July 9, 2007

A Formula For Victory In Iraq

The Weekly Standard: The Bush Administration's New Strategy Will Likely Succeed

  • Play CBS Video Video Will Bush Bend On Iraq?

    Only On The Web: With a new report due on progress in Iraq, and several key Republicans calling for a change in war strategy, a showdown may be brewing on Capitol Hill. Bill Plante reports.

  • Photo

     (AP / CBS)

  • Photo Essay Iraq In Pictures

    A daily diary with scenes of the latest attacks and snapshots from the effort to rebuild a nation.

  • Interactive Battle For Iraq

    The government, the insurgency, key players, background and photos.

(Weekly Standard)  This was written by Frederick W. Kagan and Kimberly Kagan.

The new strategy for Iraq has entered its second phase. Now that all of the additional combat forces have arrived in theater, Generals David Petraeus and Ray Odierno have begun Operation Phantom Thunder, a vast and complex effort to disrupt al Qaeda and Shiite militia bases all around Baghdad in advance of the major clear-and-hold operations that will follow. The deployment of forces and preparations for this operation have gone better than expected, and Phantom Thunder is so far proceeding very well. All aspects of the current strategy have been built upon the lessons of previous successful and unsuccessful Coalition efforts to establish security in Iraq, and there is every reason to be optimistic about its outcome.

The first phase of the new strategy unfolded over five months — between the president's announcement of the "surge" on January 10 and the arrival of the last of the five additional Army brigades and Marine elements in early June (though critical enablers for those combat forces have only just arrived). As the new units entered Iraq, commanders began pushing forces already in the theater forward from their operating bases into outposts in key neighborhoods of Baghdad and elsewhere. The purpose of these movements was to establish positions within those key neighborhoods and to develop intelligence about the enemy and relationships of trust with the local communities.

Also during this first phase, additional Iraqi security forces were deployed to Baghdad in accordance with a plan developed jointly by the U.S. and Iraqi military commands. All of the requested units were provided. The Iraqi military has just completed its second rotation of units into Baghdad; as before, all of the designated units arrived, and they were generally closer to being fully manned than in the first rotation.

The new U.S. troops have increased the available combat power in Iraq by about 40 percent, from 15 brigades to the equivalent of 21 brigades. Generals Petraeus and Odierno allocated only two of the additional Army brigades to the capital. The other three Army brigades and the equivalent of a Marine regiment they deployed in the surrounding areas, known as the "Baghdad belt." There, under the guise of Operation Phantom Thunder, they are now working to disrupt the car-bomb and suicide-bomb networks that have been supporting al Qaeda's counter-surge since January.

But this second phase is designed primarily to support the clearing and holding operations in Baghdad itself, which will continue for many months. It is those operations that are meant to bring lasting security to Iraq's capital and thus create the space for political progress.

The United States has not undertaken a multiphased operation on such a large scale since the invasion, so it is unsurprising that many commentators are confused about how to report and evaluate what is going on. Indeed, the current effort differs profoundly from anything U.S. forces have tried before in Iraq. As Coalition forces begin the attempt to establish sustainable security in Baghdad and its environs, it is worth reviewing past major combat operations in Iraq, since their clear lessons have informed planning for the current, much larger campaign.

Falluja, 2004

The U.S. Marines fought two big battles in Falluja, the easternmost major city in Anbar province not far from Baghdad, in the spring and fall of 2004. The enemy was a dense network of al Qaeda fighters and Sunni Arab insurgents who had prepared defensive positions throughout the city and had considerable support from the local population. The initial assault was ordered on short notice after the kidnapping and execution of several American contractors, whose bodies were prominently displayed from a bridge.

