To: Jon in Sacramento

I am not shocked that the US govt does things like this, but I don't want our govt accusing others when it is know that the US govt does the same thing. The US govt acts like they never do anything bad. In fact, I don't care what we give, that still doesn't give the US govt the right to put in rulers of our own on other countries. Then we wonder why "blowback" happens??? Idiot, you just meddled with another country, what do you expect???
Don't tell me we support as much as Israel, that is a bold faced lie. Who is the innocent when we meddle in other countries to contribute many deaths? FYI: I served in this recent circus that we call this operation.

Paul ~ New Orleans

You wrote, "WHY HAS NO ONE NOTED THE FACT THAT THE US INSTALLED THEIR OWN RULER IN IRAN IN 1953?"

Yes, The US and England helped put into power the Shah of Iran. Prior to this the western-friendly Prime Minister had been assassignated, parliment quickly passing changes to nationalize the oil industry, and the leader (Mossadegh) became Prime Minister.

Absolutely in the 70's the Iranian conflict arose had roots in resentment from the Shah's rule. However militants were equally angry about the "westernization" of their country (ala women not covering as islamic law proscribes), and the economic struggles Iran was facing.

Today terrorists cite any and all reasons for jihad: western influences, the crusades, our support of Israel, their economic struggles, etc.

With ALL the reasons one might point fingers at the US - we are one of the largest provider of foreign aid (food, money, provisions), we support Palestine AND Israel, we support dialogue and peaceful means to end conflict, and have use forced only when necessary and attempted to incorporate a social conscience into our military efforts.

We are not perfect, but we are not the great satan. And we will not stand quietly while terrorists plot, plan, and execute actions which injure and kill thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

And yes - we WILL operate and support policies that act in our (USA) best interests.

SHOCKED?

To Rick in Chicago:

Thanks! At least someone on this board knows of this information! It is rather sad that only two of us can point this out. Do any of the neocons and lefty wackjobs know this???? I dare any of you in that camp to refute this!!!

Paul, New Orleans, LA … EXCELLENT post!

It was called "Operation Ajax".

But most people (especially Bushies) are too stupid to look that up.

Previous post:

People who say if the military was allowed to do what it takes to win, the US would have won Vietnam and this war. Those people know nothing about military history. A professional standing army will never win a guerilla war. Why don't you ask the Brits how we did it early in the Revolutionary War.
How come people cannot get that through their head!!!???
We have been over in the Middle East since we formed as a country, the US installed OUR OWN RULER in IRAN in 1953!! How come no one takes that into account of why there is "terrorisim"? MOST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES MEDDLE IN OTHERS, accept it. The US does that same things that the white house accuses Iran of

Again!! WHY HAS NO ONE NOTED THE FACT THAT THE US INSTALLED THEIR OWN RULER IN IRAN IN 1953!!!!! Would you be pissed if this happened to us???

PLEASE ANYONE!!!

Andrew Rivera…only 'cowards' attack when unprovked? I see you didn't post where your from, you're remark of such after what happened to our country on 9/11, only a terrorist in MY opinion (especially when they didn't put where they are from and CNN STATES "Comments that do NOT include your name, city, and STATE will NOT be posted", looks like CNN cannot even uphold their own policy with your posting, Andrew AND CNN. Guess they all stick together, huh?
Steven in SC, no, 'communist' is NOT a pretty word, but it has real meaning. Your words about 9/11 "at the hands OF intolerance and hatred" should tell YOU something, who's 'hand's' steven? TERRORIST's 'hands' Steven, thats WHO'S 'hands' and if you were a TRUE friend of the TWO friends YOU lost, you would not be saying anyone disagreeing with the President (Commander in Chief) is being "unpatriotic" if they don't agree with this war. Where was I? Getting ready for work, and then I couldn't go to work, I cried with the Nation, only now the MAJORITY of the SAME Nation forgets 9/11 don't they? I am a very fortunate person, as I live close to a VERY large Military base, and I know for a FACT why we are at war, period.
Jeff from SanFrancisco, I don't know where you get your opinion, but its opinions of Americans like yours that is what is wrong with this country. For your information, Mr. Robert Gates, the Secretary of Defense, he cancelled a very important trip to assist in this report, so you are talking about people and a report you have NO clue about.
I think Anna is a product of some very bad media, as President (you have NO respect, do you?) George W. Bush is NOT the one who attacked and killed thousands in the WTC.
For your information, H. Clinton said in an speech the Iraq Goverment is on vacation. Check the "ticker" its on there. So is my reply, well, IF CNN prints it that is.
August 11, 2007 Iraqi providence's Govorner and Chief of Police were blown up and KILLED by a Bomb, and that is Hilary's Idea of being on a 'VACATION'?
thats probably who you will vote for, Anna, right?
Larry from Fairfax, for one lately, Putin is surrounding himself with KGB, and your talking about OUR President?
I hope you can prove what you just said about "Bush Sr", but thats ok, just makes me wonder what you are on. Our actions are not creating more terrorists, but maybe it is sucking them out into the open…….
posted by iraq, CNN has NO policy on names, etc. I see that more so now, thank you for pointing that out.
Greg, you hit the nail on the head. Did you see hilary's remark about the Iraq government being on vacation, thats about as LOW as you GO for a candidate. Acutally, its even lower than alot Americans go that don't support the war, and she wants to be in charge of the SAME Military she isn't supporting now?
Thats a SCARY thought.
Evan, how do you figure the war is won yet? That remark is a classic, you need to go to school or something, then you may know that they are still killing people over there, there is no peace yet, and without peace, the war is not over.
Tom, your first entry, your quote of hillary, skip over to the 'ticker' and read hillay's little quote there, as I said already, I was NOT aware that DYING from a BOMB is being 'on vacation'. Don't even expect me to consider anything you quote of hillary's, as NO one, to INCLUDE hillary clinton is EVER going to convice me dying from a bomb is 'a vacation'.
That is all I have to say, when you OR hilary can prove to me that a 'vacation' is being blown up by a bomb, then we will talk about who is lying and who isn't.
Lucas, if you have read these postings you refer to, and you only see them as some 'sharing their opinion' when they don't agree with this war, I wouldn't know what to tell you EXCEPT that the 'way' they 'share' their 'opinoins' are for one, as opinions I would expect from someone who is a terrorist or a communist, and is there really a difference? 'Personally attacked'? When so called 'American's' get on here and 'share' their 'opinion's' and they feel 'personally attacked', I hope so, because they are already ATTACKING our safety, as a Nation, our safety is at RISK already, and our Soldiers and our leaders are doing EVERYTHING possible to preserve our safety, and anyone who gets on here and says the things they do about the ones who are trying desperately to preserve our safety, I hope they DO feel 'personally attacked'. As they are only feeling this on paper, and if they feel attacked by that, what would they do if the terrorist came kicking in their doors? That would be being 'attacked', and for the ones who seem to wish that on some of us, like Rich said, "we're bringing a tank to a gun fight!!"
You feel 'personally attacked' Lucas? How do you think America's going to feel if we walk out of this war and they bring it here? You won't have time to be on your computer, it will be here, like it is over there now. And for the ones who wish that on us posting their 'opinion's', ask me if I care if they feel 'personally attacked'. I note how 'careful' some are on making their 'borderline' insinuations about our Military, and Lucas, I do NOT care what they think, or HOW they feel, if they want to attack the ones who are protecting us,
feeling 'personally attacked' would be too good for them anyway.
It is amazing though how some of them like Steven in SC can 'twist' someone's words. I don't even see where Rich said anything near how Steven interpretated it. I always say when people do that, that it goes in one ear (so to speak) and does a few flips or flops, and comes out their mouths (or to fingertips on the keyboard) as something completely different. As Steven from Charlseton, SC would like people to take what Rich said, as what Steven thinks.
What do think we are Steven? People who can't read Rich's words for how they are meant? Would you love that if you could do that? If you could take Rich's words and twist them as you did into YOUR version, and make people believe them? Thats the ONLY reason a person does that, you are aware of that, right? Which, Steven, does not give many Americans reading your words much credit for being able to think for themselves, does it? And your little touch of 'sarcasm', couldn't resist, could you?
I say this to Rich. When you asked what did our grandparents know that we don't? Is he playing for the other team? I think so, and if you know that we threw Tokyo Rose in prison for saying similiar things, you already know what grandparents knew!
If only many others did.

