Iraq Revisited

[tekajo]

Of course!
*hugs Xng.
No Sternn! Git!

[Binkie]

Tek,
you and X are freaking awesome, man. S'all I gotta say about that. Freaking awesome, the both of you!

[WolfMoon]

Sternn,

I don't think you'd actually want all those threads back up. I distinctly remember the Binkster handing you your ass quite a few times. You don't want people reading back over that kind of embarrassment do you?

[CptSternn]

Ben -

Good idea there. I'm guessing thats also probably what will happen. Just too bad yer talking about waiting out the next president - who won't sit in office until January 2009. Calculated at current costs and lives yer talking another 1,200+ dead Americans at current rate of killed per day and another 1.5 billion dollars, if they don't raise troop levels and ask for more money per month.

But what your saying is the current administration is willing to sit it out while more Americans die in a quagmire half a world away and piss away more money than is spent on most government programs just to ride out an unpopular policy because of one mans stubborness.

Everyone else -
Those threads before, much like this one, were poor attempts to attack me personally for my views. And much like this one, none of the pro-bush people have anything useful to contribute to the argument. I mean, tired rhetoric, personal attacks, and debating what exactly happened a few decades ago does nothing to help the lads dying in your name right now. It reminds me of bush's last speech.

And I quote..

Reporter -Mr President, what are your plans if civil war breaks out in Iraq?

gw - My job is to make sure that doesn't happen

Reporter - ...but what if it does?

gw - My job, as president, is to make sure is doesn't. See, I have to make sure these things don't happen, because thats my job as president.

Yeah, great answer, eh? If he answered the same question if someone asked 'what happens if there is another hurricane Katrina' and he responded 'my job is to make sure there isnt' I think people would worry. I think people worry now, because much like the people posting here, they have no plan, no new idea, and just spew the same tired old cookie-cutter reponses and avoid the issue because they know they are backing a losing horse but are too stubborn to admit it.

I could be wrong about my Iraq ideas, and think Ben, and a few others have expressed good ideas on how and when pull out should happen. Too bad others want to dodge the question and follow the president like a lemming off that cliff. Also too bad another thousand or so Americans will die for this stubborness. Glad none of my mates are over there getting shot at so bush can say he has a big penis.

[Ben Lahnger]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

Ben -

Good idea there. I'm guessing thats also probably what will happen. Just too bad yer talking about waiting out the next president - who won't sit in office until January 2009. Calculated at current costs and lives yer talking another 1,200+ dead Americans at current rate of killed per day and another 1.5 billion dollars, if they don't raise troop levels and ask for more money per month.

But what your saying is the current administration is willing to sit it out while more Americans die in a quagmire half a world away and piss away more money than is spent on most government programs just to ride out an unpopular policy because of one mans stubborness.
...
Glad none of my mates are over there getting shot at so bush can say he has a big penis.

Oh, I think it's worse than that.

Pop quiz: What did President Warren G. Harding do of import? Don't know? Had to go look it up? How many American citizens do you think even know who Warren G. Harding was?

Now, do you think people will remember who Lyndon Baines Johnson was in a hundred years? I do. They'll think "That's the president that got us bogged down in Vietnam."

Bush is building a legacy. You know what they say ... there's no such thing as bad publicity.

So ... if I were you, I would stop railing about the wasted tax dollars and the sqaundered lives. Because while it's all true, it ain't gonna change a thing. But if you want us out by 2007, you better get active and try to motivate the electorate. Make the incumbent senators and congressmen that are up for re-election sweat that they are going to lose their jobs if they don't pass legislation that cuts funding and support for the war effort before the November elections. Otherwise, we're all waiting until 2009.

I'm really sure of that.

[edible_eye]

my views on the war in iraq remain as i've stated in the past.

- iraq is a cesspool. it will always be a cesspool. it is neither our financial nor is it our moral responsibility to elevate it above the status of cesspool. iraq belongs to the iraqis, not to america. we have no jurisdiction there. they are a sovereign nation. we are forbidden, by our constitution, to interfere within a sovereign nation.
- i continue to support bush's decision to go to war for the reason he stated - purported weapons of mass destruction with a belief of imminent threat to the united states.
- i believe the president was telling the truth when he stated he believed we were in harm's way.
- it is the president's responsibility to us, the citizens of america, to protect us at all costs when he believes we are in danger of imminent attack.


