Monday, December 18, 2006

What if we are winning?

Every bit of strategy that is being discussed is based on the idea that we are losing. The Democratic opposition is based on the idea that we are losing. The media mantra is that we are losing. What if we are not?

In my December 10th entry, I observed that the Iraqi economy is doing quite well. I wrote, “This economic news also shows is that Iraqi nation may be slowly evolving into three federal sections since most of the economic progress is happening outside the Baghdad.” Newsweek is now reporting what others such as Strategypage.com have been showing for the past couple of years, the Iraqi’s economy is booming. And just as I wrote, much of this is occurring is outside Baghdad. Newsweek reports, “With security improving in one key spot—the southern oilfields—that figure could go up.” But this is not all. Newsweek added, “Even so, there's a vibrancy at the grass roots that is invisible in most international coverage of Iraq. Partly it's the trickle-down effect. However it's spent, whether on security or something else, money circulates. Nor are ordinary Iraqis themselves short on cash. That's boosted economic activity, particularly in retail. Imported goods have grown increasingly affordable, thanks to the elimination of tariffs and trade barriers. Salaries have gone up more than 100 percent since the fall of Saddam, and income-tax cuts (from 45 percent to just 15 percent) have put more cash in Iraqi pockets.” What Newsweek is describing supply side economy and guess what, it works in the United States, and it works in Iraq!

One meaning of all of this is that we may not be losing after all. If most of the country is prospering and Iraqis are forming new businesses, then can we assume that overall, we are indeed winning? Another meaning is that Iraqis are showing that they can operate in a liberated economy and if they can work in a free market economy during a war time setting; imagine what they could do if the insurgency is defeated? One important aspect of a liberal democracy succeeding is a liberal economy that frees entrepreneurs from the shackles of government. And Iraqis, with lower tax rates than even seen in the United States, have the money to form new businesses and spend money on new goods.

Much of the reporting has been poor indeed and now it has taken the mainstream media a long time to notice the economic revival taking place among the Iraqis. Maybe it is time to re-evaluate what is really happening in Iraq, before we engage in wrong policy.

49 Comments:

Blogger Jacob said...

It was funnier when The Onion did it.

6:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, the economic argument is what should truly be judged as a barometer of success. I am surprised Bush does not repeat this often for his own sake.

Victory in Iraq is assured by 2008, particularly for economic reasons. One of the reasons leftists hate what is going on there, is that the free-market is thriving

6:42 PM  
Anonymous yankeewombat said...

Spot on, mate as we say in Australia. Damn, those liberal economics - they work every time. Too bad so many people know that liberal economics are just wrong and that so many in the MSM are among their number. For them its a trap - all the time they are making sure the military is failing that sneaky liberal economy has been ..er...sneaking up on them from behind. Next we will discover those folks don't know anything about military matters either.

6:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear YankeeWombat,

(If you are an Australian), on behalf of the US, I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to the nation of Australia for not only being our staunch ally, but for also being amazingly effective soldiers and being one of the very few countries that expect Muslim immigrants to follow the rules of their new country once they go to Australia.

From a grateful United States

7:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I thougt it was funny also that the ISG said that it was a disappointment that Iraq had only 4 percent growth this year. France would love to have its economy growing at that rate...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2006/11/11/cnfrance11.xml

but then again, Paris may be as violent from islamic unrest as Baghdad.

7:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

BTW I second my deep respect and esteem for our Australian friends!

7:23 PM  
Blogger Mr. Snitch said...

Yes, bravo Australia.

7:24 PM  
Blogger Paddy O. said...

My mechanic has said the same thing. Oh, yeah, he's Iraqi who has family there still, a bit of a ways north of Baghdad. In August he visited there with his teenage son. Said his whole family is thriving like they haven't done for years, with their farming business booming. They all love Americans. He came back very pleased.

So yeah, we're winning in some places. The trick is to get the winning in all the places.

7:29 PM  
Blogger Pyrthroes said...

