IRAQ, INVASION PLUS THREE YEARS
Over the past several days there has been a focused attention on the third anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. Most of the reporting that has been covered by the mainstream media has been looking at the failures and even when covering the President's PR campaign the focus after the sound/video bites have attempted to change the positive focus portrayed by the President into either a body count or dwelling on the insurgency and the perceived notion that Iraq is either in or on the verge of civil war. Very little has been mentioned in the press about the latest revelations concerning the declassification of captured documents showing an obvious link between the Hussein regime and Osama Bin Laden prior to 9/11 and after. Almost nothing has been mentioned about the documents that have shown the deception and distribution of the WMD's by Hussein just prior to the invasion and the lengthy means to deceive weapons inspectors before the invasion. I know that those of you who are opposed to this theatre of battle as a part of the greater global war on terror are even as you are reading this preparing your arguments about the failures and the supposed deception that has been claimed by the left from the beginning. You are free to believe what you will but looking at the facts about Iraq and comparing them to other wars and theatres of battle that the United States has participated in, Iraq is not only a rousing success but more has been accomplished with fewer casualties and loss of life and in a shorter time period than in any conflict that this nation has been involved in throughout out entire history. Every soldier and civilian that is lost during any war is a tragedy that unfortunately is the highest and most devastating cost of war. At this third anniversary we must pay tribute to each and every brave American who has given the ultimate sacrifice on the altar of freedom and remember the sorrow of those they have left behind. For those who have been wounded in the fighting, there is never enough appreciation that anyone can express for the service that has been rendered to this nation and the physical sacrifice that has been made. For all who have and are currently serving our gratitude as a nation and as individuals for your service to the cause of freedom can never be expressed enough. Thank you for all you have done and will continue to do in your service to our country.
In retrospect, have there been mistakes made in Iraq ? Certainly but this is an aspect of war that has and will always occur. Though commanders and the Commander in Chief and his staff can plan and execute that plan there will always be contingencies that occur that will cause any plan to meet with obstacles which cause re-examination and revision. No one can anticipate every aspect of a war prior to or even during the conflict. This is one of the natures of war and the theatre of Iraq is no exception. Every war that we have fought in has received constant revision of tactics, goals and personnel. During WWII our first battlefield experience against the Nazi's was an absolute failure and defeat as Rommel's Afrika Corps totally and utterly devastated the United States Second Army in North Africa. A change in command brought General George S. Patton and along with British Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery , the allied forces reversed the campaign and defeated Rommel's Afrika Corps.
Many have criticized the length of the conflict in Iraq. We live in an era of sound bites and fast breaking news covered 24 hours by massive cable news channels. This gives a false expectation that any conflict should end as quickly as the sound bite can cover. Iraq and the progress that has been made with Iraqi forces in charge of security in the majority of the country and projected to be at 75% by the end of the year is extremely fast for a country to return to self protection after war. Japan still requires the protection of the United States and it took more than seven years to establish a government and a Constitution that was agreeable to the nation. Iraq has a working constitution and an elected government that is governing the nation and is in the process of finalizing their differences on the future governing of the country by all factions which are represented in the Iraqi Parliament.
Insurgency and disagreement between factions within the country does not mean civil war ! There was a strong insurgency in both Japan and Germany following WWII that killed many American soldiers who fought the insurgency. Several factions within both nations disagreed with each other even to the point of blood shed yet both countries with the help of the United States and our allies over came their differences and established agreeable governments. Eastern Germany suffered through forty five years of communist domination because of Soviet expansion but that was not caused by insurgency nor disagreements. Poor politics by leaders who divided spheres of influence after the war directly resulted in the debacle. Iraq's insurgency is not supported by the vast majority of the public who favors the elected government and a free society. Iraq does have the terrorist element do deal with which is seeking to derail every effort in order to use Iraq as a base of operations for world wide activities. Yet the recent bombings of mosques by the terrorist element that caused escalation of sectarian violence did not get wide spread support and though still existing is on the decrease. Emotions for civil war are not evident in Iraq. The majority of Iraqis want a free government and the opportunity to live in that freedom.
When will Iraq be finished ? No one can know for sure. Tremendous progress with great mistakes have taken place during the last three years and progress and mistakes will continue. Has the military learned from the mistakes ? Absolutely and changes have been implemented bringing improvement. Will critics still complain ? No doubt of that because there are always critics in war and during the aftermath. Our troops have and will continue to accomplish great strides in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both theatres will have their individual problems but the accomplishments far out weigh the trouble. The bottom line is that two countries that did not know freedom now are experiencing freedom and liberties that know one thought could have happened five years ago. Millions in both countries are free, though the situation is not perfect, neither Iraq nor Afghanistan would even have the opportunity to be free were it not for the brave men and women and the resolve of the United States of America.
