are we doing any good in Iraqi?

Joined
Jun 25, 2001
Messages
8,474
This was send to me By My niece, you all know I've mentioned that she was over there putting in her Army time..


Did you know that 47 countries have re-established their
embassies in
Iraq?


Did you know that the Iraqi government employs 1.2 million
Iraqi people?
Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated, 364
schools are under rehabilitation, 263 schools are now under construction and
38 new schools have been built in Iraq?
Did you know that Iraq's higher educational structure
consists of 20
Universities, 46 institutes or colleges and 4 research
centers?


Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United
States in
January 2004 for the re-established Fulbright program?


Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have
five 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry
regiment.
Did you know that Iraq's Air Force consists of three
operation squadrons, nine reconnaissance and three US C-130 transport
aircraft which operate
day and night, and will soon add 16 UH-1 copters and four
Bell jet
rangers?


Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a
Commando
Battalion?


Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000
fully trained and equipped police officers?
Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that
produce over 3500 new officers each 8 weeks?
Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going
on in Iraq?
They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83
railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69
electrical
facilities.


Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of five
have received
the first two series of polio vaccinations?


Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in
primary
school by mid October?


Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers
in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%?
Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists
of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations?


Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of
2004 and that the Iraqi economy is BOOMING?


Did you know that two candidates in the Iraqi presidential
election had
a televised debate recently?


OF COURSE WE DIDN'T KNOW!


WHY DIDN'T WE KNOW?


OUR MEDIA WOULDN'T TELL US!


Because a Bush-hating media and left wing liberals would
rather see
terrorism prevail in the world rather than exercise some
common sense and patriotism.
The lack of accentuating the positive in Iraq serves only one
purpose.
It undermines the world's perception of the United States and
our soldiers.


All of these facts are verifiable on the Department of Defense
website and many other independent sources.


Please pass it on!


ck out these links of more of what's going on..

http://www.dod.mil/news/Nov2005/20051110_3309.html
http://www.dod.mil
 
Boy oh Boy Dan, GREAT POST !! It sure is pitiful that the media stifles those numbers and facts.They concentrate on the "other" number-with the hope that the liberals can use it to there advantage to gain "control" in the house & senate again. Anything to further their agenda-it doesn't matter if its a lie or a "spin"-whatever it takes to get a handle on the "Sheeple". No one wants to lose a loved one-but like they say- Freedom isn't Free !! It comes with great sacrifice-God Bless all those who would lay down their life to insure this Great Country of ours ,and the freedoms we enjoy are secure!! It is a pity how fast some people forget 9/11. As I write this post CNN is using poll #'s to put a spin on the job "W" is doing and how "we" feel about some of the decisions being made.I can't stand it when the media tells me how I'm thinking & feeling about certain issues.I have never once been "polled" & I would bet that not one person on this forum has either.All B.S.:thumbdn:
 
thanks Dave


to sum it all up in two words
volunteer service

if those of them that are there, didn't want to be there,, what were they thinking? it's why they were aloud to join, read the contracts..

for those that don't want the men and women there, that DO want to be there
BUTT! out..it's their will...they are doing it so you can speak against it:rolleyes: you know not what you do..

for those that really think we can make peace without war,,try hugging
a Iraq human bomb and see if it changes his or her mind?
it may at the very least cut down on the number they take out with them..

their people want us there it's the terrorist we are fighting
((911)) we will be terrorized forever if we don't stop them, they came here on our ground and made it personal.
I know it scares the he!l out of us all but if they win now we will not ever rest and our own will have died in vane.

if Hitler won the war just where would we be right now?? some reading for the ones that don't know, need to be done before they flap their gums.. good will prevail it's the way is has to be and will be..
believe it or not the ones that fight the need for this war are helping the other side..

hugging a human bomber saves lives, one for one instead of 1 for 10 ,, an't that sick...if there was anygood,,,
the only good thing about the human bomber is, he'll only do it once..
 
I'm not trying to diminish the achievements of our military, and I think that we have indeed done quite a lot of good in Iraq, but you really have to be careful with stuff like this.

For example, take this statement here:

Dan Gray said:
Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of five have received the first two series of polio vaccinations?

Polio vaccinations began (again) in Iraq in early 2000, after an outbreak in 1999. I'm sure we have helped to get more Iraqi children vaccinated, but that statement misleads the reader into thinking that before we invaded Iraq, there was a problem with lack of polio vaccination. There wasn't.

You can pretty much guarantee that if someone with an agenda tells you some "facts," they have picked out the facts that fit their agenda, and told the facts in such a way so as to further their agenda. This goes for Bush-haters and Bush-defenders alike. That's just the way people are.

Again, this isn't intended to diminish our soldiers' achievements -- much of that list probably contains plenty of truth, and I know of other achievements that aren't even on the list. It's just a reminder that you can't always trust what you read, whether it is from the liberal media or anyone else.
 
not me,,,, I'm reckless :)
I understand that fully. :)
but I didn't or wouldn't read it that way
because of the dates, I read it to be of on going help,
again because of the date listed.


pushing this a littler more
I personally know 3 people that spent time there 2 army and one a construction worker, and many more indirectly, we are doing right by those soles and most of them with a brain know it..

bad news sells,, that's the main problem for sure here I think..

some pepole over there just don't know what's good for them and others just fear change over torment it's sad it's this way..

I look at it this way..
Bush has a job to do ,, we put him there,, I say let him do his job.
if we don't like it get him out,, other wise let him do his job..

on the other hand we have a sore sport ketchup man and his henchmen that can't let it go
so we can not have the support needed to get the job done, right , fast , and get out in due time, and that is causing more death due to the time having to mess around with it.. we need full support or a change of command,,
we don't need nam again..bush was voted in , bush has the helm.
let him do his job..still it's just mho
 
Dan Gray said:
bad news sells,, that's the main problem for sure here I think..

Yep, I think you hit the nail on the head. Unfortunate, but true. :(

Like I said, there is a lot of good being done in Iraq. And the sad thing is, you really have to search hard to find out about it!
 
brash said:
Yep, I think you hit the nail on the head. Unfortunate, but true. :(

Like I said, there is a lot of good being done in Iraq. And the sad thing is, you really have to search hard to find out about it!
yes we do..no money in good news,
if we want to think about it
the media cashes in at our expense big time
and I think the good should be added in to counter it = .
I'd feel bad thinking my wages were from the poor, beaten, and the helpless
to push the ratings up for a news company to up
my popularity. but then again the Enquirer is a big seller too:rolleyes:
 
All of that is great but still we hear about one two or three or four of our troops being killed every day. We're spending A Billion (with a B) dollars every two weeks and there is still no end in sight.

The Iraqis would have more colleges, hospitals, museums, and schools if many of them had not been looted and destroyed because Ronald Dumbsfeld sent in too few troops to secure them - against the advice of his own generals. We all watched the looting and destruction on TV as our soldiers were told not to interfere. Dumbsfeld said that a free people have a right to loot. Dumbsfeld did not secure the huge munitions dumps that Sadaam had (we knew that they were there though) and it is likely that those explosives are being used in the IED's that are killing our soldiers every day. Much of Iraq was not touched by the war so we cannot claim responsibility for "creating" all the good that remains.

Then Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said our troops would be greeted with flowers and sweets. He failed to mention that they would be exploding flowers and sweets.

We know (and have known for years) for damned sure that Iran and North Korea have or are trying to build A Bombs, we know for sure that they support terrorism, and we know that they are totalitarian regimes that oppress their people. There is and has been ample proof for years - so why in the hell are we in Iraq where there is no proof of any of the above except the totalitarian part. George W wanted Iraq for some very specific reason other than the ones given to us. It wasn't about terrorism (Bush admits there was no connection), it wasn't about WMD (there were none), and it isn't about our altruistic motives to free an oppressed people (there are billions around the world who are still oppressed).

Please don't give me the argument that the Democrats voted for the war. First of all they voted to give the president the power to go to war - after all other means had been exhausted - which they never were. The idea was to let Sadaam know that the US meant business. Secondly, as I am sure you know, all of the intelligence agencies of the federal government are under the exective branch. Congress has no intelligence gathering capability. Decisions were made based on the information that the executive branch provided.