- my issue with this war in iraq now is as follows, not that i haven't said this before...

a.) we declared the search for weapons over in january 2005. once that search was called off, our justification for staying in iraq ended.
b.) president bush was elected here in the united states. at no time were we voting for the president of, the government within or the rebuilding of iraq.
c.) iraq receives an inordinate amount of american tax-payer money. why? in the past year alone, if we'd kept that money here and had no idea what to do with it, it could have gone to help pay off federal loans, been used for scholarships, been used to rebuild american infrastructure that is in need of attention, could have been used to build, period - for america.
d.) barring the above, that money could have been issued as refund checks for working, taxpaying american citizens. i know my mindset wasn't to work for the past year just so that new buildings, toilets and hospitals could be erected inside iraq. fuck them.
e.) the united states military exists for two reasons - to destroy things and to kill our enemy. using our military to provide for "a better way of life" in iraq is an absolutely inappropriate misappropriation of resources. think about that - the american military is fighting for iraqi freedom, whatever that means.
f.) the people of iraq have been killing each other for thousands of years. they're barbarians and savages. you can put a tuxedo on a wild gorilla but that doesn't make it civilized.

[CptSternn]

Ben -

I agree with you on that. And you once again are spot on.

EE -

Althought I disagree with parts of yer first statements, it appears the second part of your statements about what the US should do and where the money should be spent are right in line with what I think should happen as well.

Also, in my last post I mean TRILLION, not billion as right now over 6 billion is being spent monthly, so 1.5 billion over the next 2-3 years is waaay off on that mark, so I apologise - was typing fast.

Also EE. At first, I though in the back of my mind that maybe what you said could be true. gw could have believed that there were weapons, and that he did feel there was a threat. But the reason I lost faith in him was his track record of either 'altering' the truth or outright lying. I could go back and list various arguments, but I think the last most high-profile one will suffice - the Katrina reponse. Bush claimed that 'no one had any idea' and a laundry list of other statements he made, all of which turned out to be 100% false, and with that video conference which emerged showing experts telling him exact what he denied ever hearing, well, its stuff like that that makes me think he's not only capable of lying to the public, but doing it, then covering it up without one shred of remorse and still refuses to say he did anything wrong. That bothers me when someone is caught in a lie and continues to change the subject when asked about it. What makes it worse is he tried to shift blame off on everyone else but himself, and make scapegoats out of people who actually tried to warn him and people who actually attempted to save lives.

[CptSternn]

Found this after I entered the last post...

U.S.: Iraq on own to rebuild

http://news.**********/s/usatoday/200...ltBHNlYwM3MTY-

The head of the U.S.-led program to rebuild Iraq said Thursday that the Iraqi government can no longer count on U.S. funds and must rely on its own revenues and other foreign aid, particularly from Gulf nations.

"The Iraqi government needs to build up its capability to do its own capital budget investment," Daniel Speckhard, director of the U.S. Iraq Reconstruction Management Office, told reporters.

The burden of funding reconstruction poses an extraordinary challenge for a country that needs tens of billions of dollars for repairing its infrastructure at the same time it's struggling to pay its bills. Iraq's main revenue source - oil - is hampered by insurgent attacks on production facilities and pipelines, forcing the country to spend $6 billion a year on oil imports.


A few things I found interesting in this article. First, all those trillions have dried up and are gone. No more money for recunstruction, and there is sitll no running water, sweage, or power for like 90% of the country. In fact, based on pre-war stats, the country has reverted like 20 years thanks to the war. This will not bode well for the people living there I, would bet on that.

Second, Iraq is importing 6 billion in oil a year to keep their operations running now. Importing 6 billion means they are not making squat of what they have, are using it, and sitll need more. This also is not a good sign, expecially since the US is saying they aren't going to pay for anything and the Iraq oil revanue must cover the cost, even though now those profits are actually a 6 billion dollar defict.

This means the country is in tatters, there is no money, and there is no way to bring more capital in as it stands. Am I reading this wrong? Anyone else care to comment?

[Binkie]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

there is sitll no running water, sweage, or power for like 90% of the country. In fact, based on pre-war stats, the country has reverted like 20 years thanks to the war.

I'd ask you to give verifiable sources for this statement/information, but knowing you, I'd only get, "It's common sense!"" as a response. Or in other words, you completely made it up as you did with information/evidence in the other thread.

I guess you haven't taken a look at the USAID site for REAL figures. Quite alright. You wouldn't want to actually know that the real situation is, after all. That would destroy your preception that the US is Evil Satan Lucifer! Rawr!

Well here is the USAID site, Sternn:

http://www.usaid.gov/

Now you can't cite ignorance to mark your fabrications and numerous false statements.

[CptSternn]

Yer right, Iraq is going swimmingly. I must be way off watching all those left wing news shows on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and in all the major new papers and wires. The US should keep the troops there because like Cheney said, there is no civl war, the world loves america, and all it well!

How could I have even gotten the idea that Iraq isn't going as planned. Me and the other 78% of america must have been misled by those liberals running the government! Thanks for pointing this out! I'll get right on trying to explain to those other few million americans that there is this girl binkie on gothic.net that is an expert on Iraq and whats going on there and we should ignore all the news and images we see everyday on the news and all the body bags coming home and pay attention to her because, shes a self professed expert on the topic, even though she has never left the confort of her own country.

