Another Installment of Good News From Iraq



 Religions > Atheism > Another Installment of Good News From Iraq

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 4

1

 

2

 

3

 

4

 
Topic: Religions > Atheism
User: "Fred Stone"
Date: 21 May 2007 08:29:42 PM
Object: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/05/21/2007-05-21
_you_bet_we_can_win.html
You bet we can win
BY FREDERICK KAGAN
Iraq is the central front in the war against Al Qaeda. And we are
beginning to win. These are not talking points. They are facts on the
ground, as I saw during my recent trips there.
Though you may be getting the opposite impression from news reports, the
sectarian violence that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had unleashed by destroying
the Samarra Mosque in February 2006 has subsided. Measured weekly,
sectarian killings are down by almost two-thirds since the start of the
Baghdad security plan. Anbar Province, Al Qaeda's former sanctuary in
western Iraq, has turned against the terrorists. Anbaris by the
thousands are signing up to fight against Al Qaeda. Violent attacks in
the province are down by 50% and combined casualties down by 65% between
early January and mid-May.
The movement is spreading. Sheiks in Diyala, Salah-ad-Din and Babil
provinces are reaching out to coalition forces to help us.
This is not the moment to consider withdrawal time lines that would
snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, as the U.S. Congress seems
determined to do. It is the time to redouble our efforts.
It is true that the overall level of violence in Iraq remains high, and
American soldiers are still dying. Scores of terrorists flow into Iraq
every month, detonating suicide car bombs against civilians, Iraqi
security forces and American troops. This is the core of the security
problem faced by our troops and by innocent Iraqis.
But looking at these casualty numbers alone distorts reality. Security
is improving across Baghdad, even in traditionally bad areas. In early
May, I walked and drove through these neighborhoods. Haifa St., scene of
day-long gunfights between Al Qaeda terrorists and coalition forces in
January, is calm and starting to revive. Its market is open and
flourishing.
Even in Baghdad's Dora neighborhood, some of which remains very
dangerous, the market now has more than 200 shops - up from zero in
February. Across the city, Iraqis are reaching out to coalition and
Iraqi troops with tips and requests for help.
In some areas, that help takes the form of attacking the enemy and
responding to enemy counterattacks. But as we kill and capture these
evil people, we create safety in our wake. We are not standing between
warring communities. We stand between terrorists and murderers and their
innocent victims, both Sunni and Shia.
It will take time for that safety to take hold. It will take time for
our enemies to accept their defeat and stop fighting. Demanding total
victory by September is unrealistic. But we are making progress, and by
then, I am confident we will be making more.
One thing impressed me above all on my most recent trip, from which I
returned on May 13: Ordinary Iraqis have not given up. Sadrists in the
parliament may demand our withdrawal, but the government of Iraq has
repeatedly asked us to stay. Iraqi soldiers and police are fighting Al
Qaeda and Shia militias every day, sacrificing alongside our troops.
One Iraqi commander told me, "Anyone who says the Americans should leave
now is not a real Iraqi citizen."
Growing numbers of Iraqis are joining the struggle against those who
want to derail Iraq's chances for security and stability. We must not
let them down, and we must not let ourselves down. This is a fight that
we can and must win.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic
organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its
enemies."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.

User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 22 May 2007 08:37:55 AM
Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Iraq is the central front in the war against Al Qaeda.

It wasn't four years ago. Gee, what happened?
Oh, yes! Bush invaded, screwed everything up & now
the place is wall-to-wall militants!
Al Qaeda though? Well, I supposed that's Bushbot for
"Civil War."
It ain't sticking, if that's what you thought...
.

User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 22 May 2007 11:04:59 AM
Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Iraq is the central front in the war against Al Qaeda.

It wasn't four years ago. Gee, what happened?
Oh, yes! Bush invaded, screwed everything up & now
the place is wall-to-wall militants!
Al Qaeda though? Well, I supposed that's Bushbot for
"Civil War."
It ain't sticking, if that's what you thought...
.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 22 May 2007 04:04:55 PM
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1179841008.766890.223670
@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Iraq is the central front in the war against Al Qaeda.


It wasn't four years ago. Gee, what happened?

It is now.

Oh, yes! Bush invaded, screwed everything up & now
the place is wall-to-wall militants!

Al Qaeda though? Well, I supposed that's Bushbot for
"Civil War."

That's right, pretend that it's just something Bush thought up.

It ain't sticking, if that's what you thought...

You better tell these guys:
http://newsblaze.com/story/20070522061939leon.nb/newsblaze/IRAQ0001/Iraq
..html
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic
organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its
enemies."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
User: "DanielSan"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 22 May 2007 08:23:26 PM
Fred Stone wrote:

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1179841008.766890.223670
@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Iraq is the central front in the war against Al Qaeda.

It wasn't four years ago. Gee, what happened?


It is now.

That's a good thing?


Oh, yes! Bush invaded, screwed everything up & now
the place is wall-to-wall militants!

Al Qaeda though? Well, I supposed that's Bushbot for
"Civil War."


