posted on September 27, 2004 06:42:19 AM
If anyone can find good news/happenings going on in Iraq it's this writer.
BY ARTHUR CHRENKOFF
Monday, September 27, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT
"The past two weeks continued to be tumultuous in Iraq. More hostages taken, more hostages beheaded, more suicide bombings, more sabotage, more fighting, all unfolding against the background of an increasingly bitter U.S. presidential election campaign and a chorus of intelligence experts, politicians and pundits expressing grave doubts about the future of the country."
"And then there was the media coverage. In the midst of all the carnage and chaos overflowing the front pages of our newspapers and the TV screens, Newsweek chose to run an overview of the current situation in Iraq, titled "It's Worse Than You Think." Having for quite some time closely followed the mainstream media's reporting from Iraq, it struck me that this is hardly possible."
"In the same week that Newsweek had its panic attack, the editorial board of a less worldly Kansas City Star met up with a group of five Iraqi journalists visiting the United States on a tour organized by the State Department. During the discussion with his Iraqi colleagues, E. Thomas McClanahan of the Star asked them what they thought about the media coverage of Iraq:
The response was amusing in a way."
"Perhaps out of tact, our visitors (they asked that we not use their names) said they hadn't seen much U.S. coverage. Most couldn't speak English. But coverage by the Arab media, they said through translators, presented a distorted picture."
"One member of the group, the only woman, said the pessimistic tone of Arab coverage was making things worse by encouraging terrorists and demoralizing those who supported democracy." "Another journalist, a man in a dark suit, said the insurgents "don't represent the Iraqi people." "Arab reporters, said a third, "try to give the impression that it's hopeless. If you watch the satellite channels from Arab countries you would imagine there's no rebuilding going on."
"Iraq's Prime Minister Iyad Allawi echoed these sentiments when he spoke before Congress last week:
I have seen some of the images that are being shown here on television. They are disturbing. They focus on the tragedies, such as the brutal and barbaric murder of two American hostages this week. . . . Yet, as we mourn these losses, we must not forget either the progress we are making or what is at stake in Iraq. We are fighting for freedom and democracy, ours and yours. Every day, we strengthen the institutions that will protect our new democracy, and every day, we grow in strength and determination to defeat the terrorists and their barbarism."
"There are two Iraqs at the moment, both equally real and consequential. The Iraq of never-ending strife--the insurgency, terrorism, crime and all-too-slow reconstruction makes for interesting news stories and exciting footage." The Iraq of steady recovery, returning normalcy and a dash of hope rarely does."
"By the way, the Newsweek story did not mention even one positive development in Iraq. So here is another story--"Iraq: Not Quite as Bad as You Thought." Read the stories below in addition to--not to the exclusion of--all the bad news. Only by knowing both sides of the story you can make an informed judgment about how things in Iraq are really going.
[those stories are in the article]
The above mentions their news/media doing the same thing our left-leaning news/media are doing.
-------------
Also don't know if any of you watched 'Meet The Press' last night but the head Army commander was interviewed by Tim Russert. Excellent questions were asked, and straight answers were given by a man who knows what's happening on the ground in Iraq. To me it was a positive report of the current situation there and why we're hearing how bad things are and what the truth of the ground situation really is at this point.
If you weren't able to watch it...might just be interested in reading the transcript of the show.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6106292/
posted on September 27, 2004 07:00:55 AM
linda your C&P as usual doesn't prove a thing.
Words like "tone" don't present facts.
What you C&P'd was OPINIONS.
The beheadings, the bombings, the deaths , the suffering from lack of clean water the sewage problems, lack of jobs are real and are happening....to make light of them as if they're not happening is inhumane at best. But that's just you.
You say, "Also don't know if any of you watched 'Meet The Press' last night but the head Army commander was interviewed by Tim Russert. Excellent questions were asked, and straight answers were given by a man who knows what's happening on the ground in Iraq. To me it was a positive report of the current situation there and why we're hearing how bad things are and what the truth of the ground situation really is at this point."
How in the 'ell do YOU, oh wise one, know those were straight answers ?????
