> tBone wrote: > All they said was the surge would bring security thats it the end. >
Duuudddeeee ... you've been listening to someone with admin talking points WAY too much. ::sigh:: 20 months ago President Bush said The Surge would create "the breathing space [the Iraqi government] needs to make progress in other critical areas." Now follow the logic here ... (1.) Bush said that "a successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations", therefore (2.) We need The Surge to create "breathing space" for that successful strategy. So we surged. Result: lowed violence, still no "progress in other critical areas". ( GAO report detailing that here: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08837.pdf ) Okay, so The Surge didn't work based on Bush's own words and his own benchmarks as measured and reported on by the GAO. Let me repeat that for effect: based on Bush's own words and define metrics The Surge failed. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. But there's a new logic in town! The one you've clearly swallowed with a treble hook. That logic basically says that if put more troops into Iraq violence will go down. If we extrapolate current progress and current troop levels ... ::crunches number:: Oh, here we go ... we'll be in Iraq at our current troop levels forever. I thought you were a libertarian! A libertarian wouldn't support Iraq in the first place and he CERTAINLY wouldn't support using American troops to secure a foreign nation's people. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;203748912;27390454;j Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:265448 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