People who say if the military was allowed to do what it takes to win, the US would have won Vietnam and this war. Those people know nothing about military history. A professional standing army will never win a guerilla war.

Posted By Paul, New Orleans, LA :
August 16, 2007 6:17 pm

Geez Paul you must have missed World War II when a standing army survived the guerilla warfare in Germany after occupying the country. Of course you would probably care to forget the fact that our ways of dealing with the German guerilla fighters were not the most civilized. You probably also would care to forget the fact that winning required inflicting large numbers of civilian casualties.

We won the Revolutionary war when we adapted to the situation. Early on we got our assess handed to us on a platter because we thought the European way of fighting was the way to go. At one time the Revolutionary war was all but lost and yet we see how that turned out.

We refused to bomb military targets in heavily populated civilian areas when we fought in Vietnam. We also conducted only limited bombing against areas where the North Vietnamese was being re-supplied from. Vietnam would probably look much like Korea if not for the fact we didn't fulfill our promise to the South Vietnamese.

If your main concern is being the "bigger man" your best off not fighting the other guy because you will lose. Just because technology has advanced dramatically does not mean that war is no longer hell. It just means less civilians get killed in the process.

When the war was popular the liberals said the following (the best one is by William Cohen, EVERYONE read what he said and remember he knows a bit about this type of stuff wouldn't you think?)Yeah, I know, Bush lied:

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons…I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." — Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." — Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." — Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." — Al Gore, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." — Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." — Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." — John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. …And now he is miscalculating America?s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." — John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

There is one aspect of this ongoing debate that I find truly disturbing and that is the fact that anyone who tries to share their opinion that this war was not such a good idea and is not going well is personally attacked. Their patriotism, support for our troops… even their intellectual capacity is called into question. While it seems apparent that this country has become split down the middle by this issue we still should try our best to discuss and debate our differences of opinion without slandering the character of those we disagree with.

To Rich in NH:

I would like to thank you for your comments. Your "shoot-em-up" "take no prisoners" "my way or the highway" "might is always right" approach to diplomacy illuminates better than my words ever could exactly how our current President has utterly destroyed decades of good will our previous leaders have built across this planet. It's easy to feel smug in a gun battle as long as you have the biggest gun. But history has shown time and again what happens to nations that get arrogant. There is not a single nation in the history of the world that has not fallen. I would love for us to be the exception. But the only way that is going to happen is for us to either take over the entire planet, or learn to coexist with other nations. And since I don't see anyone calling for Option 1, then we should probably focus on Option 2. And while I know cowboys like our President don't get their jollies through diplomacy and compromise, it is the way REAL men get things done.

Rich from NH…

I don't understand what your problem is with what I said? Victory was declared by this President 4 years ago…It's time to bring the troops home my friend. As the best friend of 2 marines who have bravely sacrificed their lives for this war…Is it too much to ask for the safe return of our military personnel ASAP? (Especially in light of the recent video of Dick Cheney that has surfaced)

To Rich of Amherst, NH:

I’m all for American military victory. But how do we win someone else’s civil war? Just whose side are we on? The Shia? The Sunni? The Kurd? What does this victory of yours look like? To think we can just summon up our resolve and go wipe out the bad guys like Rambo is naive both politically and militarily. But then again, so is believing anything that comes out of this disgraced and incompetent administration.

