Although Time Magazine has not been relevant for a couple decades, their “Person of the Year” award is a clever marketing tool that allows the magazine to convince people once a year that people actually read the thing. Long known as a liberal shill, U.S. News and World Report left it in the dust by making the revolutionary decision to actually report the news (hence the title) rather than editorialize it.
In the great tradition of the Academy Awards and the Nobel Peace Prize, The Person of the Year is another way of crowning somebody on the political left. The only time anybody right of center can win is under situations so calamitous that pressure mandates it. This happened in 2001, when 9/11 forced the magazine to pick Rudy Giuliani, since the only other option was George W. Bush. The magazine even flirted with giving the prize to Osama Bin Laden, and backed down under pressure. In 1995, Newt Gingrich was picked, again only after virtually every single democrat in the country was fired.
This brings us to 2007. There was nobody anywhere close to the significance of General David Petraeus. He is one of the greatest Generals in American history, and Iraq is a much more stable place in 2007 due to 2006 because of his genius and expertise in the field. If you believe that the War on Terror is the defining issue of our time, and that David Petraeus has led the effort to help win this war, then he is the only logical choice for Person of the Year.
Yet Time Magazine does not see the War on Terror as being of vital importance. Let us run down the list of the people deemed more important than General Petraeus.
Vladimir Putin won. He is a leftist, which is a good start to win this award. Personally, I like Putin. I like how he handles terrorists. He murders them in cold blood before they can do likewise. When children were kidnapped when a school was taken hostage, he threatened to go in and kill everybody. The terrorists called his bluff, thinking he would not allow children to become collateral damage. The terrorists were wrong. The children would have been killed anyway, and the terrorists understand Putin is not a man who bluffs. If I were a rebel in Russia, I would look at Putin and say, “I don’t need this, I am taking up golf.” That is what leaders do to terrorists. They crush them.
Yet as much as I admire Putin, he is not the most significant man this year. He could be a candidate for the selection if he leaves power peacefully and helps Russia move further towards democracy. This was not the year for him.
Yet as bad a choice as Putin was, Al Gore came in second. Never has a less consequential man been given so much adulation for doing so little. He wins awards for talking about global warming, now known as global climate change to protect the greeniacs if the climate cools. He has not offered any practical solutions. He wins awards for speaking about the issue. Only liberals could give each other awards for talking rather than doing.
Yet even Al Gore fails to be the least relevant person to be considered. J.K. Rowling? She writes children’s books for crying out loud!
I have never read Harry Potter. I am sure they are delightful books for kids. What does this have to do with the world at large? I liked “The Berenstein Bears,” as a child. i don’t remember Stan and Jan Berenstein being considered for Nobel Prizes.
If Time Magazine could somehow get past their leftist biases, they would see that the true people who helped change the world for the better were right of center this year.
Nicolas Sarkozy has to be considered. He has instantly…and I mean instantly…changed France from a borderline enemy and supporter of terrorist nations to a friend of the USA who talks tougher on Iran than any democrat and some republicans running for President. In 2002, it was Tony Blair, and in 2007 we have Sarko the American. His finest moment was when he called French rioters “scum.”
Another person who must be considered is outgoing Australian Prime Minister John Howard. He managed their economy so deftly that the nation currently has zero debt. He was a staunch supporter of the war on terror, and cracked down on immigrants that refused to adhere to Australian values. As America faced New York City tragedy, John Howard fought back against bombings in Bali.
For those who think that trees are more important than human beings, try being a schoolteacher in a fundamentalist nation. Give children a teddy bear, and when they name it Mohammed, watch as you get arrested and sentenced to 200 lashes.
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/11/mohammed-teddy-bear-fever-catch-it/
This column did lead to some lighthearted moments, some of which were clever enough to warrant reprinting with consent of those quoted.
“I’m taking a large teddy bear to Ottawa to present it to the Sudanese ambassador there – I am hoping to do this by Sunday. We’re encouraging Muslims to mail in teddy bears, with the name ‘Muhammad’ written on them, to the Sudanese ambassador.”
I commented on this below.
“My worry is when they start sending teddy bears back.
At some point somebody living in a Western democracy will receive a teddy bear with a Muslim t-shirt on it.
Throw the bear into the river as fast as possible before it explodes.
Teddy bears can also be used to smuggle drugs and small weapons, so I hope these teddies do not unscrew. Otherwise, we are sending them containers to keep their bad behavior in.
Or, perhaps I am overthinking this. 
”
Others responded with sharp wit as well.