Ken Taylor
In retrospect, have there been mistakes made in Iraq ? Certainly but this is an aspect of war that has and will always occur. Though commanders and the Commander in Chief and his staff can plan and execute that plan there will always be contingencies that occur that will cause any plan to meet with obstacles which cause re-examination and revision. No one can anticipate every aspect of a war prior to or even during the conflict. This is one of the natures of war and the theatre of Iraq is no exception. Every war that we have fought in has received constant revision of tactics, goals and personnel. During WWII our first battlefield experience against the Nazi's was an absolute failure and defeat as Rommel's Afrika Corps totally and utterly devastated the United States Second Army in North Africa. A change in command brought General George S. Patton and along with British Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery , the allied forces reversed the campaign and defeated Rommel's Afrika Corps.
Many have criticized the length of the conflict in Iraq. We live in an era of sound bites and fast breaking news covered 24 hours by massive cable news channels. This gives a false expectation that any conflict should end as quickly as the sound bite can cover. Iraq and the progress that has been made with Iraqi forces in charge of security in the majority of the country and projected to be at 75% by the end of the year is extremely fast for a country to return to self protection after war. Japan still requires the protection of the United States and it took more than seven years to establish a government and a Constitution that was agreeable to the nation. Iraq has a working constitution and an elected government that is governing the nation and is in the process of finalizing their differences on the future governing of the country by all factions which are represented in the Iraqi Parliament.
Insurgency and disagreement between factions within the country does not mean civil war ! There was a strong insurgency in both Japan and Germany following WWII that killed many American soldiers who fought the insurgency. Several factions within both nations disagreed with each other even to the point of blood shed yet both countries with the help of the United States and our allies over came their differences and established agreeable governments. Eastern Germany suffered through forty five years of communist domination because of Soviet expansion but that was not caused by insurgency nor disagreements. Poor politics by leaders who divided spheres of influence after the war directly resulted in the debacle. Iraq's insurgency is not supported by the vast majority of the public who favors the elected government and a free society. Iraq does have the terrorist element do deal with which is seeking to derail every effort in order to use Iraq as a base of operations for world wide activities. Yet the recent bombings of mosques by the terrorist element that caused escalation of sectarian violence did not get wide spread support and though still existing is on the decrease. Emotions for civil war are not evident in Iraq. The majority of Iraqis want a free government and the opportunity to live in that freedom.
When will Iraq be finished ? No one can know for sure. Tremendous progress with great mistakes have taken place during the last three years and progress and mistakes will continue. Has the military learned from the mistakes ? Absolutely and changes have been implemented bringing improvement. Will critics still complain ? No doubt of that because there are always critics in war and during the aftermath. Our troops have and will continue to accomplish great strides in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both theatres will have their individual problems but the accomplishments far out weigh the trouble. The bottom line is that two countries that did not know freedom now are experiencing freedom and liberties that know one thought could have happened five years ago. Millions in both countries are free, though the situation is not perfect, neither Iraq nor Afghanistan would even have the opportunity to be free were it not for the brave men and women and the resolve of the United States of America.
Ken Taylor
posted by The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth | 9:27 AM
31 Comments:
Iraq is a failure. There are no good options because of Bush's incompetence. Let's be clear:
1. There was no link between Saddam and 9/11. Bush said so explicitly in Cleveland yesterday.
2. It was a choice to go to Iraq and our choice was based on faulty intelligence which has proven to be wrong. There was a lot of contrarian evidence to WMDs that was dismissed.
3. Post-war occupation planning was non-existent. Oil production, water, and electicity in Iraq are at lower than pre-war levels.
4. The CPA under Bremer "lost" $9 billion. This is American taxpayer money that is unaccounted for. How much of that money do you think has been used to fund the insurgency? Hell, the "Oil-for-Food" scandal was only $1 billion.
5. After three years, there is not a single Iraqi army battalion that is capable of fighting on its own.
6. I love the notion that 75% of the country will be secured by Iraqis. So what? We haven't been fighting across the entire coiuntry. We have largely been fighting in the Sunni Triangle and will continue to do so.
7. If you want to argue that there isn't a civil war, that's cool, but sectarian violence is worsening. I would call it civil war when every single day 50 Iraqis die as a result of sectarian violence. Our guy Allawi (former prime minister who was/is supported by Bush) says there is a civil war going on.
