In advance of Petraeus report.....

Cerise

Cerise

Well-Known Member
Schmucky Schumer said:
"And let me be clear, the violence in Anbar has gone down despite the surge, not because of the surge. The inability of American soldiers to protect these tribes from al Qaeda said to these tribes we have to fight al Qaeda ourselves. It wasn't that the surge brought peace here. It was that the warlords took peace here, created a temporary peace here. And that is because there was no one else there protecting."
Click to expand...

http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/77423490-3119-4f21-9cb3-ce190f316648

Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, Levin, Clyburn, Kerry....Why is it the left feels it is in the best interest of their party to publicly speak like this? They are not doing themselves---nor this country---any favors. They are all for bickering, backstabbing, obfuscating, smokescreening, undermining, and engineering the defeat of the US.

Our troops are not inept, stupid or incapable of providing the security that Iraq needs. They are training the Iraqis to begin to stand up for themselves and to supply the security they'll need to become a sovereign nation.

To claim that our troops are unable to perform their duties in a time of war, while the jihadists are paying attention to what is said--- emboldens the enemy and put our troops in more danger.

Schumer is telling the enemy that they only need to fight a little longer to beat the weak, all-but-defeated, incompetent Americans.

UpChuck Shumer is a sorry sack of shit and should get in line with the other sorry sacks of shit before him who should resign from their position as a public official.
 
Thursday, August 30, 2007; Page A01

Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report. The document questions whether some aspects of a more positive assessment by the White House last month adequately reflected the range of views the GAO found within the administration.

The strikingly negative GAO draft, which will be delivered to Congress in final form on Tuesday, comes as the White House prepares to deliver its own new benchmark report in the second week of September, along with congressional testimony from Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker. They are expected to describe significant security improvements and offer at least some promise for political reconciliation in Iraq.


An Iraqi army vehicle drives through the empty streets of the Shiite holy city of Karbala. The GAO draft report has determined that only one of eight political benchmarks that the United States set for Iraq has been achieved.
An Iraqi army vehicle drives through the empty streets of the Shiite holy city of Karbala. The GAO draft report has determined that only one of eight political benchmarks that the United States set for Iraq has been achieved.

The draft provides a stark assessment of the tactical effects of the current U.S.-led counteroffensive to secure Baghdad. "While the Baghdad security plan was intended to reduce sectarian violence, U.S. agencies differ on whether such violence has been reduced," it states. While there have been fewer attacks against U.S. forces, it notes, the number of attacks against Iraqi civilians remains unchanged. It also finds that "the capabilities of Iraqi security forces have not improved."

"Overall," the report concludes, "key legislation has not been passed, violence remains high, and it is unclear whether the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion in reconstruction funds," as promised. While it makes no policy recommendations, the draft suggests that future administration assessments "would be more useful" if they backed up their judgments with more details and "provided data on broader measures of violence from all relevant U.S. agencies."

A GAO spokesman declined to comment on the report before it is released. The 69-page draft, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Post, is still undergoing review at the Defense Department, which may ask that parts of it be classified or request changes in its conclusions. The GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, normally submits its draft reports to relevant agencies for comment but makes its own final judgments. The office has published more than 100 assessments of various aspects of the U.S. effort in Iraq since May 2003.

The person who provided the draft report to The Post said it was being conveyed from a government official who feared that its pessimistic conclusions would be watered down in the final version -- as some officials have said happened with security judgments in this month's National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq. Congress requested the GAO report, along with an assessment of the Iraqi security forces by an independent commission headed by retired Marine Gen. James L. Jones, to provide a basis for comparison with the administration's scorecard. The Jones report is also scheduled for delivery next week.
Click to expand...

The rest of the article is here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/29/AR2007082902434.html
 
rule number four: we will sontinue to ignore all that is not in line with what we are ideologically predisposed toward.
 
Petraeus
Click to expand...

That was the source in which all agreed. Now that it's not bad news, half the crowd is going out of their way of ignoring, dismissing or otherwise downplaying the report.

All these side reports just happen to be coming out weeks or days before teh Generals? What timing.

As far as Chuck Schumer. Fuck off you piece of shit.
 
Gonz said:
That was the source in which all agreed. Now that it's not bad news, half the crowd is going out of their way of ignoring, dismissing or otherwise downplaying the report.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you get that all agreed. However if they did then why is the White House writing the report? I know they agreed.
 
the Majority Agreed, in Congress, and they need to stand behind what they say.

