will not be resolved "in a year or even two years".

"In fact, typically, I think historically, counter-insurgency operations have gone at least nine or 10 years," he said.

As you can see from the article the dead insurgent metric isn't one that is very telling.

Leeward is the direction from which the wind blows. It makes you go in the opposite direction. Set sail; it will keep blowing.

Barney, sorry to rock your world but many on the left do hate the military. I could post tons of links of pictures of signs held up at "peace" rallies that advocate killing those in the military, but I think everyone here (except you evidently) has seen them before. In case you missed it, I just posted a story about an airman who was shot to make a statement about the government and the war. Sorry Barney, but many on the left do hate the military. I did not say all or even most, but many cases of those on the left expressing hatred of the military have been documented.

I did not say all or even most, but many cases of those on the left expressing hatred of the military have been documented.

So what is the % of those on the Left that hate the military?

I see the point about the number of "dead" terrorists. I should have said number of terrorist who are no longer able to conduct terrorist activities -- whether that be because of death or capture or our troops keeping them on the run. Most of those on the left do not agree that body counts don't matter because they are frequently cited (as Lee and the BBC did) as the measure of whether or not the surge is working.

I know very well Lee "The Thief" Ward would never accept what someone with experience on the ground would say Lori.

Lee "The Thief" Ward has long since joined Confedracy of Spooked Cow Dunces and he's compelled to use the BBC as a source even after their own internal investigation declared they were in the tank for the FAR leftest moonbats and colored every report with a wide anti-American brush.

Truthout will be his next retort, and linked with a straight face.

Barney,

As I have a son in this fight at Combat Outpost Vicking, KISS MY ASS. And as I am one of those "many" who "fear" the military will be "the fall guy", because of my personal experience (U.S. Army a969-73) with the media and liberals snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, you can KISS MT ASS. Son will be home on leave the first week of August. Come on by, we'll have a threesome. Frank and Lee are welcome to join us. They can KISS OUR ASS, too, if they are still conscious after the handshake.

Most of those on the left do not agree that body counts don't matter because they are frequently cited (as Lee and the BBC did) as the measure of whether or not the surge is working.

Death counts are an indication of the level of violence therefore they matter when deciding how much security there is in Iraq. Since securing the population is the only metric that matters in an insurgency it is very relevant.

I don't have a percentage (duh) but I do know that I have seen pictures of MANY signs at anti-war rallies advocating violence against those in the military. I even saw a U.S. soldier burned in effigy at one. If I had the time or inclination I could provide dozens of links to those and other pictures, but they should be easy enough for you to find yourself. I am surprised you have not already seen them. I say many on the left because I assume that the majority of those at the anti-war rallies are on the left, judging from some of the other signs they are holding. If you really want to argue that there are not many on the left who hate the military visit a few of the leftwing moonbat sites like D.U. and you will see what I mean.

The BBC served as a useful prop outlet for Hamas and now for the AlQ terrorists. It confirms the well-known strategy of blowing up more women and children so that the terrorists' useful idiots on the left can claim that the surge has failed. This is so transparent, but these leftists are still willing to do the bidding.

BTW, Barney still hasn't given us the link to his source. Looks like Barney is a specialist in cut-and-paste half truths to support his spin.

BTW, it is interesting that the left doesn't want to talk about this quagmire right in the heart of Europe.

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/010476.php

The quagmire of Kosovo's status continues at the United Nations, thanks to Russian refusals to consider the independence of the province. Eight years after UN intervention and administration, the Security Council warns of more violence in the area as the talks have stalled yet again on the final status of the breakaway territory

If you really want to argue that there are not many on the left who hate the military visit a few of the leftwing moonbat sites like D.U. and you will see what I mean.

There are 300 million US Citizens. How many of them post on Democratic Underground and/or go to anti-war rallies?

"Death counts are an indication of the level of violence therefore they matter when deciding how much security there is in Iraq. Since securing the population is the only metric that matters in an insurgency it is very relevant."

They don't matter in the middle of the battle. We are still fighting. We have only just begun the surge and you are expecting there to be results with no fighting. What are they supposed to be doing? Singing "give peace a chance" with the terrorists? I thought they were supposed to be capturing or killing them. That is violent and dangerous business. After they have conducted operations we will know whether or not they have made areas more secure and there are some indications that is already happening in some areas, but to say they can't have casualties while fighting (or that they should be decreasing as operations are being stepped up) is absurd.