8. We are spending $6-9 billion per month and there is no end in sight. This is literally bankrupting the country - it is a major reason Bush has added $2.6 trillion to the national debt (a record by far).
9. The majority of Iraqis believe their lives were better under Saddam and want the occupation to end. 72 percent of American troops serving in Iraq think we should leave within the next year. The American people see the incompetence and want change.
10. Geo-politically Iran, China, and Russia have gained as a result of our Iraq experience.
Other than that, things are great and freedom is on the march.
Rob, Great liberal talking points. By the way never did I nor anyone else mantion a 9/11 connection. The connection was with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda and has been proven. Remember the Congressional authorization given in September of 2001 said any state who harbors Al Qaeda or assists them. Iraq fit both of these qualifications. Also the documents that are directly associated with Husseins regime are far more correct uin the assesment and distrubution of the WMD's than the inspectors or any other entity since at the time Iraq was hiding anything from the world and the documents that are translated and are in the midst of being translated show the real evidence.
Thanks for the podcast plug it is greatly appreciated!
Ken
1) I thought he was a liar and we should not believe him? “Those who harbor…”
2) There was just the international intelligence community, including his own military that believed in the WMDs right up to the war.
3) Post-war issues are a valid argument.
4) Money that was given to start the Government in Iraq was not tracked. But to comparing the money from one to the other? Oil-for-FOOD. That was to feed Iraq. It takes more money to get a Government up and running, meaning more money is involved.
5) After 6 years the Democrats only fighting plan is to bash POTUS. 240,000 Iraqi troops, with 59 Iraqi battalions capable of taking the lead in operations. That is pretty good for considering you face getting blown up for just swinging by the neighborhood recruiting office, and during training. They still require support, god forbid. You expect them to accomplish missions without air support? All anyone talks about is we need coalitions to do things, well why can’t we help them? Incase you haven’t noticed there is nothing like NATO in the mid-east. The point being… The superpower (that is the USA) would help smaller countries in the event of war. Tisk-tisk! Helping. How could we?
6) You fight where the enemy is, doesn't that make sense. Do the police run sting operations for prostitution in rural areas filled with corn fields? No they do it in the cities.
7) We have deaths in America on a daily basis. No not on the scale of Iraq, but then again we are not a newly forming country. And there is sectarian violence but the majority of deaths are coming from insurgents killing new police forces. That is not a civil war.
8) Let’s use the Huffington Post numbers, $5.9 billion which could go to $6.9 if you add in Afghanistan. So you take issue with spending the necessary amount to fight the War on Terror? That makes sense. We will make sure to cut back our debt at the expense of under-funding the DoD and War on Terror. I suppose paying that amount is not acceptable to prevent the cost of more $50-95 billion single days here?
9) When the polling is done, if you say you want America’s help you get killed that evening! 72% “want to come home.” Who in the hell doesn’t want to go home from work? YES, THAT IS WORK. I don’t doubt they want to come home, but I am very curious as to the anonymous donor was that paid for the, unauthorized by the Pentagon, poll. I would not be surprised if the money trail has a slimy path to the DNC. They have been spending ALL their money!
10) HOW? Geo-politically China is not at the top of the list, Russia is still pissed at Iran, and regardless of what they think of us Europe is against Iran getting a bomb.
With all of that, there are problems but things are good and freedom is on the march.
You guys are just hilarious. It is just amazing to see people so completely and blindly dedicated to Bush and his failed Iraq war policies that they cannot see what a huge disaster it is.
Bush is now saying that we will be in Iraq until at least 2009. So he is going to leave it to another President to solve the mess he has created.
The number of people who actually believe Bush knows what he is doing is shrinking rapidly. This isn't because of the press or Democratic attacks, it is because of what is clearly happening in Iraq. Bush's insistence that progress is being made does not fit with reality - no matter how many times he says it.
Link to Pathetic Iraqi troop capabilities:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/24/iraq.security/index.html
Link to the Poll of the Troops:
http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075
I have given my solution for Iraq in the past. No matter how you cut it, Bush has left few good options. But here is the bottom line: The Iraqis have to stand up and solve the problem we have created for them. They will either stand up and solve the problem or not.
We will see in November what people think about the war.
MDCons - I love that you enjoy spending $80 billion/year in Iraq to nation-build, but you think the American government should stop taking care of Americans. That I don't get.
In fact, Iraq is one of the causes for the bankrupting of America by Bush. It is related to why the Republicans were forced to raise the debt limit to $9 trillion last week. The deficits and debt Bush has accumulated has resulted in more than $1 trillion of foreign owned U.S. debt. This is just one of the other major problems of the Iraq war policy. As the U.S. fritters away its military resources in Iraq, China gains. Who do you think we are borrowing from in order to pay for Iraq?
