PDA

View Full Version : Disaster


ThaSaltCracka
04-07-2004, 11:43 AM
These are som excerpts from O'Reilly's show last night. Iraq has clearly gotten out of hand. It looks like the admin is over their head here.

Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly. Thanks for watching us tonight.



As we told you yesterday, the chaos in Iraq is having a huge influence on President Bush. And today, a poll by the Pugh Research Center (search) tells the tale. The president's approval rating has dropped to 43 percent, the lowest of his tenure and down a whopping 13 percent since January. The problem, of course, is the continuing chaos in Iraq.

The Defense Department (search) has severely underestimated the resistance by both Sunnis and Shi'ite fanatics. And now the U.S.A. has to fight a second war in Iraq to clean things up.

As you may know, the Marines are sieging the Sunni town of Fallujah (search), which has been a trouble spot for the past year. Fighting there is intense. At the same time, a terrorist Shi'ite cleric named al-Sadr has been allowed to arm a militia of 10,000 men. That in itself is insane. And now the U.S. military has to break that militia. Heavy casualties today in that campaign as well.

America cannot back down from this fight. That would lead to increased terrorism everywhere. But President Bush has to level with us. His administration has made costly mistakes in the Iraqi occupation. And now it is time to correct those mistakes.

This is not Monday morning quarterbacking, ladies and gentlemen. This is analyzing a situation that's costing American lives and dividing the country. As "Talking Points" said yesterday, there can be no more dependence on hearts and minds. Some people can never be reasoned with. We either break the back of the Iraqi resistance now or we lose. Period.

President Bush does have time to turn this situation around and is aided by the fact that his competition has few solutions. Senator Kennedy is good at criticizing, but how many of you want Kennedy leading the war on terror?

And if Senator Kerry has a better idea, I would like to hear it. History may show that the Iraq campaign was a mistake. But it also may show the opposite. These terror killers, some of them supported by Iran, we'll deal with that in a minute, will have to be confronted sooner or later by us. France isn't going do it. Spain isn't going to do it. So now is the time the Shi'ite militia must be crushed and Fallujah subjugated.

Not only does Mr. Bush have almost everything riding on this, so does the entire country.

And that's "The Memo."




BILL O'REILLY HOST: Now for the top story tonight. What specific strategy should be used in Fallujah?

Joining us now from Washington, Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters (search), author of the book, "Beyond Baghdad: Post-modern War and Peace." All right, colonel, I'm putting you in charge of the U.S. Marines who I -- you know, anytime now are going to go in there. What would you do?

LT. COL. RALPH PETERS, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Well, as you observed, we're paying the price for not declaring martial law and coming down hard in the beginning a year ago. Didn't have enough boots on the ground.

Now we face the problem. What would you do? We made a mistake yesterday. I understand why they didn't go in yesterday. They didn't go in because they were worried about ambushes, didn't want to go pell-mell as the general said today.

But the message that sent to the bad guys was that we are afraid to go in. That's how they read it. Well, you got to make up time. You need to go in heavily. And you need to permeate the town, saturate it with Marines (search) and call in the Army. If you have to call in -- if you have to strip away Paul Bremer's bodyguards you do it.

They need to feel the U.S. presence. Now you don't kill people indiscriminately, but we need to make up for the imbalance in the past when we try to use all velvet glove and no male fist . You take privileges away from the whole city and you make them earn them back. And in the meantime, you come down hard on the terrorists.

Bill, even in Fallujah, there are people that don't support the terrorists, but what would you do? You may not support them, but hey, they're in control in that city. And we're on the outskirts appearing to be afraid to go in. Sometimes you take risks.

O'REILLY: Listen, I agree with you. And I think most -- 90 percent of the people watching you right now, colonel, say we don't understand why the U.S. military, the Pentagon, has been so reticent in going into a place that they know beyond a doubt is the source of about 90 percent of the terrorism. This is where they're hiding out.

