Comments on: The Iraq War is a success http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/05/01/the-iraq-war-is-a-success/ Musings on politics, history, philosophy, and life on earth. Mon, 09 Nov 2009 02:12:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: Sirocco http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/05/01/the-iraq-war-is-a-success/#comment-483 Sun, 25 Feb 2007 13:58:20 +0000 http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/05/01/the-iraq-war-is-a-success/#comment-483 Thank you Keith. Cheers, and take care! Thank you Keith. Cheers, and take care!

]]> by: Keith (grndrush at dKos) http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/05/01/the-iraq-war-is-a-success/#comment-482 Sun, 25 Feb 2007 03:50:15 +0000 http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/05/01/the-iraq-war-is-a-success/#comment-482 I missed this at dKos. Killer punch line. Glad I stumbled across it. Thanks. -cdn I missed this at dKos. Killer punch line. Glad I stumbled across it. Thanks.

-cdn

]]> by: sirocco http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/05/01/the-iraq-war-is-a-success/#comment-196 Thu, 18 May 2006 18:36:53 +0100 http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/05/01/the-iraq-war-is-a-success/#comment-196 "This is not semantics." Actually, it's exactly that, so you can have it your way. Let's stipulate that your "invading war" ended on May 1 2003 (I haven't claimed otherwise, by the way). In that case, a new war -- your "insurgency" -- broke out on May 2. And while we're at it chopping this mess into separate wars: at some point thereafter, the insurgency morphed into a civil war between Iraqi government forces, aided by the Coalition, and various militias. The US has been at the heart of all three wars, and so far, botched two of them -- in part because of decisions made during or prior to the first one, including the very choice to launch it. And in stark contrast to WWII, only a small fraction of Coalition combat deaths occured during the initial war of attrition, underlining the point that preparation for the aftermath of the invasion was inexusably bungled. I don't see how any of this helps your case. Maybe that is why you resort to rehashing disgraceful smears against a decorated combat veteran whose war record makes the phony codpiece show by a confirmed combat dodger (and probable A.W.O.L.) look positively risible; and this immediately after exhorting me to "stick to the issues"? “This is not semantics.”

Actually, it’s exactly that, so you can have it your way. Let’s stipulate that your “invading war” ended on May 1 2003 (I haven’t claimed otherwise, by the way). In that case, a new war — your “insurgency” — broke out on May 2.

And while we’re at it chopping this mess into separate wars: at some point thereafter, the insurgency morphed into a civil war between Iraqi government forces, aided by the Coalition, and various militias. The US has been at the heart of all three wars, and so far, botched two of them — in part because of decisions made during or prior to the first one, including the very choice to launch it. And in stark contrast to WWII, only a small fraction of Coalition combat deaths occured during the initial war of attrition, underlining the point that preparation for the aftermath of the invasion was inexusably bungled.

I don’t see how any of this helps your case.

Maybe that is why you resort to rehashing disgraceful smears against a decorated combat veteran whose war record makes the phony codpiece show by a confirmed combat dodger (and probable A.W.O.L.) look positively risible; and this immediately after exhorting me to “stick to the issues”?

]]> by: Mike http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/05/01/the-iraq-war-is-a-success/#comment-195 Thu, 18 May 2006 17:52:40 +0100 http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/05/01/the-iraq-war-is-a-success/#comment-195 The assertion that a war is not over because there are insurgents would place WW2 in Germany with a 1949 end. For four years without neighboring support/interference and having lost a large manpower pool over the previous decade, German insurgents fought for four years. Was not the war over in 1945? Did all those people prematurely celebrate V-E Day? Certainly you confuse the invading war and the insurgency. This is not semantics. Stick to the issues. (Not everyone can be the war hero that Kerry was, thank goodness. He should buy more Purple Hearts at the Army/Navy store and pretend he served his entire tour in Vietnam or in the Navy.) The assertion that a war is not over because there are insurgents would place WW2 in Germany with a 1949 end. For four years without neighboring support/interference and having lost a large manpower pool over the previous decade, German insurgents fought for four years. Was not the war over in 1945? Did all those people prematurely celebrate V-E Day? Certainly you confuse the invading war and the insurgency. This is not semantics. Stick to the issues. (Not everyone can be the war hero that Kerry was, thank goodness. He should buy more Purple Hearts at the Army/Navy store and pretend he served his entire tour in Vietnam or in the Navy.)

]]> by: Mike http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/05/01/the-iraq-war-is-a-success/#comment-194 Thu, 18 May 2006 17:46:01 +0100 http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/05/01/the-iraq-war-is-a-success/#comment-194 The assertion that a war is not over because there are insurgents would place WW2 in Germany with a 1949 end. For four years without neighboring support/interference and having lost a large manpower pool over the previous decade, German insurgents for four years. Was not the war over in 1945? Did all those people prematurely celebrate V-E Day? Certainly you confuse the invading war and the insurgency. The assertion that a war is not over because there are insurgents would place WW2 in Germany with a 1949 end. For four years without neighboring support/interference and having lost a large manpower pool over the previous decade, German insurgents for four years. Was not the war over in 1945? Did all those people prematurely celebrate V-E Day? Certainly you confuse the invading war and the insurgency.

]]>