In response to Rob's post...
1.Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism. HAD WMD. General Georges Sada, the number 2 man in the Iraqi Air Force said so on the Daily Show, they were moved to Syria just prior to the U.S. invasion in 2003. Zarqawi was in Iraq for quite awhile, W said that in his speech yesterday too.
2. Per capita incomes have more than tripled in Iraq in the last three years according to Fox News.
3.I love how all these liberals think we can turn Iraq into a stand up Democracy in the blink of an eye. The military is sorry that it doesn't move at your rapid fire hippie pace.
4.Liberals are just drooling over a civil war. They want to see Bush fail because he runs circles around their party leaders.As said by Ken Taylor: Insurgency and disagreement between factions within the country does not mean civil war!
5.Maybe because President Bush is cutting 141 non-successful liberal programs is the reason why they're pissed at him? The deficit is 4.5 percent of GDP and is expected to fall to 1.9 percent of GDP in 2009.
6."The majority of Iraqis believe their lives were better under Saddam and want the occupation to end..."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. That is the funniest and most idiotic thing I have ever heard any liberal say. Are you an Iraqi sir? Did you live in Iraq when Saddam was in power? No? Didn't think so. Here's a quote from an Iraqi, this was at KSU in January 2006:
Q Hello, Mr. President. I am an American Iraqi Kurd. I would like to salute you and salute all the troops are freeing 27 million people. They are free. (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
Q Mr. President, I would like to share this thought with all our nation and everybody who is questioning what happened to the chemical weapons. Saddam burned 4,500 villagers. I lost more than 10 members of my family under the ground. We found their bones after, when we freed Iraq. Saddam, himself, and his people, his followers, they are chemical weapons. Please stop questioning the administration and their decision. It was the best decision anybody could take. Freeing 27 million people." (Applause.)
I rest my case on that one. It's really very sad sir that you believe Iraqis were better off than Saddam. You have definitely taken a bite of liberal idiocy.
7.Freedom is on the march, and you will be proven wrong. President Bush is saving your ass, like it or not.
Oh and very nice spin Rob on the 9 trillion dollar deficit.
They raised it because of MANDATORY spending increases due to SOCIAL SECURITY and MEDICADE. Two more liberal programs gone wrong.
or here's my links to the Iraqi woman's quote and General Georges Sada's WMD statement on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/01/20060123-4.html
http://www.exposetheleft.com/
Rob, why do you feel the need to come to conservative sites and spread your b.s. Go to your liberal sites and cry and whine there. I noticed your a professor, don't you get your liberal fill at the institution of academia in which you teach? I hear enough liberal b.s. when I turn on the television or read the newspaper, I don't need it from liberal blowhard professors who think they are holyer than thou. I've had my fill of them too.
Brett:
He is here to "school us" and fix our poor conservative minds. Should the liberals ever take back Congress they have a new social program. They will end funding to the DoD and all intelligence community members, and use the money to have a Repair-the-Conservative program to try and convert us.
Brett are you really so weak, insecure, and threatened by ideas? If you enjoy talking in an echo chamber, be my guest, but if you regularly come to this blog you will actually find some interesting discussion and debate. Who knows you may actually learn something.
Tom, Bush isn't "saving my ass," he is bankrupting us all.
I'm dying laughing. You saw General Sada on the Daily Show yesterday? Wow, that must have been a hard hitting interview. You do realize that Sada's "evidence" is that he heard about the WMD tranfer from 2 pilots who said it happened. He did not actually see it himself. The fact that Sada waited 3 years and possibly sees a way to make a lot of money selling a book to right wingers further clouds this "evidence."
I never said Iraqis are better off - I said they want us out. However, you cite one planted Kurd at a speech in Kansas (I know how big the Kurd population is in Kansas). Check out the following:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/PollVault/story?id=1389228
To correct you, it is a $9 trillion debt, not a deficit. Bush has added more debt than any other President by far and he is not even close to done. The last three years of Clinton resulted in rising surpluses and we were actually paying DOWN the national debt. Clinton didn't seem to have the problem Bush has.
The deficit is only about 3 percent of GDP (not 4.5 percent as you claim - so it is better than you think), but it was a 2.4 percent surplus when Bush came into office - the turnaround has been dramatic. The bigger problem is that the current account deficit has ballooned to an all time record of 6.5 percent of GDP.
