Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The War as We Saw It (a pessimistic view from Iraq)
The New York Times ^ | August 19, 2007 | BUDDHIKA JAYAMAHA, et. al.

Posted on 08/19/2007 3:38:06 PM PDT by TSchmereL

The claim that we are increasingly in control of the battlefields in Iraq is an assessment arrived at through a flawed, American-centered framework . . . While we have the will and the resources to fight in this context, we are effectively hamstrung because realities on the ground require measures we will always refuse — namely, the widespread use of lethal and brutal force.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: iraq; naysayers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last
Buddhika Jayamaha is an Army specialist. Wesley D. Smith is a sergeant. Jeremy Roebuck is a sergeant. Omar Mora is a sergeant. Edward Sandmeier is a sergeant. Yance T. Gray is a staff sergeant. Jeremy A. Murphy is a staff sergeant.

They have very little, if anything, that is positive to say about the situation in Iraq.

1 posted on 08/19/2007 3:38:07 PM PDT by TSchmereL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL
it would be prudent for us to increasingly let Iraqis take center stage in all matters, to come up with a nuanced policy in which we assist them from the margins but let them resolve their differences as they see fit.

I think this is called the Rumsfeld plan.

2 posted on 08/19/2007 3:42:47 PM PDT by bkepley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL
They have very little, if anything, that is positive to say about the situation in Iraq.

That's probably why it's fit for the NYT.

3 posted on 08/19/2007 3:42:53 PM PDT by SolidWood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL
"While we have the will and the resources to fight in this context, we are effectively hamstrung because realities on the ground require measures we will always refuse — namely, the widespread use of lethal and brutal force...

The Shiite clerical establishment formed the alliance to make sure its people did not succumb to the same mistake as in 1920: rebelling against the occupying Western force (then the British) and losing what they believed was their inherent right to rule Iraq as the majority....

Political reconciliation in Iraq will occur, but not at our insistence or in ways that meet our benchmarks. It will happen on Iraqi terms when the reality on the battlefield is congruent with that in the political sphere....

In a lawless environment where men with guns rule the streets, engaging in the banalities of life has become a death-defying act. Four years into our occupation, we have failed on every promise, while we have substituted Baath Party tyranny with a tyranny of Islamist, militia and criminal violence."

4 posted on 08/19/2007 3:52:35 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL
Curious, what was the political orientation of these “Soldiers” before they went to Iraq? Who is paying the bills for them to go out and propagandize like this? Could it be they are just the latest in a long line of Democrat Party propaganda stooges?

Amazing how the same people who are so cynical about commerical marketing fall hook line and sinker for this short of political marketing

But even if they are sincere, which I doubt, they have an ego centric view based on their tiny slice of the battle field. Nothing surprising here that they happened to be in a crappy part of Iraq. However, to look out your window and claim you now understand how the whole world works is absurd and childish. Yet that is what these clowns do.

Interesting isn’t it that these clowns get coverage from the NY Times, yet these guys don’t. Curious, what was the political orientation of these “Soldiers” before they went to Iraq. Who is paying

Vets for Freedom

http://www.vetsforfreedom.org/

5 posted on 08/19/2007 3:57:04 PM PDT by MNJohnnie ("Todays (military's) task is three dimensional chess in the dark". General Rick Lynch in Baghdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL

Hmmm....why does this message seem familiar?