And if army commanders in Iraq are to be believed then why didn't bush give them more troops and food and water and armor when they wanted it???? If bush doesn't believe his commanders why should we?
And why should anyone believe what YOU say....you lied in the other thread you're too gutless to reply to....????
posted on September 27, 2004 07:09:50 AM
Linda_K
posted on September 19, 2004 08:03:42 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
logansdad - I'm going to end my participation in this thread with this very long post. "
That makes you quite the liar linda, as you went on to post again and again.
posted on September 27, 2004 07:11:20 AMRUSSERT - I think, General, many people in the United States need a reality check this morning. They are reading in the papers that the Kroll security agency who is working for the U.S. government said there are now 70 attacks a day on U.S. or Iraqi government forces up from 40 before the turnover to the Iraqi government. And yet Prime Minister Allawi was in Washington this week saying that the only place that is not safe is downtown Fallujah. Who's correct?
GEN. ABIZAID: Well, the reality check is such that I get it from my commanders in the field. And my commanders in the field are confident about the military mission. They're confident about our ability to have an election period that is fair and relatively stable. We're under no illusions about the entire country being stable, and we're also under no illusions that the entire country is dangerous.
It is a very complex environment."
posted on September 27, 2004 07:43:37 AM
Another view of Iraq from a U.S. Marine....on the ground...sharing his 'take' on the situation there.
Some believe the opinions of those actually there, on the ground, shouldn't be believed.....but what the biased media reports should be taken as 'written in stone'...when it's been shown via See-BS they only want to 'turn' an election....really aren't interested in seeking the truth.
"So, you may hear analysts and prognosticators on CNN, ABC and the like in the next few days talking about how bleak the situation is here in Iraq, but from where I sit, it's looking significantly better now than when I got here."
"The momentum is moving in our favor, and all Americans need to know that, so please, please, pass this on to those who care and will pass it on to others. It is very demoralizing for us here in uniform to read & hear such negativity in our press. It is fodder for our enemies to use against us and against the vast majority of Iraqis who want their new government to succeed. It causes the American public to start thinking about the acceptability of "cutting our losses" and pulling out, which would be devastating for Iraq for generations to come, and Muslim militants would claim a huge victory, causing us to have to continue to fight them elsewhere (remember, in war "Away" games are always preferable to "Home" games)."
"Reports like that also cause Iraqis begin to fear that we will pull out before we finish the job, and thus less willing to openly support their interim government and US/Coalition activities."
"We are realizing significant progress here – not propaganda progress, but real strides are being made. It's terrible to see our national morale, and support for what we're doing here, jeopardized by sensationalized stories hyped by media giants whose #1 priority is advertising income followed closely by their political agenda; getting the story straight falls much further down on their priority scale, as Dan Rather and CBS News have so aptly demonstrated in the last week.
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 27, 2004 07:50 AM ]
posted on September 27, 2004 08:12:59 AM
What do *you* believe, linda? And please don't tell me how Worldnetdaily or fox or drudge or WSJ or the moonie times feels. We know where their sentiments lay. But then I guess no more so than yours.
My question really should be are you really able to overlook the chaos, the destruction, killing of so many with no end in sight and perceive that it's good? Are you a blatant liar in support of your presidential choice or do you really fail to see the truth?
posted on September 27, 2004 08:42:54 AM
[i]GEN. ABIZAID: Well, the reality check is such that I get it from my commanders in the field. And my commanders in the field are confident about the military mission. They're confident about our ability to have an election period that is fair and relatively stable. We're under no illusions about the entire country being stable, and we're also under no illusions that the entire country is dangerous.
It is a very complex environment."[/i]
Notice how the General never contradicts the figures in his statement ? He uses meaningless and forward looking "buzz" words like confident.
And the last general that told the truth about Iraq suddenly "retired".
posted on September 27, 2004 08:46:06 AM
Linda K - "http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005676"
Here is a hint... When it reads, "opinionjournal" it means it is an opinion. I clicked the link, and this is nothing more than an op-ed piece, meaning, it is nothing more than an editorial opinion.
