Quote :

" 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-, nine-hundred attacks a week. That's more than 100 a day. That is four an hour attacking our forces," says Woodward. The situation is getting much worse, says Woodward, despite what the White House and the Pentagon are saying in public. ... President Bush is absolutely certain that he has the U.S. and Iraq on the right course, says Woodward. So certain is the president on this matter, Woodward says, that when Mr. Bush had key Republicans to the White House to discuss Iraq, he told them, "I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." "

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/28/60minutes/main2047607.shtml

]



[Edited on September 28, 2006 at 4:34 PM. Reason : lllkkk]

9/28/2006 4:30:10 PM

kill em all or bring our people home


fuck those idiots

9/28/2006 4:31:10 PM

CBS huh? They still have Dan Rather forging documents?

9/28/2006 4:35:50 PM

Dan Rather is the source of this article?

9/28/2006 4:36:54 PM

he doesn't know who bob woodward is, i guess. he'll google him now and pretend he does. or just edit his post.

[Edited on September 28, 2006 at 4:38 PM. Reason : hypocrisy]

9/28/2006 4:37:45 PM

^^^ , ^^^^

typical jingoistic responses, ignoring everything in the first post.

9/28/2006 4:40:45 PM

Quote :

"Woodward also reports that the president and vice president often meet with Henry Kissinger, who was President Richard Nixon’s secretary of state, as an adviser. Says Woodward, "Now what’s Kissinger’s advice? In Iraq, he declared very simply, ‘Victory is the only meaningful exit strategy.'" Woodward adds. "This is so fascinating. Kissinger’s fighting the Vietnam War again because, in his view, the problem in Vietnam was we lost our will." "

9/28/2006 4:43:36 PM

^^its a josh#### thread why should it be worth a fuck

9/28/2006 4:46:35 PM

(you realize people think the same shit about you, right?)

9/28/2006 4:47:12 PM

Quote :

"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-, nine-hundred attacks a week. That's more than 100 a day. That is four an hour attacking our forces," says Woodward."

Are there more hours in the day in Iraq? Or does this guy suck at math?

9/28/2006 4:47:49 PM

^^^

Quote :

"I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me."

-- josh####

9/28/2006 4:50:08 PM

Quote :

"he doesn't know who bob woodward is, i guess. he'll google him now and pretend he does. or just edit his post."

funny...considering when i clicked on the original link it said who he was

Quote :

"He also reveals key intelligence"

thats my favorite line of the article...THATS WHAT WE WANT ON TV, OUR KEY INTELLIGENCE BEING REVEALED TO ANYONE WATCHING

9/28/2006 4:50:10 PM

Quote :

"Are there more hours in the day in Iraq? Or does this guy suck at math?"

what's wrong with his math?

9/28/2006 4:51:52 PM

4 an hour = every 15 minutes

4*24 = 96

he says over 100 a day

but i'm no math whiz...

9/28/2006 4:52:51 PM

Yeah I don't get what's wrong with the math.

800/week == attack/12.6 minutes
900/week == attack/11.2 minutes

if anything, attack/15 minutes is more conservative, but a totally sound approximation.

9/28/2006 4:53:46 PM

An average of an attack every 15 minutes. That means 4 attacks an hour. 4 attacks/hr * 24 hours/day = 96 attacks

96 !> 100
96 attacks/day*7 days a week = 672

672 != eight- nine-hundred


I took the concrete numbers and extrapolated them. You used the made up ones and extrapolated those.

[Edited on September 28, 2006 at 4:55 PM. Reason : .]

9/28/2006 4:53:49 PM

they were lookgin for a round number. 15 minutes is much simpler than saying "every 14 minutes" or every "13.26464" minutes.

9/28/2006 4:53:59 PM

oh ok since it's less than 100 we can be happy about it now.

9/28/2006 4:55:09 PM

^^ and ^ yeah man, tell the fucking idiots

and it is a shame it has come down to this from the jingoistic side, rather than commenting on this:

Quote :

"I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me"

[Edited on September 28, 2006 at 4:55 PM. Reason : ]

9/28/2006 4:55:35 PM

Quote :

"That's more than 100 a day. That is four an hour attacking our forces"

No, seems like he would have said "MORE than four an hour"

9/28/2006 4:55:43 PM

Quote :

"800/week == attack/12.6 minutes 900/week == attack/11.2 minutes "

those are both ~5 an hour

i'm sure if it was actually 5 an hour they would love to tell you how much worse bush is fucking up

9/28/2006 4:56:18 PM

I wasn't trying to say the situation wasn't bad, I'm trying to say he overestimated it based on his own words.

Wouldn't you be pissed if I said something like "4 million Iraqis die every two days in attacks"
and then was like "Well so what, just because its less means it isn't a problem" when you called me on it.

9/28/2006 4:56:57 PM

this is still disturbing and nobody else has commented on it:

Quote :

"He also reveals key intelligence"

i dont think its the news media's job to reveal our key intelligence that could help the enemies

9/28/2006 4:58:21 PM

it's also not their job to protect our secrets. there are some ethical questions here, definitely, but i'll hold out on that judgement until i've seen the interview.

9/28/2006 4:59:21 PM

you mean secrets that are classified as SECRET, TOP SECRET, CONFIDENTIAL or CLASSIFIED?

i will also hold judgement until i see it...its just unbelievably sad how people dont have a problem with people broadcasting military intelligence for all to see, including our enemies

9/28/2006 5:01:20 PM

maybe our military should work to keep things secret if they don't want them broadcast.

9/28/2006 5:02:50 PM

so now you're for the military keeping things secret???

yet you dont have a problem with the media putting that information out there for everyone?

sad sad sad

9/28/2006 5:03:37 PM

CBS? Did Dan Rather have a say in this?

