Some very bright people, like this guy, figured out the big picture behind the war over two years ago, David. And some of less bright people listened to what they said, noted it, then watched as events unfolded that confirmed more and more of what they said. (I call your particular attention to Section VIII-E) for one particularly telling observation.)

I can't explain why you didn't see this, or understand this, but now you have had it shown to you, and spelled out clearly. Does that help?

J.

Other than being a piece of well written bullshit, I don't see anything that refutes the basic premise of this post.... That there remains NO strategy for dealing with Iraq, other than "Stay the Course."

If one thinks that things are bad and getting worse, I can see how "stay the course" is bad. But if one thinks that things are improving, not "staying the course" would be folly. I fall into the latter camp.

J.

Okay Jay, I have a challenge for you... As I recall you love challenges.
Tell me how many times the situation is improving,has been stated on Wizbang, and when was the first, then tell me the number of Iraqi civilian deaths since that first post claiming improvement, and an average per month. Then average it out and include civilian deaths under Saddam over a like time period. Then as a last assignment, quantify your comment about improvements with REAL numbers, we can start with:

Mortality Rate
Unemployment
Availability of Electricity and Water

After you have done that, I will give you your props, but you still wont have a strategy.

DA

*grabbing my popcorn 'cause this is going to be good*

:)

David, I'm sorry you saw the Den Beste piece as "well written bullshit." As a prediction, it was a hell of a lot more accurate than a lot of those that the Left issued -- the thousands of US dead in the fighting, the brutal house-by-house combat in Baghdad that would turn the city into a charnel pit, the inciting of a regional war, etc. etc. etc.

I'm not going to look up those stats for you -- you wanna cite 'em, you do your own homework. But I will rebut with this piece (http://recruiterconfession.blogspot.com/2005/12/things-youll-never-hear-main-stream.html), by a military recruiter, who cites some serious statistics, and backs them up.

I'll also toss at you this analysis (http://www.logictimes.com/civilian.htm) of the "civilian casualties" in Iraq, which strongly indicates that a lot of those considered such are most likely insurgents/terrorists, and are being considered "civilians" in the sense that they are not wearing uniforms.

Hmm... popcorn? Not a bad idea, Rogue, don't mind if I do...

J.

Well I am not surprised that you chose not to do the research, since it would more than likely prove my point. But I dont have any more time to read the pro war propaganda than you do to read the anti war stuff. You almost always manage to avoid dealing with these issues Jay, I am dissapointed but not surprised.

If you'd looked at those, David, they actually would have answered several of your questions. And I find it telling that information that contradicts your position is "propaganda," while that which supports it is "stuff."

BTW, the word "propaganda" does not necessarily mean "false." In fact, the best propaganda is the simple truth -- which the recruiter's stats tend to prove.

Again, David, I feel as great a compunction to find the numbers that would refute your allegations as you do to support them. If you think they're readily available and support you, cite them -- don't foist your homework off on me.

I'm more than willing to hold up half this debate, and I've cited two sources (that meticulously document their own efforts). The ball's in your court now.

J.

P.S.: Rogue, thanks for the idea -- the popcorn was delicious.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Subscribe to this comment thread.

Comments: