|
Banned
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Let me be the first to say I have no idea what you are talking about, how the related links tie into it, and compared to most of America the press is liberal. Compared to you, the press is fascist, but we have been over this already.
|
The irony is you have much more to be angry about, because what is chronicled here is a deliberate, methodical, betrayal of your faith, not of mine:
The president, post 2004 election, able to "wind down" the "fear card":
Quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0051130-2.html
.....A clear strategy begins with a clear understanding of the enemy we face. The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists, Saddamists and terrorists. The rejectionists are by far the largest group. These are ordinary Iraqis, mostly Sunni Arabs, who miss the privileged status they had under the regime of Saddam Hussein -- and they reject an Iraq in which they are no longer the dominant group. . . .
The second group that makes up the enemy in Iraq is smaller, but more determined. It contains former regime loyalists who held positions of power under Saddam Hussein -- people who still harbor dreams of returning to power. These hard-core Saddamists are trying to foment anti-democratic sentiment amongst the larger Sunni community. . . .
The third group <b>is the smallest</b>, but the most lethal: the terrorists <b>affiliated with or inspired by al Qaeda.</b>
|
Quote:
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/16577874/page/5/
MTP Transcript for Jan. 14, 2007
....MR. RUSSERT: Senator Lieberman, let me show you the latest poll on all this about American attitudes. Support of the president sending 22,000 more troops to Iraq, 36 percent, opposed 61. Is it possible for a commander in chief to conduct a war where two out of three Americans, nearly, oppose his latest initiative and now believe that the war is not worth fighting?
SEN. LIEBERMAN: Well, it makes it harder, that’s for sure. And, and, you know, this is the great challenge because this is a different kind of war, Tim, as you well know. These are not armies massed on a battlefield or ships at sea. This is unconventional. It’s terrorism. ....
.......But my own sense of history tells me that in war, ultimately, there are two exit strategies. One is called victory; the other is called defeat. The president offered a proposal the other night that holds the hope of victory in a critical battle for the Iraqis and for us. With all respect, the other proposals represent the beginning of a retreat, of a defeat. And I think the consequences for the Middle East, which has been so important to our international stability over the years, <h3>and to the American people, who have been attacked on 9/11 by the same enemy that we’re fighting in Iraq today</h3>, supported by a rising Islamist radical super-powered government in Iran....
|
Notice that Bush stated:
Quote:
|
......The third group <b>is the smallest</b>, but the most lethal: the terrorists <b>affiliated with or inspired by al Qaeda.</b>....
|
....while Lieberman later sounded like Cheney...9/11....9/11....9/11
Bush would later change "his tune", and the "stenos" from the "liberal" NY Times were there to play the "Gunga din" role:
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/23/wo...23iraq.html?hp
By JOHN F. BURNS
Published: June 23, 2007
BAGHDAD, June 22 — The operational commander of troops battling to drive fighters with Al Qaeda from Baquba said Friday that 80 percent of the top Qaeda leaders in the city fled before the American-led offensive began earlier this week. He compared their flight with the escape of Qaeda leaders from Falluja ahead of an American offensive that recaptured that city in 2004....
......the second-ranking American commander in Iraq, told reporters that leaders of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia had been alerted....
....He portrayed the Qaeda leaders’ escape as cowardice, saying that “when the fight comes, they leave,” abandoning “midlevel” Qaeda leaders and fighters to face the might of American troops — just, he said...
....Some American officers in Baquba have placed blame for the Qaeda leaders’ flight on public remarks....
....But General Odierno cast the issue in broader terms, saying Qaeda leaders were bound to know ...
......Despite the flight of the Qaeda leaders from Baquba — a pattern that appears to have been replicated in other areas included in the new offensive, including Qaeda strongholds along the Tigris River south of Baghdad — he adopted an upbeat tone, saying the offensive held “a good potential” for reducing the Qaeda threat.....
.....First, he said, American and Iraqi troops would need to sustain their crackdown long enough for Iraqi forces to move into neighborhoods cleared of Qaeda fighters....
......But General Odierno said Iraqi forces were “getting better,” “staying and fighting,” “taking casualties” and adding an additional 7,500 soldiers to their overall strength every five weeks.......
......General Odierno played down the significance of the Qaeda leaders fleeing ahead of the offensive, saying American forces would hunt them down. “I guarantee you, we’re going to track down those leaders,” he said. “.....
American commanders had said that one difference from previous offensives that had failed to net top Qaeda leaders would be the use of “blocking maneuvers”....
......Friday that several hundred Qaeda fighters — about 80 percent of the recruits who were there when the offensive began Tuesday — remained in the western half of the city,.....
......American hopes that the Falluja offensive would deal a mortal blow to Al Qaeda were thwarted .......
....Since Falluja, Qaeda groups have shown a remarkable resilience in the face of relentless pursuit by the American forces.....
.....American commanders said this week that, more than 30 months after the city was recaptured, Qaeda groups have reinfiltrated the city.....forcing a fresh American and Iraqi offensive this month that has been aimed at capturing or killing the Qaeda fighters.....
...American commanders have begun acknowledging in the past year that the ability of the Qaeda groups to establish new strongholds after old ones are destroyed...
......General Odierno, at his news conference, sketched the sweep of the new offensive. He said the main thrust was aimed at Qaeda strongholds in Diyala Province, with its capital at Baquba; at the Arab Jabour area south of Baghdad, where Qaeda groups have sent wave after wave......
....“So far, within Baquba,” General Odierno said, “there have been many successes:.....
|
Quote:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/5/4/45748/74248
Iraq: Who Are We Fighting?
by BarbinMD
Fri May 04, 2007 at 04:04:34 AM PST
In his post-veto campaign to justify continuing with his failed war policy, George Bush <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070502-2.html">declared</a> that:
<i>Al-Qaida is public enemy No. 1 in Iraq.</i>
In fact, Bush mentioned Al-Qaida no less than 27 times in a speech that covered his usual spiel; <i>we're fighting them there, the central front in the war on terror, emboldening, surrender, and of course, September 11th. He waxed poetic about progress the Iraqi government is making, declining sectarian violence, early signs of his "surge" succeeding, and that there is no civil war, just Al-Qaida mounting "spectacular attacks" to sap the will of the American people. In fact, it seems that Al-Qaida is all that stands between the Iraqi government and a flowering democracy in the Middle East.</i>
But today we learn <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/03/AR2007050302530.html?hpid=topnews">that</a>:
<i>The number of attacks with the projectiles rose to 65 in April, said Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, who oversees day-to-day U.S. military operations in Iraq. "The overwhelming majority" were in predominantly Shiite eastern Baghdad, Odierno said in an interview this week. Officials have said the projectiles are used almost exclusively by Shiite fighters against U.S. military targets.</i>
April being the month <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2007/05/01/us_military_suffers_costly_month_in_iraq_as_104_troops_killed/">where</a> 104 U.S. troops were killed in one of the deadliest months of this war, and in a month where it was <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/29/AR2007042901728.html?hpid=topnews">revealed</a> that:
<i>A department of the Iraqi prime minister's office is playing a leading role in the arrest and removal of senior Iraqi army and national police officers, some of whom had apparently worked too aggressively to combat violent Shiite militias, according to U.S. military officials in Baghdad.</i>
|
The "stuff" in the following quote box is not news reporting:
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews
17 Insurgents Killed Near Baqubah
Most Al-Qaeda in Iraq Leaders Have Fled Offensive, U.S. General Says
By John Ward Anderson
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, June 23, 2007; Page A12
....The battle came Friday to the town of Khalis, about 10 miles northwest of Baqubah. U.S. forces saw a group of al-Qaeda in Iraq gunmen attempting to avoid Iraqi police patrols and infiltrate Khalis from the southwest, according to a U.S. military statement. . . . .
With those deaths, at least 68 suspected al-Qaeda operatives have been killed in the offensive, according to the U.S. military's tally....
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/21/wo...st/21iraq.html
....American troops discovered a medical aid station for insurgents -- another sign that the Qaeda fighters had prepared for an intense fight . . . In a statement, the American military said it had killed 41 Qaeda operatives.....
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/20/wo...0military.html
.....The problem of collaring the Qaeda fighters is challenging in several respects. . . The presence of so many civilians on an urban battlefield affords the operatives from Al Qaeda another possible means to elude their American pursuers. . . . Since the battle for western Baquba began, Qaeda insurgents have carried out a delaying action, employing snipers and engaging American troops in several firefights......
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/19/wo...st/19iraq.html
....The Qaeda and insurgent strongholds in Baquba are strongly defended, according to American intelligence reports [though even that article described the enemy in Baquba as "a mix of former members of Saddam Hussein's army and paramilitary forces, embittered Sunni Arab men, criminal gangs and Qaeda Islamists"]......
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/17/wo...st/17iraq.html
.....With the influx of tens of thousands of additional combat troops into Iraq now complete, American forces have begun a wide offensive against Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia on the outskirts of Baghdad, the top American commander in Iraq said Saturday.
The commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus, in a news conference in Baghdad along with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, said the operation was intended to take the fight to Al Qaeda's hide-outs in order to cut down the group's devastating campaign of car bombings. . . .
The additional American forces, General Petraeus said Saturday, would allow the United States to conduct operations in "a number of areas around Baghdad, in particular to go into areas that were sanctuaries in the past of Al Qaeda."....
|
<h3>Your "homies" gush over it:</h3>
Quote:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...E1NDkwNjFlMGM=
<i>Rich [Lowry, Editor of National Review] and I share an admiration for Michael Gordon, one of three (along with Burns and Filkens) NYT reporters who really work hard to get the Iraqi story right.</i>
http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...diMDI1ZjM4ODg=
Friday, July 06, 2007
Political Progress in Iraq [Rich Lowry]
This <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/world/middleeast/06military.html?ref=todayspaper">Michael Gordon story</a> from Diyala today highlights how there is political progress in Iraq, just not the sort of progress we insisted on with our benchmarks at the beginning of the year. This is bottom-up political progress as key Sunni players are beginning to swing our way (something we've been hoping for a long time). This passage goes to how drawing down our troops now would probably throw away this nascent progress and how the Sunni tribes siding with us are dependent on our combat power:
<i>The militants’ hold on the region was facilitated, senior American officers now acknowledge, by American commanders’ decision to draw down forces in the province in 2005 in the hopes of shifting most of the responsibility for securing the region onto the Iraqis.</i>
Bill Kristol
http://theweeklystandard.com/Content...3/849nkdmm.asp
In Iraq, we are fighting al Qaeda. . . . Friday's New York Times led with the news of [GOP Sen. Pete] Domenici's endorsement of (partial, gradual, and unspecified in any of its details) withdrawal from Iraq. In striking contrast to the Domenici story was a report from Iraq on the same page by Michael Gordon. It was a fascinating account of how young American soldiers are executing Gen. David Petraeus's new strategy on the ground, and how they're fighting and defeating al Qaeda.
|
<h3>But, as the NY Times "ombudsman", the READERS' representative wrote:</h3>
Quote:
http://nytimes.com/2007/07/08/opinion/08pubed.html
The Public Editor
Seeing Al Qaeda Around Every Corner
By CLARK HOYT
Published: July 8, 2007
As domestic support for the war in Iraq continues to melt away, President Bush and the United States military in Baghdad are increasingly pointing to a single villain on the battlefield: Al Qaeda. . . .
Why Bush and the military are emphasizing Al Qaeda to the virtual exclusion of other sources of violence in Iraq is an important story. So is the question of how well their version of events squares with the facts of a murky and rapidly changing situation on the ground.
But these are stories you haven't been reading in The Times in recent weeks as the newspaper has slipped into a routine of quoting the president and the military uncritically about Al Qaeda's role in Iraq -- and sometimes citing the group itself without attribution.
And in using the language of the administration, the newspaper has also failed at times to distinguish between Al Qaeda, the group that attacked the United States on Sept. 11, and Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, an Iraqi group that didn't even exist until after the American invasion. . . .
Recent Times stories from Iraq have referred, with little or no attribution -- <h3>and no supporting evidence -- to "militants linked with Al Qaeda," "Sunni extremists with links to Al Qaeda" and "insurgents from Al Qaeda."</h3> The Times has stated flatly, again without attribution or supporting evidence, that Al Qaeda was responsible for the bombing of the Golden Dome mosque in Samarra last year, an event that the president has said started the sectarian civil war between Sunnis and Shiites.
|
....it is NOT "news reporting", it is shilling and parroting for "power", and not speaking the truth to it!!! |