That's right, pretend that it's just something Bush thought up.

It ain't sticking, if that's what you thought...


You better tell these guys:
http://newsblaze.com/story/20070522061939leon.nb/newsblaze/IRAQ0001/Iraq
.html

Wow. 15 'suspected' terrorists! USA! USA! USA!
Come on, Fred. Do you honestly expect us to believe that we're fighting
terrorism in the country when over 90% of the attacks are Iraqi-on-Iraqi
(or, alternatively, Iraqi-on-USA) violence?
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 23 May 2007 06:22:54 AM
DanielSan <danielsan...@comcast.net> wrote:

Wow. 15 'suspected' terrorists! USA! USA! USA!

Doesn't it strike you as weird -- even a bit scary --
that "Fred" and his gods can get excited about
"Suspected" terrorists, yet couldn't care less about
getting bin Laden?
Bush doesn't even care where he is!
.
User: "DanielSan"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 23 May 2007 07:45:25 AM
JTEM wrote:

DanielSan <danielsan...@comcast.net> wrote:

Wow. 15 'suspected' terrorists! USA! USA! USA!


Doesn't it strike you as weird -- even a bit scary --
that "Fred" and his gods can get excited about
"Suspected" terrorists, yet couldn't care less about
getting bin Laden?

Bush doesn't even care where he is!


Well, the biggest danger to America, in the past, present, and future,
is...someone...who.......hates...America...?
Hm. I'd think that the bigger danger that exists out there is the man
who is responsible for killing nearly 3,000 Americans on our home soil.
Pity that the message sent to terrorists is, "You can kill a couple
thousand Americans in the United States. Just hide out for a bit
afterwards and you'll no longer be a concern of the United States'
president."
Terrible message to send to them.
Of course, there is also the pulling out of our troops from Saudi
Arabia, which OBL wanted...hmmmmmm.....
.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 23 May 2007 11:29:11 AM
DanielSan <danielsangeo@comcast.net> wrote in
news:Qb2dnXT-8YnTqsnbnZ2dnUVZ_h3inZ2d@comcast.com:

JTEM wrote:

DanielSan <danielsan...@comcast.net> wrote:

Wow. 15 'suspected' terrorists! USA! USA! USA!


Doesn't it strike you as weird -- even a bit scary --
that "Fred" and his gods can get excited about
"Suspected" terrorists, yet couldn't care less about
getting bin Laden?

Bush doesn't even care where he is!



Well, the biggest danger to America, in the past, present, and future,
is...someone...who.......hates...America...?

Hm. I'd think that the bigger danger that exists out there is the man
who is responsible for killing nearly 3,000 Americans on our home
soil.

And....he's....not....someone....who....hates....America....?

Pity that the message sent to terrorists is, "You can kill a couple
thousand Americans in the United States. Just hide out for a bit
afterwards and you'll no longer be a concern of the United States'
president."

Oh, obviously nothing changed between 9/12/2001 and 5/3/2003, did it,
Daniel? There were no intervening events that might have altered
priorities a bit?
Are you always this stupid or is it only when you're on the other end of
a conversation with me that your brains fall out?

Terrible message to send to them.

Of course, there is also the pulling out of our troops from Saudi
Arabia, which OBL wanted...hmmmmmm.....

So the fact that we put them in Iraq, which he *didn't* want, is not a
factor in the calculation here? My question above applies again.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic
organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its
enemies."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 24 May 2007 10:30:59 PM
Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Oh, obviously nothing changed between 9/12/2001
and 5/3/2003, did it, Daniel? There were no
intervening events that might have altered
priorities a bit?

That's right, "Fred," not a single one. In fact,
Bush had to go out of his way to invent a "Higher
Priority."
And that's what it's about, "Fred." America was
attacked, and the people who attacked us got
away with it. That's right, "Fred," the people
who attacked America got away with it. Bush let
them go. Bush let them get away with it.
Reality sucks, don't it?
.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 25 May 2007 06:21:30 AM
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180063859.696220.188010
@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Oh, obviously nothing changed between 9/12/2001
and 5/3/2003, did it, Daniel? There were no
intervening events that might have altered
priorities a bit?


That's right, "Fred," not a single one. In fact,
Bush had to go out of his way to invent a "Higher
Priority."

Right. No invasion of Afghanistan. No crushing of the Taliban.
Not a single thing.

And that's what it's about, "Fred." America was
attacked, and the people who attacked us got
away with it.

Yeah, they went from being on top of the world to hiding in a cave
somewhere.

That's right, "Fred," the people
who attacked America got away with it. Bush let
them go. Bush let them get away with it.

Yeah, those Taliban are still running the show in Afhghanistan aren't
they? al Qaeda still has those training bases and all those networks
going strong, huh?

Reality sucks, don't it?

Yeah, it sure does.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"Every day, we buy -0.000005 Celsius degrees (of Global Warming
reduction) for one half of the LHC collider."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 26 May 2007 01:59:11 AM
Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Right. No invasion of Afghanistan. No crushing
of the Taliban. Not a single thing.

