US report on Iranian weapons in Iraq 'delayed significantly', No surprise Options

[The Balls]

His poplularity is so low the Democrat congress gave him EVERYTHING he wanted in terms of war funding.

If you look to the poll from March of 08 I just posted you will see sentiments are shifting back. If you look to the one Benhamean posted you will see that even in summer 07 a majority of americans wanted to give Patreaus a shot. Do you think that sentiment supporting him is going to get worse now that he is proven that the clear hold and build stragegy is working and Iraqi troops have fought and won in three major areas in the past few months?

of course they wanted to give him a shot because there's no alternative. We're stuck there now, so we have to give him a shot.

No smart democrat wants to pull out immediately. But the vast majority of the country greatly resents Bush for getting us in there in the first place.

And if you think anyone in this country will believe his "evidence" about Iran - the first thing they'll think of is the multiplicity of lies he told to get us involved in Iraq.

He's doing a great job begging the Saudi's to boot oil production by the way.

In general, I think you can judge this president's performance over the past 7 years as nothing short of a total disaster. he's done nothing right. Gas prices are out of control, the dollar is worthless and inspired next to no foreign investment, the economy had only one small span of growth between 2004-2006 - the rest has been recession, he's killed several thousand American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqis, the intelligence community remains a total failure and we're in the midst of the absolute worst budget deficit the world has ever seen. We're broke because of this president.

How does it feel knowing that you support a president who presided over the process of the United States transition to a second world nation - watching as traditionally third world countries took the reigns and now dictate energy and financial policy to us?

[mhaverty]

of course they wanted to give him a shot because there's no alternative. We're stuck there now, so we have to give him a shot.

No smart democrat wants to pull out immediately. But the vast majority of the country greatly resents Bush for getting us in there in the first place.

And if you think anyone in this country will believe his "evidence" about Iran - the first thing they'll think of is the multiplicity of lies he told to get us involved in Iraq.

He's doing a great job begging the Saudi's to boot oil production by the way.

In general, I think you can judge this president's performance over the past 7 years as nothing short of a total disaster. he's done nothing right. Gas prices are out of control, the dollar is worthless and inspired next to no foreign investment, the economy had only one small span of growth between 2004-2006 - the rest has been recession, he's killed several thousand American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqis, the intelligence community remains a total failure and we're in the midst of the absolute worst budget deficit the world has ever seen. We're broke because of this president.

How does it feel knowing that you support a president who presided over the process of the United States transition to a second world nation - watching as traditionally third world countries took the reigns and now dictate energy and financial policy to us?

Sarcasm about the Saudi's?

Saudi Arabia granted President Bush's request for an increase in oil production yesterday, while the Bush administration heeded calls from Congress to temporarily stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve

There is no recession and hasn't been one:

The country's economic growth during January through March was the same as in the final three months of last year, the Commerce Department reported Wednesday. The statistic did not meet what economists consider the classic definition of a recession, which is a retraction of the economy. This means that although the economy is stuck in a rut, it is still managing to grow, even if modestly.

Patreus will make the case if need be to invade or attack Iran. Just like he did with the congressional hearings that lead to MORE funding for the war.

So how does it feel? Fucking great. Glad to see you have such a firm grasp of current events.

[The Balls]

Sarcasm about the Saudi's?

Saudi Arabia granted President Bush's request for an increase in oil production yesterday, while the Bush administration heeded calls from Congress to temporarily stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve

There is no recession and hasn't been one:

The country's economic growth during January through March was the same as in the final three months of last year, the Commerce Department reported Wednesday. The statistic did not meet what economists consider the classic definition of a recession, which is a retraction of the economy. This means that although the economy is stuck in a rut, it is still managing to grow, even if modestly.

Patreus will make the case if need be to invade or attack Iran. Just like he did with the congressional hearings that lead to MORE funding for the war.

So how does it feel? Fucking great. Glad to see you have such a firm grasp of current events.

Hey, look Douchebag, I can find articles to support my position too!!!

http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-05-19-voa44.cfm

http://dkosopedia.com/wiki/Economy_Under_George_W_Bush

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18353653/

Congrats!! Bush has avoided a "full blown recession" and only induced a mild recession.

In all of our articles, folks speak of slow growth - which technically signals recession.

