Baghdad (CNN) -- A bomb exploded on Thursday night in a popular coffee shop in western Baghdad, killing at least 27 people and wounding 51 others, city police officials said.
Let Freedom Reign!
Showing posts with label Iraq. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iraq. Show all posts
Democracy Is Messy!
Election-eve in Iraq:
Baghdad (CNN) -- A bomb exploded on Thursday night in a popular coffee shop in western Baghdad, killing at least 27 people and wounding 51 others, city police officials said.
Let Freedom Reign!
Baghdad (CNN) -- A bomb exploded on Thursday night in a popular coffee shop in western Baghdad, killing at least 27 people and wounding 51 others, city police officials said.
Let Freedom Reign!
North Korea would be over in a matter of weeks not months
The man who told us Iraq would only last a matter of weeks, that it had something to do with 9/11 and the invasion was "sound policy", attended one of his infamous GOP leadership meetings where he told his fellow Bushies that we are in deep doo-doo in regards to North Korea.
Why this guy is allowed to speak about American foreign policy ever again is a travesty for human life.
Hey, remember that time we went to war with the army we had---not the army we might want or wish to have at a later time
Kennedy School of Government at Harvard places the all-in costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the $4 trillion to $6 trillion range when all is said and done with "the largest portion of that bill is yet to be paid." Yep, the smartest thing George Bush ever did was invade Iraq.
So how does a very fiscally responsible, very conservative administration embark on such policy? Easy answer. They told the public that the war would cost $50 billion and "go relatively quickly. Weeks rather than months."-- Dick Cheney, March 16, 2003.
That it would largely pay for itself "from oil revenues, recovered assets, international trade, direct foreign investment…” -- Donald Rumsfeld, March 27, 2003.
That Iraq was a country that could "really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon."-- Paul Wolfowitz, March 27, 2003.
It would be a "cakewalk." That's what we were told. That's what we were led to believe. Nothing they told us turned out to be true. Every bit of it was a lie told by madmen with a psychopathic hunger for war. Yet the one thing we can never ever do in America is call the people who instituted this policy fiscally irresponsible and big government spenders. Oh no, that label is solely reserved for Democrats or people who oppose the Very Serious, Very Fiscally Prudent, Very Conservative GOP. That's just how it is.
So how does a very fiscally responsible, very conservative administration embark on such policy? Easy answer. They told the public that the war would cost $50 billion and "go relatively quickly. Weeks rather than months."-- Dick Cheney, March 16, 2003.
That it would largely pay for itself "from oil revenues, recovered assets, international trade, direct foreign investment…” -- Donald Rumsfeld, March 27, 2003.
That Iraq was a country that could "really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon."-- Paul Wolfowitz, March 27, 2003.
It would be a "cakewalk." That's what we were told. That's what we were led to believe. Nothing they told us turned out to be true. Every bit of it was a lie told by madmen with a psychopathic hunger for war. Yet the one thing we can never ever do in America is call the people who instituted this policy fiscally irresponsible and big government spenders. Oh no, that label is solely reserved for Democrats or people who oppose the Very Serious, Very Fiscally Prudent, Very Conservative GOP. That's just how it is.
Freedom Bombs and Golden Parachutes
But just think about it for a second. If the bloodbath that was the war in Iraq was the smartest thing you ever did, what does that really say about your intelligence? Can you really take that as a compliment?
War is Good
Everything Iraq
In order to give proper credit to an invasion that has cost this country no less than thousands of lives and over $2.2 trillion, The Fold is set to do an expose on all its Iraq writings from the last 4 years.
Here is the list of everything ever written about that time we went to war with the army we had and not the army we might want or wish to have at a later time. ~ Donald Rumsfeld said that not me.
In order to give proper credit to an invasion that has cost this country no less than thousands of lives and over $2.2 trillion, The Fold is set to do an expose on all its Iraq writings from the last 4 years.
Here is the list of everything ever written about that time we went to war with the army we had and not the army we might want or wish to have at a later time. ~ Donald Rumsfeld said that not me.
As Close As We'll Get to a True Admission on Iraq
Notice in the is report that House Republican Mike Rogers (R-MI) uses 2009 as a start date in Afghanistan not to complain about the war's length, but instead to use the 3-year time period as an argument that we haven't waged Glorious War quite long enough.
That we really didn't start doing anything in Afghanistan until 2009 is ironic in many ways. Prior to President Obama's refocused efforts onto the people responsible for 9/11, over 900 military personnel were killed fighting there. That's quite a statement in the overall story of just how irresponsible the Bush administration was at waging the war on terror, and just how greatly Obama's change in that war has led to many successes such as killing bin Laden. Rogers' statement, though, is about as close as we'll get to Republicans admitting Bush royally screwed us with Iraq.
That we really didn't start doing anything in Afghanistan until 2009 is ironic in many ways. Prior to President Obama's refocused efforts onto the people responsible for 9/11, over 900 military personnel were killed fighting there. That's quite a statement in the overall story of just how irresponsible the Bush administration was at waging the war on terror, and just how greatly Obama's change in that war has led to many successes such as killing bin Laden. Rogers' statement, though, is about as close as we'll get to Republicans admitting Bush royally screwed us with Iraq.
Republicans Are Still Disillusioned About the Iraq War as Ever
I realize there is no chance Rick Perry is going to be the GOP nominee. He's a miserable person and a pitiful excuse for modern elected officials. But that doesn't keep him from repeating the same sorry lies his party routinely spouts about the war in Iraq.
A person would have to be living on a completely different planet to not realize Bush's war in Iraq wasn't just unpopular "with the Democrats." No war has ever been as unpopular as Bush's blunder that gave us almost 9 years of death and destruction in Iraq. Every poll in the world clearly shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans hate the war and do not support it. A staggering 3/4 of Americans support President Obama's decision to end the war and bring our troops home by the end of the year. He has kept that promise.
The best thing a person could do who claims to support the troops would be to get them out of a war we never should have been in in the first place. Throwing a parade is childish. Rick Perry and his Republicans still can't stomach the fact their legacy is the failure of Iraq and trillion dollars deficits. It's taken a Democratic president to get our troops out of Iraq, bring the budget deficit back under $1 trillion and kill the person responsible for 9/11.
Maybe it’s because this war isn’t popular with the Democrats, I don’t know... But Mr. President, our soldiers come first. It comes before party politics. We need to welcome our soldiers home. Give them that parade. Give them that pat on the back.
A person would have to be living on a completely different planet to not realize Bush's war in Iraq wasn't just unpopular "with the Democrats." No war has ever been as unpopular as Bush's blunder that gave us almost 9 years of death and destruction in Iraq. Every poll in the world clearly shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans hate the war and do not support it. A staggering 3/4 of Americans support President Obama's decision to end the war and bring our troops home by the end of the year. He has kept that promise.
The best thing a person could do who claims to support the troops would be to get them out of a war we never should have been in in the first place. Throwing a parade is childish. Rick Perry and his Republicans still can't stomach the fact their legacy is the failure of Iraq and trillion dollars deficits. It's taken a Democratic president to get our troops out of Iraq, bring the budget deficit back under $1 trillion and kill the person responsible for 9/11.
One Step Closer to Ending Bush's Endless War Program
I've been critical of President Obama's foreign policy almost from the get-go. I wanted him to end the war in Iraq the day after his inauguration. The war is a disastrous foreign policy blunder left over from the previous administration and it needed to end as soon as possible. I also wanted him to end the war in Afghanistan. It too was a disaster foreign policy blunder left over from the previous administration. I saw no reason to continue our hapless efforts. The president instead escalated the war in Afghanistan, killed bin Laden and has had huge success at tracking down and defeating al Qaeda. He brought the fight to those responsible for 9/11 and he has succeeded.
This doesn't mean my criticism has been misplaced. I still think the best thing would have been to end both wars two years ago, bring our troops home, save hundreds of billions and start focusing on restoring America. I don't regret my stance at all.
Today, though, it appears that finally President Obama is bringing an end to Bush's Endless War program. By the end of the month there will be just a few hundred troops left in that country. We'll still be spending lots of money in foreign aid, but not near as much as we are right now nor did when we were merely managing chaos in that country. So despite my two yeas of critical attitudes toward Obama's foreign policy, I am glad to see that finally Iraq will be over. The war in Afghanistan is in much better shape than when Obama took over in January of 2009. The president deserves credit for ending Iraq, refocusing our efforts on bin Laden, killing bin Laden, and making Afghanistan front and center on the war for those responsible for 9/11.
Iraq Over So Soon? What Republicans Told Us Then Versus What They Are Saying Now
Since 2001, Congress has allocated $1.3 trillion to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Well over half of that, more than $806 billion, has been directly allocated for the nearly 9-year war in Iraq. Those figures don't even begin to scratch the surface of how much Bush's Endless War Program has cost this great country, however.
By far, the steepest price this country has paid for the wars is the more than 5,000 dead and the more than 35,000 wounded.