Now as you said, by not going in yesterday, now they're emboldened again. Now let's assume that tomorrow -- let's assume tomorrow, the U.S. Marines go in. What do they do? Search every house? Round up people? What do they do?

PETERS: Well, what they do specifically will depend upon the intelligence they have. Certainly they'll search a lot of houses. And you've got a lot of people on tape. Look for the people you've got on tape, killing people, desecrating the bodies, etcetera.

But you really -- and I can't stress this enough, Bill. You have to have cops on the beat. Every time a resident of Fallujah turns around, I don't care if they're going to the latrine, they need to see U.S. troops. And they haven't seen them.

Immediately after the war, the war didn't touch Fallujah and Tikrit. It really didn't. The Sunni Arab supporters of Saddam never really felt beaten. And in the occupation that we pretended wasn't an occupation, didn't declare martial law, they never really had a sense that we were serious.

Now we need to make up for lost time. So get in there, stay in there. Don't retreat. You've got to show strength, resolve, determination, call it what you will. You cannot shut down.

O'REILLY: All right, now the dissenters took the hard line that I'm taking and you're taking say whatever we do in there, al Jazeera is going to put on their propaganda network. And then they'll hate us more in the Middle East. They'll hate us more in Iraq. So that we have to go in and we have to do it half-heartedly. We can't go in with martial law or barbed wire or kicking in doors because they'll hate us more. Do you buy any of that?

PETERS: No -- yes, Usama bin Laden might get mad at us. No, I don't buy it. Look, success is always forgiven, however grudgingly, but an American failure is remembered and haunts us for years even -- and you know, we've had bipartisan failures.

President Reagan in the shadow of Vietnam pulled us out of Beirut after the Marine barracks were bombed. President Clinton declared defeat in the face of victory in Mogadishu, did nothing after the Africa bombings, the Cole bombings, other incidents.

And I was in the Pentagon in the executive's office of the president then. The Clinton administration did nothing. You've got to lean forward. You've got to swing. And sometimes you take some hits. Don't worry about what your enemies -- whether or not your enemies love you. Impress your enemies with your determination, resolve and the pursuit of justice.

O'REILLY: All right, a town of 200,000 people there.

PETERS: Three hundred thousand, yes.

O'REILLY: Our research says about 200,000.

PETERS: OK.

O'REILLY: I mean, you might be right, but that's what our research says. Right now...

PETERS: A high birthrate.

O'REILLY: About 200,000 people in that town. Put barbed wire around the town and in and out, ID cards, martial law, what do you do?

PETERS: That's a very good question, because as we both know, it's easy to sit here and criticize.

O'REILLY: Right.

PETERS: On a practical level, yes, you make an example of it. You close it off. And instead of trying to reward them by building more playgrounds, you ration electricity. Start with half an hour or an hour a day. Make sure it gets to the hospitals, etcetera. Ration water. And make them earn it back. And the world will scream. The world will cry out and complain no matter what we do.

We need to win. And you know, God help us, Donald Rumsfeld and his wonder boys wanted to pretend this was all -- magically going to go away. It's not going to go away, especially in an election year. In this election year, our enemies, as we saw in Spain, they're going to try to embarrass us in Iraq and hit us here at home. Bill, we both wish the world were otherwise, but sometimes you've got to fight and fight hard and not stop fighting.

O'REILLY: Yes, well, listen, I spoke to the Marines before they left Hawaii in November. And I know they can do the job.

PETERS: You bet.

O'REILLY: It's not a matter of the U.S. servicemen can't do the job, and women. It's a matter of the will to win in the Pentagon. And I have not seen that will to win after the war. I saw it before. But in the occupation after, I have not seen the will to win. Are you seeing what I'm seeing?

PETERS: I'm seeing exactly what you're seeing. Donald Rumsfeld does some things very, very well, but he, and especially his cabal of whiz kids, who never served in uniform themselves, and whose kids don't serve in uniform, they always know better than the people in uniform. And it's sad. And we're paying a price for civilian vanity. All right, yes, I love civilians. I am one now.

