Tweet
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
and Iraq still isn't as well off as before the invasion
and Iraq still isn't as well off as before the invasion
-
I don't know that to be true. For the full year of 2008, Iraq is expected to bring in over $70 billion in oil revenues (or roughly $2,500 apiece). That's much more than ever before, and should give Iraq's economy a pretty powerful jolt.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891 -
What is that money currently being used for?
And are you saying money = well off?Comment
-
Two years ago was 655000, I heard the million long time ago must be more now.
IBC says less than 100k, because they only count violent deaths of civilians.
Comment
-
Probably goes to US Corporations, let the good times roll.Originally posted by Julian Delphiki
What is that money currently being used for?
And are you saying money = well off?
Comment
-
I don't know the "well off" equation, but certainly money is a large part of the equation.Originally posted by Julian Delphiki
What is that money currently being used for?
And are you saying money = well off?
Regarding what they're using it for, I think that they're having trouble spending a large fraction of the money.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Is that crazy somehow?IBC says less than 100k, because they only count violent deaths of civilians
Now, I could understand arguing that the toll atributable to the war is actually higher due to the destruction of infrastructure (hospitals, water treatment plants, etc). I don't know how it goes from 100k to 1 million, though.
The number is unknowable. And honestly, 100,000+ dead is an awful lot of people anyway.
As for the debate over whether or not Iraqis are better off - I imagine one would have to ask the Iraqis.
-Arriangrog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!
The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.Comment
-
Yeah, I love estimates based off of how many deaths people THINK happened AKA The Lancet. I can't believe people even parade that out.Two years ago was 655000, I heard the million long time ago must be more now.
IBC says less than 100k, because they only count violent deaths of civilians.
IBC has 100K eh, you think they are off by a factor of 10?
icasualties has it at under 50K, do you think they have it off by a factor of 20?
Both note that casualties are higher as they are only counting confirmed casualties, but do you really think that are off by a factor of 10 or 20? Seriously?"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
You can quote that stuff all you want, but he appeared to be the first general in this war able to make a plan to solve the problems on the ground, sell it to the president and his troops, and execute it well. Before he took command, the mission appeared to be hazy and drifting.Originally posted by Patroklos
While Petraeus is obviously a very competant commander, lets not cannonize him. He took over after a lot of exhaustive fighting already took place, and if he had by chance been there earlier he would still have had to deal with the various mosque bombings and Shia/Sunni/Kurd internal political/power shufflings.
In short, he knew how to win this war, as U.S. Grant knew how to win the Civil War.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
That is part of it, but another is being in the right place at the right time. I bet Petraeus would tell you the same thing.Part of being a great general in our system is being able to handle the press and the rough-and-tumble of Washington politics. Perceptions are important.
Should I list the dozens of things independant of Grant that put him in a far more advantageous positon than McClellen, Burnside, Meade, etc? Pointing out the realities that facilitated a general's success is not meant to denegrate his professional accomplishments, just put them in an accurate light.In short, he knew how to win this war, as U.S. Grant knew how to win the Civil War.Last edited by Patroklos; August 5, 2008, 14:41."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
I cross-edited you.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
And I you
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
Go check what the criteria is on their site and try to think what kind of deaths do not make the cut and you see. Anybody who is defined as combatant doesn't, yeah like that is easy to define. I hope you are not saying that losing infrastructure and medicine is not a big deal? Iraqis killing iraqis who wouldn't have etc...Originally posted by Arrian
Is that crazy somehow?
Now, I could understand arguing that the toll atributable to the war is actually higher due to the destruction of infrastructure (hospitals, water treatment plants, etc). I don't know how it goes from 100k to 1 million, though.
The number is unknowable. And honestly, 100,000+ dead is an awful lot of people anyway.
As for the debate over whether or not Iraqis are better off - I imagine one would have to ask the Iraqis.
-ArrianComment
-
It seems obvious that we would put Grant above Lincoln's other generals and officers, while acknowledging their contributions.
Several years ago, Petraeus literally wrote the book on counterinsurgency, tailored it to Iraq, and used it while in command. Given the results, I don't know how we could be too complimentary to him. He deserves a freakin' ticker tape parade, as far as I'm concerned.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
You don't think McClellan would have faired better if the South had been starving to death and Lee was one Corps light, and had just suffered a string of defeats the year before?It seems obvious that we would put Grant above Lincoln's other generals and officers, while acknowledging their contributions.
EDIT: I read your original comment wrong, sorry. What you said is exactly what I am doing, that doesn't mean we shouldn't examine the differences between the periods of command.
Again, I place a good bit of the credit for the current situation on Petraeus's command abilities, but I also wonder how Franks or Sanchez would have done if they had the 30K extra troops at their disposal or Iraq security forces as developed as they were when Petraeus took over.Several years ago, Petraeus literally wrote the book on counterinsurgency, tailored it to Iraq, and used it while in command. Given the results, I don't know how we could be too complimentary to him. He deserves a freakin' ticker tape parade, as far as I'm concerned.
I think you are giving the foundation builders a lot less credit than they deserve and only looking at the house itself. Sanchez and Franks were NOT Burnsides and Hooker."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
I'm not saying that. I was saying that whether it's 100K or a million, that's a ****load of dead people. So I don't really care to argue about it, since even if I "win" and the number is close to 100k instead of 1 million, it's not good.I hope you are not saying that losing infrastructure and medicine is not a big deal?
...
Dan, is the point of this Civil War sidebar to compare Bush to Lincoln?
-Arriangrog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!
The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.Comment
Comment