Taliban? Crushed? Why hasn't anyone told the
Taliban this?????
.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 26 May 2007 06:01:12 AM
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180162751.849806.91550
@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Right. No invasion of Afghanistan. No crushing
of the Taliban. Not a single thing.


Taliban? Crushed? Why hasn't anyone told the
Taliban this?????

Where the hell have you been?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"Every day, we buy -0.000005 Celsius degrees (of Global Warming reduction)
for one half of the LHC collider."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 28 May 2007 12:45:24 AM
Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Taliban? Crushed? Why hasn't anyone told the
Taliban this?????


Where the hell have you been?

Here on Earth. You might've heard of it.
Anyhow, psycho breath, news of the Taliban
regrouping and taking control of large areas
inside Afghanistan is already years old.
At light speed, it should be reaching you in another
90,000 years....
.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 28 May 2007 06:05:33 AM
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180331124.206685.262890
@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Taliban? Crushed? Why hasn't anyone told the
Taliban this?????


Where the hell have you been?


Here on Earth. You might've heard of it.

Anyhow, psycho breath, news of the Taliban
regrouping and taking control of large areas
inside Afghanistan is already years old.

So you've been ignoring everything for years.

At light speed, it should be reaching you in another
90,000 years....

Maybe the news that this "regrouping" was long since driven out will
reach you before then.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"When they put out that deadline, people realized that we were going to
lose," said an aide to an anti-war lawmaker. "Everything after that
seemed like posturing."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 29 May 2007 08:32:43 PM
Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Anyhow, psycho breath, news of the Taliban
regrouping and taking control of large areas
inside Afghanistan is already years old.


So you've been ignoring everything for years.

April 2007:
http://tinyurl.com/2k8mwe
They're also looking at a poppy crop which will
surpass last years record high:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/05/21/afghan.drugs.ap/index.html
Pretty interesting, huh? They're expected to
exceed last year's 407,000 acres by 20%.
| Afghanistan accounts for more than 90 percent
| of the world's heroin supply, and a
| significant portion of the profits from the
| $3.1 billion trade is thought to flow to
| Taliban fighters, who tax and protect poppy
| farmers and drug runners.
Hmmm.... "Long since driven out" from "Only
launched an offensive last month."
You are truly insane, "Fred."
.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 29 May 2007 09:22:42 PM
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180488762.997097.311360
@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:


Anyhow, psycho breath, news of the Taliban
regrouping and taking control of large areas
inside Afghanistan is already years old.


So you've been ignoring everything for years.


April 2007:

http://tinyurl.com/2k8mwe

They're also looking at a poppy crop which will
surpass last years record high:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/05/21/afghan.drugs.ap/index.html

Pretty interesting, huh? They're expected to
exceed last year's 407,000 acres by 20%.

| Afghanistan accounts for more than 90 percent
| of the world's heroin supply, and a
| significant portion of the profits from the
| $3.1 billion trade is thought to flow to
| Taliban fighters, who tax and protect poppy
| farmers and drug runners.

Hmmm.... "Long since driven out" from "Only
launched an offensive last month."

You are truly insane, "Fred."

That "offensive" was crushed in less than two days, "JTEM", you
"intelligent" person.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"When they put out that deadline, people realized that we were going to
lose," said an aide to an anti-war lawmaker. "Everything after that
seemed like posturing."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Serious Mental Illness (Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq) 30 May 2007 12:56:10 AM
If anyone so much as hoped that "Fred"
retained some measure of sanity, take a
look at this:
Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

That "offensive" was crushed in less than two
days, "JTEM", you "intelligent" person.

What offensive is he speaking of? Why, golly,
the NATO offensive against the Taliban which
*I* brought up, and even offered a cite:
http://tinyurl.com/2k8mwe
That's the exactly URL posted. When *I*
introduced the subject of the offensive,
I posted the above URL in support... to
demonstrate that I wasn't simply making things
up out of some deeply rooted partisan insanity.
So, now we're left with "Fred" claiming that
the NATO offensive against the Taliban was
"Crushed," and that the Talbian itself was
wiped out years ago...
So who crushed NATO?
And even accepting the fact that "Fred" is
deeply disturbed and simply imagined I was
speaking of a Taliban offensive, how could
the Talbian be both wiped out years ago
AND still around & the target of an already
month-long offensive?
Oh well, "Mission Accomplished"....
.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: Serious Mental Illness (Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq) 30 May 2007 05:31:45 AM
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180504570.708729.216360
@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:


If anyone so much as hoped that "Fred"
retained some measure of sanity, take a
look at this:


Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

That "offensive" was crushed in less than two
days, "JTEM", you "intelligent" person.


What offensive is he speaking of? Why, golly,
the NATO offensive against the Taliban which
*I* brought up, and even offered a cite:

http://tinyurl.com/2k8mwe

That's the exactly URL posted. When *I*
introduced the subject of the offensive,
I posted the above URL in support... to
demonstrate that I wasn't simply making things
up out of some deeply rooted partisan insanity.

