Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: A Positive Outlook On Iraq

  1. #1
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    8,682
    I would say this is a failry objective look on the current situation in Iraq, one that hasn't really been advertised by the mainstream media.

    Is anything ever 'good' when American's are still dying weekly, HELL NO. But we are making a difference in Iraq and turning things for the better.



    By Dan Thomasson
    Washington Times
    January 17, 2004

    Recently a distinguished longtime colleague and friend passed along a list of seldom-mentioned non-military achievements in the Iraqi occupation.

    The picture these accomplishments paint is somewhat different from most of the news, which generally focuses understandably on the continuing violence and loss of life. This single mindedness of the press has been severely criticized by the Bush administration, which argues that because of it Americans are not getting an accurate picture of the strides being made in reconstructing and democratizing Iraq.

    The administration contends that Iraq under U.S. led coalition control has come further in six months than Germany did in seven years or Japan did in nine years following World War II. While that may or may not be true, the fact is that neither Germany nor Japan, once the surrenders were signed, remained dangerous to allied troops stationed in either nation, as has Iraq where insurgency is expected to be prolonged and dangerous for some time. Nor is the task of rebuilding so enormous as it was then.

    Nevertheless, the list of achievements is impressive and certainly worth media attention if an accurate picture of the situation is to be presented. Here are some of them:

    *Nearly all of Iraq's 400 courts are functioning and are fully independent.

    *By early last fall, the country's power generation was exceeding the prewar average.

    *All 22 universities and 43 technical institutes and colleges are open, as are nearly all primary and secondary schools. Coalition forces have rehabbed 1,500 schools and are running well ahead of schedule in this operation. Teachers, by the way, are earning 12 to 25 times their former salaries.

    *All 240 hospitals and more than 1,200 clinics are open, and doctors' salaries far surpass what they were under Saddam. Also pharmaceutical distribution has gone from nothing to 12,000 tons. The coalition has helped administer millions of vaccinations to Iraqi children.

    *A program has cleared more than half of the 27,000 kilometers of Iraq's weed-choked canals, which now irrigate tens of thousands of Iraqi farms. The project, according to the list, has provided jobs for as many as 100,000 Iraqi men and women.

    *Most of the prewar telephone services and the potable water production have been restored.

    *Some 95 percent of all prewar bank customers now have service and there is a flood of first time customers. Iraqi banks actually are making loans to finance business and for the first time in 15 years Iraq has a single, unified currency.

    These are some of the more tangible aspects of the post war occupation, if that is the proper term, on the list. There is ever so much more needed and progress isn't easily come by.

    The intangibles include a spirit of freedom in Iraq that hasn't existed in decades - freedom to practice religion without fear of reprisals (majority Shiites particularly are beneficiaries); freedom to disagree or to oppose politically without fear of imprisonment or murder; freedom to conduct elections and business and participate in international events; freedom to select the type of education one's children receive, and on and on.

    On the military side of the equation, there are an estimated 60,00 Iraqis now helping to provide security despite setbacks in the training process and desertions.

    This is not meant to diminish the volatility of the situation or to make this picture rosier than it is. The continuing threat to the lives of the coalition forces, both military and civilian, and to innocent Iraqi citizens who often are the victims of their overzealous countrymen makes the task daunting.

    From all indications, weeding out and eliminating insurgents will require the presence of coalition forces, largely American and British, for an extended period. But while that job is underway, there is, as the list of accomplishments claims, the gradual growth of a democratic underpinning that ultimately will succeed if given the chance. That, of course, depends on the political climate here. Americans aren't a patient lot and daily death tolls aren't a way to correct that problem.

    One can only hope that this nation's European allies, namely France and Germany, can view the accomplishments as reason to revise their opposition to participation in the reconstruction effort as long as the U.S. demands control. There seems little doubt, even among those of us who are unschooled in Middle East affairs, that success in building Iraq into a prosperous free state can only be good for the entire region.

    We in the press can't ignore the cost in lives and money. But to be fair we also can recognize that the administration has come a long way toward its goals in the less than a year since this began.

    Dan K. Thomasson is former editor of the Scripps Howard News Service.

  2. #2
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    Dude, I take offense to your sub-title "Things are better then they seem". It should read more like, "Things are better then the liberal media of this country will ever let you know about!" ;)

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    8,682
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Come Back to NY[/i]@Jan 25 2004, 04:25 PM
    [b] Dude, I take offense to your sub-title "Things are better then they seem". It should read more like, "Things are better then the liberal media of this country will ever let you know about!" ;) [/b][/quote]
    Haha....That's great. You hit the nail on the head.

  4. #4
    that's great.

    so can someone review for me again why i should give a f--k about the quality of life for Iraqis?

    there are a hundred ****hole countries in this world, why is improving Iraq such a priority?

    seriously i want to know

    seems to me like all we are doing is making our boys magnets for religious extremists...

  5. #5
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    1,753
    Bitonti



    I agree...maybe we should have said the same thing to the Jews and all the other people in Europe who didn't have a pot to piss in after World War II completely decimated Europe.