Linda's beliefs are steeped deeply in opinions of people like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, G Gordon Liddy, and Bill O'Reilly. Too bad these comics simply give their neo-con opinions which are almost always based on prefabricated lies meant to dupe their listeners, readers, and watchers.
This simply proves our point. Linda cannot think for herself. Instead, she uses the C&P to think for her. Nice job Linda. Present opinions as fact and you'll always get called on it.
[ edited by rustygumbo on Sep 27, 2004 08:46 AM ]
posted on September 27, 2004 09:32:06 AM
LOL - well let's see here now....
first helen asks: What do *you* believe, linda? After stating at least 50 times she doesn't care what I think...nor does she want to hear my opinions/thoughts. Just like kerry....another flip-flopper it appears. Just can't settle into one decision.
---------------
Yes, reamond I understand that some people would never believe a U.S. Commanding Officers words over what some anti-military or kerry supporter says. But see...our military ARE there and they know better than anyone else just what the truth of the situation over there is...not some ultra leftie report.
-------------
And rusty - Once again not open at all to hearing/reading about both sides. Just tell him what he WANTS to hear...and ignore the truth of the situation.
I'm fully aware of what an op-ed piece is. I'm guessing your NOT aware that each of the links provided in this op-ed gives proof to all the 40 or so good news items that are FACTS....with back up proof provided for those who wish to see the 'good news' that is occurring in Iraq. Obviously you're not one of them. But the links are NOT opinions...they're either statements from those there or they're from many articles who HAVE reported Iraq's Good News.
The fact that the lefties choose to totally ignore any good things that ARE being accomplished in Iraq and who ONLY want to focus on the negative actions of approx. 1000 insurgents/terrorists that are causing trouble for our troops...speaks a lot about just how unwilling you are to 'view the whole picture'....the good along with the trouble.
posted on September 27, 2004 09:49:41 AM
Well, I didn't ask how your feel about me, linda. I'm reading a book right now about truth...True to Life, Why Truth Matters by Michael P. Lynch. To me, you are a good study. I believe that your blind support of Bush and his policies is affecting how you view what is really happening in Iraq and you are therefore unable to see or consider the truth. You point out that you know you are reading op ed articles but yet you see these opinions as fact.
You made the same mistake last year when you saw everything as rosy when in fact it was the beginning of a major war.
posted on September 27, 2004 09:53:25 AM
Proving once again that linda's best attributes are not being able to read and sidetracking away from the issues......
""first helen asks: What do *you* believe, linda? After stating at least 50 times she doesn't care what I think...nor does she want to hear my opinions/thoughts. Just like kerry....another flip-flopper it appears. Just can't settle into one decision.
---------------
Yes, reamond I understand that some people would never believe a U.S. Commanding Officers words over what some anti-military or kerry supporter says. But see...our military ARE there and they know better than anyone else just what the truth of the situation over there is...not some ultra leftie report. ""
-------------
OK, linda refuses to read my loooongg list of bush's flip flops which is a stupid position to take at best.
And also chooses to ignore the fact that BUSH ignored the words of commanders on the ground in Iraq.
Just like she said Democrats and liberals wouldn't fight for this country and ignored the fact that neither bush nor DICK cheney had the balls to fight for this country.
posted on September 27, 2004 09:59:06 AM
Helen - I glad you are reading...you always appear to read a lot...doesn't seem to have improved your common sense one bit for all these years though.
You're still always against everything this country does...things not only President Bush supports but what our Congress votes for/on. You always side with those you feel we are abusing. Of course it's your right....but I've never seen you say one positive thing about our country....even when clinton was in office.
And while you're reading about 'truth' maybe you'll be able to answer why when you've said at least 100 times you're never speaking nor acknowledging me...that you continue to do so. That's not being truthful....that's making many false statements over and over and over. So...I'm glad you're reading about truth...maybe it will help you.
