Murtha: 'Surge Is Working'

B

Bruxley

New member
The leading opponent to the Iraq War has acknowledged what has been irrefutable for some time now, we are succeeding in Iraq. Time for Reid and Pelosi to end their obstructionism and unite to get this thing done.
CBS News

Will the rest of the Democrat leadership concede that they were wrong. Rather, WHEN will the rest of the Democrat leadership embrace the success General Petraeus has generated and stop trying to hobble him.

EVERY Democrat Presidential candidate declared at the last debate that the surge was NOT working. If they believe this they have no grasp of the facts and are not qualified for the job they want. If they know better but find their own political ambitions have a higher priority then the success of the United States then they are even LESS qualified for the job.

I said months ago that the Dems had cast their political lot on failure in Iraq. That pot has been raked. Equity and credibility lost. The Blue Dogs have now shown themselves to be the actual leaders in their party. Any of them running for President?
 
The pro-war crowd only took one part of his statement, while ignoring what he said about the political reconciliation. So Murtha released this statement as a clarification:

“The military surge has created a window of opportunity for the Iraqi government. Unfortunately, the sacrifice of our troops has not been met by the Iraqi government and they have failed to capitalize on the political and diplomatic steps that the surge was designed to provide.

“The fact remains that the war in Iraq cannot be won militarily, and that we must begin an orderly redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq as soon as practicable.

“The House of Representatives has passed a $50 billion funding bill that provides the president, our troops and our nation with a responsible plan for bringing our troops home. The president should heed the advice of the American people and allow this funding bill to become law.”

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/murtha-clarifies-remarks-on-iraq-surge-2007-11-30.html

I wonder how long the pro-war Republicans would suggest our military play policemen in Iraq, while the Iraqi government does nothing but sit back and let Americans die? $10 Billion a month gets dumped into the Iraq mess while the Iraqi government simply refuses to take responsibility for their country.
 
AHHH yes the political reconciliation spin. Tired but still tossed out.

Would you suggest that good government is one in which the central (Federal) government was the director of provinces (States) and of villages (cities) or would say that a good government was one formed by the consensus of the will of the provinces (States) which are formed by the consensus of the villages (cities)?

Local to central is the plan in place that is working and is in fact the key to that success. Local people having the liberty to live how they choose as long as they allow their neighbor to do the same. Liberty on their own terms.

Is liberty not the human desire? Would the Democrats now claim the 'Central Government rule is paramount'. Granted that does seem to be with their philosophy but it cannot work. When people self determine their own lives they have a vested interest in peace and an expectation of justice manifests. When people are dictated to by a central government eliminating their self determination the interest becomes gaining liberty and an expectation of injustice manifests which provokes people to violence.

The mantra of 'yeah but the central govermnent.....' is hollow. The people of Iraq are on that not the General. His is to give the space for it, not to manifest it.

Perhaps the most pressing is the provincial powers law, which is necessary before provincial elections can be held. A U.S. Embassy official said there had been no movement on it since July and that different factions were deadlocked over such things as whether the prime minister should have the power to sack governors. This has stalled the scheduling of provincial elections, since no party wants to hold them until they know the provinces' ultimate powers, said the official, who asked to remain anonymous.

Odierno said provincial elections were a key confidence-building measure. "I'm hoping it happens next year. I think it's essential," he said.
Click to expand...

Local to central or deadlock. Making it mandatory for it to go central to local is to endorse a fundamentally flawed sense of how liberty effects peace within a nation.
 
Why does it matter if the Surge worked?

The Iraqis are no closer to political unity now than they have been, and a temporary improvement in secular violence at the expense of US soldiers (and taxpayers) brings us no closer to an end.
 
Why it's critical has been discussed AT LENGTH in multiple threads and a rehash would only result in thread veer.

The topic is that it is now accepted that the surge is working. The goal is to discuss why. The OP also suggests the impact on Democrats.

Veering is a common tact for those that wish to not have the topic discussed or that have no facts to offer in rebuttal.
 
"Local to Central" might work if you have civilized states, but not if you have sects that would like to see each other dead. There has to be a political reconciliation agreement at the central level that provides stability and power sharing and oil revenue sharing and whatever else the sects need to keep from slaughtering each other.

The Shiites, who have been consolidating power under our occupation, are not at all motivated to work out an agreement that empowers the Sunnis. I believe the Re-Baathification legislation recently failed (or is that called the De-De-Baathification legislation?)

Until we force the Iraqi government to take responsibility for their country - the whole country - it will continue to be a on-going futile waste of lives and money.

So the surge may be working in the sense of providing increased security in Bagdad for Iraqi government to do it's job, but if they refuse to do their job than the surge effort as a whole is a failure.
 
So the surge may be working in the sense of providing increased security in Bagdad for Iraqi government to do it's job, but if they refuse to do their job than the surge effort as a whole is a failure.
Click to expand...
Looking at the crime and violence in our own cities (New Orleans, Detroit, and DC come to mind), our own government is actually less effective at providing increased security than the Iraqi government's. :barf:

So let's not throw stones. Let's root for our troops to succeed, and then let's get the hell outta there.
 
I agree the surge is working. For how long I don't know. I don't think it is thread veer to suggest that it doesn't really matter if the surge worked or not, unless the Iraqis will step up to the plate and become the masters of their own destiny.
 
