SpeedRacer 1 #1 June 29, 2009 http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE55S3WG20090629 Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #2 June 29, 2009 Iraqis aren't the only ones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #3 June 29, 2009 Now THAT'S some good news, there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #4 June 29, 2009 QuoteNow THAT'S some good news, there. Absolutely. It gives the Obushma administration more guys to send to Afghanistan. Hooray!-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #5 June 29, 2009 Be very interesting to see if the order that is there collapses like a house of cards or if it will be built upon." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #6 June 29, 2009 QuoteIt gives the Obushma administration more guys to send to Afghanistan. Hooray! Obama promised we would get out of Iraq, and he's making good on it. Change we can believe in. He also said we need to find and kill Osama Bin Laden. I agree with that, too. Even if you don't agree with his agenda, you have to admit that he's keeping at least some of his promises.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #7 June 29, 2009 >It gives the Obushma administration more guys to send to Afghanistan. Hooray! Yes, that is a good thing. That's where our enemies are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #8 June 29, 2009 Quote>It gives the Obushma administration more guys to send to Afghanistan. Hooray! Yes, that is a good thing. That's where our enemies are. Not to mention that fucking up the Taliban and drawing their attention back to Afghanistan should give Pakistan a little room to breathe. Which would be good, cause they have nukes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
makeithappen40 0 #9 June 29, 2009 Well, you know, unless you know that they came from Saudi Arabia. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
usedtajump 1 #10 June 29, 2009 Quote Be very interesting to see if the order that is there collapses like a house of cards or if it will be built upon. What's the over and under as to when we see American diplomats being helicoptered from the roof of the U.S. Embassy real soon?The older I get the less I care who I piss off. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #11 June 29, 2009 QuoteObama promised we would get out of Iraq, and he's making good on it. Change we can believe in. Amazing how "Change we can believe in" follows a timetable written by the last administration.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #12 June 29, 2009 Quote Quote Be very interesting to see if the order that is there collapses like a house of cards or if it will be built upon. What's the over and under as to when we see American diplomats being helicoptered from the roof of the U.S. Embassy real soon? Granted, I haven't been there in several years. But from what I'm hearing, the Iraqi Army and Police have transformed into professional organizations capable of carrying out their duties. I guess we'll see shortly just how good they are and if the insurgency will lose fuel as we pull further out of the country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #13 June 29, 2009 >Amazing how "Change we can believe in" follows a timetable written by the last >administration. Even more amazing is that it's the first Iraq timeline that either administration has met! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #14 June 29, 2009 Report suggests al Qaeda losing steam in Iraq Updated Wed. Jun. 24 2009 5:35 PM ET The Associated Press WASHINGTON -- The number of al Qaeda extremists in Iraq has plummeted and their ability to maintain a high-level of attacks has been eroded, U.S. intelligence suggests. Battered by the surge of U.S. and allied troops into Iraq, and the slowly increasing effectiveness of Iraqi security forces, al Qaeda's franchise in the war-worn country is finding fewer foreign fighters to tap for suicide bombings, said U.S. intelligence and counterterrorism officials who have been studying the terror group's activities. Those changes, officials say, suggest that the terror group is evolving to one more heavily dependent on local militants who are less committed to broader jihadist goals. The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence reports, said that the number of foreign fighters coming across Iraq's borders had dropped from hundreds to "tens," and the membership of al Qaeda in Iraq, or AQI, has plunged from thousands at its peak in 2006-2007 to hundreds now. Intelligence reports indicate that not only has AQI become less effective and less popular, it's become a different operation, said one senior counterterrorism analyst. During its heyday, al Qaeda in Iraq had ties to the terror group's leadership with an eye to expanding beyond Iraq's borders to a broader jihadist effort against the west. Now, the U.S. official said, AQI is focused on Iraq, struggling to maintain a foothold there as its ties to the central al Qaeda leadership weaken. The terror group's leaders, including Osama bin Laden, are now believed to be hiding in safe havens in Pakistan, along the rugged border with Afghanistan. Still, military leaders from Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, on down have repeatedly warned that progress in Iraq is fragile, and it is too soon to count AQI out. As the bulk of U.S. forces pull out of Iraq's cities by early next week, military commanders are already seeing the expected spike in violence, including more large-scale attacks. A truck bombing near Kirkuk on Saturday killed at least 75 people, and an attack Wednesday in a Shiite district of Baghdad killed at least 56. The attacks have targeted Shiite areas, and appear aimed at inflaming sectarian tension by provoking a similarly violent response from Shiites that could plunge the country into civil war. The attacks also give al Qaeda successful assaults to promote as they reach out to their loyalists. "We think we have beaten back al Qaeda to the point where they are now conducting attacks that are basically propaganda campaigns to make it look as though they are driving us out of Iraqi cities," Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell asserted Wednesday. Intelligence officials said that the U.S. is concerned about the impending transfer of thousands of jailed militants from U.S. to Iraqi control, and whether al Qaeda loyalists could be released. Right now, said one counterterrorism official, intelligence reports and internal communications suggest that al Qaeda is suffering from a lack of volunteers, but that could change if some of those prisoners make their way back into the al Qaeda fold. According to Pentagon spokesman Air Force Lt. Col. Pat Ryder, the U.S. military has seen some recidivism by those released from Iraqi prisons, but it is very low. At this point, he said, there is "no real evidence linking the release" of detainees to any increase in violence. "There is a concerted effort under way to release those who are not a threat to security," Ryder said. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #15 June 29, 2009 QuoteObama promised we would get out of Iraq, and he's making good on it. Change we can believe in.Quote Except for the *BOOOOOOOOSH* Status of Forces Agreement that ALREADY dictated that US troops would leave Iraq, sure.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhys 0 #16 June 29, 2009 Quote Absolutely. It gives the Obushma administration more guys to send to Afghanistan. Hooray! why were US soldiers in Iraq again? oh yeah those deliberate lies by greedy right wingers. thats right, we all forgot about that didn't we?"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TankBuster 0 #17 June 29, 2009 QuoteQuote Absolutely. It gives the Obushma administration more guys to send to Afghanistan. Hooray! why were US soldiers in Iraq again? oh yeah those deliberate lies by greedy right wingers. thats right, we all forgot about that didn't we? Damn Straight! Just check out these greedy right wingers - in their own words. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCVZlLBchVE&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5p-qIq32m8&feature=relatedThe forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites riddler 0 #18 June 30, 2009 QuoteExcept for the *BOOOOOOOOSH* Status of Forces Agreement that ALREADY dictated that US troops would leave Iraq, sure. Like I said, change we can believe in. If the republicans had won, the headline would have read differently.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jerryzflies 0 #19 June 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote Absolutely. It gives the Obushma administration more guys to send to Afghanistan. Hooray! why were US soldiers in Iraq again? oh yeah those deliberate lies by greedy right wingers. thats right, we all forgot about that didn't we? Damn Straight! Just check out these greedy right wingers - in their own words. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCVZlLBchVE&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5p-qIq32m8&feature=related All you've done is show that the right wing liars found a gullible audience among some of the Dems. BUT NOT ALL. PS - who said this? Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil. I don’t oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain. I don’t oppose all wars. After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration’s pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again. I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income - to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear - I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhys 0 #20 June 30, 2009 Quote Damn Straight! Just check out these greedy right wingers - in their own words. a, i'm not american b, i am not a democrat c, those guys are politicians and will say whatever the people want to hear/will get them votes. d, americans need to realise there are people that are not republicans and not democrats or liberals. maybe this generalised perspective is a major source of the probelm, it is either us or them? tha fact of the matter is that, there were no WMD's, your government blatantly lied about it, 1000's of people are dead now because of these irrational/deliberate assumtions and they are not convicted as war criminals, yet! saddam could have been take out by a covert operation, yet the US thought it was a good idea to let the whole world know weeks in advance what they planned on doing. sayng saddam had to be stopped is one thing, unnecessarily killing thousands of civilians and soldiers by being idiotic, frivilous, and irrational is another."When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rstanley0312 1 #21 June 30, 2009 Even if you don't agree with his agenda, you have to admit that he's keeping at least some of his promises. and this is the scariest thing about Obama..... he will do what he said he was going to do! I think most didn't really pay attention to what he said he was going to do but they will know soon enough. As for pulling out if Iraq..... that is great ..... it is time I think.Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #22 June 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteObama promised we would get out of Iraq, and he's making good on it. Change we can believe in. Amazing how "Change we can believe in" follows a timetable written by the last administration. I guess it depends on what one feels is more important: BS political scorekeeping, or actual substance. I just want my government to do the right thing. I couldn't care less whose idea it was. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhys 0 #23 June 30, 2009 QuoteI guess it depends on what one feels is more important: BS political scorekeeping, or actual substance. I just want my government to do the right thing. I couldn't care less whose idea it was. In hindsight, do you think attacking iraq the way the US did was a good idea?"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites redlegphi 0 #24 June 30, 2009 EXCLUSIVE: Cheney fears Iraq withdrawal will 'waste' U.S. sacrifices From the above-linked article: QuoteMr. Cheney told The Washington Times' "America's Morning News" radio show that he is a strong believer in Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, and that the general is doing what needs to be done. "But what he says concerns me: That there is still a continuing problem. One might speculate that insurgents are waiting as soon as they get an opportunity to launch more attacks." Does anybody else find it odd that the former VP is expressing concerns about a plan that his administration was part of creating and that was mandated by the Iraqi government? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jerryzflies 0 #25 June 30, 2009 Quote EXCLUSIVE: Cheney fears Iraq withdrawal will 'waste' U.S. sacrifices From the above-linked article: Quote Mr. Cheney told The Washington Times' "America's Morning News" radio show that he is a strong believer in Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, and that the general is doing what needs to be done. "But what he says concerns me: That there is still a continuing problem. One might speculate that insurgents are waiting as soon as they get an opportunity to launch more attacks." Does anybody else find it odd that the former VP is expressing concerns about a plan that his administration was part of creating and that was mandated by the Iraqi government? That will present mnealtx with a quandry.If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 1 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