The Marines were not given adequate time to prepare for the attack. They could not establish forward outposts in the city, develop adequate intelligence about the enemy, or gain the trust of the population. The American command did not fully prepare the Iraqi government for the intensity of the battle or the controversy it was bound to generate. As a result, the Marines' initial assaults resulted in heavy casualties and collateral damage. The Iraqi government was shaken, and the Marines were ordered to abandon the effort and rely instead on local forces to restore order in the city. Lacking troops, training, and support, the local allies were quickly either turned or slaughtered, and al Qaeda and the insurgents strengthened their hold on Falluja and Anbar generally.

The second Marine attack, in the fall, was much more successful. The local units were reinforced and given time to develop a much clearer intelligence picture, as well as to obtain local allies, although those were still few and unreliable. The much better-planned attack cleared the city, although with considerable collateral damage resulting largely from the sophistication of the defenses the enemy had been able to establish during the pause between the two attacks.

The Marines were not allowed to follow up on their success in Falluja, however. No effort was made to clear and hold Ramadi or the Upper Euphrates Valley for more than a year. In the meantime, the area between Falluja and Baghdad, including the Abu Ghraib neighborhood on the western outskirts of the capital, was left largely devoid of American forces and remained a major Sunni Arab insurgent and al Qaeda base. Nevertheless, Falluja was fairly stable for many months after the Marine attack, only slowly sinking back into chaos and enemy control.

Najak and Sadr City, 2004

The summer of 2004 also saw the only major combat between Coalition forces and Moktada al-Sadr's Mahdi army, or Jaysh al-Mahdi. This took place in the Shia holy cities of Najaf and Karbala and the Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City. The Sadrist uprising followed close on the heels of the first Battle of Falluja, and it seemed briefly that the Coalition might be defeated simultaneously by Sunni insurgents and Shia militias across Iraq. But U.S. forces rapidly regained control of the situation in Sadr City, where Major General Chiarelli's 1st Cavalry Division restored order. Fighting in Najaf was greatly complicated by the fact that the Sadrists took up positions in and near the Imam Ali Mosque, one of Shia Islam's most sacred sites. Skillful Coalition military operations dislodged the Sadrists from those positions without significant damage to the shrine, and killed many Sadrist fighters in the process.

The battles of Sadr City and Najaf continue to influence the situation in Iraq today. Sadr appears to have learned from these battles that his militia cannot stand up to American forces in pitched battles. He has avoided situations that might lead to such fights, preferring hit-and-run attacks, the use of IEDs (and now EFPs, explosively formed projectiles), and death-squad attacks on Sunni Arabs after the bombing of the Samarra Mosque in February 2006. The successes in Najaf and Sadr City were fleeting in another respect, however. U.S. forces left both areas quickly, and the Sadrist militias retook control of them within months. The Sadrists remain largely in control of Najaf and were long uncontested in Sadr City, although recent events have greatly complicated their situation there.

Tal Afar And The Upper Euphrates, 2005

After the uprisings of 2004, the United States focused its efforts on moving the political process forward in Iraq and on training the Iraqi army and National Police. It was widely expected in the government and especially in the military leadership that political progress would translate directly into improved security. It was also believed that the onus for conducting what military operations were necessary should fall on the nascent Iraqi military to the maximum extent possible.

Nevertheless, the Coalition command understood that only U.S. forces could provide the short-term security necessary for elections. The command requested and received significant reinforcements to this end in late 2005. The most dramatic battle before the elections came in September 2005, when Colonel H.R. McMaster's 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment cleared Tal Afar, a city in Nineveh Province between Mosul and the Syrian border.

Continued



By Frederick W. Kagan and Kimberly Kagan
© Copyright 2007, News Corporation, Weekly Standard, All Rights Reserved.



"Arguably the most influential opinion journal at the White House" - The New York Times

For more information and to subscribe, click here.