    You along with myself and everybody else in this country take for granted some of the things that we get to do. The wealth we have and the freedom we love. You don't find things like this in any other country on the planet. Especially not in Iraq during Saddam. You know, the U.S, we're just this big country of a-holes, who heaven forbid we show any kind of generosity to another country. even though we currently contribute the most aid of any country in the world.

  6. #6
    why make it so moralistic

    appreciate that you mention the Jews though
    they should put a jewish star for "the STATE" of Israel on the stars and stripes

    USA will war for the holy land

    its what made this country great, OIL and Jesus

    the Crusades chapter 87

    millions of africans die every day and no one gives a rats ass. lets be real

    no one has to tell me about how great this country is... but there is the truth and there is lies

    call it the war for Israel and OIL and at least i will respect the honesty.

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti[/i]@Jan 25 2004, 11:20 PM
    [b] why make it so moralistic

    appreciate that you mention the Jews though
    they should put a jewish star for "the STATE" of Israel on the stars and stripes

    USA will war for the holy land

    its what made this country great, OIL and Jesus

    the Crusades chapter 87

    millions of africans die every day and no one gives a rats ass. lets be real

    no one has to tell me about how great this country is... but there is the truth and there is lies

    call it the war for Israel and OIL and at least i will respect the honesty. [/b][/quote]
    Not only is you post antit-semitic it is also ignorant. Clinton walked around and talked a good game, espeically about Africa. I was GWB who in fact opened the check book to help the continent.

  8. #8
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]Dude, I take offense to your sub-title "Things are better then they seem". It should read more like, "Things are better then the liberal media of this country will ever let you know about!" [/b][/quote]

    I live in D.C. and the Washington Times is a joke. It is very hard to even find, most places and vending machines only carry the Post. I read the Times online sometimes because they mock the Redskins a lot more, but other than that they are a pretty useless Right-Wing publication.

    [quote][b]Not only is you post antit-semitic it is also ignorant. Clinton walked around and talked a good game, espeically about Africa. I was GWB who in fact opened the check book to help the continent. [/b][/quote]

    How is it that anyone who doesn't agree with our foreign policy with Israel is an anti-semite?

  9. #9
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Section109Row15,Jan 26 2004, 11:35 AM][QUOTE]I live in D.C. and the Washington Times is a joke. It is very hard to even find, most places and vending machines only carry the Post. I read the Times online sometimes because they mock the Redskins a lot more, but other than that they are a pretty useless Right-Wing publication.
    [/QUOTE]

    Of course well all know how that Washington Post is the maverick of fairness and not biasedly liberal right? <_<


    [QUOTE]How is it that anyone who doesn&#39;t agree with our foreign policy with Israel is an anti-semite? [/QUOTE]


    First, I don&#39;t agree with everything Israel does but to talk about putting a Star of David on the Stars and Stripes because you don&#39;t like Isreal is anti-semitic.

  10. #10
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]First, I don&#39;t agree with everything Israel does but to talk about putting a Star of David on the Stars and Stripes because you don&#39;t like Isreal is anti-semitic. [/b][/quote]

    Israel is our pawn, if anything our policy towards them is anti-semetic.
    (As a side note: Judaism is a religion not a race and there are more Jews in the U.S. than in Israel.)

  11. #11
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti[/i]@Jan 25 2004, 11:20 PM
    [b] call it the war for Israel and OIL and at least i will respect the honesty. [/b][/quote]
    Let&#39;s call it the War for the Liberal Hypocrites to Maintain Their Lifestyles. A lifestyle that allows them to drive cars, fly planes, take boats, use their computers, turn on a light bulb, stay warm in the winter, cool in the summer and prevent us from drilling our own oil to save a turtle.

    They claim everything America does is for oil. Then why support Israel? They don&#39;t have the vast oil supplies that other ME countries have. Why not turn our back on them and gain REAL favor with the OPEC countries. Stab an ally in the back for the black stuff -- I&#39;m sure the Bush family, Dick Cheney and Haliburton would jump at the chance. So why haven&#39;t they done it yet?

    Liberals are just plain dupes. They are the dupes of the UN, they are dupes of the supposed plight of the terrorist (Yassir and pals), they are dupes of dictators (from Hitler to Castro), they are the dupes of the REAL special interests (organized labor, trial lawyers, anarchists, activist environmentalists, feminazis and liberal racists such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc).

    Maybe America is more concerned with democracy than oil. But it can&#39;t be because liberals say it isn&#39;t.

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 01:44 PM
    [b] [quote][b]First, I don&#39;t agree with everything Israel does but to talk about putting a Star of David on the Stars and Stripes because you don&#39;t like Isreal is anti-semitic. [/b][/quote]

    Israel is our pawn, if anything our policy towards them is anti-semetic.
    (As a side note: Judaism is a religion not a race and there are more Jews in the U.S. than in Israel.) [/b][/quote]
    More ignorant thoughts from michael moore-on passed through his subserviant fools.

    And exactly what is our policy towards them? (Besides protecting their butts and standing by them).