As for the success of Kerry's anti-democracy protests and his leadership of the VVAW and association with Fonda's Winter Soldier Investigation, General Vo Nguyen Giap, Vietnam's most decorated military leader, wrote in retrospect that if not for the disunity created by such stateside protesters, Hanoi would have ultimately surrendered.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, which states, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President ... having previously taken an oath ... to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." --George Washington
posted on September 27, 2004 10:03:37 AM
"""Linda_K
posted on September 19, 2004 08:03:42 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
logansdad - I'm going to end my participation in this thread with this very long post. """"
That makes you quite the liar linda, as you went on to post again and again.
linda, as to the rest of your reply to Helen...and your other OPINIONS..it's clear...you lost the argument.....here's where you make your choice....run away and hide or start calling others liars
posted on September 27, 2004 10:17:57 AM
Attacking me won't answer the question, lindak. It seems that is your only response.
I don't want to get into your pissing match. I'm simply trying to understand how or if you can see the truth. Or, if you are seeing the truth and have decided that other priorities outweigh the value of truth.
posted on September 27, 2004 10:22:02 AM
Oh goodie - the liar crowfarm continues with her sick harassment. Running from thread to thread reposting her copying and pasting.....seeking the attention she's so desperate for. How sad.
posted on September 27, 2004 10:56:32 AM
linda whines....."""Oh goodie - the liar crowfarm continues with her sick harassment. Running from thread to thread reposting her copying and pasting.....seeking the attention she's so desperate for. How sad.""
Kinda like "twelve" and "linda" do to me!????
Instead of admitting she's wrong she starts attacking....how sad...
...and pathetic....
and stupid.....
and what a fool she makes of herself........
linda, I'm not the lonely one...I'M not desperate for attention..........
posted on September 27, 2004 11:07:35 AMYes, reamond I understand that some people would never believe a U.S. Commanding Officers words over what some anti-military or kerry supporter says. But see...our military ARE there and they know better than anyone else just what the truth of the situation over there is...not some ultra leftie report.
Linda when links were provide about the feelings of our troops you still don't believe what the true feelings are in Iraq. A couple of weeks ago I posted a link of wha the Iraqi people how the Iraqi people were thinking and the feeling of some of the troops - showing how bad it is in Iraq.
DICK CHENEY SUPPORTS MY RELATIONSHIP: People ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
posted on September 27, 2004 11:15:42 AM
If the world was to blow itself up... the last audible voice would be that of LindaK..
saying... it can't be done!! LOL Maggie
posted on September 27, 2004 11:41:56 AM
Good article Linda. I know the message is waisted on the left, Apparently the thought of fighting a war against terrorism on foreign soil is less preferable that to fight terrorism on US soil.
-------
Iraq: For Those Who Came in Late
Written by Joe Mariani
Sunday, September 26, 2004
When I was a kid, I loved Sunday mornings. I could hardly wait for the paper to come so I could get to the comics--especially The Phantom, the ''Ghost Who Walks.'' Unlike most of the other comics in my Sunday paper, The Phantom (written by creator Lee Falk until his death in 1999, but inked at that time by Sy Barry) was well-drawn and had ongoing, interesting story arcs.
Every once in a while, Falk would go back and explain the family background of his hero, the 21st Phantom. It gave the comic a sense of history and continuity that no other strip had. Each of those retrospectives was a copy of the very first Sunday strip, which showed the first-Phantom-to-be washing up on a 16th century Bengal beach and swearing on the skull of his father's murderer to fight piracy. Each started with a banner saying, For Those Who Came in Late. It was a great way to bring new readers into the ongoing story.
Most people don't pay attention to politics until they have to. For the last year, Democrats and liberals have been tossing out lies about why we're in Iraq, hoping they stick, and those lies have been debunked over and over. At this point, many who hear John Kerry and his minions repeating the same lies are tempted to laugh it off, since we've ''been there, done that.'' But those lies are not old news to those who have only just begun to pay attention to the campaign speeches. The lies Democrats tell about Iraq need to be exposed again--For Those Who Came in Late.
Lie #1: The Rush To War. There was no rush to war. There were twelve years and seventeen resolutions demanding that Saddam Hussein comply with the 1991 cease-fire agreement that he signed, which specified that he must completely disclose all his weapons programs and materials to the United Nations. He never did so. The U.N. Security Council unanimously issued resolution #1441 in November 2002, which gave Iraq one month as a ''final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations,'' or face ''serious consequences.'' Saddam still did not do so. Rather than ''rush to war,'' President Bush waited three more months for him to acquiesce, giving him further ''last chances.'' At that point, walking away and not forcing Saddam to disarm by force would have destroyed the credibility of both the United States and the United Nations, and Saddam would have won a major victory over both without a shot being fired. No statement or warning by the United Nations or the United States would have ever had weight again.