You have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to spending. Bush has increased spending by more than $1 trillion over Clinton. Fiscal conservatives are pissed at Bush for his unrestrained spending. Discretionary spending (nonentitlement spending) was up 48.5 percent in Bush's first term. Clinton only increased discretionary spending 21.6 percent over his 8 years. Read the Cato Institute's (conservative think tank) report:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0510-26.pdf
You may think everything is fine, but the U.S. Treasury Department knows the growing danger of the debt and deficit.
http://robsobs.blogspot.com/2006/03/us-is-going-bankrupt-fast.html
The Budget:
Again holds the growth of overall discretionary spending below inflation and again proposes to reduce non-security discretionary spending below the previous year’s level.
Terminates or reduces 141 programs that are not getting results or not fulfilling essential priorities, for a proposed savings of $14.7 billion, building on last year’s success in which savings of $6.5 billion were achieved in 89 of the President’s proposals.
Requests that Congress give the President a Constitutional line-item veto. All savings from the line-item veto would be used for deficit reduction.
Projects the deficit will decline from its projected 2004 peak of 4.5 percent of GDP ($521 billion) down to 1.4 percent ($208 billion) in 2009, more than in half and well below the 40-year historical average deficit of 2.3 percent.
That's from the Department of Treasury.
Homeownership is at an all-time high, productivity has increased at a 3 percent annual rate, the stock market is booming over 11,000 and getting higher, 30 straight months of job gains and 4.8 percent unemployment. Real GDP increased 3.5 percent in 2005, and growth was revised up from an original estimate of 1.1 percent to a 1.6 percent annual rate for the fourth quarter of 2005. The economy has been growing for 17 straight quarters, and the composite index of leading indicators increased 1.1 percent in January, indicating continued economic growth. In the last five years, the President's tax relief has helped spur growth by keeping $880 billion in the hands of the American people.
The Administration has reduced the growth of non-security discretionary spending every year since 2001, and at the President's request, Congress cut this spending last year.
The bottomline is, what is the President supposed to do, not support funding for Katrina? Stop funding our soldiers and their equipment? Because God knows liberals would be shouting then. Oh and they holler now because he funds them too much. But they don't say PEEP on entitlement spending because OOOH liberals love it when we spend the peopls money for SOCIALIST UNCONSTITUTIONAL programs like welfare and social security. President Bush can do no right, and the problem liberals have is, they fight President Bush like he's on the ballot AND the country holds predominately Christian conservative values and aren't in touch with progressive liberalism that is driving the Democratic Party. Liberals favorite day is April 15th and the people know it. President Bush cuts the people's taxes and liberals want to raise them, and find new ways to spend their money in STUPID, LIBERAL socialist programs. In fact, if you look at the Democratic Party's platform, it looks eerily similar to the Communist Manifesto. Democrats aren't too concerned about our military or defense. They proposed to cut 60 billion dollars in funding on March 22nd of this year.
I think in November, because you have IDIOTS running your party who say stupid things and don't know when to shut up (like Harry Reid who said we are in Iraq longer than we were in WW2...haha no Harry, maybe you need a history lesson) Democrats will be standing in November with a confused look, like "What the hell just happened?"
You know why? Because "WE KILLED THE PATRIOT ACT" doesn't fly with Americans and "I want to censure President Bush so he will apologize for the Terrorist Surveillance Program..." doesn't fly with Americans either. THE TRUTH is that Americans overwhelmingly support the actions the President has taken to protect them and Democrats can't fool people into thinking they're "tough on defense." It's actually almost laughable. Maybe your party should get a single voice, and then put up a fight, instead of having the media do it for you.
Great Post. Time will tell with all the documents comming out what really went on with Saddam. Either way he violated 17 resolutions, shot at our aircraft in the no-fly zones, tried to assasinate Bush 41 while in Kuwait, invaded his neighbors, gassed his neighbors and his own people, scortched the earth (That really added to global warming), had WMD who knows what really happened to it, bled money out of the Oil For Food Program for his own use instead of feeding his own people, paid families of Palestinian homicide bombers, had ties with other terrorist groups, (Time and documents will tell if he was involved with Al-Quaida)He deffinately had ties with Abu-Saif or however you spell those nutjobs who happen to be run by Bin Hidin's cousin or something like that, Harbor'd Zarqowi after we blew his leg off in Afghanistan, etc.. He was a WMD himself. He was also the pain in the ass of the middle east and I for one am glad he's in the slammer. Hope they show his execution live for us to see also!
Cop paste this link into your browser ROB:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=1734490&page=1
No connection to Al-Qaeda???
Tom, it is clear you have a fundamental lack of understanding of fiscal issues. Did you just cut and paste some excerpts without thinking about economic realities?