“I’ve seen horrors... horrors that you’ve seen. But you have no right to call me a murderer. You have a right to kill me. You have a right to do that... but you have no right to judge me. It’s impossible for words to describe what is necessary to those who do not know what horror means. Horror. Horror has a face... and you must make a friend of horror. Horror and moral terror are your friends. If they are not then they are enemies to be feared. They are truly enemies. I remember when I was with Special Forces. Seems a thousand centuries ago. We went into a camp to inoculate the children. We left the camp after we had inoculated the children for Polio, and this old man came running after us and he was crying. He couldn’t see. We went back there and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. A pile of little arms. And I remember... I... I... I cried. I wept like some grandmother. I wanted to tear my teeth out. I didn’t know what I wanted to do. And I want to remember it. I never want to forget it. I never want to forget. And then I realized... like I was shot... like I was shot with a diamond... a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought: My God... the genius of that. The genius. The will to do that. Perfect, genuine, complete, crystalline, pure. And then I realized they were stronger than we. Because they could stand that these were not monsters. These were men... trained cadres. These men who fought with their hearts, who had families, who had children, who were filled with love... but they had the strength... the strength... to do that. If I had ten divisions of those men our troubles here would be over very quickly. You have to have men who are moral... and at the same time who are able to utilize their primordial instincts to kill without feeling... without passion... without judgment... without judgment. Because it’s judgment that defeats us. “
Colonel Kurtz, Apocalypse Now


6 posted on 08/19/2007 3:58:10 PM PDT by Androcles (All your typos are belong to us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL

three words: summary court marshal.


7 posted on 08/19/2007 3:59:19 PM PDT by balch3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

“to look out your window and claim you now understand how the whole world works is absurd and childish. Yet that is what these clowns do.”

One could ask why it is childish for these soldiers to make assumptions on Iraq based upon their 15 month experience there, but you are not childish for claiming that you understand how this works, without stepping foot in Iraq at all.

Maybe these guys are part of the democrat propaganda machine. Maybe not. Maybe they have been paid, or maybe they haven’t. I don’t put much faith in the NYT op ed page. I also happen to believe that things are better in Iraq than what these soldiers have experienced. However, for you to call them clowns for not understanding how things are in Iraq, is a bit hypocritical. They are soldiers who have served our country, and at least one is seriously wounded. There are Democrat soldiers too, and they still deserve respect for their service.


8 posted on 08/19/2007 4:04:17 PM PDT by ga medic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

What’s weird about this article is that they write way beyond their little corner of the war. They write about things that they would have no first hand experience or knowledge of, even to go as far as to criticize us for refugees still living outside the country’s borders, which obviously they can’t verify.

Not to say these guys are stupid, just saying the statements and assertions made in the article are way beyond their pay grade, which makes me suspicious as who was doing the bulk of the writing.

In otherwards, were these guys used as props to give this editorial legitimacy?


9 posted on 08/19/2007 4:04:20 PM PDT by Free Vulcan (Fight the illegal Mexican colonizers & imperialist conquistadors! Long live the resistance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL

What does the UCMJ say about Soldiers publishing political views in a newspaper that has and continues to commit treason against the US and offer aid and comfort to the enemy? The fact that they published in the nyt is telling.


10 posted on 08/19/2007 4:16:09 PM PDT by Eagles6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ga medic

There are Democrat soldiers too, and they still deserve respect for their service.


Things in Iraq are probably going ‘better’ than it would seem from a reading of this article, which I thank the poster of.

Better is a funny term. There are likely millions of Iraqi’s whose lives have been improved.

The conflicts in Iraq are being confined to terrorist/insurgent/rebel/you name it holdouts.

As ‘negative’ as their comments seem, it would be unwise for any of us to ignore what they say.

Better for us, as you indicate, to listen, combine, verify, evaluate, then act. Much like our military intelligence does.

The ‘truth’ is probably somewhere between negative of the posted article, and the positive of the upcoming testament of General Petraeus.

It all depends on which end of the horse you are looking at.


11 posted on 08/19/2007 4:34:46 PM PDT by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

I agree 100%. My problem with the comments is the disrespect of the soldiers because their opinion is not in line with the poster’s. They may be paid writers of propaganda, but it is possible that they are actual soldiers. There are soldiers of all political views, and soldiers with many opinions. They have earned the right to their opinions through their service to our country. They shouldn’t be called clowns or worse, just because they say something we don’t want to hear. I disagree with their completely negative assessment, but I don’t disagree with their right to say it.