9/28/2006 5:04:24 PM

^^^ and maybe they shouldn't say one thing to the public, and something opposite in private. if i was american, i would be extremely pissed too if my gov/army was lying to me, and would do anything to expose the lies.

9/28/2006 5:04:54 PM

well, you have to wonder: if a reporter can find out info, then what's to keep spies from doing so. i'm only saying that if the military divulges information to the media, they should expect it to be on the front page.

now there are limits to this. they shouldn't give live broadcasts divulging US positions (a la geraldo). BUT reporters are not bound to keep the military's secrets. and if they legitimately think that something is a story and it's classified, i can't blame them for outting it.

[Edited on September 28, 2006 at 5:06 PM. Reason : .]

9/28/2006 5:05:56 PM

Quote :

"and maybe they shouldn't say one thing to the public, and something opposite in private"

yeah...lets just have everything out in the open...lets say when we are going to attack where...lets say what we know about all our enemies...after all, free information is good all the time...its not like our enemies would find out this information and change their plans accordingly

let alone the fact that every govt since the country was founded has been doing stuff like this

^true, much of the burden is on the people actually leaking the information...i just dont know how a journalist with any moral dignity would potentially publish information that could put more americans in harm's way...but thats assuming journalists have any morals in the first place

Quote :

"and if they legitimately think that something is a story and it's classified, i can't blame them for outting it."

yeah why not out it...but why not charge them with treason also

[Edited on September 28, 2006 at 5:08 PM. Reason : .]

9/28/2006 5:06:30 PM

as expected, treetwista twists people's posts.

i am not talking about specific stuff like troop positions.

i am talking about lying to the american public about how the war in iraq and the war on terror are going. if bush and co. say the situation is getting better in iraq, that's a lie. if they say the war in iraq has made americans safer, that's a lie.

9/28/2006 5:09:08 PM

Quote :

"if bush and co. say the situation is getting better in iraq, that's a lie. if they say the war in iraq has made americans safer, that's a lie."

how are you so certain they are lies? you trust everything the media tells you? you think bush and friends have their agenda but the media doesnt have their own? you're going off what you've read in the newspapers and heard on tv...whereas the president and his cabinet actually talk with generals in iraq, the intelligence community, etc on a DAILY BASIS

[Edited on September 28, 2006 at 5:11 PM. Reason : .]

9/28/2006 5:10:52 PM

plz 2 c NIE report.

[and the numbers of violent deaths in Iraq per month since Jan 2006 (or indeed since 2003)]

[and the numbers of worlwide terrorist incidents since start of Iraq invasion]

DON'T BE BLIND.

[Edited on September 28, 2006 at 5:14 PM. Reason : ]

9/28/2006 5:12:10 PM

Quote :

"so now you're for the military keeping things secret???"

bush sure aint.

9/28/2006 5:13:14 PM

^^you mean the small portion of the report leaked to the press?

9/28/2006 5:13:26 PM

Quote :

"how are you so certain they are lies? you trust everything the media tells you? you think bush and friends have their agenda but the media doesnt have their own? you're going off what you've read in the newspapers and heard on tv...whereas the president and his cabinet actually talk with generals in iraq, the intelligence community, etc on a DAILY BASIS"

why believe new information when you cant just trust president bush?

9/28/2006 5:14:08 PM

^^no, probably the part that was released by the bush administration to try to quell the reaction from the leak.

[Edited on September 28, 2006 at 5:14 PM. Reason : .]

9/28/2006 5:14:40 PM

^^so you believe the media over the president

because the media's job is to get ratings and be the first ones to publish a story

and bush's job is to protect our country

but you believe the media because they make it seem cool to bash bush because he's such a bumbling idiot with an IQ of 2

^either way the whole report isnt released...because apparently bush DOESNT want sensitive intelligence leaked

[Edited on September 28, 2006 at 5:16 PM. Reason : .]

9/28/2006 5:15:36 PM

Quote :

"and bush's job is to protect our country "

how has that worked out? worst attack evar.

9/28/2006 5:17:10 PM

how has that worked out since then?

no attacks in 5 years on american soil

9/28/2006 5:17:32 PM

JESUS, I TALK ABOUT THE NIE REPORT, AND HE IS TALKING ABOUT THE MEDIA.

I give up.

[BTW, NOW A BRITISH REPORT HAS BEEN LEAKED WHICH ALSO SAYS THE SAME THING AS THE NIE REPORT... BUT YOU WILL OF COURSE IGNORE THAT.]

9/28/2006 5:18:17 PM

i don't read pages 33-39 of a 250 page book and think i know the whole story

9/28/2006 5:19:05 PM

Quote :

"no attacks in 5 years on american soil"

you can thank tony blair

9/28/2006 5:20:23 PM

since you love mentioning who was president during 9/11/2001

why dont you mention who was president the last 5 years?

another josh#### bullshit double standard

9/28/2006 5:21:19 PM

dick cheney

9/28/2006 5:28:04 PM

Well

I know logic and such isn't very popular round these parts butttt

If there are more angry arabs now then 5 years ago

and there are more very very very angry arabs now then 5 years ago

How does anyone actually figure we're safer now then 5 years ago?

9/28/2006 5:29:44 PM

becuase once bush lets iran have the bomb, their prez will keep the world in line.

9/28/2006 5:32:17 PM

I don't know if you noticed man

But you're terrible at sarcasm.

9/28/2006 5:34:32 PM

haha i love all the "OMF WHAT ABOUT DAN RATHER"

9/28/2006 5:35:07 PM