Maybe you should go meet with Sheehan and the traveling group of Iraqi veterans who were you know, there, just a few months ago who are traveling around the world telling people what its like there and correct them as well because obviously they too have no idea what they are talking about. You go sort them out!

Smell that? Tis sarcasm.

[Binkie]

Ya know what's funny? I read over your entire post and I don't see anything to back up what you were saying like I was asking for. You know? Like real figures from a reputable source. Hummmm...

Me thinks you're making shit up again. And you are, unless you've got real statistics and sources that prove otherwise.

[CptSternn]

I started the topic. My topic was how does everyone think the Iraq war is going. In a nutshell, I said its a quagmire, another Vietnam.

Your are now asking me to prove that? I say you need to prove to me (and almost 80% of america) that it's going well. If you think I am wrong, just turn on the telly and watch yer local news. Thats all the sources I need. ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, in fact - visit any of their websites (they can be easily found by typing in '.com' after those first three letters) and look at the headlines.

...then tell me why exactly I am wrong for claiming the Iraq war is NOT going well.

Let me help you out...

First storey listed on CNN.Com right this second as I am browsing there:

Iraq suicide bomber kills 30

From MSNBC:

Attack on Iraq base kills 40

From ABC:

U.S. Denies Mosque Raid; Suicide Bomber Kills 40

From CBS:

At Least 40 Killed At U.S.-Iraqi Base

And with all those articles these footnotes were listed...

In other recent developments:

-At least 21 more corpses were found Monday, many with nooses around their neck. Nine were found in west Baghdad, handcuffed, blindfolded and with ropes around their necks, police Lt. Akeel Fadhil said. Militias are blamed for many of these killings, Logan reports.

-Mortar and bomb attacks killed at least four Monday. In the capital, a bomb exploded in a bus headed for the Sadr City slum of east Baghdad, killing two passengers and wounding at least four others, police Col. Hassan Jaloob said. The bomb had been left in a bag, he said. A car bomb at the entrance to Sadr City also exploded, though reports on casualties were not immediately available.

-Saddam Hussein's chief deputy, who has eluded capture since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq three years ago, purportedly called for Arab leaders to back Iraq's Sunni-backed insurgency, in an audiotape broadcast Monday. The tape, which Al-Jazeera television said was made by Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, appeared to be an address to the Arab League summit in Khartoum, Sudan, this week. The voice on the tape said Iraq's Sunni-led insurgency was "the sole legitimate representative of the Iraqi people." It was impossible to determine the tape's authenticity.

-A total of at least 69 people were reported killed Sunday in one of the bloodiest days in weeks. Most of the dead appeared to be victims the shadowy Sunni-Sectarian score-settling that has torn at the fabric of Iraq since Feb. 22 when a Shiite shrine was blown apart in Samarra, north of Baghdad.

-Iraqi authorities reported late Sunday that U.S. forces raided an Interior Ministry building and arrested 40 policemen after discovering 17 non-Iraqi prisoners in the facility. Police 1st Lt. Thayer Mahmoud said the arrested police were being held for investigation, but the reason was not known.

*snip*

And it goes on, and on, and on. Here are the other articles listed in 'related stories'...

Battle Over Baghdad Mosque Firefight
Iraqis Claim Forces Open Fire In Mosque, U.S. Military Denies Charge

30 Dead In Sectarian Violence
Fearing Ambush, Iraqi Army Can't Confirm Reports Of Beheaded Bodies

Iraqi Student Killed In Bombing
Young Iraqi Teen Was Headed To School When Roadside Bomb Blew


*snip*


And thats the major news sites. Am I missing something? I'm glad the USAID organisation that is paid by the bush adminsitration to post good reports on the net have done their job and posted some feel good storeys there, but lets look at the big picture - look at any news site and any news cast and tell me you think the Iraq war is going good for the american people.

Is that whay you are arguing? As I am saying without a doubt, it's gone to piss, and the people are not happy there. But please, find me a news site with some happy Iraq stories that are not on a paid US government website.

Glad to know you think things are going well. I would hate to see what would happen if the Iraq war WASN'T going so well...

[Binkie]

*yawn*

It's nice that you typed all of that out. A waste though. Looks like I'm going to have to do this hand holding thing again. Let me refresh your memory on what I want you to provide statistical back-up for since you're continually tap dancing around it:

https://www.gothic.net/boards/showpo...6&postcount=42

If you can't provide the evidence or statistical backup, then obviously you made that figure the fuck up. Pretty simple.

[Binkie]

You know what? I'm not even going to sit here and waste more time reading your diatribe. I'll just press forward and discredit your statement right here and now:

USAID SOURCE

[CptSternn]

Your seriously arguing that the Iraq war is going well?

So ye old head in the sand, forget whats on the news and the body bags coming home with no end in site means nothing?

Well, found a few more sites ye might want to check out.

