Dec 20 2006
US Attacking Al Qaeda, While Zawahiri Attacks Democracy
The news out today that Al Qaeda’s number two is upset at signs of democracy in Palestine is interesting. It reinforces the view that it is not Bush that caused Al Qaeda to attack the US (since 1991) but freedom. Zawahiri also was quite clear in reminding Democrats and spineless Reps that if they want to surrender Iraq they must talk to Al Qaeda and not these regional puppet regimes. Too funny. Maybe Sen Nelson should go and meet with Zawahiri, and complete is transformation into the modern Neville Chamberlain. He can tell Zawahiri we admit that we over reacted to 9-11 and that all we want is for his people to run the ME in a way that doesn’t make it hard on Congress to face the voters every two years. And while Democrats and other surrender-at-all-costs types are working to lose in the ME, the effort continues apace to destroy Al Qaeda one terrorist at a time – as we just captured the Al Qaeda leader in Mosul. So which path does America prefer: surrender or success? Well only the truly clueless would get the answer to that one wrong.
Crosspatch, even if he supplied it, it would be wrong. You saw what he did with your post from above, He totally mis-interpreted what you had posted then said he didn’t say it. Can you believe it.
Anyhow, almost all the news out of Iraq lately, as that article above shows, and much to the dismay of Ken, has been good.
You know Ken has openly stated that he is for more American military being killed and/or wounded to hasten America’s defeat.
I can harldly believe one French guy like him can be so confused all the time.
I have made my point and intend to ignore him from this point forward. He needs attention and does this to hijack the thread and become the focus of the discussion. He needs help of a kind we can’t provide here.
Crosspatch, I sure agree, I tried ignoring him before, but he continued to be so obnoxious and continued to attack me that I responded again. As, I think it was Bikerken that said, he’s chewed through his leather straps again and is foaming at the mouth. Funny how he disagrees with everything anyone(except Gil) says and wants proof, but always declines to provide any proof to anything he says. He even denys saying he was French when I asked him where he was from long ago. But that’s on this site, in the archives.
As of now, I’m ignoring him again.
Bye French Guy.
“Anyhow, almost all the news out of Iraq lately, as that article above shows, and much to the dismay of Ken, has been good.”
Does that include the successful attack on the Baghdad police station and the killing of three more US troops?
Yes Ken, it includes that. That is indeed good news for the likes of you.
Enjoy.
Crosspatch
Documentation?
Didn’t take long-How about this from todays pro-war Washington Times.
” Mr. Gates said he discussed with the Iraqis how their government could take the lead in addressing the country’s **deteriorating **security problems. Besides an ***unrelenting** insurgency, killings and kidnappings between Sunnis and Shi’ites are approaching civil war dimensions, and U.S. and civilian casualties continue to rise.”
And it doesn’t sound like your tribal leaders’ short-term activities amount to any real dent in insurgent ranks or Gates would have bragged about them.
I have temporarily at least driven the inane would-be nag For Enforcement into silence but not before another lie portraying me as the protagonist in seeking hjis inanity out…Let’s see how long he can stay as quiet as a Basenji
Ken, those weren’t Gates’ words, those were the words of the reporter, Lolita Baldor, writing for the AP. Gates didn’t say a single word about anything “deteriorating” or any “unrelenting” anything. Those were words inserted into the article by the reporter as her description of the conditions there. In other words, it is a reflection of the political agenda of the reporter, not a reflection of the words of Gates.
Still waiting …
“You know Ken has openly stated that he is for more American military being killed and/or wounded to hasten America’s defeat.”
For Enforcement’s crowning lie thus far—
What I’ve said for three years here and on sundry other sites is, American troops should be removed from a no-win war in Iraq and many placed on the Mexican border where they can do some good.
Recently I have added, they can remove Israel from the West Bank
and Samaria, as ordered by the UN and as Arab leaders have told
the US would lessen Moslem anger at America dramatically if
effectualized.
It is For Enforcement who wishes troops stay in harm’s way in a
no-win war.
“the political agenda of the reporter” Crosspatch says. This type of attitude which chooses to refuse to believe America is losing in Iraq and can lose in Iraq is symptomatic of an arrogant ignorance that is thankfully only shared by about 20% of the staunchest escapists.
I am gonna break my own rule here.
Ken, US casualties have not dropped because as quiet areas are turned over to Iraqi forces, we concentrate harder on the more difficult areas. This means that we have more forces concentrated in the more hostile areas while the less hostile areas are now controlled by Iraqis.
It doesn’t mean anything is “unrelenting” except us in going after them. Also, it turns out that much of the “deteriorating” situation might be a fabrication of the media. It turns out they have been reporting non-existant incidents and inflating casualty counts. CENTCOM says that the media reports of daily Baghdad body counts is about twice the rate that it is actually able to verify. AP has recently been caught red handed reporting events that didn’t happen and filing 61 news reports sourced by someone who doesn’t exist.
So who is to say that anything is “deteriorating” when that conclusion is drawn from fabricated reports?
