Funny thing Meaty, you offer no answers to the questions you ask…

That’s because the point is to watch your kind run away from the questions, Mom. Once again, you have obliged.

How can a strategy that has failed to achieve the majority of its stated objectives be considered a success?

...and no resources by which you have reached any kind of conclusions.

You’re lying, of course.

How can a strategy that has failed to achieve the majority of its stated objectives be considered a success?

If you have real evidence to present to back your views, please put it out here. I would welcome it since there is very little out there to point to the status.

You’re lying, of course.

How can a strategy that has failed to achieve the majority of its stated objectives be considered a success?

Run away again, Mom.

Funny thing Meaty, you offer no answers to the questions you ask and no resources by which you have reached any kind of conclusions. Considering the fact that the mainstream media is so silent on the topic speaks volumes about the Surge and who is really scared it is being successful. When there is a “media blackout” on any news that is good, I take that as a sign that progress has been made, and when Iraqi citizens speak out about the progress they see and they are “there”, well it makes me think that if anyone is afraid, it might just be you and your “ilk”. If you have real evidence to present to back your views, please put it out here. I would welcome it since there is very little out there to point to the status. This having to depend on Iraqi bloggers who are “living it” gets old.

Actually, you post to links and articles quite frequently Meaty, and they are usually “slanted”.

And this differs from the links and articles you post… how, exactly?

You have asked questions heavily influenced by your thinking on the subject.

I ask questions that you are afraid to answer. That is why you don’t answer them.

I will look closely and see if they can be answered with some real factual data, and not some trumped up perspective from either side.

I doubt that. It is far more likely that you will simply choose to never answer the questions. A serious discussion of the failure to achieve most of the stated goals of the surge is just too scary for you.

Benchmarks, goals, objectives, milestones, whatever… they are being done…

Produce the evidence to back up your claim, Mom. Your fact-free assertion is worthless.

I’ll ask again, simply because I know you will evade the question: How can a strategy that has failed to achieve the majority of its stated objectives be considered a success?

It is my opinion that the Surge has done what it was supposed to be doing.

That’s nice. Let’s find out if that opinion has any factual backing.

What were the objectives of the surge?

Which of them have been accomplished?

How can a strategy that has failed to achieve the majority of its stated objectives be considered a success?

Violence in Baghdad is done 81%...

Where in Iraq has violence increased?

By how much?

These are hard questions, Mom. They can’t be answered by the simple expedient of posting links to articles and blogs that promote the war. Are you able to answer them?

Not automatically…

Ah, good. Then I assume we can agree that the beliefs of the respondents to the survey — that “negative media reporting damages troop morale” or that “negative media coverage damages prospects for success in Iraq” — are irrelevant in determining whether those claims are actually true.

Perhaps you can address the question I asked: How can a strategy that has failed to achieve the majority of its stated objectives be considered a success?

“The dramatic decline in US casualties in Iraq has been one the great untold story of recent months. With thirty-nine lost in January, twenty-three in December, thirty-seven in November and thirty-eight in November, a young American male would have been safer in Iraq than in some of America’s inner cities.”

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/what_americas_declining_casual.html

Michael Borone wrote an article about the Surge calling it a “dazzling success” and pointing out why.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24190

And then you can go to a blog done by two Iraqi brothers and get their take on how things are “post Surge” in Iraq and get the info first hand.
They are not currently in Iraq, but they were there when the Surge started and definately have input about what is going on from first hand sources.
You can find Mohammed and Omar’s blog by going to

http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/2005/01/people-have-won.html

And then there is Oliver North’s article written in December on “The New Iraq” where he gives input on “how things were going then and where he sees it leading”.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23964

One has to constantly look at the situation. And I do like to go out and look at what the reporters like Michael Yon are saying. He is on the frontlines and is not supported by anyone but his readers… no special interests pulling his strings.

But let us back up a moment and examine the statistics to which Chrenkoff refers. Is it your contention that, simply because a sizable fraction of Americans agree with the idea that “negative media reporting damages troop morale” or that “negative media coverage damages prospects for success in Iraq”, that it must be so? Put more simply, does mass belief in an idea mean that said idea is automatically true?

“Nearly three-quarters of all Americans surveyed, 70.7%, indicated they strongly or somewhat agreed that negative media reporting damages troop morale. Over half of all survey respondents, 59.8%, agreed (strongly or somewhat) that negative media coverage damages prospects for success in Iraq because it encourages terrorists, and about half, 49.1%, agreed (strongly or somewhat) that things are likely going better for the U.S. than the U.S. media portrays.”

The entire blog entry give some interesting facts that I believe you miss Meaty. You can read it here:

http://pajamasmedia.com/2008/01/good_news_from_iraq_more_than.php

And as usual, you show no sign of having that ability.

Well, goody for you. Breathe the clean air outside your bubble.

Now, there are serious questions to be discussed, such as this one. Do you have the slightest ability to engage in rational debate? If so, feel free to chime in with an intelligent comment.

Somehow, I do not think I will be holding my breath…

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/the_13_steps_of_liberals_anony.html