Zalmay Khalilzad tries to talk about the troop surge

JaJae · 03-20-2007, 02:21 PM

I say trying because he has been doing interviews, but the mainstream media keeps bumping his interviews for stories that are negative on Iraq.

Katie Couric was supposed to have his interview on her show, but when it didn't swing the way she was expecting she managed to throw it up on her blog:
Couric & Co: CBS News Blogs and Editorial Forum - CBSNews.com

You can see the video entitled:
Eye to Eye: Zalmay Khalilzad

Khalilzad is the Iraqi ambassador who is slated to replace Bolton. Democrats are marveling at this saying:

Democrats and Republicans praised Khalilzad at his confirmation hearing last week, and the panel may vote to approve his nomination this month. It would then go the full Senate for approval.

``He is not going to lead the Bush administration where it doesn't want to go, but if they really are ready to pursue policies that head us out of the morass of death and destruction that we are in, then I think we have a great person in Ambassador Khalilzad,'' Senator Barbara Boxer (news, bio, voting record), a California Democrat and Bush critic, said during a visit to the UN.

Khalilzad Brings Political, Cultural Savvy to UN Ambassadorship - Yahoo! News

Khalilzad is not another Bush chrony. The Dems love him. He's a good guy.

When you watch this video you can see right off the bat the direction Couric was trying to take this to in regards of the troop surge. With her but, ... the rate of US troops killed up, etc.

His answer:
1. The sectarian violence, killing of the innocence by death squads has decreased. Numbers as high as 25%
2. Number of people coming back to their homes and related anecdotal evidence
3. The Iraqi government is being even-handed in going after militias and the insurgents.

Couric won't stand for the non gloom and doom. She follows up with "roadside bombings, attacks, chemical weapons etc..." She then asks "wouldn't you concede the level of violence has gotten worse?"

Khalilzad's response: NO! Overall there's a somewhat decline in the level of violence. In Baghdad specifically there is a significant improvement, but it will take time, there's difficult challenges ahead, it's not gonna be easy. But, the record is a net positive so far.

He goes on to say that Iraq can be a success, it's up to the Iraqis and we need to get its neighbors to help rather than undermine it.

It's an interesting video and it's an interesting message. The surge is helping, it is working. For some reason you can't find any of these interviews. I have to give Couric some credit, at least she put it in her blog. It would have been nice if it aired on her show like it was supposed to, but I guess when the message goes against what you're trying to tell people you have to put it to the B stock.

We keep getting signals from reliable sources that the surge is helping, yet why doesn't the media air it? If we were to poll the people of this forum the majority of people would probably disagree with the Iraqi ambassador and say the surge isn't working. I think people need to hear this message. There is still hope in Iraq and things are slowly starting to get better. I think our media needs to start displaying that message and quit all the doom and gloom.

ballz2wallz · 03-20-2007, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

The Dems love him. He's a good guy.

Those two are not synonymous.

ballz2wallz · 03-20-2007, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

We keep getting signals from reliable sources that the surge is helping, yet why doesn't the media air it? If we were to poll the people of this forum the majority of people would probably disagree with the Iraqi ambassador and say the surge isn't working. I think people need to hear this message. There is still hope in Iraq and things are slowly starting to get better. I think our media needs to start displaying that message and quit all the doom and gloom.

Because if the surge works, what do the Dems have left? NOTHING.

Here's what Rush says about it...

...but I still say that all of these people on the left who have proud ownership of defeat had better start thinking about what's going to happen when this works. Where will they be; what will they say; and how will they handle it? Because it's clear that General Petraeus, with only two of the five divisions that are part of the surge or brigades, whatever they are, in place (they all won't be in place until June) are actually having a lot of success.

We have a couple of interesting competing polls about the attitudes of Iraqis and it's interesting that the Drive-Bys are ignoring the good poll. We had this anti-war protest in Washington yesterday, and of course it was dwarfed in number by counterprotesters, which is also not being talked about much, if at all, in the Drive-By Media.

...This is not a comment just on the Drive-Bys. This is a comment on the people, our population, so beaten down by negative news about this that I'll predict to you that if the surge ultimately is victorious, and if Baghdad is someday rendered peaceful, that will not be big news, either. It'll be clouded by how long it took, how many deaths were necessary to secure it, no big deal, could have been done sooner, shouldn't have been done in the first place, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Now the guy who pulled down -- this a big story, too -- the guy who, along with the Americans, pulled down the Saddam statue, he's apologizing saying he might have made a mistake. Drive-Bys found this guy, I don't know where he is, but he said, "Yeah, I might have been a mistaken. I don't know. We might not be better off today than we were then." I don't know if this guy Waleed bin Attash was at Club Gitmo, but wherever he was, I'm sure he was tortured, will be the news.

A couple of competing polls about life in Iraq. From The Times Online, UK newspaper, "Most Iraqis believe life is better for them now than it was under Saddam Hussein, according to a British opinion poll published today," the neocon newspaper reports. "The survey of more than 5,000 Iraqis found the majority optimistic despite their suffering in sectarian violence since the American-led invasion four years ago this week. … One in four Iraqis has had a family member murdered says the poll by Opinion Research Business. Only 27% think there is a civil war in Iraq." Now, the Drive-By Media are not going to be happy about this. This is going to come as an enormous blow to the cut-and-run brigade in this country to learn that most Iraqis believe that life now is better than under the tyranny of Saddam. By a 61-27% margin, they don't believe there's a civil war in their country, which will force the Drive-Bys in this country -- this is a respected newspaper, the Times Online -- they're going to have to do something to discredit this poll and suggest maybe that the Iraqis themselves do not know there's a civil war. The Iraqis may be so stupid. Well, they won't say that. The Iraqis may be so traumatized and shattered they don't even recall the plight they're in.

