Bush to tell Nation...Surge is WORKING???

I watched part of the presentation today but was unable to see the whole thing due to family and household matters, but I don't think I've ever said anything derogatory against General Petraous. I started this discussion asking for your opinions about Bush's coming speech and it was started before today's Congressional hearings. That having been said, I'm not sure if it's fair for you to say what I will or will not listen to. I am and have been against this war in Iraq since the beginning, I don't deny that. I don't take what anyone reports about it automatically as fact because there have been so many conflicting reports it's really difficult to know for sure who to believe! I've heard alot of good things about Gen. Petraous, that he's a good and honorable man and can be trusted to tell the truth and I have no reason to doubt that. You say "The guy on the ground...says things are slowly turning around." I guess to me and probably many others, particularly those who are, will be or have loved ones serving over there is "SLOWLY"; how slowly? I feel compelled to ask you and others who are in support of this effort in Iraq how many more of our troops have to die before you say "Enough"? Short of going over there myself I don't know how someone like myself can really know what things are like. The Iraqis love us and don't want us to leave...or, they see us as occupiers and think it's fine that the insurgency wants to kill us; there's progress all around, the power is back on, businesses are booming...there's still no electricity or running water, people walk through raw sewage to enter their homes. You hear both stories every day on TV and the radio, so how do you know which is true? I'm not on one "side" or the other because of my political ideology, our men and women risking their lives mean more to me that some sort of political football and I really want to believe most of our leaders on both sides of the aisle feel the same. I just wish I knew where the line should and will be drawn and I'm not for one instant calling this or any General a liar or a partisan but from past experience I do doubt anything that comes out of Bush's mouth. He says one thing to the troops in Iraq and quite another to the writer of his biography where he seems to think of this war as a game he intends to "play...until October, November..." I'm sorry, this isn't a game! Annie

I have talked to many service people (Army, Navy, National Guard, Marines and Air Force) both enlisted and officers who have served in Iraq and Afganastan. These are from all over the US so it is not just local soldiers. There are some consistant messages I get from them. One is that to a person they would all go back because they feel the job is that important. Many have more that one tour over there and one close friend has five tours, all volunteer. These are people who are full time military and some who are weekend warriors. Some are married and have children others are interruptering their schooling and putting off a career. Some were in before 9/11 while others have signed up after the war resumed. The second thing I hear from them is that what we read about in teh paper and hear about on TV is not the same as what they see when they are over there. A couple have said the media is telling us out and out lies while most are saying we are not getting the whole story. My family has sent many packages of school supplies to the troops to give out to the children nd my sons unit started a school in the community and encouraged the replacement units to continue to supply the school. The third thing they all report is that the Iraq people want us there to help get them on their feet and teach them what has to be done. If you study history you will see that in the US we tried several forms of governing before we tried for independance and then it took us over ten years to get to our present form of government. First was the Continantal Congress followed by the Articles of Conferdation and finally the Constitution and it was not easy and there were many failures along the way. Several of the service people have told me that comments by the opposition are harmful and in bolden the enemy and make their job more difficult. One example was when President Bush talked about the Surge Al Sadar, leader a large private Army, fled the country and told his followers to go back andwork with the government or risk being cut out of everything. As the opposition spoke out againt the surge and the troops he started to send more messages to his former commanders and encouraged the resistance. When you get opposition political leaders in the US saying that the war is lost he got more bold and even came back into Iraq for brief appearances. You say that we can not win the war on terror. I say you are wrong. There are political leaders who don't want us to win because they are invested in defeat of the US. During the period of 1960 to the late 1980's there were several terriorist groups areoun the world. You had the Red Army, the BerMindhof, the PLO and the IRA. With the fall of Eastern Europe most of the funding for the European groups die off due to lack of funding. Many of the groups being funded by Lybia lost their funding after President Regean bombed Kadifa's camps including one that was close to one of his palaces and killed a wife and some of his children. He got out of the business as the price was too high. Isreal was on the way to eliminating the PLO and it's leadership, not he Palinstine People, until the UN invited Arafat to address the UN and he showed us wearing his trademark Side Arm. Now we are learning that much of the humanatarian aid that was sent to help the people went into his private accounts and to buy arems and train terriorist. By denying the terriorist the funds and a safe base of opperation you you eliminate them as a major threat. There may still be small groups that can set off a car bomb or take actin at the local levelbut you will not see the msjor attacks and the corrdinated attacks. Without a safe haven to train in there is no safe place for them to run and hide. Senator Leiberman understands the enemy and what we have to do to win, President Bush understans what has to be done and I feel that Sect of Defence Rumsfelt understood also. Unfortunitly the meida can only see their liberal agenda. The american people are not buying it and it shows in the decline of readership, and viewers of the old mainstream media. Maybe they will understand what is needed when Al Quida is over here cutting off their hands for not printing the truth acouding to Al Quida and removing the heads of the editors.

It didn't just start there, they had their reasons. Years before these hostages were taken, the US had overthrown Prime minister Mossadegh who the Iranian people were perfectly happy with, and installed a US friendly Shah monarchy (which the US Government publicly apologised for in 2000). So then the Iranian people had a revolution and overthrew the monarchy they had forced upon them. This is when they took hostages because they believed the Americans were CIA agents. It's similar in a way to how so many Muslims were taken into Guantanimo Bay just because they looked like terrorists, but that's besides the point. The only mistake I made there was when I said Bush got us into this mess. We've been in this mess for years but every US President who doesn't take us out of there is making it even worse for us and putting us further into harms way, and more likely to be bombed now that Al-Qaeda and the other terrorists have the ability to get to our countries so easily.

Your whole argument comes apart, when one realizes that at the time our hostages were taken in iran, we had not invaded or occupied a single country in the middle east yet, not to mention the other early terrorist incidents back in the late 70's BEFORE beruit, before the first gulf war. what was the reason before all that then?