Are you serious or are you just yanking my chain? You have to understand that, don't you?

Sorry guys, the girls need some supervision so I won't be back at the computer for a while. I will try to check back in tonight.

neponset:

Death counts are an indication of the level of violence therefore they matter when deciding how much security there is in Iraq.

As LB already noted when you take the fight to the enemy the count go up. How shocking!

Without taking that into account the story gets slanted unfairly.

Lorie points to this:
"I just posted a story about an airman who was shot to make a statement about the government and the war. " as proof the left hates the military.

Nice one Lorie. An insane person is your example?

I pointed to just another in a long list of examples where Bush hates the military. From armor to leave to Walter Reed to a flawed plan that all has lead to deaths of many of our brave brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, but you go a head and point to one mentally disturbed individual and claim he represents the thoughts and feelings of the left.

Barney, Frank, Lee, et.al.,

Liberals "support" of the troops when America is at war is like saying you love surgeons, but hate them doing surgery. Dissonance. It has such a lovely ring to it. Dorothy would be so proud of your success at getting a heart; now just find a brain. And take off the ruby slippers.

Why do a**holes like Barney and Lee want us to lose?

Neponset:

There are 300 million US Citizens. How many of them post on Democratic Underground and/or go to anti-war rallies?

GET OFF that screed!

She never said all were anti-military. Your only interest in pinning her down to a specific number is to later dredge up some poll or other "evidence" she's wrong.

If your so interested in a number give a solid and provable count of those on the left that AREN'T anti-military.

We have only just begun the surge and you are expecting there to be results with no fighting.

We have been in Iraq for over four years and we have yet to secure the civilian population. That won't chance in three months.

barneyGRUBBLE

Nice one Lorie. An insane person is your example?

Just stop being a tool! You know very well on this very site there have been dozens of posts containing images of protests that include images of the most hateful anti-US and anti-military "protest signage"

Quit being an asshat.

GET OFF that screed!

No, if Lorie wants to paint with such a broad brush then she can justify her conclusions.

Just stop being a tool! You know very well on this very site there have been dozens of posts containing images of protests that include images of the most hateful anti-US and anti-military "protest signage"

Not dozens? In the third most populous country on the planet there are dozens of people who go to protests that include hateful images. I can't believe it. That must mean Lefties in general are anti-military.

No, if Lorie wants to paint with such a broad brush then she can justify her conclusions.

And if you want to counter her claim, and in absence of a response from LB, you could prove your point with a number yourself.

You can't anymore than she can, so quite whining about it.

You can't anymore than she can, so quite whining about it.

No

Here is a quick Google search
Aantiwar left and military

A sample
The Fifth Column Left Declares War
By David Horowitz
FrontPageMagazine.com | March 17, 2003

We have long warned on these pages that the peace movement is not about peace, that it is a fifth column communist movement to destroy America and give victory to our totalitarian enemies. Now this Fifth Column is preparing to move into action to attempt to defeat America in its war against Saddam.

The Terrorists' Leftist PR Machine
By Jacob Laksin
FrontPageMagazine.com | January 11, 2005

In an op-ed for the Fort-Worth Star-Telegram, radical leftist Robert Jensen and journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin, calls on Americans to pursue "the most courageous act of citizenship in the United States today: pledging to dismantle the American empire." Jensen insists, "The United States has lost the war in Iraq, and that's a good thing." With Professor Jensen, leftist stalwart pundits and publications--including The Nation, Barbara Ehrenreich, and Howard Zinn--have abandoned pacifism in favor of rooting for America's terrorist ("insurgent") enemies in Iraq.

To witness the extent to which the radical Left has become a willing agent of Islamist terror, it is sufficient to tour some of its more unhinged tribunes. For instance, over at The Nation, that bastion of bourgeois leftism, you'll find no mention of our armed forces' recent string of victories against Islamist die-hards. Instead, from the magazine that maintained a studied silence concerning the cruelties of Saddam Hussein, comes now much hair pulling about the supposed human rights abuses visited on Iraqi "civilians" by American troops.

THe majority of the left perfers genocide to American victory in Iraq. I don't hear the call from the left for staying and defeating AlQ in Iraq despite Blue 's distraction and spin.

Bryd chirped: "Let's look at the "quality of life" for those civilians in the middle of a war zone."

All she had to do was follow the link and she'd have found that Iraqi civilian dead and wounded are up, significantly.