We can win against al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan and in the hearts and minds of Muslims around the world. But in Iraq all we can do is lose.

Evan,

I think you're the reason why they no longer keep score at my kid's ball games and why there are more trophies than players in our athletic contests!

Keep this straight - our armed forces are responsible for winning America's wars not simply showing up, getting the T-shirt that says "hero" and coming home. The objective in war is never bring ‘em home safe and as soon as possible - it's to win, win, win. And you do that by destroying the other guy/gal's will to fight - unfortunately with Harry Reid's continued statements from the hallows halls in our nation’s capitol, I think that somehow this has worked in reverse … or he's playing for the other team? Seems we threw Tokyo Rose in prison for saying some similar things. What did our grandparents know that we don’t?

Thanks,

Rich

In response to the two posted by Steven in Charleston:

Welcome to the dynamic world of Realpolitik A.K.A. – “the real world!” You bet we have a right to invade a country whether the leadership is duly elected or not. Check your history books – it’s been that way since the dawn of time regardless of your liberal enlightenment. If we (or any other country BTW) deem any foreign state or organization to represent a threat to our citizens, our way of life, our national interests or if it just plan upsets the balance of world order, you bet we’re going to act! Enough of this “Suddam has nothing to do with 9/11” - poor Saddam – bad guy to his people but no threat to anyone else – real nice, Steven. Well, I guess the next time we ask a dictator for some answers and confirmation, they just might consider we’re serious … because we need that information to get folks like you on board before we lay the wood to ‘em.

It comes down to leadership. While intell is never perfect and always has been an imprecise science made up of: 3 parts information, 2 parts intuition, and 5 parts a combination of hearsay, gossip, and nonsense - we compensate for that with leaders who aren’t afraid to act. People who must wait until all the information exists aren’t leaders – and shouldn’t be the leader of the US – those folks are the know-it-alls that go on the radio and news programs to show us all how smart they are and what we should have done. Bush didn’t lie, he took action and I absolutely agree that history will judge us better than if we had sat back theorizing of while at the same time hoping and praying the worst wouldn’t come to pass. There are many examples of that happening throughout history too – and not one of them is celebrated.

I’m getting real tired of the great enlightened ones wanting to travel back in time and change their position about supporting taking action against Suddam. Well, the results haven’t been what we would have hoped, but just because you don’t like where we are right now, doesn’t mean you can cop out and go back to ease your conscience. I know Bush makes it easy and offers all of you “do-over” types an opportunity to cop out like Al Gore and claimed the only reason you supported it was that you too were “duped.” We’re there and fighting a war of attrition, which BTW no one has every won, but it’s a success even if the only thing that comes out of our time in Iraq is that the next time the US says “knock it off or we’re coming” that these people or leaders realize we’re serious and that we’re bringing a tank to a gun fight!

Thanks,

Rich

I remember when Bush declared "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED"

Good now lets declare victory a second time and support the soldiers by bringing them home. They won the war, they are heroes! They deserve better from our Commander-In-Chief.

Let it be known that the bombs and gas used by Iraq against Iran, Kuwait, and his people…drum roll please….They were provided by the UNITED STATES. Are they bad people over there: YES, but do we need to police other people's business: NO, but we do anyway. How can no on this board address the fact that the US does this!!! We installed our own ruler in IRAN in 1953! Someone other than me must know this!!!! Anyone????

Pixie ~ TN

Absolutely there are times when our enemie's enemy is our friend. Saddam was seemingly "controllable" until he unilaterally invaded Kuwait - elevating his status from territorial bad guy to Middle-Eastern Menace and Predator.

Your attempt to equate Isreal to Saddam is laughable. IF you were to look into the UN Resolutions you would see the vast majority are the rantings of Islamic countries bent on the destruction of Israel… countries which harbor terrorists groups that blow up innocent men/women/children in buses, malls, and discos. Israel maintains an open dialogue and has made progress in pulling out of occupied territories.

We broke international law by invading Iraq?? LOL Which law was that, Pixie? UN Resolution 1441 required Saddam to comply or face "serious consequences". But if you think the US violated "international laws" you go ahead and lead up the charge for President Bush (and our congress) to be tried at the Hague.

Sorry the application of your isolationist rhetoric fails when applied to the attrocities of Hitler. But I'll tell you what … the NEXT time the UN is unable to reign in a brutal dictator - we'll send you and Sean Penn over to "reason" with them and ask them not to hurt others.

And we don't LOVE war - we love freedom and peace. And SOMETIMES - peace comes at the price of killing those that plot/plan to kill you.

Duly-elected?? Are you refering to the "vote" Saddam held and told the world 100% of the votes were for him??

Keep in mind, he was a brutal dictator that we were more than happy to support when he worked in our best economic & strategic interests. We still maintained diplomatic relations w/ him after the gassing of the Kurds. To turn around now and claim that we were right to invade because he was a Very Bad Man, we would also have to acknowledge that we were perfectly happy to look the other way as long as he was friendly to our interests.

"We WILL respect the sovereignty of RESPECTABLE nations that abide and respect the rights/value of other nations."

Riiiight, so who determines who and what is respectable? I guess we have the biggest toys so we make that choice, correct? Your talk about violation of UN resolutions is absurd. If we are going that as an excuse for our invasion, then we have to also explain why we remain staunch allies w/ Israel who has violated 68+ UN resolutions. Oh wait, that's right, there's one standard for our Respectable Allies, and quite another for the other countries out there.

"IF/WHEN a country acts aggressively (invading Kuwait) and defies the world (UN Resolutions) - then YES we can take action to remove these dictators/and or brutal regimes (Al Qaeda)."

