<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Iraq Roundup</title>
	<atom:link href="http://donklephant.com/2007/01/25/the-iraq-roundup/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://donklephant.com/2007/01/25/the-iraq-roundup/</link>
	<description>Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:03:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Climate Change Elucidated :: The Iraq Roundup</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2007/01/25/the-iraq-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-310634</link>
		<dc:creator>Climate Change Elucidated :: The Iraq Roundup</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2007 19:07:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/2007/01/25/the-iraq-roundup/#comment-310634</guid>
		<description>[...] Original post by Donklephant   Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Original post by Donklephant   Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy the Dhimmi</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2007/01/25/the-iraq-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-199160</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy the Dhimmi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2007 19:02:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/2007/01/25/the-iraq-roundup/#comment-199160</guid>
		<description>An interesting comment from an editor at the WAPO:
&lt;blockquote&gt;On Tuesday nearly every member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee warmly endorsed Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the new U.S. commander in Iraq, and a number wished him success or &quot;Godspeed&quot; in his mission. Yesterday some of the same senators voted for a resolution that opposes the increase of troops for Gen. Petraeus&#039;s commandÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬?even though the general testified that he could not accomplish his mission without the additional forces and hinted that such a resolution could encourage the enemy. &lt;strong&gt;Such is the muddle of Congress on Iraq: A majority may soon go on record opposing the new offensive in Baghdad even while encouraging the commander who leads it.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Marc Schulman at Americanfuture.net says:
&lt;blockquote&gt;I suspect foreign governments, be they friend or foe, are shaking their heads in disbelief at a Congress that wishes Petraeus good luck, while at the same time acting to reduce the chances that his luck will be good.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

What happens if the surge is successful in pacifying bagdad by 2008?  My suspicion is that the media will still be reporting &quot;endless Sunni/Shia conflict&quot; or &quot;growing animosity towards the war in Iraq.&quot;  An antiwar democrat might win because of it, and when he/she enters office, and since Iraq will be able to stand on its own, The democrat president will withdraw the rest of the troops immediately and take all the credit for &quot;ending the republican&#039;s nightmare in Iraq.&quot;

Anti war democrats hope the surge works, but late enough in the game that they can still win because of a perception of Bush&#039;s failure, but early enough so that the mess is solved before they have to make any tough decisions about the war.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An interesting comment from an editor at the WAPO:</p>
<blockquote><p>On Tuesday nearly every member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee warmly endorsed Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the new U.S. commander in Iraq, and a number wished him success or &#8220;Godspeed&#8221; in his mission. Yesterday some of the same senators voted for a resolution that opposes the increase of troops for Gen. Petraeus&#8217;s commandÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬?even though the general testified that he could not accomplish his mission without the additional forces and hinted that such a resolution could encourage the enemy. <strong>Such is the muddle of Congress on Iraq: A majority may soon go on record opposing the new offensive in Baghdad even while encouraging the commander who leads it.</strong></p></blockquote>
<p>Marc Schulman at Americanfuture.net says:</p>
<blockquote><p>I suspect foreign governments, be they friend or foe, are shaking their heads in disbelief at a Congress that wishes Petraeus good luck, while at the same time acting to reduce the chances that his luck will be good.</p></blockquote>
<p>What happens if the surge is successful in pacifying bagdad by 2008?  My suspicion is that the media will still be reporting &#8220;endless Sunni/Shia conflict&#8221; or &#8220;growing animosity towards the war in Iraq.&#8221;  An antiwar democrat might win because of it, and when he/she enters office, and since Iraq will be able to stand on its own, The democrat president will withdraw the rest of the troops immediately and take all the credit for &#8220;ending the republican&#8217;s nightmare in Iraq.&#8221;</p>
<p>Anti war democrats hope the surge works, but late enough in the game that they can still win because of a perception of Bush&#8217;s failure, but early enough so that the mess is solved before they have to make any tough decisions about the war.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nykrindc</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2007/01/25/the-iraq-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-198873</link>
		<dc:creator>nykrindc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2007 15:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/2007/01/25/the-iraq-roundup/#comment-198873</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know how much I would trust the opinion article you cite from the NY Sun. In this blog, you cited an article from the Guardian, where it was reported that the Sunni insurgency was demoralized but was looking for a means to cease fighting against the US, and turn its attention exclusively on the Shiites. 

The above seems to suggest that al Qaeda is growing in strength, whereas most reports I think, have tended to state the opposite, mainly, that even Sunni insurgent groups are actively fighting al Qaeda in Iraq as a means of reaching out to the US. The article, also seems to be of the &quot;insurgency is in the last throes&quot; type of article, and we know how those predictions have turned out. I&#039;d put my money on the Sunni&#039;s trying to make a deal with US forces and then focusing exclusively on the Shiites leading to far more violence while al Qaeda recedes into the background as more and more Sunnis turn their backs on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know how much I would trust the opinion article you cite from the NY Sun. In this blog, you cited an article from the Guardian, where it was reported that the Sunni insurgency was demoralized but was looking for a means to cease fighting against the US, and turn its attention exclusively on the Shiites. </p>
<p>The above seems to suggest that al Qaeda is growing in strength, whereas most reports I think, have tended to state the opposite, mainly, that even Sunni insurgent groups are actively fighting al Qaeda in Iraq as a means of reaching out to the US. The article, also seems to be of the &#8220;insurgency is in the last throes&#8221; type of article, and we know how those predictions have turned out. I&#8217;d put my money on the Sunni&#8217;s trying to make a deal with US forces and then focusing exclusively on the Shiites leading to far more violence while al Qaeda recedes into the background as more and more Sunnis turn their backs on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aronld K</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2007/01/25/the-iraq-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-198253</link>
		<dc:creator>Aronld K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2007 04:32:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/2007/01/25/the-iraq-roundup/#comment-198253</guid>
		<description>Maybe you should do the two minutes of research necessary to inform your readers that the NY Sun article was written by the former research director for Chalabi&#039;s Iraqi National Congress, a guy who was also deeply involved in Chalabi&#039;s early de-Baathification program.

It is hard to imagine a less credible source.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe you should do the two minutes of research necessary to inform your readers that the NY Sun article was written by the former research director for Chalabi&#8217;s Iraqi National Congress, a guy who was also deeply involved in Chalabi&#8217;s early de-Baathification program.</p>
<p>It is hard to imagine a less credible source.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