12 posted on 08/19/2007 4:51:54 PM PDT by ga medic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL

bump


13 posted on 08/19/2007 4:59:30 PM PDT by God luvs America (When the silent majority speaks the earth trembles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL; All
BlackFive discussed this piece today. Here's a taste:

I wish to begin by conveying our respectful appreciation of their service, and our hopes that their Staff Sergeant Murphy will recover quickly and fully from his injury. It will surprise no one that I am going to argue against some of the conclusions they offer, but I do not wish disagreement to be read as disrespect. Their service honors our nation, as does the fact that they feel they can provide a frank assessment of their observations to the public.

The piece they have published offers a despairing look at the situation in Baghdad, where elements of the 82nd have been operating for fifteen months. I do not intend to challenge their understanding of the facts on the ground, as they are based on direct observation. I assume the truth of every fact they report. What I wish to challenge is their conclusions about how events will, they seem to say "must," develop.

The whole piece is difficult to excerpt and not lose the flow of the analysis. I recommend reading the whole thing.

14 posted on 08/19/2007 5:27:35 PM PDT by kristinn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL

Can the delicate sensibilities on FR absorb anything critical about Iraq? Or will these guys just be dismissed as liberals?


15 posted on 08/19/2007 5:43:41 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Have you been there? From what I hear from those whose boots are on the ground in Iraq......this post rings true.


16 posted on 08/19/2007 5:53:16 PM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline

Maybe, but to write in this manner, and in this number, would have required assemblage/coaching elsewhere.

Iraq is not the quiet confines of campusville.


17 posted on 08/19/2007 6:30:10 PM PDT by petertare (--)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL

A new entry to Skippy’s List:

Skippy is not allowed to write op-eds for the New York Times.


18 posted on 08/19/2007 6:34:16 PM PDT by RichInOC (Rich's Undeniable Truths of the Day: 1. Skippy lives! 2. You don't have to be a Spec 4 to be Skippy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RichInOC

It seems strange for people here to be critical of anecdotal stories, and the policy implications of those stories, from the troops on the ground. I recall recent posts about an Iraqi child being rescued from a well by U.S. troops and many posts about individual acts of courage and generosity by those same troops. Buy the premise, buy the joke as CAG officers used to tell young pilots about believing false visual cues during carrier landings — but it seems to me the principle is the same no matter which way it cuts.


19 posted on 08/19/2007 8:25:25 PM PDT by newroark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL
They have very little, if anything, that is positive to say about the situation in Iraq.

1. That's why the NYT is promoting them. They could be the only 7 people outside Manhattan who thought the war was going badly and the Times would be promoting them.

2. Their assessment differs from that of most soldiers and other people who've taken a good close look at things on the ground, such as Michael Yon.

3. The tactics they back are the ones Rumsfeld used, which led to us getting our butt kicked for three years. In other words, their grasp of tactics and strategy is so poor they can't recognize a bad move even when it's already resulted in failure.

As usual, I'm not impressed with the latest effort by a Freeper to undermine the war effort.

20 posted on 08/19/2007 8:46:34 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Backing Tribe al-Ameriki even if the Congress won't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ga medic
Maybe these guys are part of the democrat propaganda machine.

Maybe they're just clueless. I mean, they're basically saying "To much American buitt-kicking, let's go back to the Rumsfeld plan." Not smart.

21 posted on 08/19/2007 8:48:39 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Backing Tribe al-Ameriki even if the Congress won't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV
Can the delicate sensibilities on FR absorb anything critical about Iraq? Or will these guys just be dismissed as liberals?

Can critics of the war ever compare bad reports from Iraq with good reports from Iraq and get the full picture, or are y'all too busy whining that FR is too "delicate" to swallow every bit of defeatist propaganda?

I'm not saying anything about their politics, but after the Beauchamp case, nobody should be assuming that every soldier is truthful about Iraq. About 99.999% of them are (and probably these guys are) but there are some liars and political activists in their ranks and we know that for certain now.