Wow! A whole $14.7 billion in savings! You do realize that Bush has a $2.8 trillion dollar budget for next year? The Chinese hold more than $250 billion in U.S. Treasury debt, $15 billion is nothing. This does not include supplemental spending like Iraq, Katrina, and other future hurricanes. In Clinton's last year the government spent less than $1.8 trillion.
Total discretionary (non-mandatory) spending is up almost 60 percent under Bush - more than $300 billion/year. It went up by a total of less than 20 percent under eight years of Clinton. Look at the CBO figures (www.cbo.gov).
You talk about GDP growth under Bush as if it is really great. Under Carter, GDP grew by 55%. Under Bush it has grown less than 30%. Don't be too impressed.
http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/gdplev.xls
The debt has grown from $5.7 trillion (and we were paying down debt under Clinton) to $8.3 trillion - this is far outpacing GDP growth.
http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpenny.htm
Do you even have an idea about what the current account deficit is?
Read the 2005 Financial Report of the United States put out by Bush's Treasury Department. Here is a quote that should be alarming to Americans (p. 28 of the report):
"More troubling still, the federal government's financial condition and long-term fiscal outlook is continuing to deteriorate. While the fiscal year 2005 budget deficit was lower than 2004, it was still very high, especially given the impending retirement of the "baby boom" generation and rising health care costs. Importantly, the federal government's accrual based net operating cost increased to $760 billionin fiscal year 2005 from $616 billion in fiscal year 2004. GAO's fiscal policy simulations illustrate that without significant changes on the spending and revenue sides of the budge, long-term deficits will encumber a growing share of federal resources and test the capacity of current and future generations to afford both today's and tomorrow's commitments."
Further down in the report (also on p. 28):
" . . . the federal government's fiscal exposures now total more than $46 trillion, up from about $20 trillion in 2000. This translates into a burden of about $156,000 per American or approximately $375,000 per full-time worker, up from $72,000 and $165,000 respectively, in 2000."
On of the major contributors to the explosion in U.S. fiscal exposures is Bush's highly flawed, confusin, super expensive Medicare Part D program.
Read the full report at:
http://www.fms.treas.gov/fr/05frusg/05frusg.pdf
Oh yes, haha. The wonderful Jimmy Carter. He did so many wonderful things for this country(TOTAL SARCASM). 55% GDP growth was maybe due to the fact that interest rates were over 20% and inflation was going through the roof. Thanks for giving Panama to the Chinese, disbanding our intelligence system(because it "isn't nice to spy on other countries." Thanks for giving the little Alaskan oil we have to Japan, and granting AMNESTY to hippie draft dodgers that fled like cowards to Canada. And then high intrest rates and inflation on top of it.
If memory serves me right, Ronald Reagan had a large deficit during his Presidency, and also had an outstanding economic growth, as does GWB. But as you should know, being a ambassador of academia, the economy runs in trends and just doesn't stop its trend when Presidents leave office. President Reagan's huge tax cuts, led to the economic expansion of the 1990s.
The top tax rate was 70% when Reagan took office. He got it cut in half to 35%. At the same time, he eliminated many tax shelters that the rich routinely relied on to avoid paying taxes altogether, forcing them to invest in the free market and actually pay taxes. Shortly after the tax cuts were enacted, the economy took off for an unprecedented period of peacetime growth. The misery index plummeted as unemployment fell, inflation slowed, and interest rates dropped, leading to a seven-year boom that the liberal media cynically dubbed "the decade of greed."
Tax cuts can generate a deficit, but as we saw in the 80s and 90s, unprecendented economic growth (as we are seeing now)can erase the deficit and lead to a large economic expansion in the future.
The economy will continue to grow, and the deficit will fall, the budget Projects the deficit will decline from its projected 2004 peak of 4.5 percent of GDP ($521 billion) down to 1.4 percent ($208 billion) in 2009, more than in half and well below the 40-year historical average deficit of 2.3 percent. The stock market is moving up and expected to crush its ALL TIME high of 11,700.
If you truly, honestly believe, that Iraqis were better off under Saddam, then sir, I think that you need to pull your head out of Harry Reid's ass and talk to any soldier that has served in Iraq and they will prove you wrong. My best friend just returned from Iraq after his 2nd tour, and said that Iraqi citizens kissed their hands and never stopped thanking them. Iraqis voted in a 75% turnout for a DEMOCRACY. If they wanted Saddam back, do you think they would have voted for a Democracy? ROB, maybe you should flip on the tv and watch people testify Saddam saying he used chemical weapons on their families. I highly doubt sir, that Iraqis would rather Saddam, especially since he used WMDs on his OWN PEOPLE.