End of Rant
 
Terrorist and the link to terrorism and 911 that's why we're there....
we look to these guys to make ALL the right choices, they are human too
and half of the voters won't back them so it holds them back,,from doing the right things,,
if we don't like it,, boot them out

as for the flowers your back to terrorist and 911 , it can't go on..
politics
when you need to kick someone's A$$ and your foot is in a trap
do you try to kick him risking tearing your foot off or just don't kick
and set back a watch him laugh at you?
 
Our troops in every arm of the military I can't thank enough and admire. They are always in my heart because I came from a military family and know what it's like to see your father go to war. Some members of this forum have family or friends fighting over there and I have a good buddy, that came out of little town USA to go fight this war. Now I will want him back alive and think of him every day. ;)
 
The truth about the war isn't hard to find, just talk to a soldier thats been over there, he or she will tell you. I've had 2 nephews over there, 1 at this time and talked to 3 others soldiers. They have all told me, that to leave now would be a total mistake. There has been great goobs of good done and accomplished and the Iraqy people are glad their there to help them. To pull out now would only let whats been accomplished and those that have given so much die in vain.
I never could understand why people want to always bring up the reasons we shouldn't be there and find reasons to criticize why we are. Talk to those that have walked the walk before you state your opinions, if you haven't been there, what do you really now anyway. I only go by what those that have been there, tell me. I support our troops 100%, and you can only do this by not criticizing but backing their reasons for being there. All 5 soldiers told me, the worst thing they can hear is non support from this side. I know people say, I support our troops but not the war, then you don't support our troops in the eyes of our fine men and women over there fighting the WAR. Get real people, all these soldiers want is your love and support, not criticism, and their the ones in harms way, not you.

Another thing, why are the republicans and the democratcs always trying to prove each other wrong about the whats and whys of anything. If our politicians would work together as 1 to try and solve these problems instead of ALWAYS looking for reason to criticize and prove each other wrong, I'm sure the people would have insurance they could afford, gas at reasonable prices and lots of jobs to go around, just to mention a few.

Thanks for posting Dan, its good to see some of the good being done over there in print.

Bill
 
thanks Bill
well this is my take on it..
Republicans and the Democrats,
they don't get together I think because it's easy to sit in the passengers seat and poke at the driver..

I see it as a way for them to get into the history books at the expense of our young, we need them all backing what's happening now,
and then do the bickering once it's done..even a pack of wild dogs knows it's better to band together..

the fact is
we are there,
it's the way it is,
if we don't have support now as it's needed, it will just the last longer and it just causes the morality to go down as death goes up,
just like Bill said..it's a mind set too..I know what it feels like to feel alone while serving..
those that protest and don't see it,
or those for that matter that do see it as it is and still protest < scary,

I think they are helping the Terrorist knowing it or not...

I'm sure we could be twice as powerful as we are now if we weren't divided. :(
we are committed to do the job we set forth to do and need to finish it.
"THE I think I'm right" Americans can and should bicker later..
it's simple, there is only two sides here the terrorist and the U.S. they brought it to us with 911
we have to show them we will not take it..or cower to them..

it was said 4 Americans a day are being killed over there, yes it's sad..But
hear is a fact that we all know to be true..
can we live with the ratios the terrorist brought to us here..
U.S. 911 how many dead, one day?
Terrorist 911 how many dead, one day?
more Americans died here per terrorist on 911 than in this war..
what's the odds it won't happen again if we pull out? any odds like that, I can't live with..

does that make sense?
 