Video and Galleries from Opinion

Add a Comment See all 91 Comments
by xfredmenzies July 9, 2007 1:54 PM PDT
LOL ROFLMAO! You guys need to get a show on Comedy Central! We're winning the war!!! LOLLLOL!O!!
Reply to this comment
by jjp735i July 9, 2007 1:58 PM PDT
It's a Bush plan, it will fail.
What else is there to say after his tracj record!
Reply to this comment
by ioweign July 9, 2007 2:05 PM PDT
Frederick W. Kagan and Kimberly Kagan,

A Formula For Victory In Iraq - AGAIN!

I remember when the USSR would come up with these 5 year plans for this and a 5 year plan for that, anybody else remember those? Was it the late 50's and early 60's? The Shrub's Choice Conflict reminds me of one of those plans. Well, why wasn't this formula done after 'Mission Accomplished'?

It's 2007 - are we there YET!

Reply to this comment
by mimi611 July 9, 2007 2:11 PM PDT
Does stupid beget stupid? How can you in good conscience keep singing this same sad son? Anyone who still "believes" in Bush, is truly scary.
Reply to this comment
by rdnearthezoo July 9, 2007 2:13 PM PDT
jjp735i, please remove your head from wherever it is lodged and realize that this is not Bush's plan.

This article illustrates the differences between former action and the current plan as designed by Generals Petreus and Odierno. Bush, though you obviously hate him so, did not formulate the current plan. But I doubt you read the article and only made it as far as the contributor.

For myself, though I have differing opinions on this war, found this analysis helpful. It clearly describes what we did in the past and how our military has adapted.

And as the Kagens make clear, this is no guarantee for success. But there is progress being made. And for that I am grateful and proud.
Reply to this comment
by feelfree1 July 9, 2007 2:17 PM PDT

Dead-brained traitors like Frederick W. Kagan and Kimberly Kagan, have little choice but to cheer on the illegitimate Bush regime butchers to the bitter end, for they know that they may well find themselves before a war crimes tribunal one day, along side the Bush puppet and his handlers.

Fortunately, only 1 in 4 Americans are suseptable to the boot-licking blather of these treasonous dupes.
Reply to this comment
by cdfoxtrot July 9, 2007 2:23 PM PDT
"A Formula For Victory In Iraq"? Here's one: get the hell out of there. Pronto.
None of these neo-con war monger types like Kagan seem capable of learning from history. When you invade a country and occupy it, it's only a matter of time before the locals rise up against you. Simple as that.
Withdrawal from Vietnam eventually resulted in a peaceful, stable economy whose people are now very friendly toward Americans. Let's try the same thing with Iraq. Can't hurt, can it?
Reply to this comment
by clestes-2009 July 9, 2007 2:27 PM PDT
You smoking that victory weed again Freddie???

Not one single thing Bush has done in Iraq has been successful. There never was a well thought out plan on invading besides the "Invade, remove Saddam, install Iraqi govn in 6 weeks" plan and that was never realistic.

Every subsequent plan has failed.

First we have the "Stay the Course" which didn't work.

Ten comes the "Stand up, we will stand down", that didn't work.

How about the "Together Forward" or "clear hold build" plan. That didn't work.

Now we have Together Forward 2 or Surge plan and it is not working.

Look, the basic problem here besides not enough troops, is real simple.

THE IRAQI PARLIMENT IS A JOKE!!!!!!!

Right now the Turks are planning an invasion of North Iraq to battle the Kurds. The Sunnis are boycotting the parliment.

Until the Iraqi govn takes hold and brings all these parties together, no matter what the US does, there will be only death and destruction.
Reply to this comment
by shingles1 July 9, 2007 2:40 PM PDT
Yay, the Kagans are telling us that the policy that they themselves came up with is succeeding.
Brilliant comedy!
Clown Punditry at its finest.
Reply to this comment
by terrapin78 July 9, 2007 2:42 PM PDT
All of this from those who got us into the MESS that we now face.

There is no victory to secure. There is nothing to win when you go to war on a lie.
Reply to this comment
by observantx July 9, 2007 2:47 PM PDT

Kagan, my main man, Yo, you gotta score me some of whatever you been smokin' or dropping, 'cause it's gotta be some outrageous sh*t. I can't wait to get totally blown away by the stuff you been doin'.

