The Iraq Democrats Continue To Deny
butbutbut...they CAN'T be getting better...NOT YET!!!
By haystack Posted in catering to cowards | Dem Denials | ignorance is bliss | Iraq success | War — Comments (12) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Via Real Clear Politics we learn that Iraqis, in steadily increasing numbers, are seeing "improved security and economic conditions" and these sentiments "have reversed Iraqis’ spiral of despair." To be sure, there are still many grave and serious problems ahead for them, but overall they are becoming more optimistic about their futures.
This is striking news when you consider the steady drumbeat from Democrats, including "he and she who would be President," who insist that the war is lost (one even suggesting it should never have been waged despite the multitude of UN Security Council Resolutions that indicated to the contrary) and that the surge was unsuccessful, and who suggest the only way Iraq will improve is by our quick exit (leaving them to twist in the wind). Solely based on this twisted and cynical belief that a successful ascension to power lies (somehow) in the abandonment of an entire country, Democrats will deny ANY news from the ground in Iraq that might contradict their game plan...including this:
Fifty-five percent of Iraqis say things in their own lives are going well, well up from 39 percent as recently as August. More, 62 percent, rate local security positively, up 19 points. And the number who expect conditions nationally to improve in the year ahead has doubled, to 46 percent in this new national poll by ABC News, the BBC, ARD German TV and the Japanese broadcaster NHK.
Without directly crediting the surge in U.S. forces, fewer report security as the main problem in their own lives – 25 percent, nearly half its peak last spring. Forty-six percent say local security has improved in the past six months, nearly double last summer’s level.
The number of Iraqis who feel entirely unsafe in their own area has dropped by two thirds, to 10 percent. And with Sunni Arab buy-in, U.S.-funded Awakening Councils, created to provide local security, are more popular than the Iraqi government itself.
Even more striking is the halt in worsening views. In August, Iraqis by 61-11 percent said security in the country had gotten worse, not better, in the previous six months. Today, by 36-26 percent, more say security has improved. The new positive margin is not large. But the 35-point drop in views that security is worsening is the single largest change in this poll.
To be fair, there is no reason to hype this report into something it is NOT. Problems abound in Iraq, on almost every level, but problems abound in every other country around the world, too. We have a few problems right here at home, in fact, that in many ways might be considered equal to some of those being endured by every-day Iraqis themselves. Unemployment, inadequate healthcare, crumbling infrastructure, and the like notwithstanding.
More reality checks for the Left, below the fold...
The Democrats have, for years now, not only routinely moved the bar whenever progress has been made on a series of those so-called "milestones" they fought to establish...but they've simultaneously held Iraq to some weird double standard; our own Government has been stalled in a relentless partisan gridlock during the very same period of time that they have insisted Iraq's inability to muddle through their OWN partisan gridlock provides just cause to turn our backs on them and kick them to the curb. Having it both ways is something the Left has mastered...but to expect Iraqis to "come to heel" to serve their own political ambitions is ridiculous and disingenuous.
This report means several things, in my humble opinion, but what it means more than anything ELSE is that Iraqis still need our help as they continue to progress toward being as comfortable with their own homeland (and it's imperfections) as our Democrat friends believe they can make us be with our own imperfections here in the US.
Consider this:
On a national level, as noted, 36 percent of Iraqis say security has improved in the last six months; that’s jumped from just 11 percent in August. Of them, 82 percent express at least some confidence improved security will continue, although fewer, about a third, are “very” confident of it.
At the same time, few give the United States direct credit for security gains. When those who see security as having improved are asked who deserves the most credit, Iraqi
institutions lead the way – 26 percent cite the national government, 18 percent the police, 13 percent the army. Just 4 percent mention the United States or U.S. forces.Direct ratings of the surge likely reflect the United States’ general unpopularity. Iraqis by 53-36 percent say the surge has made security worse, not better, in the areas where it’s
occurred; that, however, has improved sharply, from 70-18 percent in August.Similarly, Iraqis by 49-30 percent say the surge has made security worse in the rest of the country (it was 68-12 percent in August); by 43-21 percent say it’s worsened conditions for political dialogue (70-10 percent in August); by 44-25 percent say it’s worsened the ability of the Iraqi government to do its work (65-12 percent in August) and by 42-22 percent say it’s worsened the pace of economic development (67-6 percent in August).
I'm no expert, but it seems to me the key passage here is this:
[F]ew give the United States direct credit for security gains. When those who see security as having improved are asked who deserves the most credit, Iraqi
institutions lead the way – 26 percent cite the national government, 18 percent the police, 13 percent the army. Just 4 percent mention the United States or U.S. forces.
So, we provide blood and treasure to secure a mess we can fairly take responsibility for having made there, and in doing all the surge had attempted to do, Iraqis are starting to take ownership, assume themselves the tasks of securing and sustaining their OWN country...taking it back, as it were, and we STILL see Democrats insisting we need to leave...and leave at once.