"Support for the troops" and "why we're over there in the first place" are two entirely seperate issues. If you support the troops you don't send them into harms way without adequate leadership, preparation, and support. You don't fail to adequately fund the Veterans Administration so that they will be able to keep up with the increasing number of wounded vets returning. You don't raise co-pays on medical treatment that the vets have to pay. (Why do they have to pay anything?) Do a Google search for "funding for veterans administration" and see for yourself. "Support" is not just sitting back in your easy chair and saying "I support the troops" and feeling good about yourself, it means actions that really do support the troops before, during, and after the war. Read what the Disabled Veterans Association has to say about the erosion of veterans support here: http://www.dav.org/voters/fiscal_year_2006_budget.html The attempts by the majority party to cut veterans benefits in order to keep the tax cut for the weathy are a disgrace. This is NOT supporting the troops with actions although, out the other side of their mouths they say "we support the troops'.

I entirely agree that we cannot pull out now. So do most sensible people. Too much is at stake. Iraq would decend into civil war and that would become a regional war and destabilize the region. We've stuck our foot in it and we have to do the right thing to get out, but that doesn't mean we should have stuck our foot in it in the first place. The issue about the conduct of the war is competence of the leadership (read Rumsfeld and Bush). There are more insurgent attacks now than ever. We're losing more troops and at an ever increasing rate. The president says "stay the course", or "strategy for victory", and after two and a half years we are still losing more troops at an increasing rate. The issue is COMPETENCE of the leadership. We need to win this war and get the hell out. That is supporting the troops.

Here's a snippit from the Disabled Veterans Association Webpage that illustrates what the majority party has tried to do:

The ill-advised plan of the House leadership was to change the law to authorize service connection only for disabilities proven to have been directly caused by performing the activities of a servicemember&#8217;s particular military occupation. Injuries sustained during mealtimes and off-duty hours, for example, would not be service connected. Mental disorders and diseases would not be service connected unless the member could prove that performing his or her military job functions, and nothing else, caused the mental disorder or disease. Disabilities from the stress of the general military environment or military activities not strictly a part of a member&#8217;s military occupation would not be service connected. Infectious diseases incurred during service could not be service connected unless the member could prove the infection was incurred while performing activities of his or her military occupation. For example, a member who contracted malaria while serving in a remote jungle location could not be awarded service connection unless the member could prove the mosquito bite occurred while performing job functions, as opposed to while resting, eating, or sleeping.

This would have become law if enough people had not stood up and told their congressmen "NO". (Many people never even knew about this proposed law change) So stop waiving the flag and saying "I support the troops", "stay the course", and "strategy for victory", and get the facts from someone besides Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity or CNN or other broadcast media. Watch CSPAN and see for yourself what is going on in the Senate and the House. Then write to or telephone your senators and your representative and tell them that we need meaningful support for the troops, not just a lot of talk. Support the troops with actions not words.
 
I hear your concerns and I don't have to look at the site link..
I'm a nam vet and I'm being seen by the VA on a monthly basis for treatment..I know how it is..:(
...Support..... if you don't have the voters votes to give up the funding the gov can't give it..
that's the short of it..Vets suffer to keep taxes down...if you want to be blunt about it..
the sitting gov. need to be more of a public servant then they are rather then self servants, that would help
VOTERS did it...
 
I'm with you Dan.

If only the people who say they support the troops would actually do something about it, things could change.

As far as I know, in the Bible, the only time Jesus Christ got angry was when he cleared the money changers out of the temple. It was a time for action, not a time for words. I think it's time we got angry and took some action even if it's only letters and telephone calls. They will listen if enough voters express their concerns.

Here is a challenge to those who "support the troops." Write to your representative and tell him or her how you feel about adequate funding for VA hospitals and fair treatment for our troops and our veterans.

Here is a link for your representative to the house (you have one): http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Here is a link for your Senators (you have two): http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Go ahead people, do something besides talk.
 
I would like to mention that some troops are now doing their third combat tour in Iraq. Do a Google Search "third tour in Iraq". Unlike some wars, there is little relief for the soldiers in Iraq - no safe place to retreat to - no R&R, green zone notwithstanding. Think what three combat tours might do to a twenty year old young man or woman. Think of the human wreckage that the Viet Nam war created. You'll see a lot more in the years to come if they don't have some help when they come home.

Yes, I know that no troops are complaining but that is to be expected. I was in the Army from 1964 to 1967. We did not complain.
 
