Printable View
Here's a web page compiled by Think Progress. Although the conservatives will probably say it's slanted, the timeline mostly relies on reporting from news agencies like the Washington Post, USA Today, CNN, US TV network news (including Fox), and the BBC.
http://www.thinkprogress.org/iraq-timeline
Well , anyone going to bother trying to write a timeline of good news now we are 3 years down the line .
Lets see ..... errr..... ummmm....Saddam isn't president anymore and ...well ....and......any suggestions ?
You wrote this just to prove me wrong about conservatives!Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
~;)
I think that's my favorite of the bunch. Good timeline, by the way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Timeline
The Lynch thing was staged?
In that case, you play your devils' advocate role very convincingly, and with true gusto and enthusiasm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
Well no kidding it's slanted. This thing is cherry picked from all the news to show one point of view. Where are all the good comments? Where are the contextual backgrounds? Like the "You go to war with the army you have". That was such a damning soundbite taken totally our of context.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tachikaze
Thinkprogress.Org is a liberal feeding frenzy of subjective self-affirming liberal-speak. Damn Secular progressives.
You know its slanted so don't even pretend otherwise. You even had to put a little warning before showing it because you know it's slanted but you just wanted conservatives to appear like they are the slanted ones.
Disgusting.
Quote:
About Think Progress
Think Progress is a project of the American Progress Action Fund.
The American Progress Action Fund is a nonpartisan organization. With the blog, APAF seeks to provide a forum that advances progressive ideas and policies.
:fainting:Quote:
Originally Posted by strike for the south
Disgusting.
Well Divinus , are you up to the challenge ?
Well , anyone going to bother trying to write a timeline of good news now we are 3 years down the line .
You can even have things....cherry picked from all the news to show one point of view. .
Go on , you know you can do it , its been started already ......
Lets see ..... errr..... ummmm....Saddam isn't president anymore and ...well ....and......any suggestions ?.......
So do you have any suggestions for filling in the positive timeline ? It does look a bit sparse at the moment .
Nope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
But I am not so partisan and so extremist as to say everything was done right, either. I would like to see a timeline with EVERYTHING, and within context- neither liberal spin nor administration spin.
Nasty Secular Progressives are extremists who refuse to meet in the middle by seeing the good and the bad.
Conservatives, on the other hand, should by definition see both the good and the bad. It is the obligation of the conservative to be educated on all viewpoints, no matter how distasteful. The point of this is to apply the information to a limited interpretation of the constitution and make a decision as to what is right or wrong from a social legal perspective.
Fair enough?
I can't very well agree with you until you provide a list of good things about the war, can I? I don't assume that all issues have an equal number of good and bad points.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinus Arma
Giving love and care to a newborn child has few bad points. It's not slanted to make a larger list of positives than the negative list.
The very contrary is true of the war in Iraq.
Unless you can provide an equally long list of benefits. And I don't mean for Haliburton, Exxon, and Lockheed.
I don't need to. The biased nature of this topic has already been exposed. I don't pretend to have all the answers, but I would challenge people to think about sources before reading. I am under this same obligation and am open to new information.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tachikaze
This mission is accomplished, but the war against secular progressives continues.:2thumbsup:
Good timeline. That some are still in denial that it was wrong to go to war, or that the military and political methodologys being used to secure Iraq are to little to late is to be expected. After all; 19% still back Cheney, 17% still think Rummy is doing a good job, 32-37% still believe Bush is a leader, and 32% believe we are winning the war (isn't it an occupation actually?).
Time magazine reported last week that 85% of our servicemen still think we went to Iraq because Saddam attacked us on 9/11/01 (talk about mushrooms) - but, 72% now believe we should begin our withdrawal from there (as in ASAP). Also, an ABCnews and Washington Post poll says 57% of Americans now feel it was wrong to invade Iraq, 80% believe there will be a civilwar.
All this, and you know what Bush said? "They don't have the intellect I do" (he meant "intelligence reports", I think...I mean most people are smarter than Bush43). This week when asked when the withdrawal will begin he said, "I don't know, ask the next President." Bush did acknowledge that to do it "his way" would take another 10 years - which would make it nearly as long as our involvement in 'nam (1956-1975).
Iraq should be written off as another failed military venture, and we need to begin a diplomatic process to restore the nations prestige to pre-Bush levels. Truth is even the military want out of there - even the generals.
[edited for spelling]
what part of actual quotes and confirmed sources is so hard to get?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinus Arma