Aside from the thousands dead and $1.3 trillion allocated, there are other costs that go unnoticed but are still very much incurred. There is the cost of caring for veterans once they return. The cost of rebuilding a diminished and tired military. The cost of borrowing billions to finance the war. And the cost on the home front of rising prices due to the instability of an endless war program. Considering all that, the costs quickly surpass the $3 trillion mark.
That's a dang ton of money. But it's not enough say Republicans. They want more war, a longer occupation and a larger debt financed for no other reason than the thrill of seeing war on teevee.
Let's consider this, though. Republicans told us the war in Iraq would be over in a matter of weeks. Republicans told us it would be a cakewalk. They told us it would cost at most $50-$60 billion. Nothing they told us turned out to be true. Nearly a decade later, easily over $1 trillion already spent and they are scoffing at ending the war. Consider all that, and then also consider they are saying ending the war by year's end constitutes a "failure." There can't be anything more deranged than that.
Anti-American Vile
Today President Obama announced nearly all American troops in Iraq will be home by year's end. The Pentagon is saying about 150 troops will remain in Iraq to overlook policy arrangements.
This is a huge announcement. Finally, after almost a decade of war with Iraq, America will be ending its occupation of that country. This should be great news for all Americans. Bush's policy of War Without End was never sustainable and helped facilitate the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. A trillion dollars and thousands of American lives have been spent fighting a war of choice waged by psychopathic madmen. Finally, shortly after Christmas 2011, it will be over.
But this isn't great news for all Americans. Pathetic Republicans are furious that their war will come to an end. They are so furious they are calling the war's finale a "failure" and proof that American foreign policy under the current administration "has fallen." This is a disgrace to America and to those who have served our country so valiantly.
Treason is really all that can be said to describe these reactions:
Mitt Romney: “President Obama’s astonishing failure to secure an orderly transition in Iraq has unnecessarily put at risk the victories that were won through the blood and sacrifice of thousands of American men and women,“ Romney said in a statement.
Michelle Bachmann: "Today's announcement that we will remove all of our forces from Iraq is a political decision and not a military one; it represents the complete failure of President Obama to secure an agreement with Iraq for our troops to remain there to preserve the peace and demonstrates how far our foreign policy leadership has fallen."
I'm sure as the day goes on there will be more comments from GOP members that are similar and equally disgusting. Iraq was a war that never should have happened. We have no business staying in that country one more day. The thought that it will soon be over and we will be able to focus more of our resources on our own people is a great thing for this country. Suggesting that we should continue waging war in Iraq is the only defense mechanism the GOP has for failing to come to terms with their legacy of complete and total incompetence.
Anyone that dared call Bush policies a failure, especially his war policies, was immediately labeled anti-American and siding with the enemy by the very people speaking today. After today's comments listed above there's no reason to sugar coat anything anymore. The Republican Party has without a doubt climbed into a pit of some of the most despicable anti-American vile ever spoken. Shame can't even describe what you bring to this country.
U.S. Concludes Iraqi Parliament Doesn't Like Occupation
From the Times:
BAGHDAD — An Obama administration proposal to keep a few thousand American troops here after the end of the year to train the Iraqi military is being scaled back, as the administration has concluded that the Iraqi Parliament would not give the troops legal protection, two American officials said on Saturday.What has become of Glorious War and Freedom Bombs?
Al Jazeera Does the Job American Media Refuses To Do With the Bushies
Donald Rumsfeld, arguably the worst Secretary of Defense this nation has ever had, was pressed harder on Al Jazeera English the other day than ever by any American media network.
That's just it. We are never allowed to bring up Iraq unless we praise how brave and glorious the Bushies were for getting rid of the evil of Saddam. If we do, we are being hateful and attacking. If we dare mention that everything the Bushies ever told us about Iraq turned out to be a lie, we are immediately lumped into a group of Not Very Serious People and told not to come back out until we learn to not question anything Bush ever did.
That Bush and his cohorts set this nation on a path of Endless War without ever raising a penny to pay for any of it is considered slander in American politics and never to be mentioned. We are supposed to give Rummy and his people Medals of Patriotic Freedom and tell them how great and safe they've made the world. And call the people responsible fiscal conservative patriots.
“Do you think the numbers of US troops that you went into Iraq with did absolve you from the responsibility of tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis killed by the coalition and those criminals you talked about?” Foukara asked Rumsfeld. “Give me a straight answer.”
“You can characterize my answers any way you want,” Rumsfeld responded. “And you do it in a pejorative way.”Incredible. One of the men most responsible for the blunder of the century that has cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of people and a trillion dollars of American tax money gets told to answer for his actions and he calls it derogatory. Rumsfeld went on to call the whole interview a "haranguing," in other words an attack.