22 posted on 08/19/2007 8:53:27 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Backing Tribe al-Ameriki even if the Congress won't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: newroark
It seems strange for people here to be critical of anecdotal stories, and the policy implications of those stories, from the troops on the ground.

I'm not critical of those things and doubt many Freepers are. The point is that this ran in the NYT. anything running in the NYT should be taken with a grain of salt no matter who wrote it.

23 posted on 08/19/2007 8:55:37 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Backing Tribe al-Ameriki even if the Congress won't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Silverback

I seem to remember a muslim solder fragging his fellow soldiers...

This comes as no surprise....they need a sargents report to pre-empt the generals report...

You watch...senators will have this crumpled article in their hands demanding to know why petreas is lying...

Hell...they pushed an article the other day that said “betreas” in the frickin headline...

The left only loves soldiers who denounce war...


24 posted on 08/19/2007 9:59:08 PM PDT by Crim (Dont frak with the Zeitgeist....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: balch3
three words: summary court marshal.

Don't be ridiculous.

While I'm very reluctant to side with the 82d ABN on ANYTHING in Baghdad (I worked hand-in-hand with them around Sadr City for 3 months), these guys are pretty much dead on.

Acknowledging reality is not the same as treason, no matter how badly so many on this board wish it to be otherwise.

25 posted on 08/19/2007 10:41:48 PM PDT by Future Snake Eater (Mosul, Baghdad, Karbala, Najaf, Sadr City...'round and 'round we go...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ga medic
Describe for me the political, crime and economic details of every city in the 4 states around you.

You cannot do it, yet because you people spent time in Iraq, you think you are “experts”. You are no more “experts” about Iraq then you are of the local conditions around your home.

Notice also the key thing here. WERE in Iraq, not ARE in Iraq.

So why should I listen to the crybabies and not these guys?
By your standard they are “experts” too.

http://www.vetsforfreedom.org/

What the people are doing is acting as unpaid, unwitting propagandists for Al Qeda. All they are doing with this perpetual whining is help undermined this country’s morale in a fight it has got to win. They are giving propaganda aid to the people in the Democrat Party doing everything they can to lose. They are NOT helping the mission with this sort of drivel. They also demonstrate a pretty complete ignorance of how the surge is working.

War sucks. That not news. Crying about how bad it suck while you were there does NOT help “fix” the matter. They should simply quit whining and deal with it.

To say “Well I was in Iraq and it sucked so everything in Iraq sucks” is childish and ignorant.

Sorry having to fight terrorists doesn’t fit in with the pathetic Neo Isolationist Cold War era “Realists” dogmas.
Time to grow up and realize that the comfortable assumptions and pat dogmas of the 09-10-01 world are dead. Quit clinging to their corpse.

26 posted on 08/20/2007 3:06:17 AM PDT by MNJohnnie ("Todays (military's) task is three dimensional chess in the dark". General Rick Lynch in Baghdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL; RightOnline
namely, the widespread use of lethal and brutal force.

Napoleon in Spain, the Nazis in Eastern Europe and the Russians in Afghanistan tried these "brutal" tactic. How did it work out for them? That right, they all lost, badly. Way past time the Dinocons learn Counter Insurgency is not Total War.

27 posted on 08/20/2007 3:08:21 AM PDT by MNJohnnie ("Todays (military's) task is three dimensional chess in the dark". General Rick Lynch in Baghdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Silverback

“not impressed with the latest effort by a Freeper to undermine the war effort?”

Are you saying that I posted this column to “undermine the war effort?”

I have nothing to say negative about our war effort. You can check my history of comments here on FR. I do not post comments or threads that “undermine the war effort.”

I think we should be able to discuss dissenting opinions about the war in Iraq without accusing each other of “undermining the war effort.”

I think these soldiers’ view is overly pessimistic. However, some of their observations deserve to be analyzed. I do appreciate your contribution towards that effort.


28 posted on 08/20/2007 5:10:00 AM PDT by TSchmereL ("Rust but terrify.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: petertare

Interesting take. So, you don’t feel that the ‘average GI’ would have the brain pan sufficient to craft such observations without “outside coaching”?