So I guess by your logic that means since we broke international law by invading Iraq who was neither attacking us or presented a threat, then other countries can feel free to invade us and remove our dictator? (Why did you even throw Al Qaeda in there? you do realize that Al Qaeda entered Iraq *AFTER* we invaded, don't you?)

"Germany was a sovereign nation under Hitler. Based on your arguments we should have never invaded their country??"

GG: "Is the curriculum for history classes in some American states restricted to learning about Hitler and the Nazis and 1938 and Hitler and Germany? It must be, because there are many right-wing fanatics whose entire understanding of the world is reduced in every instance to that sole historical event — as though the world began in 1937, ended in 1945, and we just re-live that moment in time over and over and over:

Love war? You are Churchill, a noble warrior. Oppose war? You're Chamberlain, a vile appeaser. And everyone else is Hitler. That, more or less, composes the full scope of "thought" among this strain on the right."

Steve ~ Charleston, SC

You said, "We invaded a sovereign nation and overthrew a duly-elected leader despite the fact that he presented absolutely no immediate threat to our safety and security."

Duly-elected?? Are you refering to the "vote" Saddam held and told the world 100% of the votes were for him?? Good lord - he was a brutal disctator that held power through the military. Any "opposition" was either tortured/killed or gassed (hundreds of thousands of kurds).

You then go on to ask, "The question is: Are we going to respect the sovereignty of other nations or not? "

We WILL respect the sovereignty of RESPECTABLE nations that abide and respect the rights/value of other nations. That WASN'T Iraq/Saddam. Let me remind you: UN Resolutions 660, 661, 678, 686, 687, 688, 707, 715, 986, 1284, and 1441 - ALL called for Saddam to de-arm, provide documentation of the destruction of arms, and cooperate with UN inspections.

IF/WHEN a country acts aggressively (invading Kuwait) and defies the world (UN Resolutions) - then YES we can take action to remove these dictators/and or brutal regimes (Al Qaeda).

Germany was a sovereign nation under Hitler. Based on your arguments we should have never invaded their country??

Seem to remember when this war started a VERY high % of Americans supporting the effort with complete fervor.

Congress (inlcluding Hillary) completely authorized the action and the only people who were against it were the same anti-war crowd that would be opposed to ANY military action, NO matter what he circumstances.

People supported it because it was the RIGHT thing to do.

Since the quick WIN, things have not gone as smoothly as SOME would have like but you don't just go in and topple a dictatorship and have a perfect democracy the next morning.

Unfortunately, we in this country have a VERY low tolerance for pain and we tend to turn our backs when things get tough (thanks largely to media outlets such as CNN who cherrypick the news and only report things supporting their agenda).

Anyone in the their right mind, who has ANY clue of what is going on over there knows that it is not a realistic goal for us to just pick up and leave. CNN's own Michael Ware (not a supporter of America in the slightest) has reported repeatedly that if we left, the region would likely go up in flames and we here in America would face a great deal more terrorism on our lands.

[...] as a shock because of how forthright the Bush administration has been, a majority of Americans don't trust Petraeus's upcoming report and even if they did, it wouldn't change their mind, [...]

Step back for a moment. Over 100,000 US military personnel have been in Iraq for nearly 5 years now…with all the guns, planes, bombs, and warships that the worlds most powerful army can muster. Why are we there? Remember the movie Red Dawn? How would you like it if Russia or some other country invaded and occupied the USA for nearly 5 years (so far)? What gives us the right to be there at all? And don't dare reply with "UN resolutions" b/c we ignore any of those that we don't agree with. There was no reason to start a war. There is no reason to continue it. Our actions are creating 1000's more terrorists. Real good policy. But like the war on drugs, weak presidents need something to rally against. It helps even more if they can perpetuate the supposed problem (i.e., Bush Sr. flying drugs into the country and Bush Jr. creating more terrorism every day).

I think this report will show that there really are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. They are called "insurgents" and they were released on the world, not by Saddam Hussain, but by George W. Bush.

THE WAR IN IRAQ IS LOST.

Last I heard, the White House had decided they couldn't trust Petraeus to write a sufficiently glowing report so they have decided to write it themselves & slap his name on it - and the idea that ANYONE would believe ANYTHING coming out of the Cheney-Rove-Gonzales machine at this point is just laughable!

To Kristy Sanborn:

You ask where I was on 9/11/01. I was in Manhattan, just a few blocks uptown from where 2 friends of mine perished at the hands of intolerance and hatred. Where were you?

And what, I have to wonder, does that have to do with the topic at hand? Because no matter how hard this President tries to wrap his illegitimate war in the flag and the blood of 9/11, the two things are completely unrelated.

If he had REALLY been serious in erradicating terrorism, we would have sent our entire military force to the hills of Afghanistan and turned over ever single rock until we found Osama bin Laden. We would have been relentless in conducting surgical strikes to take out the terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and we would have sent the CIA into Saudia Arabia to assasinate the wealthy Sheiks funding the attacks.

But he wasn't serious and we didn't do that. Methodically tracking down a madman and conducting covert strikes wasn't sexy enough for our Cowboy King, so he had to find something good to blow up. Someplace where he had a personal score to settle. Someplace where he could justify running up our defense spending to levels never before seen, bankrupting our nation and enriching his friends in the process, knowing that all he would have to do is say "9/11″ and millions of Americans would swoon, give him whatever he wanted, and buy into the idea that anyone who disagreed was being "unpatriotic" or, in your lovely words, Kristy, a "communist."

To A Former Marine:

You ask why I think this war was illigitimate.

We invaded a sovereign nation and overthrew a duly-elected leader despite the fact that he presented absolutely no immediate threat to our safety and security.

Was Saddam Hussein an evil man who treated his citizens attrociously? Absolutely. Is his country better off without him? Perhaps, although given the fact that Iraq is experiencing all-out civil war, that position is certainly debatable. But at the end of the day that point is irrelevent.