I think you are going to be in for a major surprise next week concerning the situation in Iraq. I believe the situation there is about to make a big change for the better and it isn’t going to be because of anything we did. The Iraqis are going to (finally) do it themselves.
Wrong on every essential. One as the Baker Report said, violence
is dramatically underreported in Iraq. Two, in most cases the Iraqis
you cite do not have the weaponry or skill to successfuly do their job
and this former because US forces do not trust them with adequate weaponry. Three, the insurgency has the most vital strategic area
of Iraq encircled and laden in anarchy. It could easily spread itsself
into other areas at will and will do so if Bush floods Baghdad with more troops. Four the British have ceded the south of Iraq to
Shia militias who occasionally fight among themselves for advantage but none are anything but anti-American “Islamo-fascists” as
Strata would call them, using wrong nomenclature .
representatives of the US military itself has used the term “deteriorating” and similar within the past montth to describe Iraq conditions.
You are grasping at molecules on straws.
“Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that half of Baghdad was without electricity on Tuesday. The report says that some districts, such as Bayya`, have been in the dark for days. The Ministry of Electricity has not given any explanation for the lack of service, and it isn’t clear what the cause is (though sabotage by guerrillas is high on the list.) The low in Baghdad today was 42 degrees Fahrenheit (5 C.), and Sunday the low will be 35 (1 C.). Not having electricity in such temperatures is not comfortable, and for some (the young, sick or elderly) could actually be dangerous.”
Paste from leading Arab media outlet today…
Crosspatch-maybe before the “big change for the better” somebody will finally find out who has put large areas of Baghdad in the dark for several days and half of it dark for a whole day….
Here is a graph of Iraqi police and military deaths over time from January 2005 to date. Note the trend since July of 2005 when it peaked has been for casualty rates among Iraqi police and military. It has been falling even as they have been controlling more territory and taking the lead in more locations. In other words, in the overall geographical sense, Iraq is actually becoming less violent as time passes. Baghdad and al Anbar province have been the notable exceptions. Baghdad in particular.
US military casualty rates have been about flat as we have concentrated more and more forces into smaller and smaller areas. Yesterday we handed of Najaf and not a week passes when we aren’t handing over more real estate to the Iraqis.
The situation in Baghdad is unique for several reasons. It accounts for the vast majority of deaths of civilians but not for MNF or Iraqi forces. That is a result of various political factions jockeying for position. They are killing the members of opponent factions for political gain. Ethnic Cleansing, if you will, of various neighborhoods and districts. There is relatively little “insurgent” activity there. Almost none of the attacks in Baghdad are aimed at security forces, they are aimed at political opposition populations.
Basra is the second largest city in Iraq. I can count 3 civilian deaths and 2 security force deaths there this month so far. That is quieter than Los Angeles.
In Ramadi, the heart of the insurgency, I count less than 12 civilian and police deaths combined.
Baghdad has over 900 reported deaths and those reports are suspect. CENTCOM says gernally, it is able to veryify about half that.
So the notion that the situation is “deteriorating” could well be theatre by a news media with a political agenda.
Okay, I guess I can’t post that graph here. It comes from this page:
http://icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeaths.aspx
Note that page is simply an accumulation of MEDIA REPORTS, it is not designed to be an accurate accounting of casualties. Particularly in the light of recent events where media outlets have been suspected of publishing fabricated and inflated reports.
Even so, note the clear trend in Iraqi security force deaths (down). I would venture that if Baghdad numbers were subtracted from the civilian deaths, they would be down as well.
In other words, the only place things seem to be getting “worse” is in Baghdad itself. The rest of the country seems to be doing well.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq21dec21,0,5876665.story?coll=la-home-headlines
You’re simply escaping into the stratos-sphere of avoidance.
A record number of bodies (above)recovered represents DETERIORATION.
Side note, Sistani has NOT acceded to Bush’s coalition.
Baghdad is “unique”, dreamer, becasue it is the pivotal strategic center of Iraq. Baghdad University is averaging a 6% attendance daily rate. Crime is underreported in Basra as the Baker Report makes clear, due to a paucity of reporters ,as elsewhere.
“Handing over real estate” to Iraqis represents retreat not
progress.
Anbar is the largest province in Iraq and controlled by the
insurgency. A decline in police deaths if even true is the
result of a lessening of police activity, just as periods when the US
retreated to its bases resulted in less casualties for US troops,not
“progress.”
You’re in OJ type denial….
hjis French for his.
“You know Ken has openly stated that he is for more American military being killed and/or wounded to hasten America’s defeat.â€
For Enforcement’s crowning lie thus far—
I was just quoting Ken, from this very blog
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061221/ap_on_re_us/marines_haditha
This can’t be good for whatever small good-will remains for US troops from Iraqis, hey FE?
Crosspatch-maybe before the “big change for the better†somebody will finally find out who has put large areas of Baghdad in the dark for several days and half of it dark for a whole day….
It was probably the American troops that did it,huh Ken, truly good news for you.