And for your constant mention of expanded funding for the war? What do you want democrats to do? De-fund it? You'd love that, wouldn't you...

oh, and on the Saudi thing...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356238,00.html

EDIT - didn't mean to call you douchebag...I try not to make it personal...sorry

This post has been edited by The Balls: May 22 2008, 01:42 PM

[mhaverty]

Hey, look Douchebag, I can find articles to support my position too!!!

http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-05-19-voa44.cfm

http://dkosopedia.com/wiki/Economy_Under_George_W_Bush

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18353653/

Congrats!! Bush has avoided a "full blown recession" and only induced a mild recession.

In all of our articles, folks speak of slow growth - which technically signals recession.

And for your constant mention of expanded funding for the war? What do you want democrats to do? De-fund it? You'd love that, wouldn't you...

oh, and on the Saudi thing...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356238,00.html

EDIT - didn't mean to call you douchebag...I try not to make it personal...sorry

"technically"?

Here from your own link why you are wrong:

The last two U.S. recessions, in the early 1990s and in 2001, saw quarters in which America's economy contracted, with inflation-adjusted gross domestic product registering negative growth rates. This year, the U.S. economy has flirted with recession, but has averted an actual contraction, logging a 0.6 percent growth rate in the first quarter.

[The Balls]

"technically"?

Here from your own link why you are wrong:

The last two U.S. recessions, in the early 1990s and in 2001, saw quarters in which America's economy contracted, with inflation-adjusted gross domestic product registering negative growth rates. This year, the U.S. economy has flirted with recession, but has averted an actual contraction, logging a 0.6 percent growth rate in the first quarter.

again, you'd be hard pressed to find an economist who would tell you that 0.6 percent growth is a healthy economy.

[The Balls]

but if %0.6 growth is what you need to cling onto to talk about GW's success, then you go ahead and do that.

Congrats, George!!

[mhaverty]

again, you'd be hard pressed to find an economist who would tell you that 0.6 percent growth is a healthy economy.

Relative to a "real" ressesion and not a "technically" one it is very healthy.

[Brootsquad]

Relative to a "real" ressesion and not a "technically" one it is very healthy.

Many economist do not use the simple formula of the GNP shrinking for two straight quarters any longer as the only sign of a recession.

There are too many other factors in play right now to use that as the only measuring stick.

I'm not saying there is or is not a recession going on. But clearly the country is hurting the worst it has since '91 during Bush the First. VERY hurting.

Anyone who denies that and throws out a .6% growth in one quarter as proof that everything is great is being absurd.

I understand that you are going out of your way to bust Balls' balls....but you can't really believe with gas prices, the housing slump, the war, the deficit, etc that things are healthy?

[mhaverty]

Many economist do not use the simple formula of the GNP shrinking for two straight quarters any longer as the only sign of a recession.

There are too many other factors in play right now to use that as the only measuring stick.

I'm not saying there is or is not a recession going on. But clearly the country is hurting the worst it has since '91 during Bush the First. VERY hurting.

Anyone who denies that and throws out a .6% growth in one quarter as proof that everything is great is being absurd.

I understand that you are going out of your way to bust Balls' balls....but you can't really believe with gas prices, the housing slump, the war, the deficit, etc that things are healthy?

No things are not great but people like the balls, terry, and many left leaning and democrat types have been beating this fucking lame drum since 2003. It is tiresome. We are not in a recession yet. We have come very close.

There are good things too that come out of times like these and these times are not even that bad. The housing slump has forced several couples I know to stop the spend, refi, payoff cycle they were on as the value of their house grew ridiculous and unsustainable amounts. They are crying poor right now and I don't give a fuck. Did their kids really need to have fresh baby gap items every week and $2000 Hilfiger lined strollers charged on creidit and then paid of with a refi after they pissed away hundreds if not thousands in interest. Never mind the fees the banks and brokers burried for themselves in the new loan. That 10 to 15k in wasted fees and interest would be doing great in a 401k or even treasury fund no? The party is over. I feel bad for people who are truely poor and are on the fringes but most of the people doing the complaining were fucking stupid and still are doing ok or are in a hole they dug for themselves.

This post has been edited by mhaverty: May 23 2008, 08:27 AM

[woof.]

Of course not. I was just taking a stab at Guest or Sparky the Dunce since they blame everything Bush and the military does as being made up.

as usual...

[Brootsquad]

Listen, we had the recession debate already in another thread, I'm not going to rehash the whole thing, especially in a thread about Iranian weapons.