Maybe you can score some of that righteous stuff to the dude who's been rotated to a war zone for the fifth time. He could use a little "adjustment" to reconcile the disconnect between serving your country and serving as cannon fodder for El Presidente.

But then again, you never had to lay your keester on the line for any reason. So why should we expect any reasoned dialog from you about duty, responsibility, true patriotism, etc.?

In short, stick it up your collective *ss, you coddled, simpering, wusses.




Reply to this comment
by marcodele July 9, 2007 3:07 PM PDT
Wow! Operation "Phantom Thunder!" That's an awesome name, and the neocons will eat it up like candy. Maybe Toby Keith can make a new song and use "Phantom Thunder" in it somewhere.

"Phantom Thunder" is a bigger woodie than "The Surge." And since the surge is basically failing, we can now have Rush and Fox News focus on how Americans should show their respect for "Operation Phantom Thunder." Because with a name like that, it must be good.

Great idea Karl!
Reply to this comment
by feelfree1 July 9, 2007 3:09 PM PDT
Antillo99,

The puppet-officials in Iraq lack any legitimacy and authority, and do not have the support of the Iraqi people.

The Iraqi people have every right to defend themselves against the brutal and illegal invasion of their country, and against collaborators, including the currently installed 'officials'.

'al-Qaeda-in-Iraq' appears to be a shabby hoax, aimed at tying the illegal and disgraceful invasion of Iraq to the 'War on Terror', where no such 'link' exists, contrived as a divide and rule tactic by the illegitimate Bush regime against the people of Iraq, and as a pathetic excuse for continuing the illegal war where no justification exists.

The illegal U.S.-led invasion of Iraq is a crippling military, economic, and moral defeat for the people of the U.S., and we must bring those responsible for it before a war crimes tribunal, if we ever hope to recover from this grave error.
Reply to this comment
by marcodele July 9, 2007 3:23 PM PDT
"The Coalition Forces?"

Whose left in the coalition? Prince Harry can't play. I think its the U.S. troops and two guys from Greece in "The Coalition."

"I'm a Co-aliter, not a divider." GWBush
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 July 9, 2007 3:25 PM PDT
As good as Operation 'Phantom Thunder' is going, we expect even more success from next years Operation 'Phantom Victory'
Reply to this comment
by tejasdemo July 9, 2007 3:28 PM PDT
Wow! Operation "Phantom Thunder!" That's an awesome name, and the neocons will eat it up like candy. Maybe Toby Keith can make a new song and use "Phantom Thunder" in it somewhere.

"Phantom Thunder" is a bigger woodie than "The Surge." And since the surge is basically failing, we can now have Rush and Fox News focus on how Americans should show their respect for "Operation Phantom Thunder." Because with a name like that, it must be good.

Great idea Karl!

Posted by marcodele at 03:07 PM : Jul 09, 2007

Go Phantom Thunder !!! yeehaww..ride the like the wind !!!

Lolololololololol
Reply to this comment
by hangelle July 9, 2007 3:45 PM PDT
Phantom %u2013 ghost, apparition; unreal being or sensation; illusion; not real.

Moron - Bush, Cheney, Weekly Standard.
Reply to this comment
by xzavierbrown July 9, 2007 3:47 PM PDT
the only way to win middle east, is to expand out of Iraq and move on to where the sources of these insurgency. Syria and Iran. In conjunction with that, we need to inject that islamic mentality with a bit of freedom to choose aka liberalism. We have the technology to do so, Ironically enough that is IF THE LIBERALS WOULD ALLOW these terrorists to be dealt with to be able to plant that seed of liberalism is the MAJOR PROBLEM.
Reply to this comment
by feelfree1 July 9, 2007 3:53 PM PDT
xzavierbrown,

Re: "the only way to win middle east, is to expand out of Iraq and move on to where the sources of these insurgency. Syria and Iran."

