C. Jenkins11:45PMJul 16th 2008

Well, President Bush is really covering his tracks.

Gitmo..Closing

Hud..Secretary changed

Iran..Negotiations

I wonder how he intends to cover up the oil pipeline we have been constructing in Iraq to places unknown.
I wonder how he intends to keep the troops quiet when they come home?

Obama 08-16

Splash12:47AMJul 17th 2008

C. Jenkins -

Always true to form. You just can't give credit where credit is due. The surge was an unmitigated success ad is now a model for rooting terror from the bowels of a hell hole like Iraq.

At least tip your hat to the president for turning things around in Iraq. He will be, in all likelihood, bringing troops home from Iraq even before Obama said he would, but he will do in on the shoulder of success. Anything less, promoted by Obama, would be abject failure.

You are just one of those "I don't care what he does or how successful it is, if Bush is for it I'm against it" O-bots that are so destructive to American individualism and freedom.

Go on, follow your nose right into the that sad trap that is liberalism. Hopefully there is less of you than I think.

Peggy1:04AMJul 17th 2008

C. Jenkins, this is bad news for Obama. Right after he flip-flopped on his promise to bring the troops home in 16 months and said it might be a little longer, Bush is going to start moving them out sooner. McCain was right. It is sometimes best to visit a country BEFORE you try to assess the situation there.

dennis1:31AMJul 17th 2008

There are a number of facts that were reported last week.(1)The U.N. law allowing us in a soverein nation ends in January 2009 (2)the Iraqies have told us they want no perminant agreement for troups without finite withdraw dates. (3) We are negociating a one year temporary agreement starting in January 2009 (4) Prime Minister Malaki a Sheeite has negociated a treaty with Iran,another Sheeite country (5) thus we put a Democracy together in Iraq only to have them choose their own way -not ours.

dennis1:40AMJul 17th 2008

It doesn't matter if you are a Democrate or Repiblican
these are a series of facts that came out three days ago.(1)The U.N. mandate allowing our troups in a soverein nation in Iraq end in Jan 2009 (2) The Iraqies don't want perminant bases and want a hard timetable on withdraw dates from us for that type of agreement.(3)We are currently negociating a temporary one year agreement starting in Jan 2009.(4)Prime Minister Malaki has just signed a treaty with fellow Sheeites in Iran (5) Thus we set up their Democracy and they chose to pony up with Iran

Jonathan Davidson4:15AMJul 17th 2008

Equipping the Iraqi security forces to defend their own nation will be the most time consuming part of the process. In order to expidite the process, we are giving them 9500 armored hum vees fully equipped with weapons systems. This will enable their ground forces to fight against domestic insurrections, but they need a lot more military technology than that to provide for their national security.

Splash7:29AMJul 17th 2008

Dennis - "thus we put a Democracy together in Iraq only to have them choose their own way -not ours."
________________________

That is the point of a democracy. We would be no more that distant dictators if Iraq was required to choose our way.

They should choose their own way.

Iraq should not have foreign troops there forever, but they should choose when we, their current protection, should leave, not US or the idiots in congress or an inexperienced over-ambitious lib just trying to get elected.

Iraq should strike an accord with Iran and all it's neighbors. It is what sovereign nations do.

We will have some permanent presence there because Iraq knows that that presence is in her best interest.

When we leave, Iraq will be strong, sovereign and self sustaining. That's what America does when it frees a people. Their treaty with Iran will not give Iran control of Iraq and Iraq won't let itself be drawn into another Saddam like mistake of puffing up their chest to foolishly challenge a world power. But they will be free to do things their way.

If Iraq had to do it "our way" then she wouldn't be free, now would she?

Dennis, will you be joining C. Jenkins in his insistence on condemning America no matter what or will you be tipping your hat to the big W for the current and complete success of the surge?

Me9:37AMJul 17th 2008

I believe Obama is showing that he actually knows what he is talking about because he has been talking about Afghanistan way before McSame even thought about it. Obama been saying that he will set a timetable for troop withdrawals and thats JUST WHAT THE IRANIANS WANT! Why does Barack have these ideas like meeting with foreign leaders(good and bad)and all of a sudden the White House seems to want to do that. Obama was the first to say send more troops to the REAL WAR ON TERROR instead of fighting a war that had nothing to do with 911!

