# How is the Vietnam War (sorry, the war in Iraq) going?



## Everness

Back to my favorite topic! 

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/w...al_backs_off_on_us_troop_cuts_in_iraq?mode=PF

*Iraqi military preparedness.* General Casey, the top US military commander in Iraq, informed US lawmakers that only one out of 100 battalions of Iraqi troops  is considered capable of operating independently, two fewer than in June. (¡Vamos para atrás!) 

*Death toll. * At least 60 Iraqis  were killed in three suicide bombings in Balad, a city north of Baghdad. A roadside bomb killed five US soldiers, bringing the US military death toll in Iraq to 1,934  since the US-led invasion in March 2003. (Quiz: Who said the following? "Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.")

*Duration of insurgency.* General Casey told lawmakers that insurgencies usually take a decade to defeat. He stated, ''There is no reason that we should believe that the insurgency in Iraq will take any less time to deal with." (If you know this and you anyways decide to sign up for the Army a) you are a true patriot, b) you love to tour foreign countries that are in war, or c) you are truly stupid. Fellow Americans, start looking up the different meanings of the word draft.)

*Prospects of a civil war.* Casey stated that the growing divide over the constitution could serve to embolden insurgents seeking to spark a civil war.

*Criticisms.* ''It doesn't feel like progress," remarked Senator Susan Collins, a Republican  from Maine. When the general stated that 1 (one) Iraqi battalion was prepared to operate without US support, Senator John McCain, Republican  of Arizona, shot back: ''It was three before. . . Now we're down to one battalion?" (Katrina, Rita, DeLay, Iraq... can things get worse for W? NBC's Addendum to Murphy's Law: "You never run out of things that can go wrong.")


----------



## Oven

What is this? Are we supposed to answer? If this is a critick it lacks seriousness. If this is a joke, it's a very bad one. If this is a piece of information, it's not accurate. Finally, if you think you are clever by bull***ing another country, then you'd better get going do it somewhere else. Rethoric is good as long as it go with action. ahhh something else, be respectful for all those famlies who've lost their relatives in this war. No matter what country is fighting and for whatever reason, this is already a war and that's a pretty good point for not to laugh at it.


----------



## cirrus

At this week's conference of the labour party (the governing party in the UK) an 82 year old man was physically thrown out of the meeting for having dared to criticise the line taken by our government. All he did was shout rubbish at the speaker.  This neatly illustrates how scared the UK government is of any question about what is happening there. 

I thought the point of the intervention was to bring democratic values to Iraq.  Whether you agree or not with the war, what is wrong with looking at progress to date?  With a daily death toll in Iraq that easily matches the 7/7 terrorist attack in London every day is it not high time we asked where now?

I agree all too well that war is a serious business.  A war with no end in sight is even more so.  To my mind it is not disrespectful to people who have died in it to discuss how the future should be dealt with.


----------



## Oven

Does this thread points to do so? I mean teasing about how the US has been dealing with this matter doesn't realy sound like attempting to forsee what will happen in Iraq, does it?


----------



## cirrus

I didn't see it as teasing, more exasperation


----------



## Oven

> (¡Vamos para atrás!)





> c) you are truly stupid





> (Katrina, Rita, DeLay, Iraq... can things get worse for W? NBC's Addendum to Murphy's Law: "You never run out of things that can go wrong.")


----------



## cirrus

My feeling still remains - I see this as being about frustration.  

I would be interested to hear a world pespective on the war but unless someone else is prepared to post I shall leave it.


----------



## Everness

Oven said:
			
		

> If this is a piece of information, it's not accurate.



Are you implying that the top US military commander in Iraq is giving us wrong information? (Most of the statements in the article I quote were made by the general) Well, let me tell you that you're not alone. His boss agrees with you....

_"There are an awful lot of people chasing the wrong rabbit here, it seems to me," Rumsfeld told reporters at the Pentagon, when asked about the number of Iraqi battalions that can operate independently._

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsA...KOC_0_US-IRAQ-USA-RUMSFELD.xml&archived=False


----------



## cuchuflete

Why don't we open a thread about rabbitt chasing? International cultural differences in the choice of hounds....who gets to eat the rabbit...culinary discussion of sauces for rabbits...

and let us not forget.

How important are rabbits in a deep personal relationship?


----------



## Everness

While you chase and eat rabbits, I'll draw people's attention to an interesting exchange between Teddy and Don.

Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts: "There are 'continuing reports that the Iraqi police and security forces we're training are substantially infiltrated by insurgents." 