So, now we're left with "Fred" claiming that
the NATO offensive against the Taliban was
"Crushed," and that the Talbian itself was
wiped out years ago...

So who crushed NATO?

You bloody idiot, it was NATO that did the crushing, not the Taliban.

And even accepting the fact that "Fred" is
deeply disturbed and simply imagined I was
speaking of a Taliban offensive, how could
the Talbian be both wiped out years ago
AND still around & the target of an already
month-long offensive?

You blithering moron, they are little bitty rag-tag groups that hardly
deserve to be called anything at all.

Oh well, "Mission Accomplished"....

Oh, well, JTEM is the subject of his own post. SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"When they put out that deadline, people realized that we were going to
lose," said an aide to an anti-war lawmaker. "Everything after that
seemed like posturing."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: Serious Mental Illness (Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq) 30 May 2007 10:29:59 PM
Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

You blithering moron, they are little bitty
rag-tag groups that hardly deserve to be
called anything at all.

Yet not only survived six years of war, but
presently warrant a NATO offensive against
them?
Admit it, "Fred," you're one sick puppy...
.

User: "Matt Silberstein"

Title: Re: Serious Mental Illness (Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq) 30 May 2007 08:06:30 AM
On 30 May 2007 10:31:45 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in <Xns99404B63AE275freddybear@66.150.105.47>
wrote:

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180504570.708729.216360
@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:


If anyone so much as hoped that "Fred"
retained some measure of sanity, take a
look at this:


Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

That "offensive" was crushed in less than two
days, "JTEM", you "intelligent" person.


What offensive is he speaking of? Why, golly,
the NATO offensive against the Taliban which
*I* brought up, and even offered a cite:

http://tinyurl.com/2k8mwe

That's the exactly URL posted. When *I*
introduced the subject of the offensive,
I posted the above URL in support... to
demonstrate that I wasn't simply making things
up out of some deeply rooted partisan insanity.

So, now we're left with "Fred" claiming that
the NATO offensive against the Taliban was
"Crushed," and that the Talbian itself was
wiped out years ago...

So who crushed NATO?


You bloody idiot, it was NATO that did the crushing, not the Taliban.

And even accepting the fact that "Fred" is
deeply disturbed and simply imagined I was
speaking of a Taliban offensive, how could
the Talbian be both wiped out years ago
AND still around & the target of an already
month-long offensive?


You blithering moron, they are little bitty rag-tag groups that hardly
deserve to be called anything at all.

So who is it who is growing all that opium and protecting OBL?
[snip]
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
User: "Kate "

Title: Re: Serious Mental Illness (Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq) 30 May 2007 08:25:01 AM
On Wed, 30 May 2007 13:06:30 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

On 30 May 2007 10:31:45 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in <Xns99404B63AE275freddybear@66.150.105.47>
wrote:

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180504570.708729.216360
@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:


If anyone so much as hoped that "Fred"
retained some measure of sanity, take a
look at this:


Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

That "offensive" was crushed in less than two
days, "JTEM", you "intelligent" person.


What offensive is he speaking of? Why, golly,
the NATO offensive against the Taliban which
*I* brought up, and even offered a cite:

http://tinyurl.com/2k8mwe

That's the exactly URL posted. When *I*
introduced the subject of the offensive,
I posted the above URL in support... to
demonstrate that I wasn't simply making things
up out of some deeply rooted partisan insanity.

So, now we're left with "Fred" claiming that
the NATO offensive against the Taliban was
"Crushed," and that the Talbian itself was
wiped out years ago...

So who crushed NATO?


You bloody idiot, it was NATO that did the crushing, not the Taliban.

And even accepting the fact that "Fred" is
deeply disturbed and simply imagined I was
speaking of a Taliban offensive, how could
the Talbian be both wiped out years ago
AND still around & the target of an already
month-long offensive?


You blithering moron, they are little bitty rag-tag groups that hardly
deserve to be called anything at all.

It took a month to 'wipe out' a little bitty rag-tag group that hardly
deserve to be called anything at all?
Sounds like Nato is almost as bad as our troops - unable to maintain
order in a country that was throwing flower petals at us and where the
mission was completed in years ago. 'Good news' flows everyday from
there, and yet they need billions more and thousands more troops all
the time.
You'd almost think someone wasn't facing reality.


So who is it who is growing all that opium and protecting OBL?

[snip]

.


User: "Werewolfy"

Title: Re: Serious Mental Illness (Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq) 01 Jun 2007 02:53:25 AM
On May 30, 11:31?am, Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Oh, well, JTEM is the subject of his own post. SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS.

It's worse than that, Fred.
He likes little boys rather too much. JTEM is a Fairy who spends a lot
of time wandering alt teens and various sex sites..in between arguing
with everyone he can in a variety of forums.
Despicable sort of Troll. I'm suprised someone hasn't 'seen to' him
before now.
Werewolfy
.









User: "DanielSan"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 25 May 2007 07:37:44 AM
Fred Stone wrote:

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180063859.696220.188010
@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Oh, obviously nothing changed between 9/12/2001
and 5/3/2003, did it, Daniel? There were no
intervening events that might have altered
priorities a bit?

That's right, "Fred," not a single one. In fact,
Bush had to go out of his way to invent a "Higher
Priority."


Right. No invasion of Afghanistan. No crushing of the Taliban.
Not a single thing.

Where's Osama again?


And that's what it's about, "Fred." America was
attacked, and the people who attacked us got
away with it.


Yeah, they went from being on top of the world to hiding in a cave
somewhere.

They were "on top of the world" on 9/11/2001?!


That's right, "Fred," the people
who attacked America got away with it. Bush let
them go. Bush let them get away with it.


Yeah, those Taliban are still running the show in Afhghanistan aren't
they?

They are.

al Qaeda still has those training bases and all those networks
going strong, huh?

Well, they have different ones now.


Reality sucks, don't it?


Yeah, it sure does.

Probably why you don't like living in it, eh Fred?
.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 25 May 2007 08:20:01 AM
DanielSan <danielsangeo@comcast.net> wrote in news:VuidndG2--
cdRcvbnZ2dnUVZ_oqmnZ2d@comcast.com:

Fred Stone wrote:

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180063859.696220.188010
@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Oh, obviously nothing changed between 9/12/2001
and 5/3/2003, did it, Daniel? There were no
intervening events that might have altered
priorities a bit?

That's right, "Fred," not a single one. In fact,
Bush had to go out of his way to invent a "Higher
Priority."


Right. No invasion of Afghanistan. No crushing of the Taliban.
Not a single thing.


Where's Osama again?

Hiding in a cave somewhere in Pakistan.


And that's what it's about, "Fred." America was
attacked, and the people who attacked us got
away with it.


Yeah, they went from being on top of the world to hiding in a cave
somewhere.


They were "on top of the world" on 9/11/2001?!

Yes, Daniel.


That's right, "Fred," the people
who attacked America got away with it. Bush let
them go. Bush let them get away with it.


Yeah, those Taliban are still running the show in Afhghanistan aren't
they?


They are.

Yeah, suuuuure they are.
NOT.

al Qaeda still has those training bases and all those networks
going strong, huh?


Well, they have different ones now.

Weaker ones. Smaller ones. On the run ones.


Reality sucks, don't it?


Yeah, it sure does.


Probably why you don't like living in it, eh Fred?

I'm not the one who is called DenialSan.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"Every day, we buy -0.000005 Celsius degrees (of Global Warming
reduction) for one half of the LHC collider."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.


User: "Dubh Ghall"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 28 May 2007 06:34:19 PM
On 25 May 2007 11:21:30 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180063859.696220.188010
@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Oh, obviously nothing changed between 9/12/2001
and 5/3/2003, did it, Daniel? There were no
intervening events that might have altered
priorities a bit?


That's right, "Fred," not a single one. In fact,
Bush had to go out of his way to invent a "Higher
Priority."


Right. No invasion of Afghanistan.

The invasion of Afghanistan, was supposedly to apprehend Osama bin
Ladin, who was hiding there, and operating from there, supported by
the Taliban.
It failed.

No crushing of the Taliban.

That failed also.

Not a single thing.

The capture of Osama bib Ladin, was Bush's first priority, in
September 2001.
A year later, Bush had lost interest in bin Ladin, he was not a
priority.
The man who was responsible for the deaths of three thousand
civilians, on US soil, was not a priority.
Amazing.


And that's what it's about, "Fred." America was
attacked, and the people who attacked us got
away with it.


Yeah, they went from being on top of the world to hiding in a cave
somewhere.

But still free, and no longer a priority.


--
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
is purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.

.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 28 May 2007 06:34:56 PM
Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in
news:n5pm53p7d7t05t6gcikfdgruhoh19ts61u@4ax.com:

On 25 May 2007 11:21:30 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180063859.696220.188010
@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Oh, obviously nothing changed between 9/12/2001
and 5/3/2003, did it, Daniel? There were no
intervening events that might have altered
priorities a bit?


That's right, "Fred," not a single one. In fact,
Bush had to go out of his way to invent a "Higher
Priority."


Right. No invasion of Afghanistan.


The invasion of Afghanistan, was supposedly to apprehend Osama bin
Ladin, who was hiding there, and operating from there, supported by
the Taliban.

It failed.

al Qaeda was routed from Afghanistan and had to flee. They lost all
their resources there, lost their training camps and bases and their
financial networks were broken up. Hundreds of their people were
captured or killed. That is not failure.


No crushing of the Taliban.


That failed also.

Afghanistan is no longer run by the Taliban. That is no failure.


Not a single thing.


The capture of Osama bib Ladin, was Bush's first priority, in
September 2001.

A year later, Bush had lost interest in bin Ladin, he was not a
priority.

A year later, bin Laden was not the same threat that he was before.

The man who was responsible for the deaths of three thousand
civilians, on US soil, was not a priority.


Amazing.

Priorities change. What would be really amazing is if the President of
the United States became as obsessed with that one terrorist leader as
you are. al Qaeda is more than just bin Laden.



