6/22    http://mediamatters.org/items/200606200008
        O'Reilly on his radio show, describing how he would stabilize Iraq:
        "President O'Reilly, curfew in Ramadi, 7 o'clock at night. You're on
        the street, you're dead. I shoot you right between the eyes. OK?
        That's how I'd run that country -- just like Saddam ran it. Saddam
        didn't have explosions. He didn't have bombers, did he? ...
        you have to have that for a few months to stabilize the situation
        so the Iraqi government can get organized, can get security in place
        and get the structure going."
        \_ Ah, the right finally reveals its true colors: brownshirt.
           \_ O'Reilly isn't "the right".
        \_ So the WMD reason for going to war: kaput.  The "we'll be rich off
           oil" reason: kaput.  And now "we'll liberate the people": kaput.
           So why does papa bear say this is a good war again?
           \_ So what do you think of the recent partially released document
              revealing hundreds of wmd loaded shells were found mixed in with
              standard shells?  I don't recall anyone saying we'd be rich off
              Iraqi oil.  O'Reilly doesn't speak for the government.  So, what
              are you talking about?  More bashing on some random entertainer?
              Now if there was an actual elected official or highly placed
              appointee who said these things there'd be something to talk
              about.
              \_ The Iraq Survey Group, sent to Iraq by the administration
                 in 2003, said "While a small number of old, abandoned
                 chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that
                 Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical
                 weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible
                 Indications that Baghdad resumed production of
                 chemical munitions thereafter."
                 Looks like the crap Santorium is talking about is
                 the above.  Anonymous motd pundit, how can you take
                 anything Santorum says seriously?
              \_ This outlandish claim by Santorum et al has been widely
                 debunked and disowned.  The shells we have found were
                 highly degraded and dated back to pre-'91 times (read
                 Iran-Iraq war).  As for rich off iraqi oil, we were told
                 repeatedly that this war would cost next to nothing, and
                 that oil revenues would cover the nominal cost:
                 Iran-Iraq war.  Y'know, the ones that we sold them?).
                 As for rich off iraqi oil, we were told repeatedly that
                 this war would cost next to nothing, and that oil revenues
                 would cover the nominal cost:
                 http://www.house.gov/schakowsky/iraqquotes_web.htm
                 \_ Missing point.  This was a small part of a larger report
                    he wants declassified.  It isn't about 500 old shells, it
                    is about "why are we not getting the rest of the report
                    if there's nothing in it"?   Santorum's claim is that
                    there is more in the report we're not being told about.
                    How can you know if there's anything more if the report
                    remains classified?
                    \_ Of course I can't know.  But I do know Santorum is
                       a sanctimonious, mendacious fool, and this doesn't
                       pass the smell test.
                    \_ Wait, are you suggesting that the Bush Admin is
                       holding back evidence of WMD in Iraq? Why? What
                       purpose would that serve?
              \_ Show me a report on the web that doesn't include a freeper
                 URL.
                 \_ So it was only discussed in an open session in Congress
                    but it isn't true unless you see it on the web?  Ooook.
                    \_ Please. They discussed whether TWA800 was shot down
                       by missiles in an open session in Congress. If you
                       have docs, produce them.
                       \_ So now you claim there was no such document much
                          less the unclassified summary document?  There were
                          no shells at all?  You're the only person I've seen
                          to dispute that.  What do you base that belief on?
                          \_ You have yet to provide me with a non-freeper
                             url linking to this report. Please to be doing so.
                             \_ How strange.  It wasn't that long ago (last
                                week) that saying, "I read it on the net, it
                                must be true" was considered sarcasm.  And what
                                does the freepers have to do with it?  Everyone
                                who disagree with you is not automatically
                                your opposite number.  I've read the freeper
                                site exactly once.  I'll bet you're a more
                                avid freeper visitor than I am.
                                \_ Was there a sale on red herrings? I'm
                                   asking for a source for op's point. A
                                   published, paper source would be fine, but
                                   op and I don't meet in RL, so there's no
                                   chance of that; I'll settle for a URL that
                                   is not freeper-based. If you can't provide
                                   it, say so. The Dem below found it, and
                                   further found that it was already debunked.
                                   And no, I don't visit freeper. That tree's
                                   already poisoned, so why test the fruit?
                                   \_ No red herrings here.  You keep ignoring
                                      the point: WMD were found.  They were
                                      supposed to have been destroyed.  All
                                      of them.  Not just from post GWI.  Why
                                      would you not want to see a full
                                      accounting of everything found in Iraq?
                                      That's what the full document is.  The
                                      point you studiously ignore is that
                                      Santorum wants the whole document
                                      released.  The age or count of 500 shells
                                      is not the issue.  It is in fact, a red
                                      herring.
                                      \_ See the URL below, then compare with
                                         this report from the Iraq Survey Group
                                         Final report: http://csua.org/u/ga6
                                         Cf. also with Bush's admission that
                                         the WMDs we had been led to believe
                                         were in Iraq were not there. The red
                                         herring to which I refer is your
                                         attempt to derail my call for a source
                                         with a non sequitur about believing
                                         things you read on the Internet.
                 \_ geez, it isn't that hard -Dem
                    link:csua.org/u/ga0 (santorum.senate.gov)
                    basically these weren't the WMDs the U.S. went to war for.
                    \_ Thank you. -pp
           \_ Does O'Reilly say it was/is good?  He says we have to stay
              and win, but that's not the same thing.
              \_ As a liberal, I could agree that we've fucked it all
                 up and that we shouldn't leave Iraq until there is
                 some semblance of order.  Also I want everyone who
                 is part of this build up to invade Iraq to lose
                 everything politically, financially, and physically,
                 but that is not going to happen.
                 \_ This is where the division among liberals comes in.
                    There are many, myself included, don't think there is
                    anyway we can restore order unless we reinstate the
                    draft and flood Iraq with literally millions pairs of
                    boots on the ground.
                    \_ Whoa there cowboy!  I thought dogma stated that the
                       only answer was to *reduce* the number of American
                       feet on the ground so the natives would have less to
                       be upset about, now you're talking about a draft to
                       put millions of people there who definitely don't
                       want to be there?  The correct answer is to reduce
                       American troop count as Iraqi troop count and skill
                       level goes up until they can deal with it on their
                       own.  I see no reason why Iraqis can't restore their
                       own order given a fair chance which neither fleeing
                       nor flooding will provide.
                       \_ Given a level playing field and a restart of the
                          clock, I agree that the Iraqis have a good chance
                          of restoring order. I'm not convinced that they
                          have that level playing field or the time required.
                          That said, "dogma" is not something I would even
                          begin to entertain in an environment as richly
                          complex as Iraq. -!pp
                          \_ So after the Iraqi government pulls the local
                             militia types into the government, you think the
                             foreign terrorist types will be anything more
                             than pests?  They're such psychos they attack
                             other arabs (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia come
                             to mind) who are now pissed off and helping the
                             West find and kill them.  Zarqawi was killed with
                             information from Jordan, for example.
                             \_ "after the Iraqi government pulls the local
                                 militia types into the government" may be a
                                lot later than you think. In fact, I hear
                                they've set the date for the 12th of Never.
                                \_ cute but not reality based.  pick up a
                                   newspaper.  talks are on going and have been
                                   for a few weeks that we're aware of.
                                   \_ Cf. the inclusion of Afghan warlords as
                                      "governors" of certain areas of that
                                      country and the resurgence of the
                                      Taleban (not to mention in-fighting)
                                      between the warlords. I agree that there
                                      have been talks; I doubt the sanity of
                                      including more decentralized paramilitary
                                      forces as a solution to the insurgency.
                       \_ The problem is the number of Sunni insurgents is
                          going up as well as the number of Shiite militia.
                          I don't believe we are making any progress in terms
                          of creating "Iraqi" troops (who would fight for Iraq,
                          not a faction).
                          If on the other hand, you say we get out when we
                          think the Sunnis and Shiites come to a power-sharing
                          agreement with an acceptable level of car bombs and
                          death squads, that makes more sense.
                          \_ What is your source for the increasing numbers
                             of insurgents and lack of any progress on the
                             part of the new Iraqi government training their
                             own?
                             \_ EVERYTHING.  Don't you get it?  We're
                                training Iraqi troops, but they're actually
                                Shiite (police), Sunni (military), or outright
                                insurgents.
                                The goal is to give the Shiites/Sunnis/Kurds
                                enough pieces until there is some kind of
                                status quo, I mean, government.
                                \_ Ok so you have no source.  Shrug.  I have
                                   no problem with you having a particular
                                   feeling about it but to come here and say
                                   there are more numbers of this or less
                                   numbers of that is insufficient to make a
                                   real point.  I thought you might have
                                   actual real numbers for the Iraqi government
                                   side at least, which is public info.  I
                                   don't think the other side does a quarterly
                                   public report on their recruiting efforts.
                                   \_ Okay, fine.  There is no hard data on
                                      the number of insurgents, because
                                      insurgents by their nature don't want to
                                      be found (and eliminated).  Most numbers
                                      are for hard-core fighters anyway, with
                                      the number of sympathizers in some
                                      reports going over 200,000 individuals.
                                      However, there is a public report
                                      delivered quarterly to Congress (google
                                      "iraq congressional report") which shows
                                      the number of insurgent attacks growing
                                      (note the graph doesn't show the ramp-up
                                      from March 2003 to April 2004, which
                                      would be embarrassing).  Is the increase
                                      in attacks because the number of
                                      insurgents is increasing, or because
                                      the number is staying the same or
                                      decreasing but they're reacting fiercely
                                      because they're in their "last throes"?
                                      Who knows.
                                      It's my opinion that, while our goal is
                                      to create a national Iraqi identity and
                                      police/army force, what we're actually
                                      doing is feeding each faction until they
                                      can get into some sort of status quo, at
                                      which point we can significantly reduce
                                      the number of troops there.
                                      I completely agree that the number of
                                      "Iraqi" soldiers and police is
                                      increasing.
                                      However, it's my opinion that, while our
                                      goal is to create a national Iraqi
                                      identity and police/army force, what
                                      we're actually doing is feeding each
                                      faction (Sunni military and Shiite
                                      police) until they can get into some sort
                                      of status quo, at which point we can
                                      significantly reduce the number of troops
                                      there.
                                      In other words, what I'm doing is
                                      clarifying what "as they stand up" really
                                      means.