“Is there room in the store for an extended line of C.A.I.R. Bears? 1.Burka Bear 2.Honor-Kill Bear 3.Jihad Bear 4.Infidel Bear 5.Submit Bear 6.Sharia Bear, etc…”
“I’d like to see 10,000 of them doing this over Sudan. Operation Teddy Drop“
“Top Ten Questions to Ask Yourself Before Buying a Mohammed Teddy Bear
10. Is it halal to keep him on the same bed as Piglet?
9. Does my homeowner’s policy cover fatwas issued against me?
8. What if he wages jihad against the cat?
7. Would he behead the other teddy bears if they don’t submit to him?
6. Would I have to buy burkas for the Barbie dolls?
5. Is this really a suitable Hanukkah gift?
4. Does my toybox face east?
3. Would G.I. Joe rip the stuffing out of him?
2. Could I be accused of waterboarding if I clean him in the washing machine?
1. Could he make an IED out of a honey pot?”
“I still like the idea of putting suckers on the feet so we could hang them inside our car windows, though I’m not sure Progressive insurance covers that.”
“I hope they’ll still be on sale after my recovery from Christmas. This little darling will sit proudly beside my bobble-head Mohammed. 
”
“I thought of these bears yesterday as the news had the inevitable picture of the shrine set up in memory of the girl killed by her father.”
“Rusty’s teddy is more to the point.”
“What I would like to see, is a huge WWII style air drop. 5000 airplanes spread out all across that country, little parachutes strapped to these bears in the same manner as the Ruperts of D-Day only these would have ‘Mohammed’ emblazened across it, stitched into it in Arabic, English and whatever other language would be necessary to get the point across, at at a designated time, synchronized in true military fashion, a drop, filmed of course, to the music of ‘Flight of the Valkyries’ all across that country, Teddy Bears fall from the sky, everywhere. No matter where you look or step, Mohammed is being insulted to the point that their pointy little heads pop off their pencil necks. Teddy Bears from heaven. Millions of them, floating down, Mohammed from the sky. Picture it. Oh, to have Richard Branson’s money. *sigh* There would be nothing to top that. The look on IRB’s face alone would be worth it.”
Beneath the lighthearted jokes is the fact that Islamofacists don’t just lash people indiscriminately. They beat people in the town square. They behead people. They get enraged over cartoons that show Islam to have practicers who engage in violence, and they communicate their rage by engaging in violence!
Yes, there are people that believe that Islamofacism is not the prevailing threat of our time. Perhaps these people should try clicking their heels three times together and saying, “There’s no place like home.”
Come to think of it, perhaps Time Magazine can give their “Person” of the year award, previously given to a computer, to animals. They should start with the Tin Man, The Cowardly Lion, and the Scarecrow, because their editorial board is living in Oz.
(For those too young to know the movie, “Oz” is not Australia)
Where do we draw the line? How about we give the award to Paris, Lindsay, or Britney? They do keep plenty of people employed covering their missteps, benefitting the economy.
The world entering 2008 is a far better place than it was at the start of 2007. The reason for this is largely correlated to the leadership of the man who literally wrote the book on counterinsurgency, General David Petraeus.
Perhaps when and if Islamofacists accidentally bomb Time Magazine headquarters, not realizing it is one of their worldwide bases of support, these liberals will remain the few un-mugged, and unaware. 9/11 never happened, the Halcyon days of the 1990s still exist, and the most significant people of the year are people telling tales of fiction and fantasy, that being J.K. Rowling and Al Gore.
They both made money, and are famous. That does not make them relevant, and it certainly does not make them as important as a man saving the world from Islamofacist murderers. Reasonable people can understand this. Time Magazine cannot.
eric
General Petraeus was certainly a legitimate candidate for person of the year and I would not have been surprised or critical if he had won.
But is he “one of the greatest Generals in American history”? It is much, much too early to make that kind of judgment. Yes, there is evidence the surge is working from a military standpoint, but even that is open to debate as we have seen in the past other “surges” where the opposition simply drew back until it was over and then resumed their activities, so it is too soon to tell, but quite clearly the present surge has not yet achieved its objective.
What is it about Petraeus that has the cons so excited? Is it because they are so desparate for positive news out of Iraq — any positive news — that they are all too willing and eager to canonize the man? Is it because everyone else has failed them?
One of the greatest generals in American history? Maybe, but not yet. Only time will tell. A lot more time.
Greg wrote;
“but quite clearly the present surge has not yet achieved its objective.”
Actually Greg it has reached its objective. And that was to give the Iraqi parliament room to breath so they could do business. The surge proved the point that the Iraqi leadership cant function in better or worse circumstances.
Its a military surge so why wouldn’t it work from a military standpoint ?