First, a few more pictures to make it a birt more real. This site was started by US troops who want the world to see what is happening first hand.

http://www.undermars.com

Over a thousand pictures taken by the troops there, showing bodies, dimemberments, death, destruction, and all that good stuff.

And still, once again all you have in your aruge that Iraq 'is going well' is the same USAID site, a site bought and paid for by the bush admin so impartial perspectives are out the window. I quoted every major news source, and the best you have is bush's own personal news site? Thats weak.

Find me one news site thats not a US government agency that tells how 'well the Iraq war' is going.

But back on topic, this article which came out today and will be hitting the papers in your country soon enough is pretty insiteful as well...

Bush told Blair determined to invade Iraq without UN resolution or WMD

NEW YORK (AFP) - US President George W. Bush made clear to British Prime Minister Tony Blair in January 2003 that he was determined to invade Iraq without a UN resolution and even if UN arms inspectors failed to find weapons of mass destruction in the country, The New York Times reported.

Citing a confidential British memorandum, the newspaper said the president was certain that war was inevitable and made his view known during a private two-hour meeting with Blair in the Oval Office on January 31, 2003.

Information about the meeting was contained in the memo written by Blair's top foreign policy adviser and reviewed by The Times.

"Our diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning," the paper quotes David Manning, Blair's chief foreign policy adviser at the time, as noting in the memo.

" 'The start date for the military campaign was now penciled in for 10 March,' Mr. Manning wrote, paraphrasing the president. 'This was when the bombing would begin'," the paper continued.

The timetable came at an important diplomatic moment, the paper said.

Five days after the Bush-Blair meeting, then US secretary of state Colin Powell was scheduled to appear before the United Nations to present evidence that Iraq posed a threat to world security by hiding unconventional weapons.

*snip*

The memo also shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq, The Times noted.

Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation, including a proposal to paint a US surveillance plane in the colors of the United Nations in hopes of drawing fire, or assassinating Iraqi president Saddam Hussein.

http://news.**********/s/afp/20060327...BhBHNlYwM5NjQ-

Wow, thats a long way to go to 'bring freedom'. I mean, faking an attack on a UN plane? Breaking the US governments own ban on assassination of heads-of-state?

[4mytribe]

Ok I was one of those Pro-Bush Pro-War idiots that thought anyone that opposed it was an idiot and un-american and all that. Now I know voting for Bush twice was two of the biggest mistakes I've ever done. The war was a lie. Conservatives are whores. Im one of those pissed off angry rebelious Republicans that will vote democrat unless I REALLY like the republican. But no more voting for the lesser of two evils. I would rather vote for someone that cant win then to vote for another Bush.

[Binkie]

Like a tiny little clueless child, I must hold your hand and make you look like a dumb ass in front of everyone NUMEROUS times on the same issue.

You said this:

Originally Posted by CptIdiot

there is sitll no running water, sweage, or power for like 90% of the country. In fact, based on pre-war stats, the country has reverted like 20 years thanks to the war.

I pointed out that you didn't actually get this figure from anywhere. In fact, I posted a link to the USAID fact sheet that completely negated your statement. They actually have facts and a credible reputation, you don't. So hold on... let me make sure everyone takes note of this:

YOU MADE THIS INFORMATION UP.

YOU'RE POSTING YOUR OWN MADE-UP PROPAGANDA.

You keep posting other shit I could give a fuck less about right now, hoping it will somehow make this statement you made, which has been PROVEN to be discredited, somehow right and that you're somehow less of an idiot for fabricating and making information up to further your own cause (i.e. lying to everyone/spreading propaganda).

Bottom line? You posted "facts" that you made up (now proven to be untrue) and tried to pass it for truth. I called you on your shit and you're being that cornered little puppy dog again that's pissing all over the floor. It's time to stand up for what you are, like you said, Sternn. A liar.

[CptSternn]

You want me to back that up? Well, if you google for water/sewage/power/iraq you will find a massive list. But since your going to keep pushing that once pitiful PAID site listing, here are a few impartial news sites with current stats that show the real picture...

Electricity Production in Iraq Remains Below Pre-War Levels
by Dahr Jamail

Contrary to Bush Administration reports, Iraqi officials say the country's electricity problems remain endemic, and fear that despite Coalition promises, Iraq's plants will remain inadequate for the foreseeable future.Baghdad; May 14, 2004 – Contrary to US President George Bush’s recent statement that electricity in Iraq "is now more widely available than before the war," Iraqi officials say the power supply in their country has not yet been repaired to pre-war levels. Bush made the claim in his May 1, 2004 speech commemorating the one-year anniversary of the "mission accomplished" address he delivered from aboard the USS Lincoln.

http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/345

*snip*

Or we can look at the Wiki...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Iraq

On August 14, 2005, a Washington Post story[45] on the administration's effort to lower expectations, quoted Wayne White, former head of the State Department's Iraq intelligence team, as saying "The most thoroughly dashed expectation was the ability to build a robust self-sustaining economy. We're nowhere near that. State industries, electricity are all below what they were before we got there."