America won the "war" as such by June 2003, surfacing Iraq's murderous sadist Saddam Hussein some 18 months later (December 2004).

Since then, not only have rogue militias and Sunni terrorists received full-throated support, including massive cross-border shipments of munitions, from Iran and Syria, but sources such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia have mounted extraordinary propaganda offensives throughout the (sic) Christian World.

In this sense, the Iraqi War is just beginning... while Coalition forces have unquestionably provided a foundation for victory in the true sense --enabling a peaceful, prosperous Iraqi State, for all its inherent Muslim liabilities-- the question is whether Iran and Syria et.al. must be defeated also.

We think, yes. In Spring 2005, turning its back on Lebanon's Cedar Revolution, the Bush Administration directly fostered Hezbollah's attack on Israel last summer. Given Iran's descent to genocidal theo-fascism, plus Syria's thuggish kleptocrats, a new and deadlier confrontation could occur at any time. Match that with Putin's course as Russia sweeps to "failed State" status, and we have a recipe for worse to come.

None of this will be because the United States "lost Iraq", certainly not because the 10-week campaign in 2003 failed its objective: GWB has repeatedly emphasized, in no uncertain terms, that with Congressional, UN, and a 41-nation Coalition's unanimous approval, Saddam Hussein could not remain a threat.

America is winning, and will win indisputably in Iraq. The nay-sayers and defeatists who hope otherwise have never been more that scuttering Leftist ideologues. (Why boost Saddam? Because he hated everything America stands for-- as do Ramsey Clark, John Kerry and their ilk. For decades, they have said as much, and acted on it.) But to the extent petrodollars continue to fuel sad-sack, self-immolating Muslim terrorists, the broader War will stagger on.

Sooner rather than later, there will be another 9/11, probably nuclear with Russian fingerprints. Too late then to call Kerry, Kennedy, Murtha to treasonous account... let's hope they roil in the same radioactive cloud as those they cravenly and stupidly betrayed.

Fast-forward to AD 2030 to see how many mullah-dullahs fit on the head of Western Civilization's pin. One, two, many "martyrs" more!

7:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"War is a series of catastrophes leading to victory"

- George Clemenceau

7:40 PM  
Blogger DirtCrashr said...

Dear YankeeWombat, I concur with the thanks given by both Anonymouses and Mr. Snitch.

7:50 PM  
Anonymous Alex Bensky said...

I'll support that motion. Thanks, Australia--good friends and true allies. At one time I would have said that about certain countries to the north of here but...

7:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes Australia many thanks.

I choppered into a base called Luscombe in the Mekong Delta in '67. This outpost was manned for the most part by Australians and I never felt safer. Those were some very, very mean and capable SOB's and I do say that very respectfully.

I was, for the most part, one of those who "stayed in the rear with the gear". :)

8:07 PM  
Blogger newc said...

Trust me. Once there is an established middle class and Iraqi Army, things will smooth out. And about actually winning? Shhhhhh!
There are things that have happened that have exceeded expectations.

8:08 PM  
Blogger buck smith said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

8:20 PM  
Blogger buck smith said...

Fruited Plains Dude,

You are making a very good point. I have long thought Bush would do well to emphasize capitalism as much as democracy. The things that holds economic advancement back in Arabia as well as south America and other parts of the world is a kind of fascism that originates in the Mediterranean.

It has been transmitted through the Catholic Church and the Spanish and Italian monarchies and through Islam. One aspect of the culture, identified by Michael Totten, is that is mafia culture. Men go out (and give and receive bribes and participate in violence) and women stay at home. The prevalence of this kind of thinking will hold a society back, I reckon.

8:21 PM  
Blogger TallDave said...

Perspective. We've never lost a platoon-level battle in Iraq. And probably never will.

The Onion headline is funny but true. From the military perspective, it's one long ongoing victory. We only "lose" by leaving before the ISF is ready to take over.