Rumsfeld: ''It's a problem that's faced by police forces in every major city in our country, that criminals infiltrate and sign up to join the police force."

Rumsfeld has an innate gift to reassure Americans in times of crises... I wonder what police associations across the country think about his statement...


----------



## cuchuflete

At last, the stuff of which a multi-cultural discussion may be made:

How prevalent are stupidly reassuring government leaders and criminal-infiltrated police forces in your country?

It appears that the US Army has successfully Americanized the Iraqi police establishment, so shouldn't they be allowed to return home now?


----------



## Everness

*spin    * ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (spn)
v. *spun*, (spn) *spin·ning, spins * 
v. tr.

...
_7. To provide an interpretation of (a statement or event, for example), especially in a way meant to sway public opinion: “a messenger who spins bogus research into a vile theology of hatred” (William A. Henry III). _ 
...

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Example from today's newspaper: 

_It is not unusual for the administration to send out its top military commanders to clarify or to speak more optimistically about operations after congressional testimony or independent statements to the media that appear more pessimistic than the administration's position._

http://www.boston.com/news/world/ar...ls_portray_progress_in_brighter_terms?mode=PF


----------



## Everness

I solemnly swear that this is today's last entry. 

_Still, asked on CNN's ''Late Edition" yesterday whether he thought that the nearly 2,000 American troops killed in Iraq since the beginning of the war may have died in vain, Casey answered: ''No, I don't worry about that. . . . we're not there yet."_

http://www.boston.com/news/world/ar...ls_portray_progress_in_brighter_terms?mode=PF

This is the kind of answer you get from a professional soldier when his boss, a civilian, asks him to play politician.


----------



## cuchuflete

Oh good grief Everness!  Would you have us all think that politicians are less than fully honest?  Or that the soldiers who work for them would dare do as they are told?

Scandalous!  I bet this has never happened anywhere else, or that good and loyal citizens in any country would accept falsehoods from their leaders.


----------



## Papalote

Hello, everyone

Just want to put my 2 cents worth. 

What you are calling a ''war'' is no such thing. The USA *invaded* another country. War has never been declared. Perhaps if we knew the *true* reasons behind this invasion, besides all the moral and democratic excuses given so far, we would all be in a better position to judge what is right or wrong, useful or useless. So, until we start calling things by their true nature, it is kind of hard to understand, much less weigh, what those responsible for this mess are really saying.

Aren`t y'all lucky I didn`t have 4 cents in my pockets  !

Take care,

P


----------



## cuchuflete

Good point Papalote,

It's not just a linguistic distinction. The 'war' if there was one, was against S. Hussein's forces, and lasted a few days. The bellicosities since then seem to be a combination of an insurrection against an invader, coupled with lots of regional and sectarian 'civil war' types of killing.

The notion of 'declared war' seems to have disappeared in the 1940s. Today we are given euphemisms: police action, struggle for _______, defensive _______, protective_____ and other misleading terms. Politicians seem good at calling things by dishonest names. Terrorists likewise.


----------



## Everness

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Oh good grief Everness!  Would you have us all think that politicians are less than fully honest?  Or that the soldiers who work for them would dare do as they are told?
> 
> Scandalous!  I bet this has never happened anywhere else, or that good and loyal citizens in any country would accept falsehoods from their leaders.




It seems that you like to be bullshitted. I don't. This presentation wasn't part of a presidential debate where candidates lie through their teeth in order to get elected. This was a meeting of the Committee on Armed Services "to receive testimony on U.S. Military Strategy and Operations in Iraq." The 3 generals and Mr. Rumsfeld were reporting to all Americans. Do I need to remind you that so far this war has cost American taxpayers $204.6 billion? That almost 2,000 Americans have died? That between 26,000 and 30,000 Iraqis civilians have also died during the war and the occupation? 

When General Casey, General Myers, General Abizaid and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld testify I just want facts. I don't want any bullshit mixed in! That's something I only accept from our Spinner in Chief...

Ah, parece que conoces el dicho "Mal de muchos, consuelo de tontos"...


----------



## cuchuflete

You have made an interesting deduction.  And it's wrong.


I was attempting to take this, the latest thread in which you point out the evils and flaws, the dishonesty and stupidity, of a single regime, and generalize it to something that might be of interest to a broader audience.    

So far you have established that politicians lie, and that the generals who report to them also lie, albeit with less frequency and consistency.