Lie #2: Going It Alone. The only major countries that did not send troops or support the liberation of Iraq in other ways were France, Germany, Russia, and China. It's no coincidence that three of those are the same countries that were trading illegal arms and other banned materials (like Roland missiles and Mirage helicopter parts from France) to Saddam Hussein in return for lucrative exploitation rights in the West Qurna (Russia), al-Ahdab (China), and Majnoon (France) oil fields, as well as other deals all four had made. Iraq was one of German industry's biggest customers, and Iraq owed Germany billions of dollars, which would probably never be collected if Saddam was forced from power. Their opposition to Saddam's removal was far less based on principal than capital. If we had to ''go it alone'' in Iraq with our paltry coalition of 46 nations, it was because our ''traditional allies'' failed us, not the other way around. I'm curious about whether Kerry has any plans to apologise to all the nations he's insulted by calling them ''a trumped-up, so-called coalition of the bribed, the coerced, the bought and the extorted,'' just because France didn't join.
Lie #3: No Ties to al-Qaeda. There are two parts to this one. Iraq did have ties to al-Qaeda, but specific links to al-Qaeda alone was never one of the reasons Congress voted to remove Saddam from power, as laid out in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq. One of those reasons was his long-time sponsorship of international terrorism, not just the one group. The fact that he openly awarded $25,000 (later reduced to $10,000) to the families of Hamas suicide bombers was proof of this. In fact, Russian President Vladmir Putin warned President Bush that Saddam was planning new terrorist attacks against the United States after 9/11. As for al-Qaeda, the Washington Times noted, ''The fall of Baghdad has produced new evidence to buttress the Bush administration's prewar contention that Saddam Hussein's regime and Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda had a long history of contacts." Kerry supporters often state that the 9/11 Commission said that Iraq had no links to al-Qaeda, but that's a misquote, if not a lie. NBC's Tom Brokaw had the audacity to ''correct'' Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi when he mentioned Saddam's ties to al-Qaeda. The 9/11 Commission stated that Saddam might not have had direct, specific cooperation on 9/11, but that he did have ties to al-Qaeda. Commission Chairman Thomas Kean stated: ''There were contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda, a number of them, some of them a little shadowy. They were definitely there.'' More links to terror, including al-Qaeda, can be found in a publication by the Hudson Institute called Saddam's Philanthropy of Terror.
Lie #4: No WMDs in Iraq. Every intelligence service on the planet agreed that Saddam had not fully disclosed his illegal weapons programs, or else United Nations resolution #1441 would not have been adopted unanimously. All Saddam had to do at any time, even after the U.N.'s deadline had passed, was turn over all the requested materials and documents. David Kay's interim report to the CIA showed that Saddam had clandestine laboratories (including prison testing facilities), long-range unmanned aerial vehicles, hidden and dual-use manufacturing capabilities, and advanced work on anthrax, ricin, aflatoxin, and other biological weapons. None of this had been disclosed to the U.N. weapons inspectors. Saddam was poised to replenish his WMD stockpiles the minute U.N. sanctions were dropped, according to Charles Duelfer's final report. To put it more simply: Saddam had lemons, sugar, and a pitcher of cold water at a lemonade stand. Can anyone seriously doubt his intent to make lemonade? So where are they now? Israel told us, CIA satellite photos confirmed, and David Kay's research revealed that much of Saddam's WMD materials were moved across the Syrian border right before the war in Iraq began. Perhaps being so patient was an error; perhaps we should have used force the day after the U.N.'s final deadline lapsed.