Spoken like a true Israeli-firster, and PNAC dead-ender.
Reply to this comment
by marcodele July 9, 2007 3:54 PM PDT
I really liked "Shock and Awe" and "Smoke 'em Out of the Foxhole" a lot better.
Reply to this comment
by watcher269-2009 July 9, 2007 3:54 PM PDT
America lost this war before it was started - watch this segment from youtube - I saw this for the first time today and it made me MAD that Bush and Cheney/haliburton care nothing about our troops and winning. I hope the like works here


http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/103.html
Reply to this comment
by ramos937 July 9, 2007 3:59 PM PDT
What planet did these two administration flunkies come from. Not earth by any stretch. Virtually every print, radio and tv report out of Iraq contradicts everything they wrote in this article. Did they hold their noses as they were writing the article or are they certifyable insane.

During the weekend over 160 Iraiqs died by violence as did eight our of your guys. And that is progress?
Can someone on the far right as these two guys are ever wake up and realize that the bad guys will never meet us head-to-toe. With our air power and navy power, we would wipe them out before our ground power ever came into play. So, they will never have pitched battles with us. When we are too strong in one place, they show up in another place.

Please lock up these two yahoos for their own safety.
Reply to this comment
by terrapin78 July 9, 2007 4:08 PM PDT
Why didn't we "fight" like this 4 years ago. Instead the Bu$hies under manned the effort and now all that is left is failure.

TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE!
Reply to this comment
by feelfree1 July 9, 2007 4:30 PM PDT
Watcher269,

www.brasschecktv.com/page/103.html

Thanks for posting. I had not seen this film.

Reply to this comment
by quatermass2 July 9, 2007 4:35 PM PDT
"The Bush Administration's New Strategy Will Likely Succeed"

Well, if the "strategy" is to do nothing different, continue letting people die in the hundreds, wait for the 2008 elections and then blame whoever wins for "losing Iraq", yeah, it's a "slam dunk". Stinks as strategy, but these scab-eating death cultists couldn't care less about our soldiers OR the Iraqis.

Reply to this comment
by itchyb-2009 July 9, 2007 4:36 PM PDT
"Bush, though you obviously hate him so, did not formulate the current plan."

As commander in chief, it is his plan. He owns it, and our fellow citizens are paying for it, not to mention the untold number of Iraqis.
Reply to this comment
by clestes-2009 July 9, 2007 4:38 PM PDT
xzavierbrown

Expand out of Iraq with what??? The surge troops?? They can't even get out of Baghdad, for christ sake!! Use the Iraqi soldiers???

Have you not paid attention to what has been happening this last 4 years.

go the PBS.org and watch the Frontline segment called End Game. It sums up how and why we are stuck in Iraq very well, and trust me on this, not one of the generals interviews, all of them Iraq vets, think we should expand the war.

Jesus, what a nut case......
Reply to this comment
by tejasdemo July 9, 2007 4:40 PM PDT
The article should be titled ...

A FORMULA FOR DEATH

BY

THE WEEKLY NAZI
Reply to this comment
by cofmanaaron July 9, 2007 4:47 PM PDT
They've been doing this surge thing since a few years back and just decided to call it by another name. THank you Watcher269, for this clip: www.brasschecktv.com/page/103.html
This video shows how corruption ensnared this war, how it will never be won with Republicans in office, and that Bush is likely guilty of treason.
Reply to this comment
by marcodele July 9, 2007 4:52 PM PDT
Introducing "The Coalition":