That hardly invites discussion or debate.  

If you don't want bullshit mixed in, why do you persist in reading accounts of press conferences given by generals and politicians?  They seem to feel that they get paid to distort and lie in such settings.

Is the river comin up, or the bridge goin down?




			
				Everness said:
			
		

> It seems that you like to be bullshitted. I don't. This presentation wasn't part of a presidential debate where candidates lie through their teeth in order to get elected. This was a meeting of the Committee on Armed Services "to receive testimony on U.S. Military Strategy and Operations in Iraq." The 3 generals and Mr. Rumsfeld were reporting to all Americans. Do I need to remind you that so far this war has cost American taxpayers $204.6 billion? That almost 2,000 Americans have died? That between 26,000 and 30,000 Iraqis civilians have also died during the war and the occupation?
> 
> When General Casey, General Myers, General Abizaid and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld testify I just want facts. I don't want any bullshit mixed in! That's something I only accept from our Spinner in Chief...
> 
> Ah, parece que conoces el dicho "Mal de muchos, consuelo de tontos"...


----------



## Everness

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> If you don't want bullshit mixed in, why do you persist in reading accounts of press conferences given by generals and politicians?  They seem to feel that they get paid to distort and lie in such settings.
> Is the river comin up, or the bridge goin down?




This wasn't a press conference. It was a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee. 

*Fact:*

When Casey reported that one Iraqi battalion was prepared to operate without US support, Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, shot back: *''It was three before. . . . Now we're down to one battalion?"*

*''Right," Casey said,* ''and things change in the battalions. I mean, we're making assessments on personnel, on leadership, on training. . . . There are a lot of variables that are involved here, Senator."


*Bullshit:*

When asked about the number of Iraqi battalions that can operate independently, Rumsfeld said: "There are an awful lot of people chasing the wrong rabbit here, it seems to me. *The important fact is ... that every day, every week, every month the Iraqi security forces are larger, they're better equipped, they're better trained and they're more experienced. And that is the central fact"*


----------



## cuchuflete

Thank you for making my point for me.  Read your own posts, #'s 12 and 13.  Read the final paragraph of your post #19.  They all cite bs given in non-sworn testimony.

Are you naive to think that a person tells nothing but the truth to a bunch of Senators, who are credentialed liars in their own right?

When a liar speaks, do you really depend on context to indicate which of his statements are truthful?  

How many times did Robert McNamara and staff tell the Senate, in sworn testamony, that we 'had turned the corner' in Vietnam?

General X gives contrary statements within 24 hours or so.  How do you know which, if either, is truthful?


----------



## Everness

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Thank you for making my point for me.  Read your own posts, #'s 12 and 13.  Read the final paragraph of your post #19.  They all cite bs given in non-sworn testimony.
> 
> Are you naive to think that a person tells nothing but the truth to a bunch of Senators, who are credentialed liars in their own right?
> 
> When a liar speaks, do you really depend on context to indicate which of his statements are truthful?
> 
> How many times did Robert McNamara and staff tell the Senate, in sworn testamony, that we 'had turned the corner' in Vietnam?
> 
> General X gives contrary statements within 24 hours or so.  How do you know which, if either, is truthful?




I think you'll enjoy this site. It covers all bases.

http://www.spinwatch.org/index.php


----------



## Everness

Although I was asked to stop listening and paying attention to this administration's press conferences, my morbid interest prevailed. 

The presi spoke today.

_He (Bush) said more than 80 Iraqi army battalions are fighting alongside U.S. troops, and that *30 Iraqi battalions * are capable of taking the lead in combat. "That is substantial progress from the way the world was a year ago," he said. _ 

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/051004/w100446.html

Yes presi, that is a substantial progress from the way the world was a year ago but an even more substantial progress *from last week* when General Casey informed US lawmakers that *only one out of 100 battalions of Iraqi troops is considered capable of operating independently, two fewer than in June.*

Como diría un amigo mio, "Pero che, déjense de joder. Si van a mentir, por lo menos pónganse de acuerdo".


----------



## cuchuflete

Stubbornly, I'll keep trying to push you into making this a topic worthy of discussion, rather than leaving it as yet another monologue.   How about comparing the number of blatant lies told by your presi, per annum, compared with the logical and factual liberties taken by presi equivalents in other first, second, third world nations?

Next, take the % of the voting eligible public prone to swallow such swill, and derive a
'dietetic factor'.  This would reveal something about cultural similarities and distinctions.  