A report of the United States Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction found widespread "fraud, incompetence and confusion" in the American occupation's handling of billions of dollars of Iraqi government money and American funds given for reconstruction (NY Times January 25, 2006 [46]). Inspector-general Stuart Bowen, Jr. noted that only 49 of 136 planned water- and sanitation-related projects will be completed. [47]

Or how about the UN report?

UN report finds US war in Iraq yields a social “tragedy”
By David Walsh
18 May 2005

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/ma...iraq-m18.shtml

Among the indices of social misery contained in the report are the following:

* Nearly a quarter of Iraq’s children suffer from chronic malnutrition.

* The probability of dying before 40 for Iraqi children born between 2000 and 2004 is approximately three times the level in neighboring countries.

* Three out of four Iraqi families report an unstable supply of electricity.

* 40 percent of families in urban areas live in neighborhoods where sewage can be seen in the streets.

* More than 722,000 Iraqi families have no access to either safe or stable drinking water.

* The jobless rate for young men with secondary or higher education stands at 37 percent.

The study, entitled Iraq Living Conditions Survey 2004 (ILCS), was organized by the UN development agency in collaboration with the Iraqi Ministry of Planning and Development Cooperation and conducted by a Norwegian-trained team from the Central Organisation for Statistics and Information Technology in Baghdad. It drew its conclusions from interviews carried out in April-August 2004 with members of 21,688 households in Iraq’s 18 provinces.

In their analysis of Iraq’s infrastructure, housing, environment, health system, conditions for women, labor market and other aspects of life, the authors of the UNDP report repeatedly resort to certain terms and phrases to describe their findings: “alarming” appears numerous times, along with “worsening,” “deterioration,” “falling behind” and “reverse development.”

In these words, as well as some of the starker figures, one can detect, within the dry (and timid) language of bourgeois social researchers, the scope of the human suffering in present-day Iraq.

And from the New York Times...

http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle11841.htm

Iraq's basic services are worse now than before war began

By James Glanz
The New York Times

02/09/06 "New York Times" -- -- WASHINGTON Virtually every measure of the performance of Iraq's oil, electricity, water and sewerage sectors has fallen below pre-invasion values, even though $16 billion of U.S. taxpayer money has already been disbursed in the Iraq reconstruction program, several government witnesses have told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Of seven different measures of infrastructure performance presented Wednesday at the committee hearing by the inspector general's office, only one was above pre-invasion values.

Those that had slumped below those values were electrical generation capacity, hours of power available in a day in Baghdad, oil and heating oil production and the numbers of Iraqis with drinkable water and sewage service.

In addition, two of the witnesses said they believed that an earlier estimate by the World Bank that $56 billion would be needed for rebuilding over the next several years was too low.

At the same time, as Iraq's oil exports are plummeting and the country remains saddled with tens of billions of dollars of debt, it is unclear where that money will come from, said one of the witnesses, Joseph Christoff, director of international affairs and trade at the Government Accountability Office.

And those may not be the most serious problems facing the physical infrastructure, said Stuart Bowen Jr., the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, an independent office.


Enough there for ye now? Want me to find another dozen to cite? I got over 300+ hits on google I'd be happy to cut and paste to further my argument if you really want me too.

[4mytribe]

outch - harsh but - outch

Thats why I think I found a home here. Man people will call you on stuff and no-one gets a free ride. I know I've gotten schooled a couple times.

[Binkie]

First article is out of date. Never the less, here's one comparative of the actual outputs and figures in pre-war Iraq vs. 2004 conditions:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0319/p01s03-woiq.html

Pre-war unemployment: 50-60%
2004: 45% (28% as of 2005)

http://www.mnf-iraq.com/feature/Mar/060319oif.html

"The U.S. Embassy and the Government of Iraq continue to address the issue of Iraqi unemployment, today, about 1.5 million Iraqis are employed under reconstruction efforts, working on schools, clinic, roads and numerous other infrastructure projects, and the overall national unemployment dropped in 2005 to 28% (as reported by COSIT) or 12-18% (as estimated by MNF-I)."

Pre-war health budget: 16 million
2004: 120 million

Pre-war portable water supply: 13 million liters per day
2004: 22 million liters per day

Pre-war electrical peak: 4,400 megawatts
2004: 4,200

Electrical actually went on to improve that year to average 5,000 megawatts, as cited by the Defense Department HERE.

"Electricity production in the country averages about 5,000 megawatts, a total that services an estimated 15 million Iraqi homes and exceeds the pre-war level of 4,400 megawatts, officials said."