I look at the high unemployment rate, the collapse of the housing market, the credit crunch, the deficit, the gas prices, the weak dollar,etc and can't image how much WORSE it needs to be to be called a recession.

Are you really going to put on the blinders and not admit anything because of a .6% increase in the GNP in one quarter? Do you stick by that ONE guideline and ignore everything else going on around you?

I'll let you know when my 401K stops hemmoraging money and I stop paying $4 for gas for no legitimate reason. So much for the wonderful weak dollar closing the trade deficit. That failed as well.

If I can't save for retirement the way I want and I have to spend more money on bills, gas and food, how can I fulfill the American Dream? Or retire early so I don't work to my grave? Sorry your friends are fucktards, but I'm nothing like them and this affects me as well.

Look, there I go rehashing it right after I said I wouldn't. Damn you and your friends who live beyond their means!

This post has been edited by Brootsquad: May 23 2008, 08:53 AM

[woof.]

mhaverty

[woof.]

That 10 to 15k in wasted fees and interest would be doing great in a 401k or even treasury fund no?

no.

[mhaverty]

Listen, we had the recession debate already in another thread, I'm not going to rehash the whole thing, especially in a thread about Iranian weapons.

I look at the high unemployment rate, the collapse of the housing market, the credit crunch, the deficit, the gas prices, the weak dollar,etc and can't image how much WORSE it needs to be to be called a recession.

Are you really going to put on the blinders and not admit anything because of a .6% increase in the GNP in one quarter? Do you stick by that ONE guideline and ignore everything else going on around you?

I'll let you know when my 401K stops hemmoraging money and I stop paying $4 for gas for no legitimate reason. So much for the wonderful weak dollar closing the trade deficit. That failed as well.

If I can't save for retirement the way I want and I have to spend more money on bills, gas and food, how can I fulfill the American Dream? Or retire early so I don't work to my grave? Sorry your friends are fucktards, but I'm nothing like them and this affects me as well.

Look, there I go rehashing it right after I said I wouldn't. Damn you and your friends who live beyond their means!

[mhaverty]

no.

Better than at the bank or in a mortage brokers pocket. Pulling out equity and refing multiple times at low point differentials is a lousy use of your money. Even if you lost some of your money in a 401k you still have the remaining blance or still have the equity in your house.

You are stupid.

[Brootsquad]

So the unemployment rate is still bad. Thanks for the chart to clarify that.

You have some weird obsession or mental block where you think that because something RIGHT NOW isn't as bad as some point in the past, it must be good. That's absurd.

You might as well be Terry at this point. You are no different. He compares everything now to the glorious Clinton years to bemoan how awful things are. You go back to YOUR OWN president's first term and it's awful unemployment rates to prove that the current 5% is not bad. Insane.

A few months ago I told you that the unemployment rate would go over 5% and keep growing and you actually insulted and mocked me. In four months it's gone from 4.5 to 5%.

That would be NOT good. Again, NOT. GOOD.

[woof.]

Better than at the bank or in a mortage brokers pocket. Pulling out equity and refing multiple times at low point differentials is a lousy use of your money. Even if you lost some of your money in a 401k you still have the remaining blance or still have the equity in your house.

That I will agree with

you said they'd be doing great, they wouldn't. you didn't say, even though 401k's are drying up like water in the desert, and treasury funds, even given the state of the economy and value of the dollar, would be better than pissing it away on interest, did you? you said,

"That 10 to 15k in wasted fees and interest would be doing great in a 401k or even treasury fund no?"

no, they're not doing great, they wouldn't be doing "great". losing money on your investments is not "great". clown.

This post has been edited by sparky-the-cat: May 23 2008, 09:31 AM

[mhaverty]

So the unemployment rate is still bad. Thanks for the chart to clarify that.

You have some weird obsession or mental block where you think that because something RIGHT NOW isn't as bad as some point in the past, it must be good. That's absurd.

You might as well be Terry at this point. You are no different. He compares everything now to the glorious Clinton years to bemoan how awful things are. You go back to YOUR OWN president's first term and it's awful unemployment rates to prove that the current 5% is not bad. Insane.

A few months ago I told you that the unemployment rate would go over 5% and keep growing and you actually insulted and mocked me. In four months it's gone from 4.5 to 5%.

That would be NOT good. Again, NOT. GOOD.

[Brootsquad]

So now you are proving Terry's point that the Clinton years were better....but at NO point are you discounting anything about the economy being in trouble.