I try not to comment on topics like this, but just wanted to offer a different perspective. Not necessarily because I've been to Iraq, and I know that the last thing soldiers there want to hear are people saying that they shouldn't be there. The way I suggest we "support the troops" is by sending all of them. Put "World War II rules" in effect. Deploy everyone who can go, and you get to come back when it's done. In the meantime, everyone left in the States contributes in whatever way they can. If it means cut back on gasoline or whatever else, deal with it. I guarantee it's not as big a sacrifice as the guy in the fight is making. I don't ever want to go back to Iraq, but I know I probably will. Having said that, if "World War II rules" were put into effect today, I would think is was the right thing to do. People who address this nation's leaders by silly monikers such as "Ronald Dumsfeld" do a great disservice to soldiers, and to the nation. I'm sure that Mr Coon is far more qualified for the job based on his 3 yrs in the Army "not complaining".
 
As a matter of fact I do think I could do a better job than Dumbsfeld has done. I think many people could have. Particularly Colin Powell or General H. Norman Schwarzkopf - but they were soldiers not politicians.

Here is something that Dumbsfeld and Bush II completely ignored to our great peril:

Powell Doctrine
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

General Colin Powell made famous the so-called Powell Doctrine as part of the run up to the 1990-1991 Gulf War.

It is also known as the "Powell Doctrine of Overwhelming Force."

The Powell Doctrine simply asserts that when a nation is engaging in war, every resource and tool should be used to achieve overwhelming force against the enemy. This may oppose the principle of proportionality, but there are grounds to suppose that principles of Just War may not be violated.

The Powell Doctrine is perhaps best illustrated by his quote (as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the 1991 Persian Gulf War) about the Iraqi Army:

"First we're going to cut it off, then we're going to kill it."
After victory, the military should leave the field of engagement, rather than staying around as peacekeepers.

It has been argued that the Doctrine follows from principles laid out by Caspar Weinberger, Ronald Reagan's Secretary of Defense and, as such, Powell's former boss:


Is a vital US interest at stake?
Will we commit sufficient resources to win? (emphasis added)
Are the objectives clearly defined?
Will we sustain the commitment?
Is there reasonable expectation that the public and Congress will support the operation?
Have we exhausted our other options?
Do we have a clear exit strategy?


So, Whit, I'm glad we agree on something. I was aware of the Powell Doctrine before we went into Iraq for the second time. I am sure Bumblefeld was also. I would have paid attention to someone who knew a little more about it. Dumbsfeld and Bush did not and the troops are paying the price.



Memorable Quotes by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld:

"I would not say that the future is necessarily less predictable than the past. I think the past was not predictable when it started."

"We do know of certain knowledge that he [Osama Bin Laden] is either in Afghanistan, or in some other country, or dead."

"Death has a tendency to encourage a depressing view of war."

"I believe what I said yesterday. I don't know what I said, but I know what I think, and, well, I assume it's what I said."

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." -on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction

"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know.

from: http://politicalhumor.about.com/cs/quotethis/a/rumsfeldquotes.htm
 
I read very little of your response. It's obvious that you are all about CNN soundbites, political junk emails, and name calling. Don't worry, when something important comes up, I will do the fighting for you.
 
The right wing strategy..... first ignore the facts and when you run out of arguments start personal attacks. I'm not surprised. I was agreeing with you but apparently I used too many big words. I will try to remember to keep their arguments down to bumpersticker sized two or three word slogans. Sorry, but the important issues just aren't that simple and it does sometimes call for some skullwork.

Go back and read about the Powell Doctrine in my previous post and then compare it to your previous post. What's the problem?

When you do have to fight I hope you are well led, prepared, and equipped to do so and that the fight is for a just cause.

The Powell Doctrine simply asserts that when a nation is engaging in war, every resource and tool should be used to achieve overwhelming force against the enemy. This may oppose the principle of proportionality, but there are grounds to suppose that principles of Just War may not be violated

Quote: Don't worry, when something important comes up, I will do the fighting for you.

Seems fair. I went for you in 1964.
 
Back
Top