And that's what it's about, "Fred." America was
attacked, and the people who attacked us got
away with it.


Yeah, they went from being on top of the world to hiding in a cave
somewhere.


But still free, and no longer a priority.

For some defintion of "free" that includes "hiding in a cave somewhere".
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"When they put out that deadline, people realized that we were going to
lose," said an aide to an anti-war lawmaker. "Everything after that
seemed like posturing."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
User: "Dubh Ghall"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 29 May 2007 09:04:06 AM
On 28 May 2007 23:34:56 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in
news:n5pm53p7d7t05t6gcikfdgruhoh19ts61u@4ax.com:

On 25 May 2007 11:21:30 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180063859.696220.188010
@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Oh, obviously nothing changed between 9/12/2001
and 5/3/2003, did it, Daniel? There were no
intervening events that might have altered
priorities a bit?


That's right, "Fred," not a single one. In fact,
Bush had to go out of his way to invent a "Higher
Priority."


Right. No invasion of Afghanistan.


The invasion of Afghanistan, was supposedly to apprehend Osama bin
Ladin, who was hiding there, and operating from there, supported by
the Taliban.

It failed.


al Qaeda was routed from Afghanistan and had to flee. They lost all
their resources there, lost their training camps and bases and their
financial networks were broken up. Hundreds of their people were
captured or killed. That is not failure.

You found one magazine.
As for the training camps, they just rolled up their tents, and moved
on to the next site.
Their resources, finances,? We have no idea how wide spread they may
be, but I doubt very much, that anything the west has done, has
affected them.


No crushing of the Taliban.


That failed also.


Afghanistan is no longer run by the Taliban. That is no failure.

The Taliban is still there, and fighting.
That is NOT, crushed.


Not a single thing.


The capture of Osama bib Ladin, was Bush's first priority, in
September 2001.

A year later, Bush had lost interest in bin Ladin, he was not a
priority.


A year later, bin Laden was not the same threat that he was before.

False.
If bin Ladin was not a threat, a year after 9-11, then he was not a
threat, the day after, either.

The man who was responsible for the deaths of three thousand
civilians, on US soil, was not a priority.


Amazing.


Priorities change.

We know, and Iraq had been a thorn in America'a hide, for the better
part of the twentieth century.
The shrub had aspirations to be a "War President", A few lies about
Iraq, gave him the opportunity.
....And what a pig's arse he's made of it.

What would be really amazing is if the President of
the United States became as obsessed with that one terrorist leader as
you are. al Qaeda is more than just bin Laden.

Oh but it is.
As has been reported many times, by the various media, al Qaeda, is
only a lose assortment of small, ineffectual, terrorist cells, without
the finance and organisation which bib Ladin supplies.



And that's what it's about, "Fred." America was
attacked, and the people who attacked us got
away with it.


Yeah, they went from being on top of the world to hiding in a cave
somewhere.


But still free, and no longer a priority.


For some defintion of "free" that includes "hiding in a cave somewhere".

Sounds like bagpipes, from here.
.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 29 May 2007 11:03:25 AM
Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in
news:mdbo53l2ith2a298bbccpb5hqpaotjp4dq@4ax.com:

On 28 May 2007 23:34:56 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in
news:n5pm53p7d7t05t6gcikfdgruhoh19ts61u@4ax.com:

On 25 May 2007 11:21:30 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180063859.696220.188010
@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Oh, obviously nothing changed between 9/12/2001
and 5/3/2003, did it, Daniel? There were no
intervening events that might have altered
priorities a bit?


That's right, "Fred," not a single one. In fact,
Bush had to go out of his way to invent a "Higher
Priority."


Right. No invasion of Afghanistan.


The invasion of Afghanistan, was supposedly to apprehend Osama bin
Ladin, who was hiding there, and operating from there, supported by
the Taliban.

It failed.


al Qaeda was routed from Afghanistan and had to flee. They lost all
their resources there, lost their training camps and bases and their
financial networks were broken up. Hundreds of their people were
captured or killed. That is not failure.


You found one magazine.
As for the training camps, they just rolled up their tents, and moved
on to the next site.

So you admit that they're no longer in Afghanistan.

Their resources, finances,? We have no idea how wide spread they may
be, but I doubt very much, that anything the west has done, has
affected them.



No crushing of the Taliban.


That failed also.


Afghanistan is no longer run by the Taliban. That is no failure.


The Taliban is still there, and fighting.

A shadow of their former selves.

That is NOT, crushed.

When you go from running a whole country to running *away* from single
villages that is crushed.



Not a single thing.


The capture of Osama bib Ladin, was Bush's first priority, in
September 2001.

A year later, Bush had lost interest in bin Ladin, he was not a
priority.


A year later, bin Laden was not the same threat that he was before.


False.

Not false.

If bin Ladin was not a threat, a year after 9-11, then he was not a
threat, the day after, either.

Your refusal to take account of intervening events makes your analysis
of no value.


The man who was responsible for the deaths of three thousand
civilians, on US soil, was not a priority.