Obama is really doing better than McSame, being that McSame has more experience. Oh and by the way...McSame said "i know how to win wars". WHAT WAR HAS HE WON THAT GIVES HIM THE RIGHT TO SAY THAT?!!!?!!!? We lost vietnam remember.

Mark Impomeni9:38AMJul 17th 2008

Me,

I don't think you meant to say that withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq is just what the Iranians want. But nonetheless, I think you stumbled upon something very true. Think about that.

Thanks for reading and commenting.

Sincerely,

Mark Impomeni

Me9:57AMJul 17th 2008

I did mean that. Is it not what the leaders in charge of Irag want? They were the ones who proposed that a timetable should be in negotiation with our troops over in THEIR region. Lets not try to rephrase or lessen the statements that obviously came from the Iranian leaders over there.

Mark Impomeni9:59AMJul 17th 2008

Me,

So, in your line of reasoning, it's a good thing that Obama has the same goals in Iraq as the leaders of Iran? I'm not sure that's an argument for his election.

Sincerely,

Mark Impomeni

donrp10:19AMJul 17th 2008

to Me, as a 100% disabled vietnam war vet i want you to know that the u.s. military DID NOT lose the war, the dead head politician's did! the military was nearly all out of nam in 1973 and the country fell to the commies in 1975.

donrp10:31AMJul 17th 2008

to "Me" check this out: http://members.aol.com/viperash50/page2/index.htm

Me10:47AMJul 17th 2008

Mark Mark...you make no sense in what you are saying or want to say or trying to say. Listen or in this case read and take heed to the fact that IRAQ IS NOT OUR COUNRTY! IF SOMEONE SAYS ITS TIME TO LEAVE THEN ITS TIME TO MAKE PLANS TO LEAVE! Further more...we have a more serious problem in Afghanistan which is where we should have been from the jump. Obama wants to do the right thing by going after Osama Bin Laden. You should agree with me that thats a good thing. Now how is Iraq helping us catch him by occupying there and wasting BILLIONS of dollars there?

Me10:54AMJul 17th 2008

donrp. I appreciate everything that you've done and John McCain has done in serving this counrty. All the veterans for that matter. But what gives McCain the right to say he knows how to win wars when he never actually won any war before? Thats being a little boastful when saying that sense i've serve in vietnam then i know how to win wars. Thats not right nor is it accurate because whether the government or whoever was the reason we lost the war, that doesn't give him the right to state something he has never done before in his life and thats win a war! I believe he's being arrogant and using his military experinece in a unfair way to say something like that.

Mark Impomeni11:20AMJul 17th 2008

Me,

Interesting that you didn't answer my question. Let's review this conversation.

You originally said that Sen. Obama wants a withdrawal of U.S. troops which is what the Iranians want. I said that I thought you made a mistake meaning to say Iraqis when you said Iranians. You said you didn't, that the Iranians are pulling the strings in Iraq. I followed your line of reasoning to ask you if Obama wants the same thing as the Iranians in Iraq.

Of course U.S troops should leave Iraq when the Iraqis want them to. That is the whole concept behind the Administration's "as the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down" strategy. Nothing that has happened recently has changed that.

The question is whether now is the right time for U.S troops to leave. Obama says yes. McCain, the Administration, and the military say no. I suspect that the Iraqis would agree despite their position on the status of forces, which is a whole different question and a political one at that.

Of course I agree with you that getting Osama bin Laden would be a good thing. No one doesn't. But again, the question is not whether we should get him, but how. Should we remove troops from Iraq now to accomplish that, and is it even possible? Clearly there will be much more attention paid to Afghanistan now that Iraq is looking more and more like a solid success.

Here's a thought exercise for you: When did the war in Afghanistan begin to go less well for the U.S and Afghan troops? I submit there were two factors. One, the peace accords between Pakistan the the tribal on the Afghan border, which allowed al-Qaeda a haven to rearm and retrain. Two, the beginning of the troop surge in Iraq, because defeated al-Qaeda elements and foreign terrorists began to stream back to Afghanistan with their tails between their legs to take advantage of the haven provided by Pakistan.

So, yes, I believe that Iraq helped the effort in Afghanistan by taking the pressure off U.S troops there. That we didn't ultimately catch bin Laden is not the fault of Iraq, but rather due to the fact that he is most likely beyond our reach in Pakistan. Unless, of course, you want to start another war.