People have forgotten what real wars are like. We've lost thousands of troops in a matter of hours before. Japan was easier to occupy, but then we didn't nuke Basra and Kirkuk.

Most Iraqis have taken to democracy and capitalism like fish to water. All we have to do is put them in position to finish the job.

8:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

YES, HERE IS STRONG EVIDENCE WE ARE WINNING
– The extreme aggressive posturing of Iran and Syria is because of existential threats
– They are surrounded by growing democracies (Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Israel)
– Middle East dictatorships SHOULD feel threatened, because THEY ARE
– The pessimistic catastrophizing by the MSM is valid for them, in way
– Because every success by the Bush admin puts another nail in the left’s coffin
– The left’s moral turpitude, the wobbly high-grounding, the aimless reasoning, the constant whining, betray the permanent lack of direction, the frustrated malaise of a dying political philosophy
– Iran & Syria’s aggression is only puzzling for the MSM, who HOPE we are losing
– Those who KNOW we are winning can clearly see why Iran & Syria are defensive

DemocracyRules

8:43 PM  
Blogger Neo-andertal said...

Yes there is some improvement especially in Shiite controlled south central Iraq. Mosul and the far north have held their own and the Kurds have not had to fight. On the other had Anbar has only improved marginally and situation in Baghdad and Diyala province north east of Baghdad has deteriorated. It’s a mixed bag. The media is exaggerating the hopelessness of the situation don’t counter by exaggerating the modest regional good news.

The greatest opportunity for improvement is in the Shiite south but much of that depends on marginalizing Sadr’s forces. A political coalition against Sadr is badly needed and could serve as a framework to pressure him. A direct face down with Sadr is not needed at this time because of several factors. First the political system couldn’t take it and second the development of the Iraqi Army in the hasn’t quite advanced to the stage were they would stand Sadr down. It’s better that a new coalition be formed and pressure gradually increased.

I’m all for the increase in troop levels if it is directly applied to Diyala province and the northern approaches to Baghdad. I don’t think the violence in this area is going to disappear any time soon. The insurgents now have enough support both inside and outside to keep up the violence indefinitely. Added pressure by American troops would keep the lid on things while the Iraqi Army progresses and the Iraqi political situation plays out.

The real question right now is how much power does Sadr have and how much of a mess can he make out of things in the south. If Sadr can cause enough trouble he might be able to hang things up indefinitely until everything falls apart. If the Shiites can manage to form a strong coalition without many of the hotheads than the Iraqi army will also probably come into its own. Than eventually the Sunni minority will have to genuinely come to the table for a political compromise.

There’s no easy way to do it anymore. The Iraqi’s will have to fight their way through this or succumb to it. I just hope the domestic political clock doesn’t run out before it plays out one way or the other

9:26 PM  
Blogger Neo-andertal said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

9:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would also check out Afghanistan. I saw literaly thousands of house starts there around Kabul. That kind of grass roots economic boom shows optimism about the future that is being translated into bricks and mud walls.

9:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Frickin' hilarious that you'd post this on the same day that Bush finally admits that we *aren't* winning.

11:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Parallels between Iraq and the Vietnam War have been drawn. What level of economic growth did Vietnam experience during the war?

12:45 AM  
Anonymous TallDave said...

Yes, let's compare the military situation to Vietnam. How many platoon-level or higher battles did we lose? How many cities did the enemy control?

5:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is just like Vietnam. We ARE winning, but we will CHOOSE defeat over victory. The Left ultimately wins by getting us to "suicide" ourselves (yet again).

5:50 AM  
Blogger fortunateSon said...

I've always like the Onion but their tone is so self-congratulatory and mocking on the issue of death resulting from the war...it doesn't sit well with me. The tendency to place the blame on us for all of the deaths in Iraq since 2003 for instance - its our ruthless, barbaric opponents that have caused this death toll! Not us! Myself and thousands of American military men and women wake up every morning there and spend 16-18 hrs a day trying to build a better life for them. Don't put that blood on my hands, you smug a**holes who do nothing but mock the extraordinary efforts of others from the safety of your boring, ordinary and self-serving upper-class American worldview.