Oh, by the way, 33% saw effective reconstruction efforts. 67% called them ineffective. The news in it is not perfect, but the vast majority think life is better than under Saddam, and a vast, vast, vast majority think they're not living in a civil war. However, USA Today has a poll out. "Most Iraqis live in fear of violence four years after the invasion. Four years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, nearly 9 of 10 Iraqis say they live in fear that the violence ravaging their country will strike themselves and the people with whom they live. Just 5% say they worry 'hardly at all' about the safety of those in their household. The findings are part of a survey of Iraqi public opinion sponsored jointly by USA TODAY, ABC News, the British Broadcasting Corp. and ARD, a German TV network. The full results from face-to-face interviews with 2,212. Iraqis from Feb. 25 to March 5 will be released Monday."

This other poll, by the way, by Opinion Research Business, talked to 5,000 Iraqis, over twice as many, and that poll shows an entirely different result. At least that's how the reporting of it looks. So this poll that USA Today published here and did jointly with ABC and the BBC, very good news for the Drive-By Media, very good news for the cut-and-run brigade, very good news for those who own defeat. Be interesting to know exactly where the Iraqis were polled and when, and geographically -- if it's all Baghdad, if it's throughout the country or so forth. This we don't yet know.

motivez · 03-20-2007, 02:46 PM

Nothing?

Finally getting something right doesn't erase the corruption and plethora of mistakes, abuse of power, taking of civil liberties, etc, that this Administration has been a part of.

Every sane person hopes this works, but the idea that if it does everyone should just forget about what all went wrong along the way is ridiculous.

Pro Street · 03-20-2007, 02:50 PM

wow, claiming victory very, very early.

once again I'm getting a case of deja vu.

JaJae · 03-20-2007, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Every sane person hopes this works, but the idea that if it does everyone should just forget about what all went wrong along the way is ridiculous.

Nobody has suggested we should.

JaJae · 03-20-2007, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by Pro Street

wow, claiming victory very, very early.

once again I'm getting a case of deja vu.

Somebody has suggested such a thing?

ballz2wallz · 03-20-2007, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by Pro Street

wow, claiming victory very, very early.

Who's claiming victory?

ballz2wallz · 03-20-2007, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Nothing?

Finally getting something right doesn't erase the corruption and plethora of mistakes, abuse of power, taking of civil liberties, etc, that this Administration has been a part of.

Every sane person hopes this works, but the idea that if it does everyone should just forget about what all went wrong along the way is ridiculous.

What is it specifically you're talking about? Frankly, we're just trying to get Iraq to work, and that's all we've really talked about here.

Pro Street · 03-20-2007, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Who's claiming victory?

claiming that the surge is working.. same difference.

there's no way to say it's working when even the full surge contingent isn't even over there. It's also been going on for roughly only a month

also, how are death squad attacks down? who trackes this? how is 100 dead instead of 150 dead [arbitrary number] a good thing?

if this holds for 3-4 months, then it's showing success.

ballz2wallz · 03-20-2007, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by Pro Street

claiming that the surge is working.. same difference.

But it is working at the moment

Nobody will claim victory until the end, when we know there is a victory.

Pro Street · 03-20-2007, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

But it is working at the moment

Nobody will claim victory until the end, when we know there is a victory.

sorry, what makes you think this is the result of the surge?

Maybe the fact that Sadr told his army to stop fighting for now?

JaJae · 03-20-2007, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by Pro Street

sorry, what makes you think this is the result of the surge?

The fact that the ambassador of Iraq said so?

It's funny that we can't say the surge is working and things are getting better, but we can say things are getting worse and Iraq is a failure. Why the double standard?

DosEquis · 03-20-2007, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Khalilzad is not another Bush chrony. The Dems love him. He's a good guy.

UHhh, only to the untrained democrat. Khalilzad is a member of PNAC and has signed the 1998 letter to clinton to invade Iraq. He also signed their "statement of principles" in 1997. He is as much a chrony as Cheney, Libby, Wolfowitz, Perle, Rumsfeld, Dobriansky, Armitage, and Bill Kristol (quayle's advisor, now fox news analyst, editor of the weekly standard, and PNAC chairman).

They are ALL in bed together. Any positive reflection of the policy he can release, he will. He has wanted to invade Iraq since 1998.

Pro Street · 03-20-2007, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

The fact that the ambassador of Iraq said so?

It's funny that we can't say the surge is working and things are getting better, but we can say things are getting worse and Iraq is a failure. Why the double standard?

wait, the ambassador of Iraq said so? THAT is your reasoning?

No, I'm not saying it's working, and I'm not saying it's worse... it's too soon to tell.

a rose-shaped turd is still a turd.

DosEquis · 03-20-2007, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

The fact that the ambassador of Iraq said so?

It's funny that we can't say the surge is working and things are getting better, but we can say things are getting worse and Iraq is a failure. Why the double standard?

The surge worked temporarily 3 other times too. Then when the surge is over it goes back to the way it was. Sadr also stepped his men down. The surge is not a policy that is going to work long term and we need long term solutions.

ballz2wallz · 03-20-2007, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by Pro Street

sorry, what makes you think this is the result of the surge?

Maybe the fact that Sadr told his army to stop fighting for now?

What makes you think that's the reason for the recent success?

Pro Street · 03-20-2007, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

What makes you think that's the reason for the recent success?

what success?

so far it's a trend, not a result.