But our military can do the job. But they've got to know they've got the backing. Look, sometimes things go wrong. Sometimes innocent people get killed. And instead of court-martialing people, you suck it up and move on. I'm not talking about mass atrocities. I am talking about rationally, judicially, but aggressively doing what needs to be done.

O'REILLY: Well, this is a crossroads in Iraq right now...

PETERS: You bet.

O'REILLY: the next couple of days.

PETERS: You bet.

O'REILLY: And we'll see what happens.

Colonel, always a pleasure to speak with you. Thank you very much.

PETERS: Thank you, Bill.


Thoughts???

GWB
04-07-2004, 12:23 PM
Why even watch O'Reilly - he is such a liberal!

Cyrus
04-07-2004, 12:28 PM
Soldiers are trained to kill people as efficiently and as much as possible. Period.

On top of all the bungles and the snafus and the no-planning-sorry's of the administration vis-a-vis Iraq, they have asked the grunts to do police duty. But soldiers are trained to kill and not to do police people. Asking a grunt to do police duty is asking way too much. It just can't be done. Somebody inform that dufus in the White House :

It jes' cayn't be duhn, Meestah Preziden', sah!

...And then you have that phoney, O'Reilly, demanding that Bush "crushes" the insurgency. Yeah, that's great, that's winning hearts and minds, right there, let's pulverize the whole damn city, if not the whole damn country...

ThaSaltCracka
04-07-2004, 01:27 PM
He is somewhat right though, are soft stance after the war was "over" has probably lead to boldness of many Iraqis. This situation is a mess though, I wonder how many more troops are going to die before W admits major combat has begun again.

This is a catastrophic failure by the administration in Iraq, and they are paying for it with the lives of our soldiers.

I hate to say this, but those liberal wackos before the war seem to have had it right.

Boris
04-07-2004, 01:31 PM
[ QUOTE ]
...And then you have that phoney, O'Reilly, demanding that Bush "crushes" the insurgency. Yeah, that's great, that's winning hearts and minds, right there, let's pulverize the whole damn city,...

[/ QUOTE ]

That might have to happen. Sad but true.

Cyrus
04-07-2004, 01:35 PM
Then we'll talk.

superleeds
04-07-2004, 01:42 PM
[ QUOTE ]
He is somewhat right though, are soft stance after the war was "over" has probably lead to boldness of many Iraqis.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Bush administration had no choice whethe to soft stance or not after the war. THEY DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH TROOPS MOBOLISED TO DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT THEY DID. They thought a band-aid was ok to do the job. They were wrong. As simple as that.

[ QUOTE ]
I hate to say this, but those liberal wackos before the war seem to have had it right.

[/ QUOTE ]
I was one liberal wacko who thought they were right to oust Saddam. I believed he had WMD. Saddam was a truly dangerous man and with WMD he had to be stopped at all costs. Now it appears he was bereft of such weapons and was just posturing. So I was wrong. I can admit it, the Bush government can't and even now they can't admit to misjudging winning the peace (they didn't think they would need to). That is why it is still such a mess. And until the US admits it made mistakes the rest of the world will let them carry-on on their own. To do this right you either need overwhelming man-power or overwhelming world-wide political will. The US has neither. Did someone say Vietnam.

ThaSaltCracka
04-07-2004, 04:10 PM
[ QUOTE ]
The US has neither. Did someone say Vietnam.

[/ QUOTE ]
Iraq has the pontential to turn into another vietnam.

[ QUOTE ]
They thought a band-aid was ok to do the job.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you might be right. We were told the Americans will be embraced as liberators and everything will be okay. You know what, all we did was open a can of worms Saddam was able to keep closed, most Iraqis hate us and our presence. There is fighting all over the country.

[ QUOTE ]
And until the US admits it made mistakes the rest of the world will let them carry-on on their own. To do this right you either need overwhelming man-power or overwhelming world-wide political will

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree.