    How does it feel to know your favorite "political analyst" (that&#39;s a joke in itself) is now backing someone for President just a few years ago he considered a war criminal?

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Come Back to NY[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 03:17 PM
    [b] How does it feel to know your favorite "political analyst" is now backing someone for President just a few years ago he considered a war criminal? [/b][/quote]
    Michael Moore&#39;s now backing Bush? :o

    Just kidding.

    I&#39;m in a really good mood today, and I&#39;m trying to keep it light&#33;

  14. #14
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [quote][i]Originally posted by tailgators+Jan 26 2004, 03:20 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (tailgators @ Jan 26 2004, 03:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Come Back to NY[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 03:17 PM
    [b] How does it feel to know your favorite "political analyst" is now backing someone for President just a few years ago he considered a war criminal? [/b][/quote]
    Michael Moore&#39;s now backing Bush? :o

    Just kidding.

    I&#39;m in a really good mood today, and I&#39;m trying to keep it light&#33; [/b][/quote]
    Well he&#39;s not backing blowjob bill clinton and hitlery&#39;s not running....maybe he should back lurch as he wants to destroy our intelligence services.....just kidding ;)

    [b]1995: John Kerry- Proposed Bill Cutting &#036;1.5 Billion From Intelligence Budget. Kerry introduced a bill that would “reduce the Intelligence budget by &#036;300 million in each of fiscal years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000.” There were no cosponsors of Kerry’s bill, which never made it to the floor for a vote. (S. 1290, Introduced 9/29/95)

    1995: John Kerry- Voted To Slash FBI Funding By &#036;80 Million. (H.R. 2076, CQ Vote #480: Adopted 49-41: R 9-40; D 40-1, 9/29/95, Kerry Voted Yea)

    1994: John Kerry- Proposed Bill To Gut &#036;1 Billion From Intelligence And Freeze Spending For Two Major Intelligence Programs. Kerry proposed a bill cutting &#036;1 billion from the budgets of the National Foreign Intelligence Program and from Tactical Intelligence, and freezing their budgets. The bill did not make it to a vote, but the language was later submitted (and defeated – see below) as S. Amdt. 1452 to H.R. 3759. (S. 1826, Introduced 2/3/94)[/b]

  15. #15
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]1995: John Kerry- Proposed Bill Cutting &#036;1.5 Billion From Intelligence Budget. Kerry introduced a bill that would “reduce the Intelligence budget by &#036;300 million in each of fiscal years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000.” There were no cosponsors of Kerry’s bill, which never made it to the floor for a vote. (S. 1290, Introduced 9/29/95)

    1995: John Kerry- Voted To Slash FBI Funding By &#036;80 Million. (H.R. 2076, CQ Vote #480: Adopted 49-41: R 9-40; D 40-1, 9/29/95, Kerry Voted Yea)

    1994: John Kerry- Proposed Bill To Gut &#036;1 Billion From Intelligence And Freeze Spending For Two Major Intelligence Programs. Kerry proposed a bill cutting &#036;1 billion from the budgets of the National Foreign Intelligence Program and from Tactical Intelligence, and freezing their budgets. The bill did not make it to a vote, but the language was later submitted (and defeated – see below) as S. Amdt. 1452 to H.R. 3759. (S. 1826, Introduced 2/3/94)
    [/b][/quote]

    And your point? What are you saying that if we had funded the intelligence agencies with billions more they would have stopped September 11th? Or more likely they would go after the real criminals like people getting copies of movie screeners and uploading them. Or maybe they could use the extra money for staging coups and installing dictators around the world.

  16. #16
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 03:41 PM
    [b] [quote][b]1995: John Kerry- Proposed Bill Cutting &#036;1.5 Billion From Intelligence Budget. Kerry introduced a bill that would “reduce the Intelligence budget by &#036;300 million in each of fiscal years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000.” There were no cosponsors of Kerry’s bill, which never made it to the floor for a vote. (S. 1290, Introduced 9/29/95)

    1995: John Kerry- Voted To Slash FBI Funding By &#036;80 Million. (H.R. 2076, CQ Vote #480: Adopted 49-41: R 9-40; D 40-1, 9/29/95, Kerry Voted Yea)

    1994: John Kerry- Proposed Bill To Gut &#036;1 Billion From Intelligence And Freeze Spending For Two Major Intelligence Programs. Kerry proposed a bill cutting &#036;1 billion from the budgets of the National Foreign Intelligence Program and from Tactical Intelligence, and freezing their budgets. The bill did not make it to a vote, but the language was later submitted (and defeated – see below) as S. Amdt. 1452 to H.R. 3759. (S. 1826, Introduced 2/3/94)
    [/b][/quote]

    And your point? What are you saying that if we had funded the intelligence agencies with billions more they would have stopped September 11th? Or more likely they would go after the real criminals like people getting copies of movie screeners and uploading them. Or maybe they could use the extra money for staging coups and installing dictators around the world. [/b][/quote]
    Nice research you did in response to his FACTS.

    Any intelligence failures are pinned squarely on the backs of such democratic luminaries as John Kerry and Robert Torricelli.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us