Why does it matter if the Surge worked?

The Iraqis are no closer to political unity now than they have been, and a temporary improvement in secular violence at the expense of US soldiers (and taxpayers) brings us no closer to an end.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
I'm glad that we are finally past the denial of the facts pertaining to our success in Iraq. And I agree that until Iraq reaches a national consensus on how their country is to be governed the job isn't done.

My point in the above post was that IRAQIS, not General Petraeus, have to do that work. And that the process is underway. It is a local to central progress versus the much insisted upon central to local. The provincial elections have to happen. The central government being shaped by provincial elections is how the central government becomes a national reflection not vise versa. The desire of the central government to have the ability to fire provincial leaders isn't going to be acceptable. And frankly SHOULDN'T be acceptable.

The nature of all governments to gain and accumulate power is inherent. The counter is for that government to be composed of more and more local elements. The provincial elections put people in positions to shape the central government into a reflection of the common nation.

As the political progress continues local to central, the reconciliation will be ironed out.

Remember, we didn't get it done for some time. And we still battle every election to maintain local to central control. From Articles of Confederacy to the US Constitution was a local to central reconciliation. When it comes to liberty there can be no other way. And I hope we can all agree that liberty is good for all people, not just Americans.
 
I still don't understand what military victory we supposed to be looking towards, I sure as hell don't know what some people are talking about :confused: and I was there for 14 months.

Last I knew all we had to do was train enough Iraqis, up to our standards, to take over for us while the government gets their sh!t in gear.
 
So mind-bogglingly sad. Our soldiers are coming home missing limbs and you folks are still playing politics.
Click to expand...

Exactly, Please, anyone tell me how "the surge" has improved or protected
America.
 
Exactly, Please, anyone tell me how "the surge" has improved or protected America.
Click to expand...

I can't think of a single way, and I have been voting Republican for years.....lots of years. When Bush proposed going into Iraq, I thought surely he is not that dumb. Never underestimate dumbness. To this day I am still trying to figure out the mid-stream change from the 9/11 Saudi connected terrorist to Saddam Hussein. We should have gone after that SOB Bin Laden and shoved an F16 up his rear end. Instead we cozy up to Saudi Arabia and go to war with Iraq.

This does not mean I will vote for Hillary, it just means I am highly disappointed with George Bush. Outraged is a better word.
 
To this day I am still trying to figure out the mid-stream change from the 9/11 Saudi connected terrorist to Saddam Hussein.
Click to expand...

Israel wanted to be rid of Saddam, and we obliged them. The US already had good access to Saudi oil, and wanted Iraq's, on our terms. Plus, look at all the money being made by US corporations in Iraq. Now it comes out that we are planning to stay permanently--no surprise, of course.

I'm just hoping Bush doesn't decide to go after Iran before leaving office, but I'm afraid that could well be next on the agenda. After all, why not? It's not like anyone can stop him.
 
The "why continue the war" in Iraq has been covered in plenty of other threads, by myself and others, and I'm not going to rehash it here. History and God will ultimately judge Bush and his administration, and any opinions of how it will be viewed are moot for about 20 years or so.

But in terms of the political solution ...

Here we are, on a pro-gun bulletin board that believes the ultimate power (i.e. the ability to overthrow a government/have the weapons to do so) lies with the people, and we're crying for a "top down" solution in Iraq.

The fact of the matter is ... if a political solution comes, it is much more likely to come from the bottom up (the people) then the top down (government mandated). And that's how it should happen. The government can't force millions of people to start getting along, the people have to choose to do so.

For the last 5 years Iraqi's have been watching their relatively modern cities turned into wastelands of blood and carnage. I think it's pretty clear they've had enough, and they want to once again be able to shop openly and spend a pleasant afternoon at a sidewalk cafe. Maybe get a job, educate their kids, etc.

It is this will of the people that will bring about the reconciliation, if it is ever to happen (and I realize there are political and religious issues that may still derail all of this).

When the Iraqi people demand reconciliation, the government will find a way to provide it. And it appears the Iraqi people are, for the moment, supporting the cessation in violence.

Don't be surprised if your grandchildren are reading books talking about how the "prophetic" George Bush is widely viewed as the most intellectual and far sighed president in American history. And how his war, unpopular with the short sighted early 21st century "move-on.org" Americans (sent to internment camps in 2020) , actually did bring about a new era of peace and prosperity for the whole world (I just put in this last part to really tee off the GW Bush haters) :D :D :D
 
It doesn't matter if the surge is working or not.

If your teacher tells you to write a paper on Shakespeare and you write it on Chekhov instead, you're still going to get an F even if it's a great paper, because you didn't follow the assignment.
 
Here we are, on a pro-gun bulletin board that believes the ultimate power (i.e. the ability to overthrow a government/have the weapons to do so) lies with the people, and we're crying for a "top down" solution in Iraq.
Click to expand...
The “top down” political reconciliation agreement shouldn’t take any power from the people. It should be a framework for the sects that want to kill each other to instead co-exist peacefully.

The only obligation for us to be in Iraq at this point is to fix what we broke. It is common knowledge now that starting the Iraq war was a mistake, and that the occupation was mishandled. But if the Iraqis don’t step up to the plate and take responsibility for their country, our obligation is over and we should leave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top