The question is: Are we going to respect the sovereignty of other nations or not? If we are, then we have to acknowledge that going into Iraq was a mistake — they had no WMDs, and we had the intelligence to know they didn't. And if we aren't going to respect the soverignty of other nations, and are just going to do whateverthehell we want, then we have absolutely NO standing to object when China decides to invade Tiawan, North Korea decides to invade South Korea, and India and Pakistan decide to blow each other to oblivion. If WE get to do what's in our best interest on the world stage, then so does everyone else.

You would have to be a complete moron to believe anything associated with this administration. They simply don't know how to tell the truth. I suppose there will be a few sheep that follow the herder. But for the most part people understand the consiquences now and are ready to say enough. We are not a nation of cowards like this administration constantly implies. Only cowards attack when unprovoked. Yes I am calling all you war hawks cowards.

CNN is really scraping the bottom of the barrel with this one. They're afraid that if the report happens to be good (I expect it to be mixed) they will have to report the troop surge is working which they personally hate. Way to be objective!!

Vietnam deja vu. The U.S. military has now lost credibility w/ the American public. Is there no end to the swath of destruction by Bush/Cheney?

Greg from Phoenix…we already know you trust the report…I mean you've been fooled by this neo-con administration from the get go and you will continue to do so. Considering this report is going to be doctored by the White House, it's safe to assume that you will be the #1 fanboy when this comes out next month.

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise, the "Petraeus Report" is going to be written by the white house, whats not to trust there? Oh but of course it is the polls fault the liberal media, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. you guys on the right are broken record just repeating the same old BS line over and over and over, maybe if you say it enough times reasonable people will believe it? Lets hear it one more time what the heck, progress is being made, the good news is not being reported,stay the course, oh I don't think so it is still BS.

The war that was "lost" is now the winnable war. The trajectory of events is now favorable.

But Hillary and Barack and the Breck Girl are all for losing. It's actually in their favor for us to lose a war!

Harry Reid sent these kids to go fight the war, then he said we're losing it.
The bottom line here is that the Democratic Congressmen undermined the troops and actually threatened to hold back funding our brave men and women and for that patriotic Americans will never forgive them.

Ask any combat soldier or veteran and maybe people would get a clue what this war is about instead of believing everything the media put in their heads. I guarentee if their csptain is doing their jobs the soldiers know why they are there. Get a Clue is right!! So many from both partys are believing exactly what the media wants and don't get the real pictures. I know I was deployed when in service and the media never told the real truth they only tell bits and pieces for their adgenda.

Myron from Honolulu, you say "We grew up knowing the Government lies!".
I am sorry you had to grow up like that, being taught that. You ask, "So Whats New?" I will tell you whats "NEW", the Government doesn't lie, Mayron, but because you aren't the only one who grew up like that, or there are people who listen to people like you who did have to grow up like that, thats what some people do think.
Our Government is no different that any other organization in the world, they have some that aren't honest, but who busts them when they discover this? Our Military is Government, and they are the one of the first to bust one of their own, when they find they are not doing things right. It doesn't happen often, but when it does, they take care of it. Thats not lying. It holding their own accountable.
What about all the articles printed about some Govt. officials even getting busted? What about the ones busting them? They are of our Government, and they don't like it when other ones make them look bad.
I am really sorry you feel like that. I don't know how old you are, but I have always felt that no matter how a person is raised, they reach an age that they are old enough to still know what is right, and what is not. And saying our Government lies, as you did, is not right.
Maybe you don't really know that. Maybe you don't have that much association with any Government officials, maybe you just read what the media prints, and they don't say much about ALL the good ones, Myron.
And it is unfortunate, but they also let some really run down the good Government officials, maybe thats why you grew up thinking the Government lies.
There are many people that think that all Government officials lie. While it is true that some really do, and its unfortunate when that happens, as it gives people the opinion you have, but they are still far and few between, the ones who do lie, etc.
Then there are people who have been busted by many differnt levels of Law Enforcement, our prisons are full of them, and you wouldn't get too many of them to say any Government official is honest. I know first hand, Myron, some Govt. officials that have not only lied, but broken the law also, I am not saying it doesn't happen, but what I am saying is they are far outnumbered by the ones who don't.
It breaks my heart, Myron, to know there are people like you that had to grow up being taught that.
Only you can change your thoughts on that, Myron, no one else. Just because you were raised to believe that, doesn't mean its the way it really is. I was fortunate, I was very fortunate actually. I was raised the opposite, Myron. I was raised to believe in our Government and our Justice system, as that is also part of our Government. I was raised that if there was ever a time I needed help, that the police were the first to go to, and they are ALSO Govt. officials, that you say "lie".
Think about being raised the exact opposite of what you were raised to believe. Only to find out, that there really are some (Govt.) officers and judges who will not only lie, but break the law also. Its very very disappointing to say the least to live this, and it can almost shatter ones belief in our Government completely, if a person LETS it. Thats my point, Myron, IF you let it, then yes, you will believe that our Government lies.
I hope for your sake that someone comes along and enlightens your life, as I have had MANY Government Officials do in my life, and I can tell you as well as anyone, that our Government on the whole does NOT lie. I know of too many of the really good ones. Just like this General Petraeus and so many more like him, they live their lives, Myron, to do good for the world, and read some of these postings and the things 'Americans' are saying about them. When it is us Americans they are doing this to protect. The same as our Law Officials of all levels, they do what they do to protect us, the majority do.
Months ago, I watched a video, of a Maj. General Benjamin Mixon, right after, Myron, the big political stink about this "surge" of troops being sent overseas. This video of the Maj. General, he explained how badly he needed those extra troops. He tried to tell America how he needed them. But at the time, there were politicians fighting our President Bush and the others who wanted to send Commanders like this Maj.General Mixon the troops he needed. He did get them hthough. And just the other night, as he is Commander of this newly dubbed Task Force Lightening where he is at,and he is ok because he has those extra troops, as where he is they said, is a pretty hot frontline spot right now. When I read that the other night, all I could I could think about was what IF those politicians that were so against sending those troop surges over there, what if they hadn't? They would have made 'sitting ducks' out of the ones already over there. But our President George W. Bush and the others, they sent those troops over there anyway. And I thanked God again, just the other night that they did. Because this Commander, Maj. General Mixon said that there is NO safe haven for these terrorists, espcially where he is at. And if you had seen that video I did, Myron, you would know that he meant it too! Again, a 'Government' official.
No, Myron, they don't lie.