Hungary *** 0 Withdrew troops: Mar. 2005
Nicaragua 0 Withdrew troops: Feb. 2004
Spain 0 Withdrew troops: Late-Apr. 2004
Dominican Republic 0 Withdrew troops: Early-May. 2004
Honduras 0 Withdrew troops: Late-May. 2004
Philippines 0 Withdrew troops: mid-Jul. 2004
Thailand 0 Withdrew troops: Late-Aug. 2004
New Zealand 0 Withdrew troops: Late-Sep. 2004
Tonga 0 Withdrew troops: mid-Dec. 2004
Portugal 0 Withdrew troops: mid-Feb. 2005
Singapore**** 0 Withdrew troops: Mar. 2005
Norway 0 Withdrew troops: Oct. 2005
Ukraine 0 Withdrew troops: Dec. 2005
The Netherlands 0 Withdrew troops: Mar. 2005
Japan 0 Withdrew troops: Jul. 2006
Italy 0 Withdrawal troops: End of Nov. 2006
Slovakia 0 Withdrew troops: End of January 2007

The fact that these authors even reference "The Coalition" tells me they're about as honest as Fox News.
Reply to this comment
by jimfinster July 9, 2007 4:55 PM PDT
Frederick W. Kagan and Kimberly Kagan:

What have you two been smoking !?!

Reply to this comment
by feelfree1 July 9, 2007 5:01 PM PDT

I can always count on the dead-brains and traitors at the Weekly Standard, when I need a whiff of the 'New World Odor'.
Reply to this comment
by bluestardad July 9, 2007 5:02 PM PDT
AEI IS ON C-SPAN WITH A DOG AND PONY SHOW SAYING THE SURGE NEEDS MORE TIME AND IS BEING SUCCESSFUL!

The American Enterprise Institute (Pro-Israeli Think Tank) came up with this Surge Plan Not American Generals! Bush fired them cause they did not want to surge troops!

Contact Information Reuel Marc Gerecht

American Enterprise Institute
1150 Seventeenth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036
Assistant: 202-862-5926
Fax: 202-862-4875
E-mail: RGerecht@aei.org


Why not send this chickenhawk an email? Tell him how impressed we all are by his "analysis".

This is a guy who worships Kristol, Perle, Wolfowitz, et allthe neocons who contributed to this Bushit War.

Duel Israeli Passport Holders Masquerading as Americans!

LET THESE ISRAELIS AND THEIR NEOCON PUPPETS GO TO IRAQ AND FIGHT WHILE WE BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!

I KNEW THIS WAS THE WEEKLY STANDARD BY JUST THE TITLE OF THE STORY!

IRAQ IS NOT NOR HAD EVER BEEN IN AMERICAN INTEREST!

Reply to this comment
by mizpah63 July 9, 2007 5:24 PM PDT
Kagan & Kagan are obviously playing to their readers and patrons. No one else could possibly believe this nonsense.
Reply to this comment
by walt1944-2009 July 9, 2007 5:57 PM PDT
65 years ago, a paper-hanger in Germany calling himself "The Fueher (Leader)" lost all confidence in his generals who were telling him the war was lost, and appointed himself as Supreme Commander of all military forces in Germany. His military abilities and understanding was ZERO, but that didn't stop him from moving "phantom" armies around and calling senior citzens and children to fight "TO THE DEATH" for the "FATHERLAND".

The end result of that episode in German history was a disaster for the country and the division of the country between east and west which lasted 50 years!

Today, we have a "Decider" in the White House, a coward with ZERO military training and ability ignoring his military generals, and sending grandparents and kids to fight a war that isn't even defending their own country! Am I the only one who sees disturbing parallels here?

SIG HEIL, BUSH!
Reply to this comment
by johnshaft4 July 9, 2007 6:01 PM PDT
Kagan is so detached from reality (along with his fellow Zionist/Mossad traitors) as to be diagnosed clinically insane.
Notice how it is always more Amercian life, limb and treasure lost, without a drop of Israeli Jew blood lost or a Jew cent.
See: NoWarForIsraelDOTcom
Reply to this comment
by ivandrago July 9, 2007 6:16 PM PDT
Is this what it's like to read Fox News. Much rosier than anything I've read before in quite some time. It's a much happier version of things on the ground. It would be nice if I were inclined to believe it.

