Woodward: Bush Covering Up Iraq Violence

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ktmexc20, Sep 28, 2006.

  1. [​IMG]

    New book from Bob Woodward:

    State of Denial

    Veteran Washington reporter Bob Woodward tells Mike Wallace that the Bush administration has not told the truth regarding the level of violence, especially against U.S. troops, in Iraq. He also reveals key intelligence that predicts the insurgency will grow worse next year.

    In Wallaces interview with Woodward, to be broadcast on 60 Minutes this Sunday, Oct. 1, at 7 p.m. ET/PT, the reporter also claims that Henry Kissenger is among those advising Mr. Bush.

    According to Woodward, insurgent attacks against coalition troops occur, on average, every 15 minutes, a shocking fact the administration has kept secret. “It’s getting to the point now where there are eight to nine hundred attacks a week. That’s more than 100 a day. That is four an hour attacking our forces,” says Woodward.
  2. Let the swift boating begin...

  3. Pabst


    We only lose an average of three soldiers per day. (In WWll we lost an average of 400 soldiers each day!)

    Many of those deaths occur in multiple fatality incidents.

    So either Woodward's figures are exaggerated or the effectiveness of the insurgents attacks are miniscule compared to their effort.
  4. Is this what is called "moral relativism?"

    After all, be honest Pabst. In your opinion (and probably in the opinion of many Americans) one American life is worth how may Iraqi lives? 1,000?

    And if the American is white republican, how many more is it worth?

  5. fhl


    No, it's not moral relativism. It's called debunking bogus facts. It is obvious from the facts that pabst stated that there is something grossly wrong with the woodward's allegations. They don't add up.
  6. We'll see fhl. I'm sure that these claims will be talked about quite a bit in the up coming weeks.
  7. fhl


    Too cute by half on the part of libs, as usual. Saying that someone is 'not telling the truth' is suggesting that they are lying, or in other words, stating something that is untrue. These attempts by libs to say that their opponent is "not telling the truth" when in actuallity they have not said anything, is a tactic I have also seen in my congressman's race. As the public catches on, they will realize it's just one more reason to take everything libs say with a grain.
  8. Pabst


    The safety of the Iraqi people rests in their own hands. No one else.

    Compare the attitude of Iraq's warring Muslims to that of Parisian's in WWll. Paris was divided between Nazi sympathizers (the Vichy government was pro-Hitler) and the resistance fighters who incidently were Communists. Was it a fatal gesture for one to sit in a cafe'? Or to ride the Metro? Of course not. Because the French realized that just because one is at war doesn't give excuse to civil disobedience let alone the wanton murder of civilians.

  9. Everyone who disagrees with your point of view is a "lib"? Come on man, try being practical and objective, even just a little.
  10. I guess we can count on the democrat media to roll out one of these every week from now to the election. Last week was the NEI leaked report that we were told concluded that Iraq had made terrorism worse, when the actual document was considerably more circumspect. And by now, we know the drill. 60 Minutes, which used to be journalism of a sort, is used to shill a book by some liberal writer that just happens to be published by Simon & Shuster, which is owned by CBS. Then the next week, Katie Couric will devote considerable time to the "news" that 60 Minutes had a story on the book. Talk about a circle jerk. I just hope they are able save time for more in depth reporting about macaca and Sen. Allen's jewish grandfather.

    As the election gets closer and there is less time to refute this mudslinging, the charges will get more outlandish. Remember Rather-gate? Hey, maybe Allen's great grandfather was a muslim slave trader?
    #10     Sep 28, 2006