Although you would like to simplify this by saying;
“as we have seen in the past other “surges” where the opposition simply drew back until it was over and then resumed their activities, so it is too soon to tell,”
Not only has the opposition drawn back, just about all of Al Queda has left due to civilian retaliation. Commerce has returned in many provinces.
New Iraqi army and police forces are being recruited, trained, and equipped. Some 1,200 Iraqis will be trained this year for the new Iraqi army, and in two years, 40,000 army recruits will be trained.
Fifty-eight of 89 Iraqi cities have hired police forces. In total, 34,000 Iraqis are employed in patrolling the streets of their country, and of these, 30,000 Iraqis are currently patrolling with coalition forces.
More than 8,200 tons of ammunition, thousands of AK-47s, grenades, and other weapons have been seized throughout Iraq — much of which was stored by the Hussein regime in hospitals, schools, and mosques.
The CPA has hired more than 11,000 Iraqis to guard key facilities around the country.
Coalition forces, with information from an Iraqi, conducted operations that lead to the deaths of Uday and Qusay Hussein following their refusal to surrender. To date, 37 of the top 55 most wanted Iraqis have been captured or killed. With the deaths of Uday and Qusay, more and more Iraqis are freed from their fear and are volunteering their services and information.
Coalition forces continue to take the offensive against the remnants of the Ba’athist regime who are targeting the sites and symbols of reconstruction and stabilization successes.
An Iraqi Civil Defense Force will help U.S. and Coalition forces in rooting out Saddam loyalists and criminal gangs who have been attacking military forces and obstructing reconstruction efforts. Four thousand Iraqi militiamen will be trained by U.S. troops over the next eight weeks.
In Basra, 500 river police have been patrolling since June 19.
Some 148,000 U.S. service members and more than 13,000 Coalition troops from 19 countries are serving in Iraq.
Most of Iraq is calm and progress on the road to democracy and freedom not experienced in decades continues. Only in isolated areas are there still attacks.
Electricity: Electricity is now more equitably distributed and more stable, instead of, as during Saddam Hussein’s rule, being supplied to Baghdad at the expense of the rest of the country. For the rest of 2003, $294 million is budgeted to improve electrical systems.
Water Systems: Water supply in many areas is now at pre-conflict levels. Over 2000 repairs have been made to 143 water networks, and water quality sampling has restarted. There are plans to add 450 million liters of capacity to Baghdad’s system.
Healthcare: Iraqi hospitals are up and running, and healthcare, previously available only for Ba’athist elite, is now available to all Iraqis. Drugs are being supplied to hospitals and clinics, and medical worker salaries are being paid regularly, ensuring employees attend work. Vaccinations are available across the country, and anti-malarial spraying will take place this autumn.
Returning Refugees: Refugees began returning from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. UNHCR and the Coalition are working together to ensure that groups of refugees in Jordan and Iran can return to Iraq safely and comfortably in the near future.
Revitalizing Oil Production and Distribution: Repairs and modernizations are being made to the antiquated and neglected oil production and distribution systems. Oil will provide the future wealth of the country but was severely misappropriated by the former regime.
Police: There are 6,000 police on the streets of Baghdad and 34 out of 60 police stations are currently operational. Throughout Iraq, there are some 30,000 police patrolling the streets.
Road Repairs: Emergency road repairs, underway throughout Iraq now, will employ even more Iraqis in the coming weeks.
Airports: The Baghdad and Basra airports are ready to open, and the airport in Basra is expected to begin commercial operations in August. Several airlines are likely to start regular air service to Iraq.
Major Bridges: $4.3 million has been provided to repair the Tikrit Bridge; $4.4 million to rebuild the Al Mat Bridge; and $3.2 million to rebuild the Khazir Bridge.
Port at Umm Qasr: The port at Umm Qasr is open and functioning again, and customs and port authority agents are being trained.
A New Economy: A new Iraqi economy is being built on the principles of market economics, respect for the rule of law, and transparency.
Salaries: The CPA regularly pays salaries to those teachers, healthcare workers, soldiers, police, and other public sector employees who have returned to work. Payments of pensions and other emergency payments have also helped to avert a humanitarian crisis. Teachers’ salaries, and other key employees’ salaries, have increased four-fold over their pay under Saddam Hussein. Some 39,000 electrical workers are back at work. Other sectors show similar encouraging signs.
Commerce: The marketplace in Baghdad has many goods that were previously unavailable because of sanctions or because they were forbidden under the previous regime. Items such as satellite dishes are now readily available to Iraqis.