The inverse factor would be calculated by the number of days, if any,  on which a presi or presiproxy or equivalent tells the truth, multiplied by the percentage of voters, such as yours truly, who cannot believe the presi capable of such an act.

Just a thought to punctuate the stand-up delivery.


----------



## murena

Everness, thanks for sharing those facts and present them in such a clear way. I think is important not to let those kind of global problems slip from people's minds. 

It is sad to see the ridiculisation attempts from some forum members. I think that if somebody does not like to see this kind of information in this forum, he/she is free to browse other threads.

Saludos


----------



## Everness

Gracias murena!

Despite people’s efforts to portray the war in Iraq as an exclusive American problem that people from other countries don’t really care about, the reality is that the entire world has a huge stake in this war. Moreover, and if the political establishment in your country doesn’t seem to care, citizens should start to pay attention to what’s going on in Iraq because this is the way the US is planning to combat international terrorism. (By the way, I’ve already been called a supporter of terrorism; just for the record, I’m against all type of violence.)  It’s interesting to note that many foreros are from countries that are currently part of the “Coalition of the Willing,” the group of nations that participated in the invasion of Iraq. (Click on link to get a complete list of countries http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multinational_force_in_Iraq#List_of_nations)

So I don’t think we need to put a spin on this topic to make it palatable or relevant to other audiences outside the US. Comparing the lies of our government with the lies of other governments in order to find out who lies more or who lies less, more openly or more blatantly, etc. etc. amounts to a distraction. (Eso me recuerda las discusiones entre los muchachos acerca de quién la tiene más larga.) If I focus on the US, it’s because my country spearheaded this insane military crusade. In sum, this thread and this topic have enough merits to be standalones. 

Now, if people think that a forum on language isn’t the appropriate place to discuss the war in Iraq, well, that would be another story. But if you check some of the latest threads, you’ll realize that foreros aren’t on the same page when it comes to defining culture or what’s appropriate or relevant to an international cultural forum that deals with languages. Professional translators and interpreters, or even people like me who simply love languages, don’t live in a vacuum and the fact that we are interested in discussing linguistics doesn’t mean that we can’t discuss political or even religious issues –two definite hot potatoes— if we choose to.  No one obligates anyone to participate in threads like this one. (But it would be a good idea!  )


----------



## Everness

*Question: * 

What does a President do when the latest Gallup/CNN/USA Today poll tells us that 1) *only 32 percent * of those approve of Bush's handling of the war; 2) *a remarkable 59 percent * now say that the invasion a mistake, and 3) *an even more remarkable 63 percent * say they want to see some or all U.S. troops withdrawn? 

*Answer:*

Compare Islamic radicalism with communism. (Bush used the word communism 6 times in his latest speech about the war on terror.) 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/10/20051006-3.html

Read this interesting commentary on Bush's speech:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/2...Aj9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl


----------



## luar

Everness, don´t you get it? Bush is trying to fulfill God´s will!
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article317805.ece
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/051007/1/3vhhu.html


----------



## Everness

luar said:
			
		

> Everness, don´t you get it? Bush is trying to fulfill God´s will!
> http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article317805.ece
> http://sg.news.yahoo.com/051007/1/3vhhu.html



Thank you Luar. This is amazing.... and not as in Amazing Grace!

_"And I did, and then God would tell me, 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq...' And I did._

So now we know how the presi dragged us and other 48 countries into Iraq. I just hope that the Lord speaks to him with the same clarity and tells him how the hell we get out of this mess...


----------



## luar

Como dirían mis amigos boricuas: Mr. Bush, o te peinas o te pones los rolos.
_"I am surely not going to justify war based upon God. Understand that. Nevertheless, in my case, I pray that I will be as good a messenger of His will as possible. And then of course, I pray for forgiveness."_
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article317805.ece


----------



## katylyn

I just joined my first "ever" forum and the reason being that I am a spanish student wanting to hear from others like me and wanting to learn about the spanish and hispanic cultures. I guess the powers that be have guided me hear. I say this because, on wedensday I was telling my spanish that my son "that is in the National Guard" was coming home from a five week stay in New Orleans and went on to tell him that in January he is being sent to Iraq, then went on to discuss that the Iraqi war made me think of Viet Nam.


----------



## cuchuflete

Welcome to the forums Katylyn,

The two wars have a lot of differences, and a lot in common.  Let's hope that your son returns home safely from Iraq.

Un saludo,
Cuchuflete


----------