Second article has the guy talking about electricity in Baghdad. While they don't enjoy 20 hours of electricity anymore, other parts of the country now see more when they used to see only one hour or less. The electrical distribution has been evenly divided amongst Iraqis, where it once was not. Power output for the entire country is higher than it was pre-war.

If you don't believe me, scroll up a little on that same Wiki article you cited, Sternn. You'll find this:

"On July 28, 2005, Iraq's Electricity Minister announced that Iraq's electricity supply had risen to above pre-war levels."

Can also be confirmed here:

http://www.iraqdirectory.com/files/a...article623.htm

"Iraq electricity surpasses pre-war levels

July 28, 2005

Iraq's electricity supply has risen above pre-war levels to 5,350 megawatts (MW) despite sabotage, boosted by hydroelectric power and more imports from Iran, Syria and Turkey, the minister in charge said on Thursday.

"Now electricity has reached a record after we broke 5,350 megawatts a few days ago for the first time since the war," Electricity Minister Mohsen Shalash told Reuters.

Iraq's emergency moves had eased electricity shortage during summer when temperatures can rise above 50 degrees centigrade (122 Fahrenheit), Shalash said in an interview in Amman during a stopover on his way to Iraq."

That report came just days before the statement you cited was made. Kinda contradictory, eh?

From USAID:

"2. Expanding Access to Electricity: In 2002, Baghdad had access to electricity 24 hours a day; the rest of Iraq was limited to 3-6 hours.

* Currently, all 18 governorates receive nearly 14 hours of electricity daily, an incredible improvement for a country emerging from decades of conflict and little investment.
* USAID efforts have added 1,400 megawatts (MW) of generating capacity to the national electrical grid, expanding access to 4.2 million Iraqis throughout most of Iraq. "



Third article is based on statistics from 2004 and doesn't compare anything against pre-war stats. I don't see any 90% figures anywhere in this article either. It also states that 3 out of 4 Iraqis even HAVE electricity (whereas the other one-fourth also have electricity, but have no problems with it). So 25% somehow translates into 90..... how?

From USAID:

"3. Providing Potable Water: Many parts of Iraq had no access to or provision of clean potable water. Indeed many of Iraq's waterways were contaminated with refuse and sewage.

* Over 4 million Iraqis who had no clean drinking water in 2002 now have safe, potable water piped to their homes following USAID efforts to refurbish water treatment plants in 15 cities.
* USAID is also providing plant-level operations and maintenance (O&M) training at major water and wastewater plants nationwide to ensure that these plants remain functioning."



Last article, Wiki also had some stuff to say about this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstruction_of_Iraq

"After (with some international support) overthrowing the previous Iraqi government, the US has sent aid to restore electric service knocked out during combat. The Associated Press says that electrical power generation and distribution, curtailed due to combat operations and sabotage, has been restored to above prewar levels."

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ory?id=1378209

"Facts & Figures: Average Amount of Electricity Generated (Megawatts):

Pre-War (Estimates):

Nationwide: 3,958

Baghdad: 2,500

January 2005:

Nationwide: 3,289

Baghdad: 985

September 2005:

Nationwide: 4,247

Baghdad: NA (last available April 2005: 854)

Source: Brookings Institution, Iraq Index."

http://www.brookings.edu/views/op-ed...n/20060124.htm

"As a result, not only are more schools being rebuilt and health clinics reopened but water and sanitation services also are gradually improving, irrigation canals are operating at prewar levels, and almost 90 percent of the demand for household fuels for cooking and heating is being met."

http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/accomplishments/watsan.html

"USAID has rehabilitated sewage treatment plants, expanding access to sewage treatment to over 5.1 million urban Iraqis, processing 315.3 million gallons daily. Over 2.4 million Iraqis who had no clean drinking water in 2002 now have access to safe, potable water following USAID efforts to refurbish and expand 19 water treatment plants in five cities. By 2006, water treatment service will be provided to over 3.3 million Iraqis. Providing clean water and efficient sewage treatment has greatly improved sanitation and contributed to a decrease in waterborne disease. USAID is also providing plant-level operations and maintenance (O&M) training at major water and wastewater plants nationwide to ensure that these plants remain functioning."

http://www.mnf-iraq.com/feature/Mar/060319oif.html

"Before March 2003, only 5.5 million of Iraq's 25 million citizens had access to a safe and stable water supply. Iraq's cities suffered from inadequate sewage systems, today nineteen potable water treatment facilities have been built or rehabilitated, providing a standard level of service to about 2.7 million more Iraqis."

http://www.iraqdirectory.com/DisplayNews.aspx?id=1044

"By October 2003, U.S. government efforts rehabilitated electric power capacity to produce peak capacity of 4,518 MW, greater than the pre-war level of 4,400 MW. Peak production reached 5,365 MW in August 2004 and a peak of 5,389 MW in July 2005."

So there you go.