Lie #5: Diversion from the War on Terror. Iraq is, in fact, an essential part of the War on Terror. At one point, even John Kerry agreed; on 7 September 2004 he stated that American soldiers who died in Iraq gave their lives ''on behalf of their country, on behalf of freedom, the war on terror.'' Afghanistan and Iraq were essential components of a larger strategy than shooting a few killers and calling the war a success. Democrats base this attack on a false assertion that troops were pulled out of Afghanistan to fight in Iraq but not replaced. In reality, troop levels in Afghanistan were never affected by the fighting in Iraq; only the composition of the troops has changed. If anything, overall troop levels have increased. The only groups that switched focus from one country to the other were the Democrats and their enthusiasts in the ''mainstream'' media.
The War on Terror is not about one country, one group, or one person. Democrats don't want to admit that Pakistan has given up its terrorist support, becoming an ally in the war. They don't want to acknowledge that Libya has also given up terror support as well as its WMD programs, as a direct result of Saddam's removal. (Ghaddafi phoned Italian Prime Minister Sylvio Berlusconi to say, ''I will do whatever the Americans want, because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid.'') Syria has begun to buckle under pressure to withdraw troops from occupied Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia is moving towards democratic reforms. If the mullahs that rule Iran stop working on a nuclear weapon, the Iranian people may get their chance to institute a democracy on their own. That's how the war will be won, not by pulling out of Iraq and leaving a lone fledgling democracy to be swallowed by its surrounding enemies.
If John Kerry and his cronies can again force the U.S. to abandon its responsibilities by turning public opinion against the war, if we're forced to watch helplessly as innocents who trusted our promises are butchered again, then the Democrats will at last be justified in calling Iraq a second Vietnam.
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The person who has nothing for which he is willing
to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
--John Stuart Mill
posted on September 27, 2004 12:12:17 PM
Linda, I've been looking for articles that show us how the rebuilding is going in Iraq, yet there seems to be none available. People DO want to see the positive things going on, but where are the pictures?
Don't you think Bush has cried wolf too often? He has lied about this war from the beginning, so what makes you think anyone would believe this nonsense about "how well the war is going" without some proof? The side that says the war is a disgrace can show pictures to back up their claims, why can't Bush?
posted on September 27, 2004 12:12:57 PM
Linda what do you have to say about this article and Colin Powell's statement? Are you going to dismiss his statements because he is not in Iraq and does not know what is going on?
CRAWFORD, Texas -- Secretary of State Colin Powell acknowledged Sunday that the situation in Iraq is "getting worse," but he insisted hostile areas could be quelled to allow elections in January throughout the country.
Powell and Gen. John Abizaid, who is in charge of the U.S. Central Command, said tough military action would be needed in some regions, particularly the Sunni Triangle, to ensure stability for the election.
But in appearances on Sunday news shows, Powell and Abizaid disagreed over whether elections could be held in all areas of the strife-torn country. Allies of Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry on Sunday questioned whether the balloting could be considered legitimate if it bypassed some regions.
Powell, in an interview on ABC's "This Week," acknowledged that violence by insurgents is worsening and traced it to the upcoming elections.
"They do not want the Iraqi people to vote for their own leaders in a free, democratic election," Powell said of the insurgency. "And because it's getting worse, we will have to increase our efforts to defeat it, not walk away and pray and hope for something else to happen."
With a recent Time magazine poll indicating that 55 percent of voters think the situation in Iraq is worse than described by President Bush, Abizaid acknowledged that "it's a hard fight" but added that "the constant drumbeat in Washington of a war that is being lost, that can't be won, of a resistance that is out of control simply do not square with the facts on the ground."
Abizaid, appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press," dismissed as "overly pessimistic" a National Intelligence Estimate for the president that in late July suggested a bleak future for Iraq, with civil war as a worst-case scenario and "tenuous stability" in the country as the best case.
"I'm very confident that by the time the January elections roll around, we'll be in good shape," Abizaid said.
The acknowledgement of difficult times ahead in Iraq comes just days after Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi downplayed increasing violence and spoke of positive change in an appearance before Congress and in a White House news conference with President Bush.
On Sunday, Powell and Abizaid offered different explanations of the U.S. goal for Iraqi elections.
Abizaid said the aim is for elections "to be held in the vast majority of the country."
"I don't think we'll ever achieve perfection," Abizaid said. "And when we look for perfection in a combat zone, we're going to be sadly disappointed."