MMMMMM
04-07-2004, 04:42 PM
Today's Nuze
Wednesday, April 7, 2004

WHAT'S HAPPENING IN IRAQ

There is intense fighting in several areas across Iraq. Some US Marines say that the fighting is more intense than any they faced last year prior to the fall of Saddam Hussein. Islamic radicals have seized control of at least one city and of a couple of bridges over the Euphrates River.

What's going on? Is this that civil war the detractors have been warning us about?

You could say that there are two new fronts in Iraq. As many as 12 U.S. Marines were killed yesterday in intense fighting in the western Iraqi town of Ar-Ramadi. Coalition officials say the attack was mounted by remnants of Saddam's ousted Baath Party. The insurgents took heavy casualties. This is on top of what happened last week in Fallujah, where four civilian security guards were killed and mutilated.

We also have the insurgency being led by a chubby little radical Islamic Cleric named Muqtada al-Sadr. al-Sadr is the son of an Islamic Ayatollah who was murdered by Saddam Hussein. You would think he would be appreciative of the efforts of the coalition. Not so. al-Sadr isn't quite old enough to have earned respect as an Islamic leader ... so he is determined to claim that position through rhetoric and violence. It was his newspaper that was shut down by coalition forces two weeks ago ... shut down because it was calling for the murder of American civilians and soldiers wherever they could be found.

So al-Sadr has decided that now is the time for him to send his militia out to drive the Americans from Iraq. At the present time, al-Sadr is said to be barricaded in his offices in Najaf. He is surrounded by armed supporters. Isn't it a good thing when these radicals gather together in one place? Are these "supporters," really members of Sadr's private army, not vulnerable to a few well placed laser-guided bombs?

If the coalition shows some guts ... and every indication is that it will .. al-Sadr and his militia will be pretty much history in a few days, as will the remnants of the Baathist regime currently making its last stand.

The radical elements in Iran are afraid. They're there ... and they know much better than most Americans that the war in Iraq has been an incredible success. Most of the country is at peace. People are going about their business, living in freedom for the first time. There is more electricity and clean water than there was before the war. More children are going to school. Businesses are opening left and right. There is more health care available to the average Iraqi than there was under Saddam.

A recent poll shows that Iraqis are overwhelmingly glad Saddam is gone. Oxford Research International reports that that the three most-admired Iraqi officials are all members of the Iraqi Governing Council. This surely is bad news to the Baathist losers and al-Sadr. In fact, only one percent of Iraqis say that al-Sadr is the Iraqi leader they most trust.

Seventy-eight percent of Iraqis say that attacks on coalition forces are not acceptable. And 56% of Iraqis say that their lives are better now then they were under Saddam.

Now this may not get reported in the States. After all, it isn't exactly good news for Democrats. But you can bet those who want to disrupt coalition plans and seize control of Iraq for one faction or another know the numbers. They're getting desperate. They know that power is scheduled to be handed over to the Iraqi governing council on June 30th, and they don't like that one bit. The Islamic terrorists want all the power to rule as they see fit, and they aren't the list bit interested in the freedom of speech and freedom of religion guaranteed in the new Iraqi Constitution. They hate democratic processes. They want it their way, and we're not letting them have it.

Cut and run? Pull our troops out now? Sure ... that would be a wonderful idea, if, that is, you want the entire Middle East to descend into chaos. America cannot be safe from Islamic terrorism if it does not see this through.

Some people hate me saying this ... but this is World War IV, my friends. Fight it over there now, or fight it here later.

AND THIS JUST IN

American Marines are now in Fallujah ... collecting the garbage, so to speak, after last week's attack on four American civilian contractors. One reporter says that this is a rout for the Marines. We're told that the bodies of Iraqi insurgents are being stacked like cordwood. Good. Let them stay there and rot. A reminder of what will happen to those who test American resolve.

http://www.boortz.com