That's just it. We are never allowed to bring up Iraq unless we praise how brave and glorious the Bushies were for getting rid of the evil of Saddam. If we do, we are being hateful and attacking. If we dare mention that everything the Bushies ever told us about Iraq turned out to be a lie, we are immediately lumped into a group of Not Very Serious People and told not to come back out until we learn to not question anything Bush ever did.
That Bush and his cohorts set this nation on a path of Endless War without ever raising a penny to pay for any of it is considered slander in American politics and never to be mentioned. We are supposed to give Rummy and his people Medals of Patriotic Freedom and tell them how great and safe they've made the world. And call the people responsible fiscal conservative patriots.
Republicans Had No Qualms About Adding to the Deficit to Rebuild Iraq
A very good pickup from Think Progress...
After George Bush invaded and blew up Iraq, we had to fix it. In the words of Bush's then Secretary of State, former General Colin Powell, if you break Iraq, "you buy it." And buy it we did.
To date the American tax payer has footed at least $44.6 billion to build roads, schools, mosques, and other infrastructure in Iraq. Bush and the GOP did not raise one penny to pay for any of it. In fact, they never, ever, one single time complained about spending money in Iraq where we've spent over a trillion dollars. Therefore, every single penny for reconstruction, just like for the war, has been added to the national debt.
Last week when a natural disaster struck the east coast and did billions in damages, Republicans decided to channel their make-believe fiscal conservative side and suggested that any money for disaster relief (i.e., money for our own people to be spent on our own soil) has to be offset with cuts from somewhere else. Truth be told, this year alone any time federal disaster relief has been promised to aid in reconstruction efforts, Republicans have insisted all of it must be offset with cuts to other areas. Prudent fiscal conservatives they are.
When Republicans were in charge of this country and were in a prime position to hold true to their self-proclaimed fiscal conservative values, they never one single time paid for anything. Everything they did was added to the national debt including reconstructing foreign countries. In addition, they never one time tried to hold up funds to reconstruct Iraq and routinely called anyone who dare question it unpatriotic. But when it comes to spending money here at home on our own people for natural disaster relief, Republicans would rather spend that money on an Iraqi.
On what planet does any of that make sense?
After George Bush invaded and blew up Iraq, we had to fix it. In the words of Bush's then Secretary of State, former General Colin Powell, if you break Iraq, "you buy it." And buy it we did.
To date the American tax payer has footed at least $44.6 billion to build roads, schools, mosques, and other infrastructure in Iraq. Bush and the GOP did not raise one penny to pay for any of it. In fact, they never, ever, one single time complained about spending money in Iraq where we've spent over a trillion dollars. Therefore, every single penny for reconstruction, just like for the war, has been added to the national debt. Last week when a natural disaster struck the east coast and did billions in damages, Republicans decided to channel their make-believe fiscal conservative side and suggested that any money for disaster relief (i.e., money for our own people to be spent on our own soil) has to be offset with cuts from somewhere else. Truth be told, this year alone any time federal disaster relief has been promised to aid in reconstruction efforts, Republicans have insisted all of it must be offset with cuts to other areas. Prudent fiscal conservatives they are.
When Republicans were in charge of this country and were in a prime position to hold true to their self-proclaimed fiscal conservative values, they never one single time paid for anything. Everything they did was added to the national debt including reconstructing foreign countries. In addition, they never one time tried to hold up funds to reconstruct Iraq and routinely called anyone who dare question it unpatriotic. But when it comes to spending money here at home on our own people for natural disaster relief, Republicans would rather spend that money on an Iraqi.
On what planet does any of that make sense?
Democracy Brought
Along with everything that is great and good in the world, it's all because George Bush and his decision to invade Iraq. This is an important lesson not just for life. But also if you want to be taken seriously in American politics.
"Sound policy" in America is an almost 10 year war that was raged merely for spite led by a bunch of madmen with hard-ons for other people doing the fighting. It is a war that has cost almost a trillion dollars, thousands of American lives, hundreds of thousands of foreign lives; not to mention, not one thing the Bushies ever told us about it has turned out to be true. But this is "sound policy" as dictated to us by our small government fiscal conservatives.
It's also, according to Cheney and the other madmen who ordered it and the thousands who continue to cheer it on, purely responsible for democratic uprisings in other Arab countries. Despite Iraq not being a democracy or even remotely close to anything desirable enough to emulate by any country in the world (just this week over 100 people were blown up in streets), the Bushies continue to insist all the credit for all the good is directly because of the Glorious War and their Super Patriotism.
Meanwhile, no one questions it...
More Evidence of Cheney's "Sound Policy"
The Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan found at least $60 billion was lost because waste and fraud from poor planning, ineffective oversight of contractors and payments to warlords and insurgents. Yet more proof of what Dick Cheney and the Bushies call "Sound Policy."
Cheney Calls Iraq War "Sound Policy"
This morning he went on NBC's Today show where he tried once again to rewrite history and claimed the invasion of Iraq was sound policy.
“I just don’t believe that. I think the critics at home want to argue that. In fact, I think it was sound policy that dealt with a very serious problem and eliminated Saddam Hussein from the kind of problem he presented before.”
Ahhhhh yes, sound policy. After nearly a decade, thousands of American lives later, a trillion dollars without raising a single penny to pay for it, it's all sound policy to the War Cheerleaders. He's a sick man. The disaster him and the Bushies did to this country will take decades to correct.
Panetta Idiotically Channels Bush on Iraq War
America's newest War Cheerleader in Chief, Leon Panetta, traveled to Iraq today and told a room full of American troops that the reason they are there fighting is because of 9/11.
The whole war was a lie led by a bunch of madmen bent on war profits and chest-thumping innuendo. That a member of the Obama administration is still repeating the same sorry lies of the disasterous Bush administration is both troublesome and illogical.
"The reason you guys are here is because on 9/11 the United States got attacked," said Panetta, according to the Washington Post. "And 3,000 Americans -- 3,000 not just Americans, 3,000 human beings, innocent human beings -- got killed because of al-Qaeda. And we've been fighting as a result of that."No. The reason why they are there, still, after 8 years of war, is because George W. Bush wanted to invade. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and there was no al Qeada presence in Iraq until after the American invasion.
The whole war was a lie led by a bunch of madmen bent on war profits and chest-thumping innuendo. That a member of the Obama administration is still repeating the same sorry lies of the disasterous Bush administration is both troublesome and illogical.
Deep Thought
Really says something about our national discourse when more people are shocked at the Casey Anthony verdict then about the fact the Iraq war death toll is the highest it's been in 3 years where we've spent nearly a trillion tax payer dollars in over 8 years of war.
Condi Rice Still Wrong on Iraq
Despite Iraq having nothing to do with 9/11, like the Bushies led us to believe. Despite Iraq not having WMD, like they led us to believe. Despite the fact 8 years later we are still occupying Iraq and spending billions every month, which is not the "matter of weeks" they told us it would be (or that it would pay for itself). Despite the fact that we were not welcomed as liberators but as enemies and that we unleashed a brutal civil war in that country. Despite nothing about Iraq the Bushies told us turned out to be true. Set all that aside for a second and just concede former Secretary of State Rice's points that even though they were sort of kind of wrong about some stuff nevertheless Saddam still posed a threat a to America and the Middle East. Just concede it for a moment.
Alright Dr. Rice and all you other Bush fans, you're right. I get it. He was a threat. Not a threat with WMD and a relationship with the terrorist that attacked us on 9/11 but a threat in some sort of weird way that he was a terrible dictator who punished his very own people but was powerless outside of his country. So a threat he was.
However, all that overlooks one huge and important point. Invading Iraq turned our attention and resources away from Afghanistan and the hunt for Bin Laden. That's why we didn't find him and kill him until 5 days ago.
Whatever threat Saddam posed it was nothing compared to the threat of what happened on 9/11 and the person who was responsible. But Bush and his administration saw it as being way more important than that. Which is why they waived off Bin Laden and chose Iraq. And because of that our entire country paid a dear and lasting price. So you can have your threat but you cannot possibly argue that invading Iraq did allow for bin Laden and the people actually responsible for 9/11 to free.
Alright Dr. Rice and all you other Bush fans, you're right. I get it. He was a threat. Not a threat with WMD and a relationship with the terrorist that attacked us on 9/11 but a threat in some sort of weird way that he was a terrible dictator who punished his very own people but was powerless outside of his country. So a threat he was.
However, all that overlooks one huge and important point. Invading Iraq turned our attention and resources away from Afghanistan and the hunt for Bin Laden. That's why we didn't find him and kill him until 5 days ago.
Whatever threat Saddam posed it was nothing compared to the threat of what happened on 9/11 and the person who was responsible. But Bush and his administration saw it as being way more important than that. Which is why they waived off Bin Laden and chose Iraq. And because of that our entire country paid a dear and lasting price. So you can have your threat but you cannot possibly argue that invading Iraq did allow for bin Laden and the people actually responsible for 9/11 to free.
Posts
