PDA

View Full Version : No, seriously


Cyrus
06-28-2004, 06:56 PM
Hasn't this Iraq con gone long enough?

So far, we've had:

A focus on Iraq that detracted from the real theat to American security, the bin Laden network (see a bunch of analysis from Left to Right); a political leadership that completely ignored the advice of war planners (see the testimony of military men); a president that alienated almost all other western countries and brought anti-Americanism to new depths across the world (see various polls); a thousand American and coalition troops dead (see the news); Iraq ready to plunge into chaos from civil war and acts of popular sabotage (see the news) which TV anchormen want us to believe are "isolated acts of terrorists"; the American administration cutting and running (see Bremer boarding up and getting the hell outta Dodge); and so forth.

Get me another cold one.

cardcounter0
06-28-2004, 07:03 PM
Didn't you hear? The early turn over of power back to Iraq was a complete success.

Mission Accomplished.
/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Cyrus
06-29-2004, 01:31 PM
If they still have that banner from the aircraft carrier, they can use it again - and again.

I read about a similary named item in the CD stores the other day. The title was "Best Rock Compilation Ever - Number 4".

Wake up CALL
06-29-2004, 03:50 PM
One peculiar trait of prevention is that you only know when it hasn't been successful not when it has.

Cptkernow
06-29-2004, 03:54 PM
[ QUOTE ]
One peculiar trait of prevention is that you only know when it hasn't been successful not when it has.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont know but I think the reported increase in terrorist attacks has some bearing on this post.

What do you think Ringo ? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

elwoodblues
06-29-2004, 03:57 PM
I agree. Adding to the difficulty is that there are often a multiplicity of factors that take affect, not just one (or even a handful). Based on the difficulty of judging the effectiveness, any ideas about how we should judge the success of such policies?

elwoodblues
06-29-2004, 03:59 PM
Not necessarily because you don't know how many, absent the policies, would have taken place.

Cptkernow
06-29-2004, 04:43 PM
There would have been less.

Wake up CALL
06-29-2004, 05:40 PM
[ QUOTE ]
There would have been less.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you know that, how? Seems like the number of terror attacks on US soil since 911 has been zero. How much less than that is possible?

IrishHand
06-29-2004, 06:05 PM
No need for terror attacks on US soil when we're so kindly providing them targets on their front lawn. (Nevermind the fact that the mere act of stepping on their front lawn was likely to inspire a hostile reaction wholly apart from any predisposition they would have had against us).