P.S. Don't be fooled into believing that U.S. soldiers are somehow targeting civilians for extermination. That is a generally a lie, with some notable exceptions. I was a soldier once, and I never felt compelled or encouraged to murder women and children. The insurgents do a fine job of that on their own.
Reply to this comment
by mojo805 July 9, 2007 6:44 PM PDT
Of course Kagan is going to write that Bush's strategy is going to succeed because Kagan cooked up the surge plan at the American Enterprise Institute back in January to discredit the Iraq Study Group's report and recommendations and was able to get Bush to buy into his plan. I'm so sick of the neocons constantly *** up foreign policy. I can only hope that the Republicans who are critical of the surge policy can move towards a more sensible policy regarding Iraq.

And I hope that News Corp doesn't get its hands on the Wall Street Journal. The editorial staff at the WSJ are pretty extreme but I'd hate to see the regular news staff at the WSJ compromised by News Corp.
Reply to this comment
by imnho July 9, 2007 8:12 PM PDT
Another Alice-in- wonderland article from the National Standard. The war will go on without let up. Althought the Sunni's may be fed up with al-quadia they are implacabble opponents of the ******.

This war will drag on without resolution. the two sides that have to make peace have no interest in negoation. They look at the present goverment as a joke(And a bad one at that)

The surge can be prolonged untill the next president and then they will try to blame the disaster on the next president
Reply to this comment
by gkc99 July 9, 2007 8:13 PM PDT
Kindly refer to the article about the "surge" being a joke.

So withdraw and let the Iraqis have their little scuffle.

No Muslim man is really happy unless he has the blood of innocent bystanders on his hands.

When the dust settles, the greedy *** will surely sell us any oil we need.

That was the official US policy under Bushit the Elder.

Too bad Sonny is too f**king stupid to listen to "Pop".
Reply to this comment
by gkc99 July 9, 2007 8:17 PM PDT
Some further steps that would be useful:

1) end Muslim immigration into the US. The refugees from AFrica, refugees mind you taken in by the UK, were just convicted for trying to murder the people who helped them. There is no lower form of life than muslim terrorists.

2) hunt down all nazi-islamist 5th columnist traitors in the USA, including "Black Muslim" followers of Louis Farrakhan, and export them back to the kind of fascist paradise they would love in Iran. Plus Muslims LOVE to have darkie slaves! Nothing like the Black man to provide good hot coffee to the Muslim man in bed in the morning.

3) give the Pakis an ultimatum--either come clean about all the nukes the've spread around the world, or prepare to welcome the detonation of two hydrogen bombs--one over Pakistan (Islamabad, say) and the other over Mecca. Vaporize that rock the Muslim god hides in when he demands we all put our faces in the mud to the Muslim mullahs.
Reply to this comment
by clemenhagen1 July 9, 2007 8:26 PM PDT
I never watch FOX, but the other day while in a hotel I subjected myself to five minutes. In those five minutes the FOX talking heads waxed poetic about the marvels of the surge, while simultaneously asking why the "Democrats" don't seem to have the courage to do something about Iran. I used to think FOX, the Weakly Standard, and other such consistent Bush supporters were merely partisan. This article, juxtaposed with the reality of the release regarding Iraqi violence and the failure to meet benchmarks, proves them to be insane. Just because 25 to 30 percent of the inbreds who read this garbage continue to support Schrub doesn't make it true. All the corporate blood money sponsorship that keeps propagandists like the Kagan's under contract doesn't make it any less ludicrous or insane either.
Reply to this comment
by caykasagi July 9, 2007 8:45 PM PDT
the only card the US still has to win this war is to send in katie couric.
My god, if she cant solve this problem no one can!
Reply to this comment
by mcvet July 9, 2007 9:09 PM PDT
I don't know what these two are taking but I sure would like some of it. Talk about Rose Colored Glasses!! ROFLMAO
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 July 9, 2007 9:43 PM PDT
clemenhagen1 said: "I used to think FOX, the Weakly Standard, and other such consistent Bush supporters were merely partisan. This article, juxtaposed with the reality of the release regarding Iraqi violence and the failure to meet benchmarks, proves them to be insane"