I for one think it is COMPLETELY inaccurate to suggest that our military has "lost" anything.

Seem to remember our military going in and liberating Iraq in about the same amount of time it takes to order a Big Mac.

The fact that some yahoos continue blowing themselves up in an effort to turn American public opinion against the war does not equate to a "loss" by our military.

There will be crime in the streets of Iraq (just like there will be crime in the streets of the USA)) for many years to come and I don't think we should back down just because the operation hasn't gone as smoothly as some would have liked.

The fact that the Democratic candidates have tried to USE this in order to curry public favor is REPREHENSIBLE and they will MOST DEFINITELY pay for it come election time.

Remember the training of the Iraq’s to stand up and then we will stand down? And how well that was going we were told. It went so well we had to “surge” troops in an attempt to gain control. Now we find out that thousands of arms given to those we were training have disappeared and we have no idea where they are or who has them.
And the general in charge of this was General Petraeus.

to Steven in Charleston, SC., no, I don't believe people like you to be
'monsters'. There is a difference between 'monsters' and communists.
And your intelligence you brag about, and you don't know the cold hard facts that people do die in wars, as sad as it it, it is reality.
We should have never gone there? OK, where were you on 9/11/01?
Did you happen to hear about the JFK International airport attempt by TERRORISTS??
You must have been one of CNN's 1,029 people who participated in this so called 'poll'.
I posted earlier, but CNN hasn't printed it.
I have heard many people say though, that there are even communist media sources in the U.S.
Does anyone wonder which ones those may be?

>The people who are answering these polls have a vested interest in bad things happening for America; it's good for liberal Democrats for us to lose in Iraq.

Posted By xtina chicago IL : August 16, 2007 5:54 pm

This is typical ignorance demonstrated over and over again by many conservatives. So what's this "vested interest" in losing xtina? You and your kind are so simple minded to think that people who are against the war are against America.

But this argument has been the same for years. Guess you can't teach an old dog new tricks. There will always be people like you who cannot look beyond the small picture in front of you.

Killing terrorists is fine with me. Creating millions of new ones with thoughtless and reckless arrogance is not.

xtina from Chicago IL says: “it's good for liberal Democrats for us to lose in Iraq.”
This is a despicable statement. Like all members of my party I am an American first and a Democrat second. I support our troops on all fronts, but I’d like to see them led by competent leaders with some concept of world politics and military strategy. I also want them fighting against our enemies, not trapped in the crossfire of someone else’s civil war.

So What's New?

We grew up knowing the Government lies!

A 'poll' and this holland man thinks that 1,029 people called to do this 'poll' gives him the right to say "Most of America's mind…" wheres his mind at? as he said "It's more the 'messenger'….." and holland thinks he is THE messenger.
GENERAL (see, I have NO problem, holland, with the title of GENERAL) Petraeus AND Ambassador Crocker has more integrity AND knowledge in their little fingertips, than the one running his mouth about his so called 'poll', has in his whole being, obviously after this 'poll'.
No, CNN didn't call me either, I think they have their little list of idiots they call all the time, therefore I thank GOD they didn't call me, thats a COMPLIMENT.

These poll results always make me ask myself, "where do they get these hundred or so knuckleheads who are supposed to reflect the broader consensus?" After reading some of these comments here, I need look no further. "Lies, conspiracies, Bush/Chaney/Rove….blah, blah" - c'mon people! This is a thinking person's game. We're not supposed to judge until all the evidence is in - yet CNN - the same network who squelched the 9/11 footage because they thought it best for all of us knuckleheads, now jumps out to discredit a report that hasn't even been typed. That's what I call unbiased predicting … er… I mean reporting.

Polls and statistics give the air of scientific reasoning and legitimacy, which is the basis of peddling this silliness. In that same spirit, please CNN, run a test group where you poll the same group in parallel with a "do you think Elvis is alive?" question. That way we can really see just how much political extrapolation is going on via the news manufacturing process.

Thanks,

Rich

People who say if the military was allowed to do what it takes to win, the US would have won Vietnam and this war. Those people know nothing about military history. A professional standing army will never win a guerilla war. Why don't you ask the Brits how we did it early in the Revolutionary War.
How come people cannot get that through their head!!!???
We have been over in the Middle East since we formed as a country, the US installed OUR OWN RULER in IRAN in 1953!! How come no one takes that into account of why there is "terrorisim"? MOST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES MEDDLE IN OTHERS, accept it. The US does that same things that the white house accuses Iran of

Posted By Steven in Charleston, SC : August 16, 2007 6:01 pm

You know, every time I hear of some kid being killed or raped for no good reason, I get upset. So, by your logic, we should just leave NY, Washington DC, or every metropolitan area where there's lots of crime?

You lament the people being killed, but you apparently have forgotten the hundreds of thousands murdered by Saddam and his sons. Do you think Iraq would have been better off with him still in power? Or is it that you just hate BushMcHitlerBurton more than anything else?

You say that "I AM anti-illegitimate war", so tell me, what about this war is illegimate?