Amazing.


Priorities change.


We know, and Iraq had been a thorn in America'a hide, for the better
part of the twentieth century.

And unlike the lion in the fairy tale, we don't need a little mouse to
come along and pluck out thorns for us.

The shrub had aspirations to be a "War President", A few lies about
Iraq, gave him the opportunity.

A fine example of the "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.

...And what a pig's arse he's made of it.

What would be really amazing is if the President of
the United States became as obsessed with that one terrorist leader as
you are. al Qaeda is more than just bin Laden.


Oh but it is.

As has been reported many times, by the various media, al Qaeda, is
only a lose assortment of small, ineffectual, terrorist cells, without
the finance and organisation which bib Ladin supplies.

And you believe everything that you read in the papers.



And that's what it's about, "Fred." America was
attacked, and the people who attacked us got
away with it.


Yeah, they went from being on top of the world to hiding in a cave
somewhere.


But still free, and no longer a priority.


For some defintion of "free" that includes "hiding in a cave
somewhere".


Sounds like bagpipes, from here.

Is that porridge you've been eating?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"When they put out that deadline, people realized that we were going to
lose," said an aide to an anti-war lawmaker. "Everything after that
seemed like posturing."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
User: "Dubh Ghall"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 29 May 2007 04:44:42 PM
On 29 May 2007 16:03:25 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in
news:mdbo53l2ith2a298bbccpb5hqpaotjp4dq@4ax.com:

On 28 May 2007 23:34:56 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in
news:n5pm53p7d7t05t6gcikfdgruhoh19ts61u@4ax.com:

On 25 May 2007 11:21:30 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180063859.696220.188010
@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Oh, obviously nothing changed between 9/12/2001
and 5/3/2003, did it, Daniel? There were no
intervening events that might have altered
priorities a bit?


That's right, "Fred," not a single one. In fact,
Bush had to go out of his way to invent a "Higher
Priority."


Right. No invasion of Afghanistan.


The invasion of Afghanistan, was supposedly to apprehend Osama bin
Ladin, who was hiding there, and operating from there, supported by
the Taliban.

It failed.


al Qaeda was routed from Afghanistan and had to flee. They lost all
their resources there, lost their training camps and bases and their
financial networks were broken up. Hundreds of their people were
captured or killed. That is not failure.


You found one magazine.
As for the training camps, they just rolled up their tents, and moved
on to the next site.


So you admit that they're no longer in Afghanistan.

No Fred, I don't.
Like you, I don't know where they are.


snip

Afghanistan is no longer run by the Taliban. That is no failure.


The Taliban is still there, and fighting.


A shadow of their former selves.

So you say, but if that came from the same source as "Mission
Accomplished", then you will forgive my scepticism.

That is NOT, crushed.


When you go from running a whole country to running *away* from single
villages that is crushed.



Not a single thing.


The capture of Osama bib Ladin, was Bush's first priority, in
September 2001.

A year later, Bush had lost interest in bin Ladin, he was not a
priority.


A year later, bin Laden was not the same threat that he was before.


False.


Not false.

If bin Ladin was not a threat, a year after 9-11, then he was not a
threat, the day after, either.


Your refusal to take account of intervening events makes your analysis
of no value.


The man who was responsible for the deaths of three thousand
civilians, on US soil, was not a priority.


Amazing.


Priorities change.


We know, and Iraq had been a thorn in America'a hide, for the better
part of the twentieth century.


And unlike the lion in the fairy tale, we don't need a little mouse to
come along and pluck out thorns for us.

Yea, I think that you would be more like the scorpion, in the story of
the frog and the scorpion.


The shrub had aspirations to be a "War President", A few lies about
Iraq, gave him the opportunity.


A fine example of the "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.

Demonstrate it.

...And what a pig's arse he's made of it.

What would be really amazing is if the President of
the United States became as obsessed with that one terrorist leader as
you are. al Qaeda is more than just bin Laden.


Oh but it is.

As has been reported many times, by the various media, al Qaeda, is
only a lose assortment of small, ineffectual, terrorist cells, without
the finance and organisation which bib Ladin supplies.


And you believe everything that you read in the papers.

IIRC, it was originally, an announcement made by your own White House,
and based on CIA intelligence.
.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 29 May 2007 04:29:52 PM
Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in
news:vt6p539p74r1bkiduqm05a9rmvi0n96fi2@4ax.com:

On 29 May 2007 16:03:25 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in
news:mdbo53l2ith2a298bbccpb5hqpaotjp4dq@4ax.com:

On 28 May 2007 23:34:56 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in
news:n5pm53p7d7t05t6gcikfdgruhoh19ts61u@4ax.com:

On 25 May 2007 11:21:30 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in news:1180063859.696220.188010
@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

Fred Stone <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

Oh, obviously nothing changed between 9/12/2001
and 5/3/2003, did it, Daniel? There were no
intervening events that might have altered
priorities a bit?


That's right, "Fred," not a single one. In fact,
Bush had to go out of his way to invent a "Higher
Priority."