rhys 0 #16 June 29, 2009 Quote Absolutely. It gives the Obushma administration more guys to send to Afghanistan. Hooray! why were US soldiers in Iraq again? oh yeah those deliberate lies by greedy right wingers. thats right, we all forgot about that didn't we?"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TankBuster 0 #17 June 29, 2009 QuoteQuote Absolutely. It gives the Obushma administration more guys to send to Afghanistan. Hooray! why were US soldiers in Iraq again? oh yeah those deliberate lies by greedy right wingers. thats right, we all forgot about that didn't we? Damn Straight! Just check out these greedy right wingers - in their own words. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCVZlLBchVE&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5p-qIq32m8&feature=relatedThe forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #18 June 30, 2009 QuoteExcept for the *BOOOOOOOOSH* Status of Forces Agreement that ALREADY dictated that US troops would leave Iraq, sure. Like I said, change we can believe in. If the republicans had won, the headline would have read differently.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #19 June 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote Absolutely. It gives the Obushma administration more guys to send to Afghanistan. Hooray! why were US soldiers in Iraq again? oh yeah those deliberate lies by greedy right wingers. thats right, we all forgot about that didn't we? Damn Straight! Just check out these greedy right wingers - in their own words. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCVZlLBchVE&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5p-qIq32m8&feature=related All you've done is show that the right wing liars found a gullible audience among some of the Dems. BUT NOT ALL. PS - who said this? Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil. I don’t oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain. I don’t oppose all wars. After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration’s pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again. I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income - to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear - I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhys 0 #20 June 30, 2009 Quote Damn Straight! Just check out these greedy right wingers - in their own words. a, i'm not american b, i am not a democrat c, those guys are politicians and will say whatever the people want to hear/will get them votes. d, americans need to realise there are people that are not republicans and not democrats or liberals. maybe this generalised perspective is a major source of the probelm, it is either us or them? tha fact of the matter is that, there were no WMD's, your government blatantly lied about it, 1000's of people are dead now because of these irrational/deliberate assumtions and they are not convicted as war criminals, yet! saddam could have been take out by a covert operation, yet the US thought it was a good idea to let the whole world know weeks in advance what they planned on doing. sayng saddam had to be stopped is one thing, unnecessarily killing thousands of civilians and soldiers by being idiotic, frivilous, and irrational is another."When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 1 #21 June 30, 2009 Even if you don't agree with his agenda, you have to admit that he's keeping at least some of his promises. and this is the scariest thing about Obama..... he will do what he said he was going to do! I think most didn't really pay attention to what he said he was going to do but they will know soon enough. As for pulling out if Iraq..... that is great ..... it is time I think.Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #22 June 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteObama promised we would get out of Iraq, and he's making good on it. Change we can believe in. Amazing how "Change we can believe in" follows a timetable written by the last administration. I guess it depends on what one feels is more important: BS political scorekeeping, or actual substance. I just want my government to do the right thing. I couldn't care less whose idea it was. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhys 0 #23 June 30, 2009 QuoteI guess it depends on what one feels is more important: BS political scorekeeping, or actual substance. I just want my government to do the right thing. I couldn't care less whose idea it was. In hindsight, do you think attacking iraq the way the US did was a good idea?"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #24 June 30, 2009 EXCLUSIVE: Cheney fears Iraq withdrawal will 'waste' U.S. sacrifices From the above-linked article: QuoteMr. Cheney told The Washington Times' "America's Morning News" radio show that he is a strong believer in Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, and that the general is doing what needs to be done. "But what he says concerns me: That there is still a continuing problem. One might speculate that insurgents are waiting as soon as they get an opportunity to launch more attacks." Does anybody else find it odd that the former VP is expressing concerns about a plan that his administration was part of creating and that was mandated by the Iraqi government? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #25 June 30, 2009 Quote EXCLUSIVE: Cheney fears Iraq withdrawal will 'waste' U.S. sacrifices From the above-linked article: Quote Mr. Cheney told The Washington Times' "America's Morning News" radio show that he is a strong believer in Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, and that the general is doing what needs to be done. "But what he says concerns me: That there is still a continuing problem. One might speculate that insurgents are waiting as soon as they get an opportunity to launch more attacks." Does anybody else find it odd that the former VP is expressing concerns about a plan that his administration was part of creating and that was mandated by the Iraqi government? That will present mnealtx with a quandry.If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
