DEDICATED TO EXPOSING DISINFORMATION AND PROPAGANDA AND TO PROMOTING UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS - WITH SHARP ANALYSIS AND BLUNT COMMENTARY. NO ADS. NO TIP-JAR. JUST THE TRUTH.
DEDICATED TO EXPOSING DISINFORMATION AND PROPAGANDA AND TO PROMOTING UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS - WITH SHARP ANALYSIS AND BLUNT COMMENTARY. NO ADS. NO TIP-JAR. JUST THE TRUTH.
http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20060619-031131-8489r
ReplyDeleteUPI'S Seiff above,has it right. The US is
treading water or worse in Iraq.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200227,00.html
ReplyDeletemore and more families will grow disillusioned with the war as this piece indicates. the US will be forced out without a victory.
ao attacks decline, and we roll up alq's biggies and grow the iraqis army and we're treading water!? BULLSHIT. we are winning.
ReplyDeletethe only way we lose is if the dems win - they'll retreat and hand iraq to alQ the way they handed south vietnam to the commies.
Yeah "Democrat" Kissinger won the "Peace Prize" for that retreat.
ReplyDeleteThe Iraqi Army is so ineffectual the big discussion in surrounding Arab countries now is why won't the US arm it adequately...mistrust or excuse to stay?
anon 751 your wrong on the facts:
ReplyDelete(1) we had vietnamized the war by 3/29/73 upon which date there were no us troops in vietnam. none.
vietnam did not fall until 1975 - two YEASR later, and it ONLOY fell becasue democrat doves who controlled congress stopped financing the South Vietnamese democracy.
nixon's strategy was working; therefore it was no retreat; IOW: the South Vietnamese could've held the line against the commies if ONOPY the democrat doves hadnlt pulled the plug on them and abandoned them as they did the contras.
they current democrat doves will do the same thing to the iraqis. which would be bad. very bad.
(2) we arming the iraqis in the employ of the democratically elected coinstitutional govt of iraq.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,,1802401,00.html
ReplyDeletemore bad news from Iraq's second city! and this from the BRITS
NOT THE "LEFT" msm...
Historians dominantly agree,the South Vietnamese "wanted it less", had less skill,were never going to win no matter how well financed.
BWAHAHAHAHA!
ReplyDelete1 - the guardian is more leftist than the bbc! and totally leftist EU msm - which is further to the left than ANY in the US!!
2 - the svg held on for two friggin years without US combat troops. they could have held on for longer: JUST LIKE SOUTH KOREA.
if the DEMS/DOVES hadn;t ABANDONED the South Vietnamese, then they'd be a rich and as free as SOUTH Koreans instead of as poor and tyrannized as NORTH Koreans.
so you - anon 917 are totally friggin WRONG!