People who say if the military was allowed to do what it takes to win, the US would have one Vietnam and this war. Those people know nothing about military history. A professional standing army will never win a guerilla war. Why don't you ask the Brits how we did it early in the Revolutionary War.
How come people cannot get that through their head!!!???
We have been over in the Middle East since we formed as a country, the US installed OUR OWN RULES in IRAN in 1953!! How come know on takes that into account of why there is "terrorisim"? MOST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES MEDLE IN OTHERS, accept it. The US does that same things that the white house accuses Iran of.

Wasn't it just yesterday that the White stated that THEY will be writing the September report, after taking the General's report into consideration? Apparently they don't trust him to put enough slant on it.

All one has to do is look at what has happened to every single public member of this Administration who has ever even remotely suggested that George Bush doesn't walk on water or that his policies aren't just the best ever, to know that Gen. Petreus' entire professional career is riding on this report. As a result, I have to assume that whatever this report says, it will be the best possible positive spin he can put on the situation, and therefore needs to be taken with a grain — or perhaps an entire shaker — of salt.

And to those of you who insist on blaming CNN, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic presidential candidates, the blogosphere, and "liberals" in general for the poor poll results, have you ever considered that Americans just might be able to accurately weigh the objective evidence? Thousands of American soliers killed. Tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians killed. Abject poverty for millions. Civil War. The Iraqi government apparently trying to make arms deals behind our backs. How exactly can those FACTS be spun to suggest that things are going well?

And to all of you who seem to believe that those of us who oppose the war WANT things to go badly, what kind of people do you think we are? Are you so unable to believe that intelligent, compassionate, serious people could actually disagree with you, that you have to believe us to be monsters? Every time I hear of soldiers or Iraqi civilians being killed, it hits me like a knot in my stomach. This is a war that should NEVER have been started. And every day we are there, no matter how well things are going, death will occur. And as long as we pretend that we have any right to be there, the blood that is flowing will be on our hands. I am not anti-war. I AM anti-illegitimate war.

The people who are answering these polls have a vested interest in bad things happening for America; it's good for liberal Democrats for us to lose in Iraq.

Paul,

Our troops need to get out in VICTORY! Just getting out in one piece is not going to get the job done. We got out too early in Vietnam, and look at the bloodbath that followed.

The endgame must be victory, not just "getting out."

Pres. Bush will pay about as much attention to this report as he did the Iraq Study Group report. In fact, at his press conference prior to his much-deserved vacation this month, Bush said that this report will have no bearing on his plan to stay in Iraq. Gen. Petraus' report is going to be d.o.a.

Jeez, folks, let's HEAR it first!!!

Poll: Americans don't tust Iraq report
Reality: Most Americans are ignorant fools

Common sense and good judgement seem to be completely missing from most of the American population at least since the far left has become louder and even more entrenched in the mass media. It's soooooo much easier (and popular) to "blame bush (TM)" for whatever woes you face rather than dealing with facts. Most people have no idea why we are fighting this war or have some insane misconceptions and lies made popular by the media such as "this is a war for oil" or that its "an illegal war" - none of which is true. Iraq was an easy target to remake into a country more friendly to the USA and the post 9/11 western world. It was to be made into an example for the rest of the middle east - all of which is run by dictators and fat ass royalty which cares not a thing about their extremely impovershed and brainwashed populations such as the case in Saudi Arabia where members of the royal family travel to Milan to shop for a new boat, etc. just as you would go to the corner for eggs or in the case of Iran, proclaim that Islam must rule the world as they develop nuclear technology and thumb their nose at the world. We are there in Iraq to oppose all of that. We are there to demolish all those that would likely otherwise harm us HERE, stateside. We are making great strides in Iraq as of late. The media keeps calling it "the surge" when they damn well know the cornerstone is a wholesale change in stategy in the way war is being fought, not just a troop level increase. The people of Iraq want us there, finally - After all the anti-US propaganda and sentiment there, now they want us to stay, because they finally see with their own eyes that we are the good guys! All of you defeatist, wrong-minded uninformed non-thinkers should be ashamed not only for being unamerican, but for being so damn stupid and gullible to do and think what the media wants you to do and think. Wake up people! Get a clue!

I hate to burst a bubble for those with preconceived notions but here goes:

I'm a Democrat.
I want America to win in Iraq.
I want the surge to succeed.
I do trust General Petreaus.

Now comes the BUT:

I don't trust Bush / Chaney and have good reason to not trust them.

I think that we have to leave Iraq for reasons of cost measured in terms of both lives and money.

My interest is shifted to HOW do we get our troops safely extracted.

The Administristration is lagging in the discussion.

IF we leave Iraq has already been determined, WHEN we leave Iraq will be determined by HOW we leave so as to sustain as little damage as possible.

So I am focused on HOW and that is not likely what we will hear about from General Petreaus.

Stop already with sterotypes and please support our troops. They need to get out of Iraq in one piece.

Jayson's on the mark!

"Vietnam was lost for the same reason Iraq may very well be lost. Too much political grandstanding and interference. If the military is allowed to do its job without any undue interference we will win, but until then expect things to go slowly."

The troops marched straight into Baghdad and had Saddam's regime toppled in a few weeks.

After that, splinter groups used mosques and hospitals as weapons caches and hiding places. But us being the 'civilized' society we are didn't want to offend anyone by going in and killing them there.

How insane is that logic? "We're fixin' to kill ya pal, no offense."

The reason there is a Geneva convention is to establish 'rules' for armed engagement, but the rules are useless if only one side follows them. BOTH have to follow the rules. That's where we've "lost the peace" trying to be civil with an enemy that refuses to be!

My $0.02,
Chip

David Schuster on the Chris Matthews show is reporting today that the September report will not be written by Gen. Petraeus, but by White House speech-writers.

Since I have learned to believe the exact opposite of what the MSM says, I will believe this report 100 percent.