On the Vietname parallel: Yes, let's draw on some similarities...let's talk about what happened after we left in Vietnam where those who stood with us (and their families) were executed...and Cambodia, where the Khmer Rouge went unchecked murdering millions while we licked our wounds in a neo-isolationist hangover.

Let's see a parody on that! Or if you like, let's make fun of the 300,000 Shites who were killed by Saddam after we abonadoned them in 1991 for the sake of "regional stability"...or the tens of thousands of babies that died for lack of medicine from the result of UN sanctions in the 1990's that did nothing but strengthen the regime.
[sarcasm tag for the thinking impaired]There's just so much potential for comedy in human misery!![end sarcasm]

FortunateSon

7:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

...A political coalition against Sadr is badly needed and could serve
as a framework to pressure him. A direct face down with Sadr is not
needed at this time because of several factors. First the political
system couldn’t take it and second the development of the Iraqi
Army in the hasn’t quite advanced to the stage were they would
stand Sadr down.


Isn't facing down Sadr and other militias exactly what's desperately needed at this time? And it has to be done BY US.

The strategy for dealing with them was to let the Iraqi government do it, using the newly formed Iraqi Army and Police. But the government will never issue such orders. Presumably in order to avoid being shot, the Iraqi PM has clearly made a deal with Sadr. They're HELPING Sadr; no way will they issue orders to attack Sadr. The Iraqi govt and militias seem likely to stay commingled until militias are cracked down on.

There are increasingly big parts of Iraq where the militias are the rule of law, not the government. That means protection money, shakedowns, ethnic cleansing, shootings for any reason the militias feel like, lootings, etc. That's why we aren't currently winning.

Multiple sets of numbers show deaths and violence are on the increase, doubtless from increased militia activities. That's about exactly what what would happen if we stopped domestic enforcement operations against the Mafia for a few years. We haven't gone after Iraqi militias, and exactly that has happened.

More here:
http://www.centristcoalition.com/blog/archives/003628.html

9:08 AM  
Blogger Jeff said...

I wonder... perhaps... the Iraqi economy is doing well because the US is pumping billions of dollars into it every month? And that maybe their economic growth statistics reflect this more than they do actual growth of businesses and sustainable economic conditions?

Just a guess.

Also, it's interesting to note that at the same time Iraq is 'booming' they still have 30-50% unemployment. So we aren't exactly talking about a tide which is lifting all boats, here.

9:59 AM  
Blogger Ben Cronin said...

Guys, get over it ... the war is lost. It's time to staunch the bleeding and start repairing the damage Bush et al. have done.

But I guess I'm just an Islamo-commie defeatocrat, so what does what I say matter?

12:11 PM  
Blogger markg8 said...

The cell phone business in Iraq is exploding. No wonder as they're used as IED triggers. Yes business is so good in Iraq a million people a year are trying to get out.

My God you people will do anything to cling to your delusions. The Iraqis want us out. The US people want us out. Any chance we had of "winning" died at Abu Ghraib. We've lost. Get over it. There was only a tiny chance we'd ever be able to pull this off and Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld squandered that before the invasion by kicking the State Dept's Future of Iraq Project's nation building Arabists to the curb. I can't believe I still have to write this stuff years after the fact.

Folks this war is a disaster and we're not going to win it. And it's not because I, Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi say it. Just like Vietnam it's not because "the left wouldn't let us win". If you believe that you're lying to yourself to protect your delicate little pysche. The left had nothing to do with this debacle except send their kids to war and go along with every emergency supplemental.

I hope the rightwing finally learns:

1. dividing your friends and uniting your enemies is no way to win a war,

2. the military is the wrong tool to fix a political problem,

3. without the other 2 legs of American power, (economic and diplomatic leverage) the military leg is less than useless, it's a drain on our resources and the other legs that severely damages us.

4. And that America isn't a paper tiger vulnerable to a hostile world that needs to prove itself every generation militarily to keep our enemies at bay. Some didn't learn
that after Vietnam and embraced that morning in America crap to salve their fragile egos. 250,000 dead campesinos in Central America in the 1980s to prove we were tough on communism wasn't enough. Over 600,000 dead in Iraq and shoving the world's gas station to the brink of regional war apparently has awakened the American people to the stupidity of letting our pride get in the way of our and the world's real interests.

We have real problems and yes real enemies we have to face starting with Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

We'd better face them together soon and come up with solutions the whole planet can live with or human civilization will collapse under it's own weight and folly.

That doesn't mean you should hang your heads and wail. It doesn't mean you should nurture your resentments to salve your fragile little psyches until the next Reagan comes along to lift you out of your funk by declaring morning in America. Most of us never had a crisis of confidence after Vietnam and most won't now. But I suspect for most of you on this blog that wasn't and won't be the case. Like I said you'll just have to get over it because it's going to be a long, long time before the USA buys any jingoistic snakeoil from the Republican party again.

12:39 PM  
Blogger JB said...

Typical leftist psychobabble from marky. There are no totalitarian threats to our way of life, only wounded egos to salve. Everything in the world is America's fault -- either of commision or becuase we haven't reached out sufficiently for global consensus. In other words, typical leftist snake oil.

1:43 PM  
Blogger markg8 said...

Oh there are threats all right but Al Qaeda, North Korea and Iran are nowhere near the threat Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were for instance.

We didn't invade China to show the Japanese how tough we were after Pearl Harbor or throw away our own rights to fight them. There's no reason to do it now. There's also no reason gin up a decades long crusade against Islam because a 40,000 strong subset of the Wahhabi sect of Sunni Islam who live in caves pulled off a terrorist attack by 19 jihadis wielding boxcutters.

But even in that alternative universe where you evidently live JB, where there are a billion implacable bloodthirsty Muslims who only live to kill us why would anybody think the Bush Administration is capable of leading that fight?

2:42 PM  
Anonymous yankeewombat said...

Yankeewombat again. I appreciate the thanks to Australia and, yes, I am real. The meaning of Yankeewombat is that I am both American and Australian. I came to Australia in 1976 from the US and hold citizenship in both countries. I blog under a separate flag for much the same reasons that Neo NeoCon does...so my lefty friends can pretend that they don't know it's me.

To Markg8 I want to say this. In 1965 Bobby Kennedy said about his opposition to the Vietnam war, which I shared, that it was painful to feel forced to distinguish between one's government and one's country. I felt that pain then and I noticed it again yesterday when I bought a new power supply for my computer from a man named Nguyen. Markg8, sounds to me like one of those people who neither understands nor feels that pain.

His sarcasm toward Reagan shows that he doesn't understand the reforms Reagan made to the big government leftism of the previous era. (eg with labor market reform in the US, UK, and AUS unemployment is around 5%, with no reform it is around 8-10% in France and Germany.) Indeed I see Markg8 as a conservative in the worst sense of the word - someone blindly clinging to the past. He doesn't understand the power of Friedman's economics - the point of the original post, he doesn't understand that fascism combined with religious fanaticism and nuclear weapons can create a threat that is greater than the treats posed by the the standing armies of Japan and Germany. In this last is the core delusion that misinforms his segment of left/liberal opinion - that we are not under mortal threat. For an unconscious conservative like Markg8 clinging to the certainties of WW2 are always preferable to dealing with the uncertainties of the present. Sure commenters to a post about good economic news from Iraq may naturally focus on the positive without it meaning we are denying there are problems, but accusing the post and its commenters on this thread of being delusional is a clear case of projection. Islamic radicalism is the elephant in the room for the likes of markg8. It is not denial to focus for a moment on a clear report of good economic news from a left leaning newsmagazine in the context of a conflict that is being constantly portrayed as a debacle. It is legitimate to ask 'How can that be if it is a debacle?' Talk about denial, it ain't the cell phones being used on IEDs, mate, that are making the Iraqi economy boom.