Banks: Banks are open in Baghdad. The CPA is working with Iraqis outside of Baghdad to open banks across the country as soon as possible. In addition, international interest in establishing an Iraqi trade bank has been strong, and proposals from foreign banks are under review for creating this trade facility.
Food: The CPA has purchased the upcoming wheat and barley crops, helping to meet the country’s food needs while supporting farmers. These crops include over 600,000 metric tons of Iraqi wheat and more than 300,000 metric tons of Iraqi barley.
Loans for Entrepreneurs: A micro-credit facility is now being set up in the South. Credit facilities for the rest of the country are also planned. Iraq’s two major banks will start making small and medium sized business loans to help Iraqi entrepreneurs restart their businesses.
Currency: A unified currency for Iraq has been announced. The exchange of old banknotes for new ones is set to begin October 15.
Iraqis’ Savings: The dinar has maintained its value against the dollar, preserving the dinar-dominated savings of Iraqi citizens.
Natural Resources: Oil production is increasing, with daily production of crude averaging 1 million barrels in recent days.
Budget: The budget for the last six months of 2003 is now being executed, and the 2004 budget formulation process has begun.
If you would like to see more of the progress that is taking place I will be happy to accommodate you.
To say that cons are desperate for good news out of Iraq is ridiculous.
We are desperate for a media that will actually report it.
NY times put Abu Garaib on their front page ten days in a row.
So far since September they have only reported on the numerous positive results of the surge two or three times.
Nice try, micky2.
If the surge has achieved its objective, as you say, then why is it still ongoing? Why don’t we declare victory? It’s ongoing because it hasn’t achieved its objective, which was not simply to give breathing room to the Iraqi politicians to do business, but for the Iraqi politicians to actually do their business. And, as you admit, they have not done so and do not appear capable of doing so in the future. So it doesn’t look like it is possible for us to declare victory.
You say, “Its a military surge so why wouldn’t it work from a military standpoint?” Because unless it was merely a training exercise or something devised to line the pockets of those who profit from such things, the surge needed to have an actual objective. Simply engaging in military action for its own sake is silly – there has to be an objective beyond just waging war, like gaining independence from the British, keeping the Union together, stopping Hitler from taking over the world, etc. Once we won the Revolutionary War, the fighting stopped. Once the Civil War ended, the fighting ended. Once Hitler was dead and Germany defeated, the war in Europe ended. No matter how successful an operation is militarily, if it doesn’t achieve its broader objective, it has failed.
Your litany of success in Iraq also has nothing to do with the surge. I can’t state with certainty everything in that long list comes from the same source but most of it appears to have been taken verbatim from a document on the White House website (http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/part6.html) entitled “Results in Iraq: 100 Days Toward Security and Freedom – Highlights of the Renewal of Iraq and the End of Saddam’s Regime.”
The document is dated August 8, 2003, almost four years before the Petraeus surge began. If all of the supposedly wonderful things contained in the report had actually been true, there would have been no need for a surge in 2007. Maybe that’s why you’re not seeing these “positive results of the surge” reported in 2007.
Greg wrote;
“If the surge has achieved its objective, as you say, then why is it still ongoing? Why don’t we declare victory?’
It is still on going because it is still on going ! What’s the problem with that ? You achieve a position and you hold it.
Besides that, do your homework , troops are now starting to come home.
And I don’t know where you pulled out this victory thing from.
Show me where any pol or military person said the surge would give us victory.
The surge was meant to stabilize and it did.
Greg wrote;
“You say, “Its a military surge so why wouldn’t it work from a military standpoint?” Because unless it was merely a training exercise or something devised to line the pockets of those who profit from such things, the surge needed to have an actual objective.”
Stop playing assinine childish games Greg. It was a military action with a military goal to free up room for the parliament and it worked, you’re redundant.
Greg wrote;
“The document is dated August 8, 2003,”
That’s right Greg ! I surely didn’t try to disguise it ! I put it right up there. Simply for the purpose of knowing that once I show you the next set of documents you will revert back to saying how screwed up it was before, which is always over blown by the left. So… now that we have that covered here’s the update.
I had it all waiting, its been on my blog for a month now just waiting for some pessimistic moonbat blinded by hate to come along and say the surge is not working.
You guys make me sick. You couldn’t just say ” hey ! you know what ? You guys look like you’re finally getting your footing here, keep up the good work !” ( You do have a son over there , right ?)
But Noooooooooooooooo. The programmed doctrine of hate and discouragement must prevail ! Right Greg?
Here Greg!,
Greg wrote;
“Maybe that’s why you’re not seeing these “positive results of the surge” reported in 2007”
THE IRAQ SURGE:WHY IT’S WORKING …’I WALKED down the streets of Ramadi a few days ago, in a soft cap eating an ice cream with the mayor on one side of me and the police chief on the other, …
http://www.nypost.com/seven/03202007/postopinion/opedco... – 44k – Similar pages
http://www.nypost.com/seven/03202007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/why_its_working_____opedcolumnists_gordon_cucullu.htm?page=0
NO ‘NIGHTMARE’
NO ‘NIGHTMARE’. WHY ‘SURGE’ IS WORKING … (The term “surge” is far too simplistic, as it implies simply throwing more forces at the problem, when Petraeus’ …
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10232007/postopinion... – 41k – Similar pages
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10232007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/no_nightmare.htm
Townhall.com::Shhhh… The Surge is Working::By Patrick Ruff…Early indications are that the troop surge into Baghdad is working. It hasn’t been reported on widely, but murders in Baghdad are down 70%, attacks are down …
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PatrickRuffini/2007/... – 169k – Similar pages
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PatrickRuffini/2007/02/24/shhhh_the_surge_is_working
The ‘surge’ is working- Los Angeles TimesAs recently as a month ago, it appeared that Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker would be running into a withering fusillade of rhetorical …
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-boot8sep08,0,... – 40k – Similar pages
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-boot8sep08,0,1085443.story?coll=la-opinion-center
The Surge is Workingat HansMast.comThe Surge is Working. The Financial Times:. Violence in Iraq has fallen at a rate that has surprised military commanders…
That’s the best you can do? Opinion pieces from an Army lieutenant, a teenager, and a couple conservative commentators? Surely you can do better than that! Or maybe not …
Try reading these op-eds carefully. Can’t you see that they contradict one another?
You don’t seem to understand the difference between present and past tenses. You said the surge “has reached its objective.” Funny, none of the sources you cite say that. They all claim varying degrees of the surge working, which I have never denied, not that it has already worked or achieved its objectives. I’m not aware of anyone besides you who is saying that. Surely not Petraeus. Not Bush. Not anyone.
But I’m sure you’ll respond with your usual brow-beating approach, because, as the old lawyer adage goes, when the law’s against you, argue the facts, when the facts are against you, argue the law, and when the law and the facts are against you, attack the opposing counsel.
You wrote, “That’s right Greg ! I surely didn’t try to disguise it ! I put it right up there.” No you didn’t.
Greg wrote;
“Try reading these op-eds carefully. Can’t you see that they contradict one another?”
The point behind the sources was not to show you they all agreed on anything other than the fact that the surge has worked and achieved what it set out to do which I stated in my first response to you. Different media’s will of course report different degrees of success in different areas depending on the publication and its authors feelings and standing. And that the intention of the surge was to give the Iraqi parliament room to breath so they could govern with some degree of fluidity.
The “objective” was to bring a level of stability that actually allowed the people and its country to get some footing.
You however ask why no one has claimed “victory” And I asked you what the victory was supposed to be about. What would that victory be ? You never answered me.
Greg wrote;
“So it doesn’t look like it is possible for us to declare victory.
The point you missed was that we did victoriously clear the path for the Iraqi Parliament to do what they are supposed to do, and so far they have not been victorious in their endeavors.
But our soldiers sure as hell did what they were supposed to do, no question about it.
Any fool knows that victory in Iraq is a ways off.
If that victory was to be a completely stable and sovereign Iraq the same fool would surely realize that an escalation on troop size would not do that. And that no single component in the war could possibly do that.
Greg wrote;
“Yes, there is evidence the surge is working from a military standpoint, but even that is open to debate as we have seen in the past other “surges” where the opposition simply drew back until it was over and then resumed their activities,”
Not only has the opposition drew back, a lot of it has disappeared as a result of Iraqi citizens retaliating against Al Queda. The best example being Anwar province.This movement started in Anbar province and has now spread to Diyala, Nineveh, Babil and other provinces, including parts of Baghdad.
Once again,in addition commerce is on the rise, more kids are going to school and refugees are returning to a safer Iraq.
So… It is working from more than a military standpoint. It is now working from at least these standpoints I just mentioned.
Patreaus himself whom you seem to have some respect for said in his address to congress that the surge has worked so far. And if continued on the same course will continue to work.
But I’m sure you will find semantic way to alter that to another meaning.
That would be your brand of “high brow” disingenuous presentations.
A perfect example would be this pathetic attempt at discrediting me.
I said; “That’s right Greg ! I surely didn’t try to disguise it ! I put it right up there.
You replied; ” No you didn’t”
” No you didn’t.”
That’s a lie Greg. I did put it right up there (its plain as day) with no attempt to hide the fact that those links were from 2003. Otherwise I would of deleted the dates or altered them. Once I realized what had happened I did not ask Eric if he would edit it out for good reason, because I think it should be proudly displayed what all we have accomplished since the war began, not just the surge.
Greg wrote;
“But I’m sure you’ll respond with your usual brow-beating approach,”
I may not carry my dialogue as you would and you can call it what you want.
but at least I don’t act as if everyone is an idiot if they don’t agree with me and take everything out of context , which at times is almost as good as a lie.
And I surely don’t insult peoples intelligence by arguing against things that are undeniably true and then expect people to believe it.
The best piece of evidence that the surge is working is the change in the Dems criticisms.
It used to be “the war is lost”
Now its ” the surge is working , but!”
http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1107/Murthas_comments_on_surge_may_be_a_big_problem_for_House_Democrats.html
Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), one of the leading anti-war voices in the House Democratic Caucus, is back from a trip to Iraq and he now says the “surge is working.”
Murtha’s latest comments are also a stark reversal from what he said earlier in the year. The Pennsylvania Democrat, who chairs the powerful Defense Subcommittee on the House Appropriations Committee, has previously stated that the surge “is not working” and the United States faced a military disaster in Iraq.
Here’s one from the L A Times , the moonbatheart beat of Cal.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-boot8sep08,0,1085443.story?coll=la-opinion-center
It’s obvious what accounts for the more cooperative mood. Notwithstanding all the political hype and hyperbole, events on the ground do matter, and there is no denying that events in Iraq have been moving in the right direction since the surge started. Not even the Democrats deny it. Sens. Jack Reed, Hillary Clinton and Dick Durbin, among others, have acknowledged that, as Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin put it, “The military aspects of President Bush’s new strategy in Iraq . . . appear to have produced some credible and positive results.”
These results include, according to a well-placed officer in Baghdad, a 48% decline in civilian deaths across the entire country since December 2006 and a whopping 74% reduction in Baghdad, the focus of American and Iraq security efforts.
Heres alittle more proof that its not just a military success.
Go to the link, these below are all individual articles
http://www.iraqupdates.com/p_articles.php/article/13770
U-turn as US tries to revive Iraq state industry (8th Mar 2007)
FIRST IRAN-IRAQ TRADE COOPERATION COMMISSION MEET HELD IN TEHRAN (7th Mar 2007)
U.S. official says network of Iraqi and world businessmen underway (4th Mar 2007)
Car washing… good job for the jobless (4th Mar 2007)
Successful Iraq rebuilding effort could end in 18 months (4th Mar 2007)
1000 companies and 50 countries in the 2007 exhibition of reconstructing Iraq (4th Mar 2007)
The Fair of (Made in Iraq) will be held in Baghdad next April (4th Mar 2007)
King of Spain confirms his country’s commitment to reconstruction (4th Mar 2007)
Reconstruction projects provide Iraqis with big improvements to essential services (4th Mar 2007)
Halliburton sees Iraq contract awards in 2nd qtr (2nd Mar 2007)
Advanced rates of international Baghdad – Basra project (28th Feb 2007)
IRAN’S KISH FTZ INKS COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH IRAQI KURDESTAN (28th Feb 2007)
Heres another exaple of it not only being a military success.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OGY2OTc2ODg2ZGMwZWNiYjVlYTQ5N2YwMjNlYzFjYTY=
There’s more, but you get the idea. I stopped the mayhem at Garma because I came across a recent story from that town, from the Marine Corps News. I haven’t seen it on al-Reuters, and don’t expect to, but it seems to me an important story nonetheless. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and Ron Paul and the editorial board over at the New York Times should look at it too:
Dec. 12, 2007
GARMA, Iraq (Dec. 12, 2007) — Residents here celebrated a success for their livelihoods, with the grand reopening of a marketplace central to the city’s economy, Dec. 1.
Marines with 3rd Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment, Regimental Combat Team 6, and other Coalition Forces joined Garma citizens and local dignitaries in the celebration of the market reopening, marking progress toward economic growth for the community.
“It’s a sign of progress and hope for a new tomorrow,” said Capt. Quintin D. Jones, commanding officer with Company L. “The mayor and I wanted to make an immediate impact in the area by making goods readily available, helping improve commerce. Now, the market can work as a crossroad for Garma to tie back into other cities.”
One will get you five that there are many Garmas with similar stories. They are not hard to find, nor is it particularly dangerous for Western reporters to go there and have a look for themselves. There aren’t many terrorist attacks in Anbar Province any more, because al-Qaeda has been defeated there, and the Marines are devoting a lot of their time — indeed most of their time, if some Marines I hear from are to be believed — to projects like the Garma market, developing wells, repairing broken electrical grids, and working on scores of microinvestment projects.
It isn’t just Garma, or just Anbar Province, it’s going on all over the country. Meanwhile, the critics of the war — I heard Biden carrying on about this just a couple of hours ago — intone that, yes, we may be making military progress, but there is still no political reconciliation. But they are wrong, too. Take, for example, this recent story from Taji, a locale best known for the several weapons programs conducted there during Saddam’s time:
Sunni and Shia tribal sheiks, local government leaders, senior Iraqi Army officials and local Iraqi police officials from throughout the Taji area recently met at the Prayer Town Hall to continue reconciliation efforts and celebrate the “awakening” — a term used to describe a turning away from sectarianism and violence.
More than 200 attendees from the villages of Hor Al Bosh, Sheik Ahmer, Shat Al Taji, Falahat and other areas dined as they discussed issues affecting their villages and ways in which they can improve the quality of life for the people living there.
“They decided to have a Sawa (lunch) to bring both Sunni and Shia tribal leaders together for solidarity,” said Anchorage, Alaska native Capt. Martin Wohlgemuth, commander for Troop D, 1st Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery Regiment, which is attached to the 1st Squadron, 7th Cavalry Regiment. “This is a continued extension of the Sunni and Shia partnership which has truly spread to every corner of North Taji.”
“As the security situation continues to improve, Sunnis are able to travel to mainly Shia areas and the Shia can go to Sunni areas. In many cases, these are places they have never been before or never dared to go before,” added Wohlgemuth, whose troops patrol in Assiriyah. “They are only able to do this because of reconciliation and forgiveness. This is a continued sign of progress.”
Indeed it is.
Stories like these are enormously important for several different audiences. They are important for us, because we will shortly cast votes in an election that will probably define the course of the war in the next few years. They are important for our elected representatives, who insist on distorting the events in Iraq and elsewhere, and are pretending to “solve” problems that often do not exist. They are important for the peoples of the Middle East, who are lied to daily by their leaders, by their media, and by some of our media as well. They need to understand the defeat of al-Qaeda, and the emergence of an Iraq in which the old red lines between Sunni and Shiite are daily eroding, in favor of joint efforts, political debate, and hard work on behalf of their common country.
Meanwhile, the country’s leading religious leaders seem on the verge of issuing an historic document: a fatwa condemning violence. The signatories would be two towering figures, one Sunni, one Shiite. The Sunni leader is Sheikh Ahmed al Kubaisi, whose Friday sermons from Dubai reach 20 million of the faithful. The Shiite will be Ayatollah Sayyid Ammar Abu Ragheef, chief of staff for Grand Ayatollah Ali al Sistani, whose influence extends from Iraq deep into Iran.
The fatwa will represent the culmination of years of dialogue with religious leaders behind the scenes in Iraq and throughout the region by Anglican Canon Andrew White, who works in Baghdad. Once the fatwa has been formalized, further meetings will be held among a wider circle of Iraqi clerics.
It may even be reported.
These are all credible sources Greg, so dont start with that “is that all you got?” crap, because there is plenty more out there.
In my low brow fashion I guess it would be appropriate to say that you wont bother to look for the good news.
You would rather see as you right even if it makes our country look like a bunch of losers.
What does that make you ?
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the – Web Reconnaissance for 12/21/2007 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
It seems Micky2 needs his own website/blog etc…and Greg needs to get past his Freshman year in college…GOOD LUCK GUYS!
Brian, click on my name.
This is where I come, because this is where the action is.
And yes, I agree with Greg needing some forward motion.
“These are all credible sources Greg, so dont start with that “is that all you got?” crap, because there is plenty more out there.”
Your definition of “credible sources” is anyone who agrees with you.
“In my low brow fashion I guess it would be appropriate to say that you wont bother to look for the good news.”
No, I look for good news. It’s just hard to find with regard to Iraq and it is crystal clear that our government is not a credible source. And then you have to weigh the good news with the cost of having achieved it.
“You would rather see as you right even if it makes our country look like a bunch of losers. What does that make you ?”
Honest.
Greg replied;
“Your definition of “credible sources” is anyone who agrees with you.”
Credible sources prove my point Greg. And you cant stand it !
That is a personal statement. When you say “who” you are refering to a person.
My sources sre the “source” not the independant like you with ideals.
My references are a hell of lot more reliable than taking your word for it greg.
The evidence that the surge is and has worked is plentiful and factual on a massive scale.
As far as honesty goes. You would be honest to accept the massive concencous along all lines of media.
Huffington post , NY times and all the liberal rags including every left wing TV broadcast is saying the same thing. As I said in closing that statement ” theres plenty more out there”.
You would be honest to say (IMO) that you just cant stand to see us do anything right in Iraq.
I asked; ( with typo correction)
You would rather see your way as right even if it makes our country look like a bunch of losers. What does that make you ?”
Greg replied;
“Honest”
I believe you honestly would want our country to fail, just so you can have the selfish pleasure of saying you were right.
Greg wrote;
“No, I look for good news. It’s just hard to find with regard to Iraq and it is crystal clear that our government is not a credible source. And then you have to weigh the good news with the cost of having achieved it. ”
Funny that you should critisize the government as a non-reliable or non-credible source when it comes to Iraq.
But I just went over the debate we had on the subject of climate change/gerbil warming and you use the government repeatedly and quite often , actually almost always as your confirming and credible source to back up all your arguements on the subject.
So let me get this right Greg.
When it comes to an issue you believe in, the government has the final word and is the ultimate in terms of credibility and reliability in truth.
But when it comes to the war, they are not to be believed. Hmmm… interesting.
Below you will see a portion of this hypocrisy for yourself.
Today you said;
“and it is crystal clear that our government is not a credible source.”
greg said,
November 5, 2007 at 11:24 pm
As for micky2’s comments about the 2003 climate change report, it was commissioned by Andrew Marshall of the Department of Defense. Since 1973 he headed a think tank within the Pentagon whose role was to envision future threats to national security. The DoD’s push on ballistic-missile defense is known as his brainchild. Donald Rumsfeld picked him to lead a sweeping review on military “transformation,” the shift toward nimble forces and smart weapons that was the hallmark of Rumsfeld’s strategic vision. He’s hardly a liberal pansy.
And yes, Schwartz and Randall are futurists, which is good because that was what the report was about – the future. That’s what we need from our governmental planners – vision and hard thinking about what the future holds. It’s better to be proactive than reactive and what would scare me is if no one in the military wasn’t thinking about the future.
The report’s conclusions have also been echoed by others in the defense industry. In March, the U.S. Army War College, again not your namby-pamby liberal front group, funded a two-day conference at the Triangle Institute for Security Studies titled “The National Security Implications of Global Climate Change.” In April, the Military Advisory Board, consisting of eleven senior retired U.S. admirals and generals, including some close advisers to VP Cheney, said much the same thing. Micky2, you may not like what the reports are saying but it’s really hard to deny that our military is paying serious attention to global warming.
YOU CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS GREG !
The government either is or is not reliable, make up your mind.
Hmmm, what’s good for the goose ….
My recollection is that you thought the global warming report was completely bogus, so if the government either is or is not reliable, well, you can fill in the rest.
There’s also an obvious big difference here, which I suspect even you can see. In the case of Iraq, the government position has been repeatedly debunked as unreliable or untrue and there is a pretty solid body of evidence that has demonstrated a pattern of falsehoods on the part of the Bush Administration towards Iraq. If the Pentagon report you refer to was the only source against a sea of contrary reports, I would of course look at it with a lot more skepticism. However, it follows mainstream science, and, in any event, I would never use it as the only — or even a major — source of scientific thought on global warming.
You use it to your convenience, like a child playing favorites.
To use the military as a source for info on war is pretty rational when it pertains to a war that is in play.
To use it for predicting weather 20 years from now is opportunistic and grabbing at straws.
Show me where the governments info on the war has been debunked as unreliable or untrue.
Even so, it does not change the fact that you are a hypocrite of the highest regard for two reasons.
#1 By your own admission a couple weeks ago you said you support your sons efforts in the war, but you do not suppoort the war.
I dont like what you are doing, but you are doing it well ?
==================================================================
#2 You praise the info from the government as reliable when it supports your position on climate effects in the future.
But their info is not credible when it comes to the war. When their main purpose is to fight wars, not predict the weather or its future impact.
You are the one who cannot stand to be wrong to the point that you fudge info and hypocrisize yourself. And when that doesnt work , you launch childish personal attacks out of nowhere.
You are the looser only because you argue relative terms with emotionally based opinions.
your personal attack is proof of the emotion over riding the logic.
The gentleman who said that you need to get past your freshman year in college was right
And by the way Greg.
I am not the one who said that the government was an unreliable and non- credible source.
It was you who said that. I am neither the goose or the gander.
My critisisem in the matter was directed at the two “futurists ” whos preminitions were included in the report.
Please. Show me where I said that the government was an unreliable or non- credible source.