Right. No invasion of Afghanistan.


The invasion of Afghanistan, was supposedly to apprehend Osama bin
Ladin, who was hiding there, and operating from there, supported
by the Taliban.

It failed.


al Qaeda was routed from Afghanistan and had to flee. They lost all
their resources there, lost their training camps and bases and their
financial networks were broken up. Hundreds of their people were
captured or killed. That is not failure.


You found one magazine.
As for the training camps, they just rolled up their tents, and
moved on to the next site.


So you admit that they're no longer in Afghanistan.


No Fred, I don't.

Like you, I don't know where they are.

I know where they're not.


snip

Afghanistan is no longer run by the Taliban. That is no failure.


The Taliban is still there, and fighting.


A shadow of their former selves.


So you say, but if that came from the same source as "Mission
Accomplished", then you will forgive my scepticism.

That comes from Afghan sources.



That is NOT, crushed.


When you go from running a whole country to running *away* from single
villages that is crushed.



Not a single thing.


The capture of Osama bib Ladin, was Bush's first priority, in
September 2001.

A year later, Bush had lost interest in bin Ladin, he was not a
priority.


A year later, bin Laden was not the same threat that he was before.


False.


Not false.

If bin Ladin was not a threat, a year after 9-11, then he was not a
threat, the day after, either.


Your refusal to take account of intervening events makes your analysis
of no value.


The man who was responsible for the deaths of three thousand
civilians, on US soil, was not a priority.


Amazing.


Priorities change.


We know, and Iraq had been a thorn in America'a hide, for the better
part of the twentieth century.


And unlike the lion in the fairy tale, we don't need a little mouse to
come along and pluck out thorns for us.


Yea, I think that you would be more like the scorpion, in the story of
the frog and the scorpion.

I think you're more like the fox in the story about the sour grapes.


The shrub had aspirations to be a "War President", A few lies about
Iraq, gave him the opportunity.


A fine example of the "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.


Demonstrate it.

You're presuming that he had those aspirations *before* 9/11 gave him
the motivation to attack America's enemies. You're also presuming that
the statement about being a "war president" indicates that he had
"aspirations" along those lines.

...And what a pig's arse he's made of it.

What would be really amazing is if the President of
the United States became as obsessed with that one terrorist leader
as you are. al Qaeda is more than just bin Laden.


Oh but it is.

As has been reported many times, by the various media, al Qaeda, is
only a lose assortment of small, ineffectual, terrorist cells,
without the finance and organisation which bib Ladin supplies.


And you believe everything that you read in the papers.


IIRC, it was originally, an announcement made by your own White House,
and based on CIA intelligence.

That would be the same CIA that told us that WMD in Iraq was a "slam
dunk".
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"When they put out that deadline, people realized that we were going to
lose," said an aide to an anti-war lawmaker. "Everything after that
seemed like posturing."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
User: "Dubh Ghall"

Title: Re: Another Installment of Good News From Iraq 29 May 2007 07:00:18 PM
On 29 May 2007 21:29:52 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in
news:vt6p539p74r1bkiduqm05a9rmvi0n96fi2@4ax.com:

On 29 May 2007 16:03:25 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in
news:mdbo53l2ith2a298bbccpb5hqpaotjp4dq@4ax.com:

On 28 May 2007 23:34:56 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

snip


So you admit that they're no longer in Afghanistan.


No Fred, I don't.

Like you, I don't know where they are.


I know where they're not.

I know a lot of places that they are not.
What I don't know, is all the places.


snip

Afghanistan is no longer run by the Taliban. That is no failure.


The Taliban is still there, and fighting.


A shadow of their former selves.


So you say, but if that came from the same source as "Mission
Accomplished", then you will forgive my scepticism.


That comes from Afghan sources.

From Afghans, or from UK/US sources in Afghanistan.
snip


And unlike the lion in the fairy tale, we don't need a little mouse to
come along and pluck out thorns for us.


Yea, I think that you would be more like the scorpion, in the story of
the frog and the scorpion.


I think you're more like the fox in the story about the sour grapes.

Relevance?
Or is it just an ad hominem attack?


The shrub had aspirations to be a "War President", A few lies about
Iraq, gave him the opportunity.


A fine example of the "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.


Demonstrate it.


You're presuming that he had those aspirations *before* 9/11

That is correct. Long before 9-11, he was for direct action against
Saddam.

gave him the motivation to attack America's enemies.

It has NEVER been shown that Iraq was a threat to America, or anyone
else, except Kuwait.

You're also presuming that
the statement about being a "war president" indicates that he had
"aspirations" along those lines.

Yep. Daddy was a war president, and junior wanted to be just like
daddy.


IIRC, it was originally, an announcement made by your own White House,
and based on CIA intelligence.


That would be the same CIA that told us that WMD in Iraq was a "slam
dunk".

So the CIA, lied: is that it?
.
















  Page 1 of 4

1

 

2

 

3

 

4

 


Related Articles
 

NEWER

pg.3585     pg.2749     pg.2106     pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER