Read my response to *US*. If you disagree take your best shot....I await
your reply....

"robw" <noddy093@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:l6SdnedK7YYO4nXbnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@comcast.com...

No.

It's not important.

Tell me how success in Iraq will prevent a group from walking into any
mall
in this country and cause harm?

Did this "war" prevent the "Fort Dix Six"???

No, it was a clerk in a Circuit City.


This fraud is useless.


"Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:46e85aa6$0$24258$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

A simple question, will you answer it? Is success in Iraq important or

not

important? And why do you believe what you believe?

"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:46e56f66$1$15426$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...

Your Chance of Being Kidnapped or Killed in Baghdad is 100%

By Cenk Uygur
Created Sep 8 2007 - 6:58pm

We were talking to Newsweek's correspondent in Baghdad, Babak
Dehghanpisheh,
on Friday's show. I asked him if a Westerner, journalists or

could walk around in Baghdad unprotected by the military. He said it

would

be "suicidal."

I don't really know what I expected. I knew it was dangerous and I
suspected
that no Westerner went outside of the Green Zone without protection,
but

I

didn't get the sense of how perilous it was until we talked to
Dehghanpisheh.

So, I followed up by asking him if being harmed was a certainty if

were
unprotected in Baghdad. He answered that your chances of getting

or

kidnapped in Baghdad if you were an unprotected Westerner was "one

hundred

percent."

Think about that. That's amazing. The Bush administration claims that

they

have made significant progress in Baghdad security. If anyone had

you

that four and a half years into the Iraq War, that any Westerner who
walked
around Baghad without a military convoy would have a 100% of being
kidnapped
or killed in Baghdad, what would you have thought?

You probably would not have believed it. You might have asked, "What
happened, did we lose the war?" You certainly wouldn't have surmised

that

we
were making progress.

Imagine if someone told you of all the Americans who had died and

injured in the war, the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians
killed,
the
fact that there were no weapons of mass destruction, that Saddam
Hussein
had
no links to the 9/11 bombers, that Iraq was in a state of chaos,

was

mass ethnic cleansing [1]and sectarian warfare and Baghdad was 100%

unsafe

to Westerners - then imagine that the Bush administration was still
talking
about how we were making great progress in the war and that it was
still
worth doing. And then imagine that people took them seriously.

I don't think the people inside Washington have a sense of how awful

this

war has gone. It is an unimaginable failure. It is a historic and

catastrophe. And here we are this far into it with politicians still
talking
about winning and saying it was the right thing to do to go in and

if

we just stay a little longer and keep escalating the conflict we can

turn

it
around.

I don't think any Congressman should be able to vote to continue this

war

unless they can take an unprotected walk in Baghdad for fifteen
minutes.
Put
the voting booth in the middle of Baghdad, give them some purple ink
and
any
Congressman who can make it to the voting area without a military
escort
and
vote yes to continue the war should have their vote counted.

Even with all that we have seen, is the American public fully aware

the

situation in Baghdad? Has the media done its job in making them

Is

everyone in America aware that Baghdad is off limits to any

that
you will be kidnapped or killed if you don't have protection there?

could anyone who knows this think we have made any progress in

How
could anyone conclude that the war and the so-called surge have been
anything but a complete and utter failure?

You can watch the whole interview with Babak Dehghanpisheh of

(and
read the transcript) here [2].

Watch The Young Turks [3]
_______



--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has
not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such
material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice

issues.

I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107

"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over,

their

spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore

their

government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime

are

suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous

public

debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of

winning

back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles

are

at
stake."
-Thomas Jefferson

"* US *" wrote in message news:3rnge3tuclgslca7qgg2phdpnkgcimp2db@4ax.com...

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 11:31:19 -1000, "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:

...success in Iraq ...

What's that, to you? Getting the USA bankrupted
and defenseless and defamed worldwide, with plenty
of carnage for your sociopathic thrills?

All you have to do is explain to me why success ...

"* US *" wrote in message news:3rnge3tuclgslca7qgg2phdpnkgcimp2db@4ax.com...

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 11:31:19 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
<okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:

...success in Iraq ...

What's that, to you? Getting the USA bankrupted
and defenseless and defamed worldwide, with plenty
of carnage for your sociopathic thrills?

I worry about my countries priorities, when we do not seem willing to
protect what is basically a vital resource (Oil) that is in Iraq.

I do not want Iraq to become another safe haven for terrorist and I
am particularly worried when that safe haven is a country with a
whole lot of money from oil revenues. And I certainly don't want us
to make the same

mistake we made in Afghanistan, when we made it possible for the
Taliban to take over control of that country, who in turn provided al
Qaeda a safe haven to operate from.

I do not believe that leaving Iraq before the job is done, is sending
the right message to the current adversaries and any future
adversary. It confirms what I believe was Ho Chi Minh's belief that
you can defeat a super power like the United States, by simply
inflicting enough pain for a long enough period of time, and the
United States would no longer support the effort, and would leave. I
think that every time we do leave because the "cost is too high", we
reinforce that message, and we certainly do not distract from that
message..making it that much harder for any time in the future we do
send our military men and women into harms way (it certainly does not
make it easier). Even talk of leaving cannot help but give the
insurgency hope that they might succeed, and certainly does not send
the opposite message, which translates to more of our men and women
dying, not less.

I worry when we cannot pacify a country of 25 million. I wonder what
can this country handle if we cannot pacify a country like Iraq, and
how we can hope to pacify a country with a much larger population,
with an active insurgency. I wonder what kind of message that sends
to future adversaries, especially a country with a very large
population like China.

I think it is okay to withdraw from Iraq, when we are convinced that
the government of Iraq is strong enough to successful defend
themselves against the insurgency, without any military assistance
from the United States (excluding of course continued supplying the
needs of the Iraqi military). I fail to see how we can do that, when
we pull out our considerable military advantage, that the Iraqi
people simply do not have.

I think the goal of creating a functioning and successful democracy
in that region of the world, is very important and can transform that
region of the world forever.

I do not think it is in our best interest to have a government in
Iraq to side with our enemies, those being Iran and Venezuela. I
think adding another oil rich nation to that duo, only makes our life
harder, and it certainly does not make it easier.

I believe that the world has a big problem when we know of countries
who are violating the very Human Rights beliefs that we supposedly
have concerned about, to allow countries to continue to abuse their
own people, and we do nothing about it. If for no other reason,
removing Saddam was a good thing not a bad thing. We are making
great sacrifices to give the people of Iraq an opportunity to live a
life that we in the United States to often take for granted. I also
believe that failure in Iraq, means that we are going to be less
willing to change what is happening in other countries like the Sudan
and North Korea.

I believe that if you do not have the stomach for a fight, then you
should not start the fight in the first place. And if you do not
have the stomach for this fight, when are we going to have the
stomach for a fight, is my question. And if we do not have the
stomach for this fight, then the next question becomes, why do we
need to be a Super Power?

I worry about my countries priorities, when we do not seem willing to
protect what is basically a vital resource (Oil) that is in Iraq.

I do not want Iraq to become another safe haven for terrorist [sic]

al Qaeda...

I do not believe that leaving Iraq before the job is done

... you can defeat a super
power like the United States, by simply inflicting enough

... to future adversaries ...

side with our enemies...

are violating the very Human Rights beliefs that ...

...removing Saddam ...

...success in Iraq ...

"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:46e56f66$1$15426$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...

Your Chance of Being Kidnapped or Killed in Baghdad is 100%

By Cenk Uygur
Created Sep 8 2007 - 6:58pm

We were talking to Newsweek's correspondent in Baghdad, Babak
Dehghanpisheh,
on Friday's show. I asked him if a Westerner, journalists or otherwise,
could walk around in Baghdad unprotected by the military. He said it would
be "suicidal."

I don't really know what I expected. I knew it was dangerous and I
suspected
that no Westerner went outside of the Green Zone without protection, but I
didn't get the sense of how perilous it was until we talked to
Dehghanpisheh.

So, I followed up by asking him if being harmed was a certainty if you
were
unprotected in Baghdad. He answered that your chances of getting killed or
kidnapped in Baghdad if you were an unprotected Westerner was "one hundred
percent."

Think about that. That's amazing. The Bush administration claims that they
have made significant progress in Baghdad security. If anyone had told you
that four and a half years into the Iraq War, that any Westerner who
walked
around Baghad without a military convoy would have a 100% of being
kidnapped
or killed in Baghdad, what would you have thought?

You probably would not have believed it. You might have asked, "What
happened, did we lose the war?" You certainly wouldn't have surmised that
we
were making progress.

Imagine if someone told you of all the Americans who had died and been
injured in the war, the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed,
the
fact that there were no weapons of mass destruction, that Saddam Hussein
had
no links to the 9/11 bombers, that Iraq was in a state of chaos, there was
mass ethnic cleansing [1]and sectarian warfare and Baghdad was 100% unsafe
to Westerners - then imagine that the Bush administration was still
talking
about how we were making great progress in the war and that it was still
worth doing. And then imagine that people took them seriously.

I don't think the people inside Washington have a sense of how awful this
war has gone. It is an unimaginable failure. It is a historic and epic
catastrophe. And here we are this far into it with politicians still
talking
about winning and saying it was the right thing to do to go in and that if
we just stay a little longer and keep escalating the conflict we can turn
it
around.

I don't think any Congressman should be able to vote to continue this war
unless they can take an unprotected walk in Baghdad for fifteen minutes.
Put
the voting booth in the middle of Baghdad, give them some purple ink and
any
Congressman who can make it to the voting area without a military escort
and
vote yes to continue the war should have their vote counted.

Even with all that we have seen, is the American public fully aware of the
situation in Baghdad? Has the media done its job in making them aware? Is
everyone in America aware that Baghdad is off limits to any Westerner,
that
you will be kidnapped or killed if you don't have protection there? How
could anyone who knows this think we have made any progress in Baghdad?
How
could anyone conclude that the war and the so-called surge have been
anything but a complete and utter failure?

You can watch the whole interview with Babak Dehghanpisheh of Newsweek
(and
read the transcript) here [2].

Watch The Young Turks [3]
_______



--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues.
I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107

"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public
debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning
back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are
at
stake."
-Thomas Jefferson