Again, you obviously have no real understanding of the figures.
I used Carter as an example of GDP growth as a comparison because you were touting the great growth of GDP under Bush. Reagan followed up his tax cuts with the largest tax increase to that point in history in 1986 because of the exploding deficit and debt (unlike Bush). He recognized the danger to American economic stability.
The debt and deficit situation is worsening at a much higher rate than at any point in history. The current account deficit (which you clearly do not understand) is at an all time high relative to GDP. It stands at over $800 billion. Bush has compounded the problem with his out of control discretionary spending - NCLB, Medicare Part D, funding of faith-based programs and tax breaks that ultimately only help the rich.
The way Bush is paying for his failed policies is by borrowing. Under his leadership we have seen the debt limit raised 4 times in 5 plus years (a record). Where does the debt go? To foreign investors.
We are literally borrowing from the Chinese so that we can buy their stuff. That is what Bush's economic policies are doing.
Iraqis want us out, plain and simple. The fact that they don't have security, electricity, water, oil revenues, and are in civil war as a result of the invasion is why.
Actually Rob, that tax increase was brought about by your Democrat controlled Congress, and actually led to the mini-recession.
The problem we have here is, if these faith based initiatives were spent on socialist programs, you'd be all for it. NCLB FINALLY holds our teachers accountable, and keeps the Unions from protecting their asses at every turn.
You think life under Saddam was good for these people? That they were better off?
Iraq's per capita income had dropped from $3,800 in 1980 (higher than Spain at the time) to $715 in 2002 (lower than Angola). In 2005, per-capita income is estimated to have increased to over $1,000.
More than 30 percent of Iraq's schools have been rehabilitated, more than 36,000 teachers have been trained, and approximately 8.7 million revised math and science textbooks and 3 million school supply kits have been provided to students nationwide.
Vaccination campaigns have significantly reduced infectious disease outbreaks. For example, 98 percent of children under five have been vaccinated for polio.
"USAID has rehabilitated sewage treatment plants, expanding access to sewage treatment to over 5.1 million urban Iraqis, processing 315.3 million gallons daily. Over 2.4 million Iraqis who had no clean drinking water in 2002 now have access to safe, potable water..."
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/
I can't wait for 2006! You're own party pundits are worried for election day Rob! Do you know why? Because your party has no voice, and no COMPETENT leadership. You wanna win an election, get rid of spokespeople like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Dick Durbin, Hillary "Plantation" Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean "YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAA!!!!" I can go on forever...
You hate President Bush so much, why can't you find a way to EVER beat him?
Reagan worked with Congress and signed the tax increase. He used the veto pen 78 times during his tenure. Revisionist nonsense to say Reagan was against it.
Why do you think the Iraqis want us out? It is pretty clear that they are fed up the failures to deliver basic services and security, as well as with American occupation.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/PollVault/story?id=1389228
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/177.php?nid=&id=&pnt=177&lb=hmpg2
http://telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/23/wirq23.xml
I don't hate Bush, I don't know the man. I think he has been an incompetent president and his policies are a disaster, but I don't hate him.
I'm sure you voted for Kerry. You of all people should know how much weight polls hold. Remember the exit polls that showed Kerry way ahead of President Bush in the November election? I'm sure your liberal news outlets polled in the Sunni Triangle. haha..
I love President George W. Bush.
I rely on the soldiers I talk to, I don't rely on polls. Every single soldier I've seen on t.v. and in person say Iraqis want us there and thank us for liberating them from a terrorist, Saddam Hussein.
Thanks to each of you for the discussion that has taken place on this hot issue. Rob, as you know I totally disagree with your view and believe that the evidence you express is based on polls, blogs, and figures that are compiled by a media and liberals who would rather see Iraq fail than realize that the President and our military are winning this theatre of battle. Though you have stated that you do not hate Bush just his policies you are one of the few that will intellectually admit that truth. The evidence that you have shown is compiled on the most part by those whose hatred of the President is so strong that they will stop at nothing to bring down Bush and all of his policies. When Tip O'Neil took office as speaker more than 20 years ago he stated that since his party, democrats were the opposision that it was their agenda to oppose. The current crop in Washington believes that regardless of facts, reality or whether their opposition is demoralizing or wrong that their only agenda is to oppose and obstruct with a political detruction that is meant to bring down the Bush Presidency regardless of the consequences. Has he made mistakes? Yes, but so have ALL Chief Executives. History will prove that his policy against terror in every battlefield that it is fought is the right policy.