It might help at the voting booths, but our having been the cause AND the cure can not be denied on the streets of Iraq, regardless the energy the Left continues to expend to argue to the contrary.
Iraq better hurry up before this November 2008 circus comes to town...
The Iraq Democrats Continue To Deny 12 Comments (0 topical, 12 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
In the last seven months, we've seen Rep. Baird (WA), Rep. Donnelly (IN), and Rep. Etheridge (NC) all decide that, given that it looks as if the war can be won, it is worth winning.
Who will be the next to recognize the new facts and change position?
I, for one, will greet him with open arms.
This article is a head scratcher for me, in some ways. Some constructive criticism:
First, it seems self-defeating to point out the un-realistic assessments by one group (which you back up well with your citation of the ABC News article), and then make your own rather bold claim - unsupported by any citations - that "We have a few problems right here at home, in fact, that in many ways might be considered equal to some of those being endured by every-day Iraqis themselves." Laundry list, please, of those "few" domestic problems suffered by Americans which are equal ("in many ways") to those endured currently by Iraqis?
Second, your other quoted passage seems to me possibly more indicative of the elimination of a reason to stay. Do you believe the opinion of Iraqis - that only 4% of those who feel security improved feel our presence is the reason - is incorrect? Why don't you call them out for having an incorrect opinion; why are we not getting credit? If you believe the opinion is correct, then we have to ask whether the ROI is worth our expense, at least on the topic of "security" for Iraqis, when all our efforts are so pale in comparison with what the Iraqis themselves are doing.
Finally, the statement regarding "a mess we can fairly take responsibility for having made there", is interesting. At what point in time do you think American citizens became responsible for the Iraq "mess", as you put it?
I specifically stated 3 items Iraqis spoke negatively about that are issues we have here at home-unemployment, healthcare, and infrastructure. Here's a citation on US employment news:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/07/business/07cnd-econ.html
Do I REALLY need to give you a link to the bridge collapse and the screaming from the left about all the money wasted in Iraq that could have been spent here PREVENTING the bridge collapse? [this would be an infrastructure example] Can you spell google?
I suppose I could paste a few of the endless links from Clinton and Obama about the state of healthcare in this country...given they promise to establish a universal healthcare system in their first 100 days (or some such nonsense). I'm just not going to...hillaryclinton.com and barackobama.com should get you started.
Really now, does a provided link tell you something you haven't heard yourself for MONTHS here and other places?
And...btw...Americans became responsible for the mess the day we invaded Iraq my friend. The debate is long exhausted regarding whether we should have done so or not...but as Colin Powell said so long ago... you break it you own it.
Please re-check what I wrote. I clearly suggested that their opinions about our role in their security means, to me that they are decreasingly taking a back seat to our efforts and are increasingly seeing themselves beginning to step up to the plate. We stick around long enough, and they'll be asking us to leave...secure in their confidence in themselves to "take it from here"...as Bush has told us on many occasions. BUT...they are clearly not there yet given their own remaining concerns about the state of things still.
Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus
Then what you're telling me is that you agree with the viewpoint of Clinton and Obama that our infrastructure is terrible and that our healthcare system is among the worst in the world - equal, evidently, to that in Iraq? And that our unemployment rate in America is as high as that in Iraq?
Don't let me put words in your mouth, though - if, when you wrote, "We have a few problems right here at home, in fact, that in many ways might be considered equal to some of those being endured by every-day Iraqis themselves.", what you meant to say was "The American left thinks we have a few problems...", then that's a different matter.
And...btw...Americans became responsible for the mess the day we invaded Iraq my friend.
I disagree. Insofar as we invaded Iraq in order to deal with a threat being posed to America by the Hussein regime, then what followed in the immediate aftermath was the Hussein regime's responsibility, not our own. We were never obligated to undertake the effort we have following the removal of the regime. The farthest I would ever go is some kind of repayment in kind for damages to infrastructure that were a direct result of our military force, under the (arguable) theory that we should settle on necessary damages that unfortunately affected presumably innocent civilians as well.
Now it's debatable whether our subsequent actions toward achieving whatever other ROI we are after have obligated us to assume some responsibility for what happens as an outgrowth of pursuing those additional goals, and to the extent that, for example, pursuing a permanent military presence results in some kind of civil unrest among Iraqi citizens, then I could see assuming some of the effort involved in dealing with that. But even then, it isn't American citizens going around Iraq, kidnapping and executing and stealing and sabotaging and so forth; it's Iraqi citizens, it's (corrupt) Iraqi officials. It makes no sense to blame America or Americans and saddle them with the responsibility for problems that Iraqis are - intentionally - causing.
I agree with Clinton and Obama that we have infrastructure and healthcare problems. I never said ours was the worst in the world...and you know they didn't say that either. Stop now, please.
And we invaded Iraq to deal with a threat from his regime and the larger war we are fighting was brought there -read al Qaeda-in the aftermath...a thing we obviously were not prepared for or didn't believe would come in his (Hussein's) departure.
Your portrayal of who is responsible for kidnappings and killings is convenient, and you know you can't prove these are coming from Iraqi nationals...because no one ELSE can either. We know some are Iranian, some Iraqi, and some from other AQ sympathizers...
you seem to live in the same alternate reality as those this piece was originally directed at.
Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus
I agree with Clinton and Obama that we have infrastructure and healthcare problems. I never said ours was the worst in the world
I didn't accuse you of that.
You've stated those issues are as bad ("in many ways") as they are in Iraq. Which I equated with "among the worst in the world". But hey, if you think I'm wrong about Iraq's infrastructure, healthcare, and unemployment issues being "among the worst in the world" right now, feel free to object. I'm still stunned that you actually believe they're on par with America.
I pointed out a statement of yours that struck me as indefensible: "We have a few problems right here at home, in fact, that in many ways might be considered equal to some of those being endured by every-day Iraqis themselves.". I stand by my opinion of it.
Your portrayal of who is responsible for kidnappings and killings is convenient, and you know you can't prove these are coming from Iraqi nationals
Well I know they aren't coming from America citizens, to whom you're assigning responsibility for the "mess".
Can you prove that the majority of sectarian violence, theft, sabotage, corruption, and crime in general is not coming from Iraqi citizens? Likely, no more that I can prove that it all comes from Iraqis. But the only "metric" of civil unrest that I've seen evidence that implicates foreign nationals as perpetrators in larger numbers than Iraqi citizens is suicide bombings. I can therefore reasonably speculate that if all Iraqi citizens desisted from criminal activity, tribal violence, and government corruption, that there would no longer be a "mess" in Iraq for some people to try and saddle Americans with the undeserved obligation to clean up.
Call it an alternate reality all you want, but if you're going to blame America and therefore assign responsibility to Americans for whats going on in Iraq right now, the onus is on you to make your case.
three of Iraq's list of problems can be found on our own list. Nature and severity and degree are not the same, but the items are. Iraq's, by the way, when you look at other countries around the world are not as bad...Darfur anyone?
There are others, of course, but that's not what you're after here is it? American citizens aren't doing the kidnappings and killings...nice one...I suppose once we determine which ones ARE, we can pack it in and have the UN make THEM help Iraq get back on their feet?
Not sure what you're after here man....
I'm not blaming America in the sense you are pushing here. We went in, we have handled some things poorly, we are making it right, and we have a job to finish...for the longer-term good of positive relations with a country we need to be friends with in the center (or one OF the centers) of the war on terror.
I'm done now.
Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus
Nature and severity and degree are not the same, but the items are.
Well then they can't really be "considered equal" as you originally stated, can they? That overstatement, particularly immediately following your well-supported and realistic take on Iraq, is what I directed part of my constructive criticism at.
I'm not blaming America in the sense you are pushing here.
Fair enough, perhaps it's a matter of semantics. But when someone claims that America is "responsible" for the situation in Iraq, they really ought to be pretty precise about what they really mean.
If what you really mean is that America has its own interest and rationale in continued engagement in Iraq, in order to, as you suggest, establish a pro-American regime in the Middle East, well that's a pretty defensible statement. The American administration is obligated to do what is in America's best interests.
But exercise caution when suggesting that what's happening there with regards to the civil unrest, violence, corruption and general dysfunction is something that America must shoulder any blame or responsibility for. Insofar as the Iraqi regime was a threat to America, it follows that America is not obligated to address issues that resulted from the overthrow of that regime. Now if, as you suggest, the administration has caused injustices through mismanagement, negligence, or whatever, in the course of pursuing goals that extended beyond addressing the threat posed by Iraq, then, yes, I would agree they and by proxy all Americans are responsible for correcting those injustices.
That is, IMO, a much more correct and reasonable position than suggesting that "Americans became responsible for the mess the day we invaded Iraq".
Here's what's going to happen, by November, Iraq will have improved by leaps and bounds. If a Democrat is elected, by March next year, the Democrats will be praised for fixing Iraq, but the housing/mortgage crisis will be a non-issue. If a Republican is elected, Iraq will be a non-issue, and the NYT will attack McCain for the housing/mortgage crisis instead.
Courage becomes a living and an attractive virtue when it is regarded not only as a willingness to die manfully, but also as a determination to live decently.
at all, especially to give an accurate assessment of Iraq. That is why we have the alternative media & why it's still gaining in popularity & usage. The arena of information is no longer the sole purview of the dinosaur MSM.
for the democrats. The problem is that the far left kos kidz & moveon.org types STILL have defeat in Iraq as their primary objective, & these people have much power in the democrat party. It will be interesting, once the democrats have a nominee (hopefully after a spirited brawl - uh, debate - on the convention floor), how the nominee does in corralling the far left influence, or will a significant portion jump the democrat ship for Nader or another?
The GOP must win in November. The country simply can't afford to turn itself up on its head by electing ultra-liberals.