But she's not interested in facts and measureable metrics - let's pretend that the "quality of life in Iraq" is improving.... bullshit.

Meanwhile, it's spin, spin, spin until election 2008 - to hell with the dead and wounded, we've got Republicans to keep in office. Pathetic - yes, it's the only word to describe the right wing blogosphere's efforts to continue to justify a war that even Republicans in Congress now admit has failed.

THe majority of the left perfers genocide to American victory in Iraq.

I think you mean the majority of Americans prefer genocide to American victory in Iraq. link Either 2/3rds of the Country is aligned with the political Left or the evil Lefties convinced 1/3rd of the country to believe genocide is preferable to victory in Iraq. Which is it?

Lee "The Thief" Ward:

Meanwhile, it's spin, spin, spin until election 2008 - to hell with the dead and wounded, we've got Republicans to keep in office.

If that were the case Bush would have pulled out long ago and may have still held the House and Senate.

Let's look at the quality of life?

OK... Not sure of latest but as of six months ago the Iraqi economy was "booming." (no pun intended)

Blue,
The left is the one who tried to influence the public opinion with their less than honest reporting towards which purpose?

Do you have an honest poll that asks these questions:

We should withdraw from Iraq despite the following consequences:

(1) A possible genocide in Iraq and impending disaster in the ME
(2) A defeat for the US and a clear victory for the terrorists and their sponsors in Iran and Syria
(3) The possibility of the terrorists following us home right on American homeland
(4) The possible cost of trillion of dollars to protect all the soft targets in America
(5) The possibility of a police state in America for protection of the homeland.

If you have the results of such a poll, please let me know. Otherwise, I had to say that the left is willing to spin to ensure American defeat for the US military (and the victory for the terrorists).

Otherwise, I had to say that the left is willing to spin to ensure American defeat for the US military (and the victory for the terrorists).

Conservatives have been jumping up and down about the liberal media and Lefties for a good long while. How is it that Righties underestimated the ability of the Left to spin a victory into a defeat? If you are looking for people to blame for the poor public perception of Iraq I would start with all the war supporters. They supposedly knew the stakes involved in Iraq but didn't do enough to get the US public invested in victory. It seems to me the Lefties were just doing exactly what Conservatives have always accused them of doing.

Blue,
No need to spin or distract. If you want the truth, please give me the results for such a poll. IT 's not too hard for you if you have the truth on your side.
For now, we know that the majority of the left will spin and work to ensure a withdrawal from Iraq regardless of the cost outlined above. When the left has political power, they cut funding to South Vietnam to give the communists the victory. They did the same for the Nicaraguan communists. Now the leftists in Congress are trying to cut the funding for the war against AlQ in Iraq. Those are the facts we know so far.

IF that is the record of the left 's support for the military, I shudder to think what the left 's opposition is like.

There was a time not so long ago the anti-Iraq war types were spouting the Bush isn't listening "to his Generals" line of tripe.

Wonder why some of the the same people aren't listening?

A senior U.S. military commander warned on Friday against cutting the number of troops in Iraq, saying the Iraqi security force cannot fight on its own and a U.S. reduction would cede progress to the insurgents.

"It would be a mess," said Army Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, commander of U.S. forces in an area stretching from Baghdad's southern suburbs through a region known as the "Triangle of Death."

He said the additional 30,000 troops sent to Iraq over the past four months had given commanders' the ability to reach areas controlled by insurgents and provide greater security.

"If those surge forces go away, that capability goes away. And the Iraqi security forces aren't ready yet to do that," he said, speaking to Washington reporters by video link from Iraq.

"So now what you're going to find, if you did that, is you'd find the enemy regaining ground, re-establishing a sanctuary, building more IEDs, carrying those IEDs in Baghdad and the violence would escalate," he said, referring to the improvised explosive devices, or roadside bombs, used to deadly effect by insurgents.

Again, my lefty brothers live and breathe in denial. Lorie, I am somewhat older then you. I served in the military in the later 1960's and early 70's. There is no doubt the left hates the military, and a tiger does not change its' stripes. I am not saying democrats, just those on the left. Which of course is most the MSM and the trolls here. Can anyone tell me how soon after we went in Iraq did the left start calling it a quagmire and a mistake? Less then ONE year? Can anyone tell me if GW went into Iraq without majority of congress approving it? Are the leftist democratic leaders now talking about defunding, again, the troops as they did in Vietnam? See, tigers and lefties do not change their stripes. Here is the left mantra since 2003: we torture people, our soldiers are like nazi's, the military are stupid, our soldiers are cold blooded killers, etc. Yeah. The left loves the military. ww

"The upside of bring the war home is that folks like Lee, Barney, and Frank will have an opportunity to face-off with terrorists on their home turf."

With the anonymity of blogging, how do we know they aren't terrorists? I have no idea who these Anti-Americans are....

Lee
What good are "measurable metrics" at this stage? We are too early in the surge to rely upon totally unreliable sources or "reporting", like the BBC...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1942948.ece

The rest of your post is spin,spin,spin.....

Lee, are you deleting posts at Blue? Yes or No.

"In fact, typically, I think historically, counter-insurgency operations have gone at least nine or 10 years," he said.

The General is right (as I'd expect him to be).

The post-WWII occupation of Japan lasted approximately 7 years (1945-1952).

The post-WWII occupation of Germany lasted almost exactly 10 years to the day, going from 8 May 1945 to 5 May 1955, when the last American High Commissioner stepped down.

Both nations had long been accustomed to a form of democratic government.

It's only been 4 years in Iraq, and that nation has virtually no history of democratic government. This ain't something that's gonna get up and running overnight, ya know.

I just heard that Bush's progress report (due this weekend) will say that none of the benchmarks the President has sent are on track or have been met. Read: No Progress!!!

I guess that explains the recent rats jumping off the ship (see Lugar, Warner, Snowe...). Just as I predicted yesterday.

correction: set not sent

BarneyG2000

I just heard that Bush's progress report (due this weekend) will say that none of the benchmarks the President has sent are on track or have been met. Read: No Progress!!!

OK, as BryanD used to say...I'll bite!

Who writes the progress report?
Who set the benchmarks?
What does "on track" mean?

I'm not finished here barney, I just want you on record now.

Just a little dishonest aren't you barneyGRUBBLE?

What you heard was none of the benchmarks set for the Iraqi Gov haven't been met.

Oh... and BTW it's not "due this weekend" it will be released Tuesday!

Pull you head out of your rectum so you can actually hear & decipher what was really broadcast.

Hughs, see marc's comment. The President is required by law to report on the progress in Iraq every 90-days.

marc, you are correct. The benchmarks and goal the President set for the Iraqi government (including Sunni inclusion, power sharing, oil revenue and others) are not or will not be met.

So what is your point? Do you think that is a good thing, or that political stability is not required to win the war?

BG:

So what is your point? Do you think that is a good thing, or that political stability is not required to win the war?

No point other than noting your either a disingenuous fool, or a certified liar.

Or both.

marc, please explain yourself. What have written that was wrong?

Marc, he's been proven to be both. See this thread where Barney makes up some numbers, attributes them to a source, then has someone post the real numbers from that source with a link!

It's classic.

From Fox News:

Besides an order to increase up to 20,000 troops in the country, FOX News confirmed Monday that the plan also will include establishing a set of benchmarks that the government there will be expected to reach in an effort to stabilize the country in the face of heightening sectarian tensions.

http://www.comcast.net/entertainment/index.jsp?cat=ENTERTAINMENT&fn=/2007/07/09/710386.html

blow it out your ass ccg.

Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT.O: Quote, Profile , Research) Web portal MSN said on Saturday that Live Earth concerts generated more than 9 million Internet streams, the most ever for an online entertainment event.

http://investing.reuters.co.uk/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=allBreakingNews&storyID=2007-07-09T220206Z_01_N09304959_RTRIDST_0_ENVIRONMENT-CONCERT-RATINGS.XML

Blow it out your ass again.

Hmmm, can't even respond in the thread where your error was shown.

Pitiful, really. So pitiful. I'll pray for you, Barney. I really will.

Go back to the post.

Now you can blow it your ass for the third time.

BarneyG2000

I asked three questions. You responded to one by telling me to read marc's post.

Answer the other questions.

Sorry hughS. Your questions were:

Who writes the progress report? The progress report is required by law of congress. I do not know who actually writes the report but it is sourced out of the WH

Who set the benchmarks? Bush did in his speech that announced the surge. You can go back to his speech (Dec or Jan?)

What does "on track" mean? It means not! That is what was reported that none of the benchmarks that Bush imposed has been met by the timeline that was put forth by Bush. We will have to wait until the report is released to know more.

barneyGRUBBLE:

marc, please explain yourself. What have written that was wrong?

Jesus H Christ in a ferris wheel just how Sthuuuupid can you be?

You admitted to BEING WRONG in this comment!!!

Did that fin scar your ass as you jumped over that shark?

nothing from ccg? what's the matter? cat got your colon?

Where is the left 's outrage wrt this barbarian evil from AlQ? Wonder How these people can look themselves in mirror. The NYT is advocating abandoning Iraq to these barbarians with the majority support on the left (with the exception of Lieberman maybe)?

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTUzNmIyNDUyMmRjZTk0OTYwZTRhZTVmNzFkOGIwMGY=

On Friday, Yon reported that al Qaeda served up a son for dinner to his own family-- a barbarism reminiscent of Atreus (hence the "curse" on the House of Atreus) cooking (sans feet and hands) and then serving his twin brother's sons to their unsuspecting father Thyestes. So Yon reports a revolting modern-day Thysestean feast:

The official reported that on a couple of occasions in Baqubah, al Qaeda invited to lunch families they wanted to convert to their way of thinking. In each instance, the family had a boy, he said, who was about 11-years-old. As LT David Wallach interpreted the man's words, I saw Wallach go blank and silent. He stopped interpreting for a moment. I asked Wallach, "What did he say?" Wallach said that at these luncheons, the families were sat down to eat. And then their boy was brought in with his mouth stuffed. The boy had been baked. Al Qaeda served the boy to his family.
What is striking about all this savagery--whether with the filmed beheadings of Westerners in Iraq to the recent flaming Johnny Storm human torch at Glasgow, screaming epithets as he sought to engulf bystanders and ignite his canisters -- is the absolute silence of the West, either distracted by Paris and i-Phones or suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome and obsessed with Guantanamo.

Since AlQ makes Iraq its central battle, the liberals want to cut and run.

http://www.tbo.com/news/nationworld/MGBVJ2X2S3F.html

Al-Zawahiri Video Stresses Importance Of Iraq War
Skip directly to the full story.
By LEE KEATH The Associated Press

Published: Jul 6, 2007

ADVERTISEMENT

More from this channel:

Search for more information:

Site Search Archives Keyword

TBO.com Site Search | Tribune archive from 1990

BAGHDAD - A new video by al-Qaida's deputy leader Thursday left no doubt about what the terror network claims is at stake in Iraq - describing it as a centerpiece of its anti-American fight and insisting the Iraqi insurgency is under its direct leadership.

You admitted to BEING WRONG in this comment!!! marc

If you say so marc. I hope your are happy to live in your reality based world.

If you say so marc. I hope your are happy to live in your reality based world.

Most certainly.

Much better than being a blithering idiot!

Why do a**holes like Barney and Lee want us to lose?

So many of you still look at this war as a game of College football. This is not a team sport with a set of rules. Lives are lost due to poor strategy and pie-in-the-sky idealism that is based on fantasy instead of real facts.

George Bush lost this war by lying about it - then he lost it again by going into Iraq with too few troops - then he lost it again by neglecting the infrastructure - then again by squandering rebuilding funds, etc. etc. etc.

You people, however, seem content with following him and his poor judgement off a cliff because you're both scared and stubbornly childlike in your ability to never want to admit you've been wrong - or were duped.

It's every one of you who champion this war as chest-pumping exercise and sports event that are responsible for the lost lives of more of our soldiers. This is real, people. You want to support your troops, cultivate a realistic assessment of the events at hand. Fantasy has no place in this argument.

Hansel2, how come you liberal lefties seem to know what motivates us? You haven't a clue. I would like to ask you liberal a question: If the US will leave Iraq when the violence eases up, why do the insurgents not reduce the violence? Hmmm? I know, but do you? Come on, you can do it. ww

WildWillie, people who want to debate motivations rather than substance are people who understand their own limitations.

If the US will leave Iraq when the violence eases up, why do the insurgents not reduce the violence?

I'll bite. Why don't you tell us your assessment of it, ww? What you have over there is a civil war and a series of connected and unconnected groups who have various motivations. The only one they have in common is a hatred for the U.S. soldiers, and staying there will certainly not eliminate that hatred.

Furthermore, the Iraqi parliament is a joke, and their motivations don't diverge either. So, where does that leave our guys? It leaves them with no support from the people they're protecting or their new government. Tell me how this is going to be resolved? How will we "win" in this kind of environment? We can't. The best we can do is pull to the edges, wait and watch. No manner of gung-ho Ramboism is going to put this shell back together.