Like so many, I am tired of the democrats and thier lapdogs in the media undermining our soldiers and our effort in the WOT.

IF the report said "WE'RE LOSING THE WAR" - would you pessimists THEN believe the report?

Simple fact - the nay-sayers WANT to hear bad news. Good news would HAVE to be a lie in their eyes.

So much for objectivity.

I agree, the report maybe fictious. Anyone belonging to the Bush's administration has lost Integrity…and has helped cultivate/breed a group of dishonest people. I can remember when we were respected throughout the world!

Once again we see an example of Bush Derangement Syndrome. CNN and all their pals in the media have succeeded in undermining the President and the war.

We could kill every last terrorist in Iraq and have the place running at full capacity as a peaceful democracy and CNN would still want us to surrender and leave.

I will not trust the report, but not because I do not trust the author. He is an honorable man in an impossible situation. He must follow orders. To me, he looks like a man under severe pressure. I feel sorry for him. If he speaks the truth, he is doomed.

Vietnam was lost for the same reason Iraq may very well be lost. Too much political grandstanding and interference. If the military is allowed to do its job without any undue interference we will win, but until then expect things to go slowly. The politicians haven't figured out their is such a thing as too many chiefs and not enough indians.

Maybe if Harry Reid would pull his fingers out of his ears and stop screaming I can't hear you at the top of his lungs that we are losing he might remember that he doesn't know squat about military tactis and strategy.

There is also a reason why the founding fathers wanted a represenative democracy and not a direct one.

As a military member most of the congress calling for the immediate pullout of troops makes me sick. Most of these same idiots said they would wait for General Petraeus's report and then immediately pushed for a immediate pullout for Iraq. There is a reason those hypocrites aren't president and why they will be losing any military votes they picked up in the last election.

Thanks Democrats! Way to support the military…

And Ron's right - CNN polls are always slanted.

Many Democrats and Independent thinkers have already said that the surge is working and making progress.

Not part of the Democratic group with some fortitude was the always truthful Reid and Pelosi.

But, I never would have let those a-holes take a month off in the middle of this, what kind of message did that send?

Out troops should have taken the month off and let these a-holes kill themselves a little easier.

OMG are you serious? Most Americans don't trust a report written by the Bush White House about the progress we're making in Iraq?? But I mean, look at the stellar track record they've had with that? /cannot fathom

lol.

I really see no reason what so ever for the general to lie about anything. Let's face it, those in uniform are the ones really standing in harms way. Yes, I believe the general will be honest about his opinion.Sometime I wonder if CNN and the lkes are trying to influence ones opinion. Want a true poll? Ask 500,000 . Combat veterans

Why does CNN persist in lying to us that there is going to be a report submitted by General Petreaus?

If there was, I might consider it worthwhile to consider.

But it turns out this is a report from the White House. And that's not even worth waiting for.

Who in their right mind would trust the Iraq report. Dana Perino just said the report would be presented to the president and then given to Congress after it has been packaged by the White House. I'd like to see how the Republican candidates and Uncle Joe Leiberman try to spin this thing in September.
Second of all, would you expect anything less? Petraeus is a soldier; a highly respected and candid one at that, but he is still a soldier. If the White House is saying one thing, and he has said another, guess who's going to fall on their sword in the long run.
If you picked Bush and Cheney, I've got some oceanfront property in Fort Worth I can sell you.

When's CNN going to ask us how much we trust the media?

They lied to us during the Vietnam war in order to keep funding and political support for the war….

I see no reason why they won't twist the facts in Iraq to do exactly the same thing.

Reports are only as credible as the source and authors behind it. Even still any random facts can be calculated statistically to prove a point.

That's still twice the trust America gives this Congress…

No one here mentioned that the report will be written by the White House and not by Petreaus.

So why should there be any trust in this document.

Dear Mr. "Home of the Brave",

It's because of lunkheads like you that America is no longer what it used to be - you are a traitor to the good that is still left in our great country!

IT WILL ALL BE A PACK OF LIES ANYWAY. THIS WHITE HOUSE BUNCH DOSEN'T KNOW THE MEANING OF TRUTH.

"American's"?

Who is editing these things?

"Only 26 percent of those polled feel that the Iraqi government is making progress while 69 percent said that it wasn't."

How many could even find Iraq on a map? Better yet, tell you who borders it on the east, north, south and west? Or, give the coordinates (within 5 degrees) it occupies on the map? Or, name the three main ethnic groups that make up the population and what the significant issues are that keep them at odds?

If you can do any of these without using a reference, then you probably have enough credibility to make a decision.

If not, go back to the Lindsay Lohan, Anna Nicole channel…or go read the story about the president's daughter getting engaged.

Have a nice day,

Chip

I was not contacted and do trust the General, but I don't trust the administration at all. The white house is the one will sping the report not the General. Either way, the war was illegal and then Bush couldn't even conduct it the right way by listening to the Generals when they were asking for 500,000 troops like desert storm.

Why should American trust anything that comes out of this administration? They have no credibility whatsoever. After all the lies to justify going to war we have to suspect that they’ll lie to continue what is obviously a failed policy.

In any case, the biggest problems in Iraq aren’t military, they’re political. Is the report going to tell us that the Iraqi government is working, or that Shiite and Sunni factions are ready to make peace?

Surge or no surge, it’s someone else’s ongoing civil war and we need to get our troops out of it.

I have learned that any Poll by CNN is allways slanted.

Leave it to CNN to attack a report that hasn't even come out yet. Makes me wonder whose side their really on..

Everyone who was NOT contacted by this CNN opinion poll and who WILL trust what the general's report says please respond here.

Remember, General Petraeus' appointment was overwhelmingly supported by Republicans and Democrats alike.

I'll begin by saying that I WILL trust the report.