29 posted on 08/20/2007 5:27:18 AM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL

Apologies for the friendly fire. Mistook you for one of the surrender monkeys I had a tussle with last year.


30 posted on 08/20/2007 6:48:02 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Backing Tribe al-Ameriki even if the Congress won't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
Way past time the Dinocons learn Counter Insurgency is not Total War.

I like to say that they all own copies of "Zapp Brannigan's Big Book of War."

31 posted on 08/20/2007 7:04:33 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Backing Tribe al-Ameriki even if the Congress won't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL
You may not want to undermine the war but these donk grunts sure the hell do. Their “observations’ seem to be nothing more the democrat talking points.

I find it hilarious that they call the former regime a ‘Baathist Tyranny’ then go on to complain about disbanding Saddam’s terror army and not forgiving Baathists fast enough.

32 posted on 08/20/2007 3:28:16 PM PDT by Blue State Insurgent (FRee your mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline

They sold out. You may think that’s smart but I don’t.


33 posted on 08/20/2007 3:33:22 PM PDT by Blue State Insurgent (FRee your mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL
These soldiers speak of “2 million Iraqis in refugee camps in bordering countries and two million more that have been internally displaced and now fill many urban slums”. My question is where did they get their information from and when did they have the time to do their research being they are from the 82nd Airborne division.
34 posted on 08/20/2007 5:46:16 PM PDT by valoreo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I thought this might interest you.

No doubt it is anecdotal. But the details of how the Iraqi Army generals are commanding a polyglot of militias loyal to their own agenda is probably true. The citizenry, helpless and terrified, would like us to stay and protect them.

You can see why our soldiers want to help these folks. But like so many Islamic hellholes, it is the military and religious elements that will conspire to destroy any freedom and establish another dictatorship, the choice being an Arab dictator who is an Arab nationalist or one who is a theocrat.

I do feel sorry for ordinary Iraqis. But they don't have the courage to stand up to these people. We may get the police under controls but the private militias inside the Army will be a constant danger to us, the Iraqi people and the new government.
35 posted on 08/20/2007 7:28:08 PM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: valoreo

Maybe they get their information from the same place that you do. They do have television and news there.


36 posted on 08/20/2007 7:52:32 PM PDT by ga medic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
While I'm very reluctant to side with the 82d ABN on ANYTHING in Baghdad (I worked hand-in-hand with them around Sadr City for 3 months), these guys are pretty much dead on. Acknowledging reality is not the same as treason, no matter how badly so many on this board wish it to be otherwise.

But we just love "the troops". At least until they say something we don't like.

A couple of posters on this thread are embarrassing. I know they never served and they're trashing these guys. I thought it was a good account of what one group saw. I think we have other instances where soldiers have written of some ordinary Iraqis who have been just great and they thought that in their area, things were going well.

I think it's fine to have such editorials as long as we have a good balance from different areas. There are some positive stories too and those should be published prominently the same way this one was.

I saw an interesting bit on Tucker Carlson today where he was interviewing a retired colonel on this editorial. The colonel said that while officers can face very serious discipline for such public writings, that enlisted men can and do write almost anything they want to, including about their own commanders. Nothing in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (article 88) forbids their writing such opinions. Officers and even retired officers can be tried for such writing but not enlisted men, meaning that many of these retired generals and admirals are getting away with speech that is not legal when they criticize the president and his war strategy. Anyway, with pervasive email access throughout Iraq, we are hearing from the soldiers and support troops in a way and far more directly than in Vietnam or in other wars. Tucker, to his credit, was criticizing some of their editorializing when they wrote about "the vast majority of Iraqis feel..." and pointed out that these soldiers were editorializing about a general opinion within Iraq that they couldn't speak to and had no way to measure. Tucker wasn't rejecting their right to opine but thought part of it was painting with far too broad brush for anyone to use, either pro-war or anti-war.