8:11 PM  
Blogger JB said...

"But even in that alternative universe where you evidently live JB, where there are a billion implacable bloodthirsty Muslims who only live to kill us why would anybody think the Bush Administration is capable of leading that fight?"

That's a nice little strawman, marky, but the reality is a billion Muslims need not want to "kill us" for us to lose the civilizational struggle. It suffices for them to sit on the sidelines and adapt to facts on the ground as they emerge. If you're not part of the solution, you're not of much use -- sorta like your ilk.

As for your question about Bush -- you go to war with the country you have, to paraphrase Rummy.

11:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yankeewombat try again. You feel sorry for Nguyen and now disagree with RFK's and your former position on the Vietnam war or what? Your whole post is just as confusing. BTW there was nothing certain about the outcome of WW11 65 years ago today. I'm more than willing to discuss Reagan's union policies and the rest of your points sometime but that's not what we're discussing here. Let's stay on topic.

JB if you want to win a billion Muslims over to our side you don't do it by invading a country that's the cradle of their civilization based on easily disproved lies and then make up various rationales to stay. You don't do it by doubling the number of people Saddam killed since the invasion. By int'l. law and frigging common sense an occupier is responsible for security in the country. You don't threaten to fire anybody in the Pentagon who brings up post war nation building before the war. You don't quash local elections and try to form a government with handpicked caucuses and turn around and claim it was all about democracy all along once the most respected cleric in the country
(an Iranian btw) threatens to put a million protesters in the street unless they get free and fair elections. You don't fire it's army even though you promised beforehand you wouldn't, sending half a million soldiers with assault rifles home without a paycheck. You don't stand stand down your army while almost every government ministry and the infrastructure is

9:34 AM  
Blogger markg8 said...

Yankeewombat try again. You feel sorry for Nguyen and now disagree with RFK's and your former position on the Vietnam war or what? Your whole post is just as confusing. BTW there was nothing certain about the outcome of WW11 65 years ago today. I'm more than willing to discuss Reagan's union policies and the rest of your points sometime but that's not what we're discussing here. Let's stay on topic.

JB if you want to win a billion Muslims over to our side you don't do it by invading a country that's the cradle of their civilization based on easily disproved lies and then make up various rationales to stay. You don't do it by doubling the number of people Saddam killed since the invasion. By int'l. law and frigging common sense an occupier is responsible for security in the country. You don't threaten to fire anybody in the Pentagon who brings up post war nation building before the war. You don't quash local elections and try to form a government with handpicked caucuses and turn around and claim it was all about democracy all along once the most respected cleric in the country
(an Iranian btw) threatens to put a million protesters in the street unless they get free and fair elections. You don't fire it's army even though you promised beforehand you wouldn't, sending half a million soldiers with assault rifles home without a paycheck. You don't stand stand down your army while almost every government ministry and the infrastructure is looted to the studs. You don't outsource your scutwork on military bases in a nation with 60% unemployment to terrified Nepalese indentured servants who were deceived into believing they were being hired for 3 times the pay to work in 4 star hotels in Jordan or Kuwait. You don't build a city within a city and wall it off from the outside world and run a kleptocracy inside. You don't "lose" $9 billion of Iraq's money. You don't hire over 100,000 mercenaries who answer to nobody with no rules of engagement for security. You don't hire American kids right out of college to run whole ministries who applied to work at the Heritage Foundation as junior research assistants. You don't send just 6 people fluent in the local language. You don't neglect to train your soldiers in the most rudimentary local communication methods like hand signals. Our Army's local hand signal for "halt" is just a friendly wave in Iraq.

Some other things you yourself don't do. You don't cherrypick their holy book looking for 1400 year old quotes to prove they want to kill
all non believers. You don't ridicule their religion. My bible says I should stone you to death for such heresy. You don't pretend that spreading democracy all over the middle east is the solution you want and then act horrified when they elect leaders you don't like. You don't pretend you actually believe in freedom when you advocate
destroying the constitution here at home. You don't call Saudi Arabia and Egypt, where poltical dissent is
restricted to mosques, moderate governments.

You go to war with the country you have. Who's blaming America again?

9:34 AM  
Blogger Repack Rider said...

I don't know how many posters here are military veterans like I am, but I would bet the number hovers close to zero.

If you all think it was a good idea to invade a sovereign nation that was not a threat to us, to kill tens of thousands of innocent people, and allow Haliburton to loot the treasury, why are you limiting your "involvement" to posting your silly thoughts on a blog?

Why aren't you in Iraq in a uniform and eating MREs, or on your way to the recruiting office?

Wait, I think I know. You're cowards who talk big but do not have the cojones to back it up.

No sacrifice is too great for people who don't have to make it.

8:20 AM  
Blogger Steve said...

Yes, if you squint your eyes just right and put on those rose colored glasses and clap your hands really loud, then we are winning! Hurray! I guess you can just stay home and watch FOX "News" and no one will think you are a coward, because we are already winning and a "surge" is unnecessary. You are courageous and brilliant, yes you are. And we are winning... yes, we are winning.

9:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am glad to hear that economics is winning over thuggery. Just think how much better it would have gone if we had been able to secure the area, not tortured people, not made half the world hate us.

So yes, in a new Iraq sometime in the future, we may find a liberal economy and a vast hatred of the United States.

I feel safer.

10:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I guess that all the educated and professional Iraqis who are fleeing their country as soon as they can get a ticket out must know less about the "booming" (ahem) economy than some yahoo who has a blog.

You right-wingers never cease to amuse. But then I was always a sucker for sick comedy.....

Oh, and as always, I need to ask you blowhard "patriots": What's keeping you from enlisting? The Guard is taking people in their late fifties. Your hyperventilations mean nothing. If you really believe in your precious war, put your money where your mouth is -- or shut up.
-- sglover

12:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Back up one of your assertions or shut the hell up, rightwing moron.

5:20 PM  
Blogger travis said...

This is demented. Why are you focusing on the economic situation during a bloody civil war caused by centuries-old religious differences? Every single one of your economic allegations could be 100% correct, and it would not alter the military situation, nor would it change the impact of the 100 dead bodies found each day. Maybe you can be like the economist version of Fred Phelps, and show up at military funerals, telling the mourners that the soldier's death was not in vain, now there's a vibrant, prosperous economy in Iraq.

But sure, buckwheat, if you think we're winning, yipee-ki-yay. That means we can leave. Thanks for the good news -- and the pony.

12:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The economy in bullets, rifles, bombs, prosthetic limbs and organ donations is booming. Kidnapping for ransom also recirculates a lot of cash.

Truly, Iraq is a free-market paradise which is not being fairly reported in the media.

6:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh. Back in our other war, I heard the cocaine traffic is booming. The Afghan economy is set for a record growth. See, free-market really works, and what's more, the wingnuts have a lot more coke to snort.

Onwards to the next country!!!!!

6:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just a small point: cocaine is produced from the cocoa leaf. It is mainly a South American export. Opium is produced from poppies. It is the cash crop in Afghanistan and is the main contributer to their booming economy.

Carry on!

4:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Like our Dear Leader said, just go shopping.

3:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

free game hentai ware free game hentai ware free game hentai ware free game hentai ware

This a good link's !
Posted by Admin

11:09 AM  
Blogger jesus said...

I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.


Sara

http://smallbusinessgrant.info

12:50 AM  
Blogger Tom Donelson said...

Dear Sara,

Thanks for the kind words, feel free to comment any time.

7:25 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home