Ken
Fine, you want to believe that Iraqis want to be occupied. Show me some evidence. Does anyone have a recent poll or any credible evidence that the Iraqis want us to stay indefinitely? I have a cousin who was a sniper in Iraq. I have another relative in Iraq right now. I wouldn't use what they told me as evidence because they are a sample of 2. I have given you three polls - give me one in return.
While you may think that the evidence I provide is biased, the fiscal stats I have provided come directly from Bush's Treasury Department, Commerce Department, Bureau of Economic Analysis, and the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.
Personally, I will be fine financially because of the diversity of my holdings/investments and accumulated wealth. However, the bankrupting of the country by this administration and the sale of U.S. treasury notes to foreign investors is alarming. If you want to believe that Bush's debt and deficits will just magically go away and have no impact, that is up to you. I hope you don't have a variable rate mortgage and I would recommend in investing in foreign stocks and currencies, as well as gold and platinum. You'll thank me in a couple of years.
No one said staying indefinatly, just until they can govern and protect themselves. Yes this make take years. It took years afetr the fall of Germany and Japan. They are both still wanting our protection. This does not mean that we will be in Iraq as long, but Iraqis know that we are necessary for the above reasons and understand the necessity. Again ask the troops who are continually thanked and asked not to leave! By the way concerning polls take for example my poll about illegal immigrants which right now shows that the majority of those who have voted favor amnesty. Now you and I both know that is not a truth about how the country feels about immigration of illegals. Polls can be twisted to say whatever the polster wishes. Though my poll is not scientific it is being manipulated by people who want their point of view to look like the majority and the polsters who create the major polls are similar in their manipulation by the questions asked and the way they make the percentages of those polled. I was once a regular sample in one of the major polls, the Zogby Poll., and though I am a Bush supporter as you know, when answering the questions as they were asked I actually looked as if I only marginally supported Bush and in many cases was against him as President. I asked to be removed from their sampler list because I could not abide by the bias in the questioning and the results that the polling was forcing me to give because it was NOT a true measure of my thoughts on the issues or the President.
Ken
Bush himself said we will be in Iraq for the remainder of his presidency and there is no indication of when we will leave - that means we are there indefinitely.
Show me any poll conducted by any organization that shows Iraqis want us to stay. If you want to criticize the three polls that I gave that's fine, show me an alternative.
Iraq is going to do one of two things. Either, the civil war is going to worsen and they will have to fight it out amongst themselves to figure out how the country will be run. Or it will emerge as a pro-Iran Islamic theocracy that is largely governed by Sharia law.
Either way, it will be the will of the Iraqi people that will dictate how the country is run. We don't have much influence now, and will have even less when all is said and done. The thousands of American casualties and the $500 billion to $1 trillion that we spend (depending on how long we are there) will have been wasted.
How does that mean we will be there indefinitely? You seriously need to get a grip. How long have we been in Germany after the fall of communism, Japan, etc?
You liberals are all the same. YOU WANT A CIVIL WAR AND YOU WANT US TO FAIL! You want it because you despise President Bush's policies and that he runs circles around your party all the time. You liberals criticize but you yourselves have no alternative. Just "Bush sucks. We have no alternative but Bush sucks."
Tom, why are you so angry?
Look up "indefinitely" in a dictionary. I have used it appropriately to describe our tenure in Iraq.
I don't "want" a civil war and I don't "want" failure in Iraq. I am saying that Bush and his administration have failed in their planning and understanding of Iraq and its people. If you think things are going well, I'm happy for you - I just disagree.
For some reason you seem to think that anyone who disagrees with Bush is un-American or pro-terrorist. That is utterly ridiculous. I have kids and don't want to see any harm come to them, just as others worry about their kids. But I believe that Iraq is a complete waste of time and resources and will not result in strengthening America - it has weakened us economically and geo-politically for reasons I have stated.
Trading partner? Sure, a pro-U.S. democracy would be a great thing in the Middle East, but that is not what Iraq is becoming. They are turning into an Islamic theocracy that is more aligned with Iran than with the U.S.
converse pas cher, true religion jeans, vans pas cher, air jordan pas cher, timberland, nike blazer, air max, hollister, nike air max, louboutin pas cher, michael kors, mulberry, air force, sac longchamp, ray ban uk, michael kors, michael kors, burberry, hermes, ralph lauren pas cher, ralph lauren uk, nike free, ray ban pas cher, nike roshe run, true religion jeans, north face, tn pas cher, hogan, sac guess, new balance pas cher, coach purses, oakley pas cher, longchamp pas cher, vanessa bruno, true religion outlet, lacoste pas cher, true religion jeans, north face, lululemon, hollister pas cher
Post a Comment
<< Home