As I look through the thread, I notice many comments from those who think that our enlisted have no freedom of speech and shouldn't have such freedom. I saw relatively few signs that very many on the thread actually went and read the article. The problems in command for the Iraqi generals, the very real sympathy for the plight of ordinary Iraqis, there was nothing subversive or un-American in the op-ed.
37 posted on 08/20/2007 7:54:29 PM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL

This just in!:

Seven Democrats found in U.S. military.


38 posted on 08/20/2007 7:56:23 PM PDT by unspun (We are still in the end times.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: petertare; RightOnline
Janus-faced role of the Iraqi police and Iraqi Army

Ummm....haven't finished reading this yet....but...references to "Janus?"

Is it possible that this rings a little "coached" to me? Any reason they wouldn't have used, say, "two-faced?"

39 posted on 08/20/2007 8:05:44 PM PDT by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL
Reading this, and not one of them was shot at. Pussies.

5.56mm

40 posted on 08/20/2007 8:07:39 PM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: petertare; RightOnline; TSchmereL
Trying to please every party in the conflict — as we do now — will only ensure we are hated by all in the long run.
...we have failed on every promise...
...it would be prudent for us to increasingly let Iraqis take center stage in all matters, to come up with a nuanced policy in which we assist them from the margins but let them resolve their differences as they see fit

I think I've fairly summarized the internally-inconsistent complaint, here.

America is bad because we have tried to please every party....we should instead be more nuanced.

If I Google just the terms "Janus-Faced" and "nuanced" from this article, I get a helluva a lotta John F. Kerry hits.

41 posted on 08/20/2007 8:28:26 PM PDT by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: petertare; RightOnline; TSchmereL
Oh....and "we have failed on every promise."

Not every one.

"Saddam was hanged at dawn on Saturday for crimes against humanity after Iraq's prime minister rushed through an execution few believed would help stem the sectarian violence tearing the country apart."

42 posted on 08/20/2007 8:32:11 PM PDT by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
You guys might enjoy this milblog from an 82nd Airborne team leader. It might be worth watching when he reacts to the NYT op-ed and gives his opinion on it. He seems pretty gungho, not sure how long he's been there though. It's made the top 100 in Army milblogs already. Good writing, some pix too, interesting sketch of his day-to-day in Iraq.

Eighty Deuce On The Loose In Iraq
43 posted on 08/20/2007 9:24:19 PM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Forgot to ping you to my link above. It’s a very interesting blog.


44 posted on 08/20/2007 9:25:12 PM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL

ping for later


45 posted on 08/20/2007 10:19:39 PM PDT by ER Doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

My computer is having difficulty getting to the NYT website. I’ll try again in a couple of hours.


46 posted on 08/21/2007 5:24:22 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan
"...assertions made in the article are way beyond their pay grade..."

Be careful:

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq."

47 posted on 08/22/2007 12:27:19 AM PDT by amchugh (large and largely disgruntled)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ga medic

Is there assessment completely negative? That’s not how I read the article. What they seem to be saying (to paraphrase badly) is that if we abandon the idea of having an Iraq which squares up precisely with American goals we are more likely to succeed sooner. If we hold out for unrealistic goals, we won’t even be able to achieve compromise objectives.


48 posted on 08/22/2007 12:30:07 AM PDT by amchugh (large and largely disgruntled)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: amchugh; ga medic

oops, *their assessment*


49 posted on 08/22/2007 12:37:35 AM PDT by amchugh (large and largely disgruntled)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: amchugh

I’m not talking about intelligence, I’m talking about experience. This is a pretty broad sweeping article about the situation in Iraq. They likely wouldn’t have access to the intelligence to back up the assertions made in it. I think these sargeants have the character not to speculate about things they don’t know about, for example refugee camps outside the borders. I think someone else other than them did the bulk of the writing.


50 posted on 08/22/2007 5:49:49 AM PDT by Free Vulcan (Fight the illegal Mexican colonizers & imperialist conquistadors! Long live the resistance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson