Comments on: Time Mag Dismisses Surge Gains As Insufficient

By: Max

Max — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 10:26:38 +0000

Doubtless, they were sitting on this story as long as they could until something like the incidents mentioned occurred, so that they would have something negative to say about the success of our troops in Iraq, and Bush. Shameful.

By: Dave M

Dave M — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:43:13 +0000

So what? I dismiss Time Magazine as insufficient.
By the way, Strata posts that the twenty de-capitated bodies
story is more faux-news. Apparently it didn’t happen. According
to the bbc*
( http://strata-sphere.com/blog )

So if the Time story is based on that incident, then the whole
thing is just more dumbfakery.

What else can you expect from the media. I don’t read them
anymore unless I want to know what the Left is thinking.

By: WarBicycle

WarBicycle — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:50:22 +0000

According to LGF and Gateway Pundit the 20 headless bodies is a bogus report. Anyone surprised?

By: POD1

POD1 — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:12:30 +0000

Isn’t this the same Time magazine that falsly reported
the “Haditha Massacre”?

All liberals should be ground up and used as some kind of bio-fuel.

By: Political.fish

Political.fish — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:54:15 +0000

POD1:

Great comment, but I think ground shit is better used for fertilizer, than fuel

By: Lamplighter

Lamplighter — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:55:13 +0000

Time magazine is a dissembling propaganda organ of the left. Have you ever read some of its “columnists?” They are absolutely radical. But this is what passes for “normal” in the MSM. Has Time apologized for its ginned up “Haditha scandal,” where after several months it went to Iraq to “investigate and report” on a “massacre” that never occurred? And, apparently in this article, the 20 dead body claim hasn’t been verified and has been called false by at least one other news organization. The author of this article is the same guy that wrote a more or less sympathetic bio of John Walker Lynd.

By: Brian H

Brian H — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:50:58 +0000

Heh, the last bogus decap story had “20″ also. You’d think they’d be smart enough to vary the number. Maybe they just edited the previous news release to change the placenames around a bit.

By: DMac

DMac — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 23:12:37 +0000

The progress in Iraq is stunning. We have come so far recently, I really hope we keep it going. It’s a shame we didn’t make more of a republic and less of a federal system in Iraq, in many ways it would have ran smoother. But we are where we are, I really hope the government starts getting some things accomplished. Then again how can we be critical of the Iraqi Government, look at our worthless congress, that is sectarianism at it’s finest.

By: Kipp

Kipp — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:51:46 +0000

There are some good points in the article. The south is a semi-independent emirate with the British withdrawal. The Iraqi government is toothless. We know as good a job as the US military is doing, there are limitations to an undermanned occupation. We cannot curb Iranian influence in the south if there are no US forces there.

By: sully

sully — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 05:35:30 +0000

“There are some good points in the article….”

That’s how propaganda is properly written dumbass.

“…undermanned occupation.”

As compared to you who knows nothing about… well, anything.

By: Kipp

Kipp — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:24:36 +0000

How is the occupation going in the Shia south, Sullen? How are we doing keeping Iranian influence out down there? Why don’t you discuss how my points are wrong without insults. Are you capable of any intellect at all?

By: sully

sully — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:04:35 +0000

You continually posit your views and “points” as though you do know something about the topics on which you choose to comment yet you reflect no standard of “intellect” on those subjects (and often the very definition of the words you choose), hence, your “points” are only worthy of insult.
K?

By: Kipp

Kipp — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 00:53:16 +0000

I was right. You are incapable of putting together an intelligent thought. Are you capable of challenging the post or only the one who posts? So far all you have shown is you can knee jerk with the best of them.

By: sully

sully — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 05:14:30 +0000

As my post states…. you’re an asshole incapable of a cogent thought let alone any kind of cogent theory.