I'm actually beginning to think they are evil. The things they want cannot POSSIBLY be in the interest of most Americans, Iraqis, Israelis, etc. I think they are dedicated to corrupting the minds of a significant minority of American voters, so that America's fine military will be used to further someone's agenda. Whos? I'm not sure, but I suspect global corporations.
Reply to this comment
by wogerwabbit July 9, 2007 10:45 PM PDT
This is just another republican attempt to retain their validity during this self-immolation phase of their existance. The repubs have been SO WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING, and it's a pitiful thing to see, as so demonstrated here by the lame neocon posts trying to justify their failures. They are LOSERS and will not admit it... they'd rather see America destroyed than open their minds to the truth. Loyalty to your party over your country is treason, plain and simple. America First... party be damned! Support our troops, bring them home!
Reply to this comment
by idlepugilist July 9, 2007 10:50 PM PDT
We all admire and honor our soldiers for their dedication and sacrifice. In highest regards, we thank all of you for your service to America.

On a tangent note, the Weekly Standard could not yet pull its collective head out of its rearend by thinking their will some type of resolution with a new strategy. I sure hope, for our soldiers' sake, that they will see greater successes. However, only a fool (read: Weekly Standard) is unable to see the puppet show going on. The WS, just like Bush, is incapable of admitting that terrorism does not Originate in Iraq.
Our soldiers are a magnet for more terrorists who filter into Iraq & want to kill Iraqi civilians for having the most remote association with American soldiers.
Reply to this comment
by nellowstone July 9, 2007 10:55 PM PDT
Just stay the course, were about to start winning! In the current context of thousands of Americans dead and wounded, hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis dead and wounded, I find the Kagans jingoism highly offensive. I notice they use the term "the enemy" to describe the various segments of Iraqi people our fine soldiers were ordered to fight throughout his narrative. I don't know about the rest of America, but I find that too strong a term to decribe people who had never done anything to us before we invaded thier country. The Bush administration, the Kagans, and the rest of the neo-cons seem to think they can continue to pontificate about the Iraqi catastrophe and people will believe them. The facts are; they lied, our soldiers and the Iraqi people, died.
Reply to this comment
by nellowstone July 10, 2007 12:10 AM PDT
A couple more points. I can't shake the the feeling the Kagans are describing some sort of board game, wich for them, (unfortunately for the rest of us), it is. Safe in their think tank, they are quite insulated from the horror their musings have unleashed. They are free to talk tough about their geo-political scheme to shove democracy down peoples throats with the barral of a gun. These people are not hawks, consertives, or "tough on terrorism" they are members of hopefully ever-shrinking intellectual clique that promotes war. Except for the ever-shrinking part, thats a pretty good description of Al-Queda. For both groups, 9/11 was a dream come true. If you consider the total impact in lives, treasure, and American influence, I don't think Bin Laden could have done a better job if he had planned the whole thing himself. Or maybe I'm just not giving him enough credit.
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 July 10, 2007 12:22 AM PDT
nellowstone said: "I don't think Bin Laden could have done a better job if he had planned the whole thing himself. Or maybe I'm just not giving him enough credit."

Bin Laden (singing the Beetles song): "I get by with a little help from my friends (Bush), gonna smile with a little help from my friends"

It HAS been a great time for the megalomaniac crowd.

Too bad its sooo expensive for the rest of us...
Reply to this comment
See all 91 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR
  • Viewed
  • Commented
Latest News
Featured Blogs