Sincerely,

Mark Impomeni

Me11:38AMJul 17th 2008

Lol ok u right about the iranians comment.All along i meant to say iraqis. But my point still make sense because whether or not we want to stay in Iraq its up to the iraqis to say that. And sofar they haven't said that they want us to stay. And of course the surge is going to work. If u put more gasoline on a fire its going to burn more. By just sending more troops to iraq would absolutely help cut down violence. But u take the risk of loosing more lives and putting more lives in danger. Back to my point, those troops in the surge could've been helping to KEEP Afghanistan stable before the Taliban and Al queda grew stronger in that region! We are burden by the Iraq war and now Al Queda is showing why we should've focused on them in the first place instead of get distracted because of a counrty with so much oil! BUSH IS A CON ARTIST AND U KNOW IT!

Mark Impomeni11:46AMJul 17th 2008

Me,

Now we are geting somewhere.

Al-Qaeda was in Iraq, too. As evidenced by the terrorist group calling itself "Al-Qaeda in Iraq." They have now been defeated, accoriding to the Iraqi govenrment, thanks to the troop surge and the strengthening Iraqi Army. So fighting the war in Iraq was fighting al-Qaeda.

As for your comment that "of course the surge is going to work," that's not what Sen. Obama said a when he opposed it. He said specifically that he "was not convinced" that an additional 20,000 U.S. troops would have any impact on security in Iraq. That judgment has now been proven spectacularly wrong.

So I guess my next question is, given his past mis-judgements on war strategy, why should we trust Obama's judgment with respect to further troop withdrawals in Iraq or buildups in Afghanistan?

Sincerely,

Mark Impomeni

Me12:19PMJul 17th 2008

Why should we trust McSame? Look Obama said that the surge wouldn't work and TO BE EXACT IT HASN'T LIVE UP TO WHAT IT ORIGINALLY WAS INTENDED TO DO. Bush said that the surge would help stop the violence, SO-FAR it SEEMS to be working. But what he also stated was that the surge was going to HELP IMPROVE IRAQ'S POLITICAL STRUCTURE AND MAKE IT MORE CAPABLE FOR THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT TO MANAGE. DO YOUR RESEARCH ON THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS THE MAIN GOAL FOR THE SURGE AS WELL. As a matter of fact, its safe to say that THE SURGE IS WORKING TO A DEGREE! But with that said i do believe Obama can be trusted more than McSame can when it comes to foreign policies because NOBODY ELSE WHERE IN THE WORLD WANTS McCAIN TO BE VISITING THERE COUNTRY AS OUR NEW LEADER. DO THE RESEARCH ON THAT AS WELL!!!! I f we are to be a great nation we need to be percieved as a good moralized country to the WORLD!

Mark Impomeni12:38PMJul 17th 2008

Me,

The main goal of the surge was to stop the violence in Anbar and Baghdad. The Iraqis were supposed to be able to make political progress as a consequence of that reduction in violence, not because the U.S. was sending in troops. Iraq has absolutely made that political progress, as evidenced by the defeat of Shiite militias in Basra, and al-Qaeda in Mosul. Those things would not have happened but for the surge. Also the Iraqi Parliament has passed an oil revenue sharing law, amnesty for former Baathists, and a provincial elections law, all key goals of national reconciliation efforts. So no matter how you slice it, the troop surge has been an unmitigated success. It is a folly to argue anything else.

Why should we trust McCain? How about because it was his idea to have a troop surge in the first place? McCain was advocating for increasing troops in Iraq long beofre the Administration got on board. Obama opposed the surge, while McCain knew it would work. McCain's judgment wins out here.

Why should any American care what foreigners or their goverments think of our presidential candidates? They don't select our leaders, we do. Furthermore, they don't have to live with the policies that our candidates would institute once in office. I could care less what the world thinks of McCain or Obama. That said, most of the rest of the world will always think poorly of the United States out of jealousy, no matter who our leaders are. I'll believe that the world hates America when all the world's people stop trying to come here.

And by the way, all of the countries, except maybe Jordan, that Obama will visit on his upcoming trip have already been visited by McCain. McCain has been to Israel, Iraq, France, England, Colombia, and Mexico as a presidential candidate. Your accusation that no foreign countries want McCain to visit is inaccurate.

Sincerely,

Mark Impomeni