[4mytribe]

Im kinda buzed right now so cant argue but under the best of circumstances I would probably say the same. You have too much backing you up and put more work into that one then I have time to argue with. Anyways Im on your side with the war anyway so sheez.

Sucks to be that other guy. Ummm can you do me a favor and put me on ignore in case you want to debate me as not sure I wanna battle you.

Just kidding but damn you killed Kenny.....

[CptSternn]

First off, the parts of the wiki you quote are from government officials who made 'claims' NOT actual facts and figures. The article continues on to say that those government officials basically made that crap up.

The other three sites you also have now quoted facts and figure from are yes once again all US GOVERNMENT SITES. You have yet to find me one solid new agency to back your information up. All you do is spew the same tired rhetoric bush himself is spewing based on the bush admins own stats - NOT impartial news articles, NOT independant outside agencies.

Much like the pre-war intel, everything bush says is skewed to fit his arguments. By only being able to back your argument by using those same skewed figures all coming from the EXACT SAME US GOVERNMENT source is weak.

We have already seen where bush 'modified' the stats from the 'clean air act' he repealed to say more pollution was better, we saw where his 'clean forest act' which called for more cutting of protected trees was also based on facts he skewed, and as everyone knows and the newest article I posted showed he planned to fake information to start the iraq war to suit his needs.

So why should any website you post that is part of this same administration and gets its cues directly from bush be believed? I mean, you have no outside independent facts, only facts from bush himself saying bush is doing a good job.

Weak.

[Binkie]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

First off, the parts of the wiki you quote are from government officials who made 'claims' NOT actual facts and figures. The article continues on to say that those government officials basically made that crap up.

This is why you have to click on the sources that Wiki users post behind quotes. Should you do this with the quote I refered you to, it'll take you here:

http://www.iraqdirectory.com/files/a...article623.htm

Where you'll read this:

"Iraq's electricity supply has risen above pre-war levels to 5,350 megawatts (MW) despite sabotage, boosted by hydroelectric power and more imports from Iran, Syria and Turkey, the minister in charge said on Thursday."

Don't believe me? Go back to the Wiki article and click on that little "[35]" you see being that little bit of information.

The other three sites you also have now quoted facts and figure from are yes once again all US GOVERNMENT SITES. You have yet to find me one solid new agency to back your information up. All you do is spew the same tired rhetoric bush himself is spewing based on the bush admins own stats - NOT impartial news articles, NOT independant outside agencies.

I posted a link to the Christian Science Monitor, ABC News, and the Iraq Directory. All boast the same claims the government and international websites do, not to mention the very SAME Wiki article you tried to use.

I'd still trust the government sites though for stats and figures (of which none of your articles really list beyond a few random ones from an outdated UN report), mainly because, oh I don't know, they've overseeing the overhaul in all of these utilities. Don't belive them? The Electricity Minister of Iraq, himself, Mr Mohsen Shalash, went ahead and backed all of these government claims up in the article I posted (now for the second time).

Much like the pre-war intel, everything bush says is skewed to fit his arguments. By only being able to back your argument by using those same skewed figures all coming from the EXACT SAME US GOVERNMENT source is weak.

...

AHAHAHAHAHA! That's the best you can do?!? Recording electricity levels is not an intelligence operation, Sternn. You look at the numbers and write them down.

Exact same government sources? I'm sorry, did you see www.cia.gov in any of my sources? How about any references to Chalabi, the INC, or "Curveball?" Oh, man... you're REALLY corned. Most of the actual stats come from ABC News, Christian Science Monitor, and The Iraq Directory.

We have already seen where bush 'modified' the stats from the 'clean air act' he repealed to say more pollution was better, we saw where his 'clean forest act' which called for more cutting of protected trees was also based on facts he skewed, and as everyone knows and the newest article I posted showed he planned to fake information to start the iraq war to suit his needs.

*Yawn* I cited independant sources with half of my stats. I guess that's not enough so we'll change that figure to about 3/4ths.

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6&sect...=29&m=7&y=2005

"Iraq’s electricity supply has risen above pre-war levels to 5,350 megawatts (MW) despite sabotage, boosted by hydroelectric power and more imports from Iran, Syria and Turkey, the minister in charge said yesterday.

...

A decade before the US led invasion in 2003 capacity had fluctuated between 3,000 to 4,400 megawatts at its peak."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/li...911-afps01.htm

"Electricity production in the country averages about 5,000 megawatts, a total that services an estimated 15 million Iraqi homes and exceeds the pre-war level of 4,400 megawatts, officials said."

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security...dailywatts.htm

"U.S. Agency for International Development administrator Andrew Natsios said power generation would rise from a daily average of 5,000 megawatts now to 5,500 to 6,000 megawatts by the middle of next year. The level before the 2003 U.S. invasion was around 4,400 megawatts."

http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?R...on=Iraq_Crisis

"Before the recent conflict, between 3,300-4,400 megawatts were produced per day. According to USAID, power generation began steadily increasing and reached 5,000 megawatts in July 2004."

OK... now what?

Weak.

I aggree with this self evaluation of your counter arguement.

[Empty_Purple_Stars]

Damn.

I smell Bacon.

[CptSternn]

First article is out of date. Never the less, here's one comparative of the actual outputs and figures in pre-war Iraq vs. 2004 conditions:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0319/p01s03-woiq.html

Yes, I did miss yer reference to the CSMonitor link. But after further review - ALL OF YOUR ARTICLES ARE OLDER THAN MINE! So here is an article, a follow up to YOUR ARTICLE from the SAME PUBLICATION, thats isn't from 04, this one is only a few months old unlike all those 2004 article and those paid us goverment stats you have posted...

Iraqis thirst for water and power

Lack of basic services is prompting growing protest aimed at Iraqi officials.

...Iraqi officials said last month that the country would need an estimated $20 billion over the next five years to restore full electric power capacity and keep power flowing to the entire country. Iraqi Electricity Minister Mohsen Shalash seemed confident that Iraq would be able to restore full power within two years and that daily demand - estimated by the US General Accounting Office to reach 8,500 megawatts this summer - will climb to 18,000 megawatts by 2010.


http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0811/p01s03-woiq.html

So, once again, your stats are wrong, based on

1. US government agency sites. Why not just link the whitehouse.gov site that tells us how great the Iraq war is going?

2. Articles that are years older than the ones I posted. In fact, you had to have seen the articles I posted, then followed the links BACK to OLDER articles to find those OLD stats you have posted. Your actively working to spew false information base on articles from 2003-2004.

If you check the dates on yer articles vs. mine, you will see everything you have is over a year old.

Here are a few more, all posted within the past few MONTHS (not YEARS like your OLD stats)

Can You Say "Permanent Bases?" The American Press Can't
By Tom Engelhardt
Tomdispatch
Tuesday 14 February 2006

Since guerrilla attacks have actually been on the rise and the delivery of the basic amenities of modern civilization (electrical power, potable water, gas for cars, functional sewage systems, working traffic lights, and so on) on the decline, since the very establishment of a government inside the heavily fortified Green Zone has proved immensely difficult, and since U.S. reconstruction funds (those that haven't already disappeared down one clogged drain or another) are drying up, such partial withdrawals may prove more complicated to pull
off than imagined.

*snip*

Or what about this one just about 12 WEEKS OLD...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...010200370.html

[b]U.S. Has End in Sight on Iraq Rebuilding[/i]
By Ellen Knickmeyer
The Washington Post
Monday 02 January 2006

But the insurgency has set back efforts across the board. In two of the most crucial areas, electricity and oil production, relentless sabotage has kept output at or below prewar levels despite the expenditure of hundreds of millions of American dollars and countless man-hours. Oil production stands at roughly 2 billion barrels a day, compared with 2.6 billion before U.S. troops entered Iraq in March 2003, according to U.S. government statistics.

The national electrical grid has an average daily output of 4,000 megawatts, about 400 megawatts less than its prewar level.

Iraqis nationwide receive on average less than 12 hours of power a day. For residents of Baghdad, it was six hours a day last month, according to a U.S. count, though many residents say that figure is high.

U.S. officials at the time promised a steady supply of 6,000 megawatts of electricity and a return to oil production output of 2.5 million barrels a day, within months.

But the insurgency changed everything.

Or hey, one from LAST MONTH

Insurgents Thwarting Iraq Reconstruction
The Associated Press
Thursday 02 February 2006

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/inte...struction.html

American goals to fix Iraq's infrastructure will never be reached, mainly because insurgents have chased away contractors and forced the diversion of repair funds into security, according to an audit of the Iraqi Relief and Reconstruction Program released last week. It is the latest in a series of auditing reports being issued by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction.

The spending diversions forced the cancellation of 60 percent of the 136 planned water and sanitation projects, including sewage, irrigation and dams. Just 49 water projects are expected to be completed, the audit says.

Of the 425 planned electric projects, 300 will be finished, meaning ambitious US promises to restore Iraqi power will not be fulfilled.

Projects canceled include $1 billion for six generating plants across Iraq, which will cut back US-funded increases in Iraq's power generation capacity from a planned 3,400 megawatts to 2,109 megawatts, the report said. The stated monthly goal was 6,000 megawatts.

Iraq's still-constant blackouts and a perception among Iraqis that the United States failed to live up to early reconstruction promises have helped make the US occupation deeply unpopular.


So there ye go - another three articles, all within the past few months, from impartial news agencies, including an UPDATED article from which you drew OLD facts, ALL stating that you are WRONG.

So please, if yer going to debate the facts, don't just cherry pick old articles like bush did with the pre-war intel, try using some up-to-date articles from the past few weeks and also don't use any sites where the webmasters are on the bush admin payroll.

-S