But Powell said, "Right now, our goal is, and I think it's an achievable goal, to have full, free, fair elections across the whole country."
Powell said the U.S.-led coalition needs to "make sure that we bring the Sunni Triangle under control" to allow for elections across Iraq. Powell also told CNN that action would be taken against the "no-go zones"--hostile areas largely avoided by U.S.-led forces.
"The major thrust of our political and military and diplomatic efforts over the next several months will be to make sure there are no no-go zones," he said.
Powell's predecessor in the Clinton administration, Madeleine Albright, an adviser to the Kerry campaign, questioned the value of elections in Iraq if they cannot be held nationwide.
"What's the purpose of the elections in Iraq? It is to try to get a government that the Iraqi people see as legitimate," Albright said on ABC. "That's the whole purpose of it."
She said Allawi's statement in Washington last week that 15 out of 18 Iraq provinces were ready for elections was "kind of like deciding that California, Texas and Florida won't participate in our election."
DICK CHENEY SUPPORTS MY RELATIONSHIP: People ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
posted on September 27, 2004 12:18:05 PM(Ghaddafi phoned Italian Prime Minister Sylvio Berlusconi to say, ''I will do whatever the Americans want, because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid.'')"
posted on September 27, 2004 02:28:40 PMApparently the thought of fighting a war against terrorism on foreign soil is less preferable that to fight terrorism on US soil.
Iraq asn't a terrorist state, had no WMDs, had no operational association with al Qaeda.
You Bushtards are like trained seals. You try to slide Iraq into the war on terrorism when in fact Iraq had nothing to do with terrorists attacks against the US.
Bush has screwed up royally. It was reported today that Bush has been prompting his advisors for plans to get our troops out of Iraq ASAP.
posted on September 27, 2004 04:53:17 PM
Why do they hate us? Maybe because we're killing them.
According to the ministry, the interim Iraqi government recorded 3,487 Iraqi deaths in 15 of the country's 18 provinces from April 5 - when the ministry began compiling the data - until Sept. 19. Of those, 328 were women and children. Another 13,720 Iraqis were injured, the ministry said.
posted on September 27, 2004 05:46:18 PM
Thanks bear...and you're right....the message is waisted on the left, Apparently the thought of fighting a war against terrorism on foreign soil is less preferable that to fight terrorism on US soil.
kerry has said he'll defend this country if we're attacked. So it does appear he'll left them come here and do more destruction rather than keeping the war there.
Your article is great at proving the lefts lies wrong. But that's the way it's been for almost 4 years now. They sling the sh1t and time and time again it has been proven wrong. They won't ever fact that though.
----------------
KD - I don't understand why pictures are so important...when words from those there on the group talk about what's been improved. My link obviously didn't deserve any of your time. That's why I'm getting tired of providing links...they're never believed by kerry supporters anyway.
-------------
Over 700 Iraq's have died fighting along with our soldiers for their country. Their police and security are being killed while applying for jobs to protect their country. It's not only American soldiers who are fighting for their freedom.
-------------
And logansdad - Yes, I believe Powell....things are currently getting worse in SOME AREAS and better in others. As I've stated before we were warned the situation on the ground was going to worsen as their elections draw closer. The terrorists don't want to see a free Iraqi people voting for what they want...and they will continue to worsen as the election draws nearer. No doubt about that.
My post of 'Good News' was because rusty said if there's good news post it. So I did. Then all you kerry supporters again only discount anything good that is being reported from those there and our soldiers there. Like you just can't stand anything that's not negative to be reported.
It's like the dems want us to fail in Iraq....so they win this election. What a shame they can't support our troops like they always claim they do. LOL...that's a laugh.
As for the success of Kerry's anti-democracy protests and his leadership of the VVAW and association with Fonda's Winter Soldier Investigation, General Vo Nguyen Giap, Vietnam's most decorated military leader, wrote in retrospect that if not for the disunity created by such stateside protesters, Hanoi would have ultimately surrendered.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, which states, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President ... having previously taken an oath ... to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." --George Washington
LOL...that's a laugh.