The assholes that are already playing on it need to go.
I don't care about much of the rhetoric, but when a man of this stature, and I'm not just talking rank,
is belittled for political purposes, that's despicable.
 
This whole war has been belittled for political cause since about 9/17.
 
spike said:
I don't know where you get that all agreed. However if they did then why is the White House writing the report? I know they agreed.
Click to expand...

H.R. 2206 said:
(1) In the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law 110-28), enacted May 25, 2007, the Congress enacted broad legislation, part of which originated in the Senate, and the President signed the legislation which specifically mandated that the President take the following actions:

(A) ``The President shall submit an initial report, in classified and unclassified format, to the Congress, not later than July 15, 2007,assessing the status of each of the specific benchmarks established above, and declaring, in his judgment, whether satisfactory progress toward meeting these benchmarks is, or is not, being achieved''.

(B) ``The President, having consulted with the Secretary of State, The Secretary of Defense, The Commander, Multi-National Forces-Iraq, the United States Ambassador to Iraq, and the Commander of U.S. Central Command, will prepare the report and submit the report to Congress''.

(C) ``If the President's assessment of any of the specific benchmarks established above is unsatisfactory, the President shall include in that report a description of such revisions to the political, economic, regional, and military components of the strategy, as announced by the President on January 10, 2007. In addition, the President shall include in the report, the advisability of implementing such aspects of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, as he deems appropriate''.

(D) ``The President shall submit a second report to the Congress, not later than September 15, 2007, following the same procedures and criteria, outlined above''.
Click to expand...

http://www.rules.house.gov/110/special_rules/hr2206_senate/hr2206_amnd2_senate.pdf

There shouldn't be anything to complain about, it's just as Congress agreed to. :shrug:
 
More proof the dnc has already made up their minds:

WASHINGTON - President Bush's war strategy is failing and the top military commander in Iraq is "dead flat wrong" for warning against major changes, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said Sunday.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20676775/
Click to expand...


Tomorrow--as General David Petraeus provides his Iraq assessment to Congress--the antiwar group MoveOn.org is running a full-page advertisement in the New York Times under the headline: "General Petraeus or General Betray us? Cooking the books for the White House."
http://www.theweeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/091rhesh.asp
Click to expand...

More proof that they care about political power than the truth.
 
He's dead flat wrong? Even before the report to Congress, he's dead flat wrong. Yep, politics before national interest.
 
The Gen. has been at the Fronts.
How many of the naysayers have been there?
I venture to say 0.

I truly don't believe the Gen. is going to color the situation in a fashion
inconsistent to what HE believes.

To say Everyone with whom you disagree (naysayers in congress) are the
president's whipping boys is just wrong.
 
right. and the guy trying desperately to keep a business afloat isn't gonna paint the rosiest picture possible for the investors?

considering the amount of money we've spent there, anyone NOT asking tough questions at this point is dumb, naive, or both.
 
I said nothing of asking questions.
I'm all for that.

as far as the business analogy...
I'm giving Gen. Petraeus the "innocent until proven guilty" treatment.
I think he's earned that at least.
 
while at the same time some folks here are ready to label anyone asking questions - in congress in particular - as unamerican ultrahypercommiepussies.
 
2minkey said:
while at the same time some folks here are ready to label anyone asking questions - in congress in particular - as unamerican ultrahypercommiepussies.
Click to expand...


More like self-serving, power-hungry, shit-stirring idiots, but...depends upon the questions asked, and the context of those questions. What we have going on is a sequence of statements lamenting just about anything the administration comes up with.
 
hmmm yeah this lamenting must be learned behavior resulting form a long history of bush admin bumbling....
 
Yep, the Republicans are putting politics ahead of the truth.

About 70% of Iraqis believe security has deteriorated in the area covered by the US military "surge" of the past six months, an opinion poll suggests.
The survey by the BBC, ABC News and NHK of more than 2,000 people across Iraq also suggests that nearly 60% see attacks on US-led forces as justified.

This rises to 93% among Sunni Muslims compared to 50% for Shia.

The findings come as the top US commander in Iraq, Gen David Petraeus, prepares to address Congress.


He and US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker are due to testify about the effects of the surge and the current situation in Iraq.

The poll suggests that the overall mood in Iraq is as negative as it has been since the US-led invasion in 2003, says BBC world affairs correspondent Nick Childs.

_44107043_coalition_forces_203.gif
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6983841.stm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top