Keep googling pitch-ers (that's one for the Boston Accent thread!), I'll be here in real life if you are interested in playing.

Thanks for allowing me to fill in for The Balls and Sparky in their absence. You boys may continue.

[woof.]

So now you are proving Terry's point that the Clinton years were better....but at NO point are you discounting anything about the economy being in trouble.

Keep googling pitch-ers (that's one for the Boston Accent thread!), I'll be here in real life if you are interested in playing.

Thanks for allowing me to fill in for The Balls and Sparky in their absence. You boys may continue.

waste of time talking to this bonehead, Broot. I can't help but wonder if his wife, or co-workers wish he would just shut up. mama mia, the attention whoring and righteous self importance, combined with a total lack of any critical thinking skills are astounding.

[mhaverty]

So now you are proving Terry's point that the Clinton years were better....but at NO point are you discounting anything about the economy being in trouble.

Keep googling pitch-ers (that's one for the Boston Accent thread!), I'll be here in real life if you are interested in playing.

Thanks for allowing me to fill in for The Balls and Sparky in their absence. You boys may continue.

A real by definition recession began I believe right as Clinton left office. I say I believe because I think that one was subject to debate as the GDP figures have been disputed. Anyway things were great during the clintion years economically but it had nothing to do with him other than balancing the budget for which he deserves some credit. So they were great then and very good for most of the bush years. If the unemployment rate continues to rise I will be alarmed. But in terms of the past 40 years we are in real good shape right now unless energy continues its exponential rise. If it does we will really be fucked. We are approching 1980 levels of fuel costs but inflation and unemployment are not there yet.

[Chappaquiddick]

There was something interesting missing from Maj. Gen. Kevin Bergner's introductory remarks to journalists at his regular news briefing in Baghdad on Wednesday: the word "Iran," or any form of it. It was especially striking as Bergner, the U.S. military spokesman here, announced the extraordinary list of weapons and munitions that have been uncovered in recent weeks since fighting erupted between Iraqi and U.S. security forces and Shiite militiamen.

Among other things, Bergner cited 20,000 "items of ammunition, explosives and weapons" reported by Iraqi forces in the central city of Karbala; an additional Karbala cache containing 570 explosive devices, nine mortars, four anti-aircraft missiles, and 45 RPGs; and in the southern city of Basra alone, 39 mortar tubes, 1,800 mortars and artillery rounds, 600 rockets, and 387 roadside bombs.

Not once did Bergner point the finger at Iran for any of these weapons and munitions, which is a striking change from just a couple of weeks ago when U.S. military officials here and at the Pentagon were saying that caches found in Basra in particular had revealed Iranian-made arms manufactured as recently as this year. They say the majority of rockets being fired at U.S. bases, including Baghdad's Green Zone, are launched by militiamen receiving training, arms and other aid from Iran.

Today brought fresh attacks, including an unusual barrage fired at a military base used by British and U.S. forces in Basra, in southern Iraq. A statement said "several" rockets hit the base during the afternoon, and that initial reports indicated two civilian contractors were killed, and four soldiers and four civilians injured.

It was the first reported attack of its kind since March 27 in Basra.

Iraqi officials also have accused Iran of meddling in violence and had echoed the U.S. accusations of new Iranian-made arms being found in Basra. But neither the United States nor Iraq has displayed any of the alleged arms to the public or press, and lately it is looking less likely they will. U.S. military officials said it was up to the Iraqis to show the items; Iraqi officials lately have backed off the accusations against Iran.

A plan to show some alleged Iranian-supplied explosives to journalists last week in Karbala and then destroy them was canceled after the United States realized none of them was from Iran. A U.S. military spokesman attributed the confusion to a misunderstanding that emerged after an Iraqi Army general in Karbala erroneously reported the items were of Iranian origin.

When U.S. explosives experts went to investigate, they discovered they were not Iranian after all.

Iran, meanwhile, continues to seethe after an Iraqi delegation went to Tehran last week to confront it with the accusations. It has denied the accusations, and it says as long as U.S. forces continue to take part in military action in Iraq's Shiite strongholds, it won't consider holding further talks with Washington on how to stabilize Iraq.

—Tina Susman in Baghdad

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbey...the-elusiv.html

WHERE IS THE TROOF???????

[mhaverty]

waste of time talking to this bonehead, Broot. I can't help but wonder if his wife, or co-workers wish he would just shut up. mama mia, the attention whoring and righteous self importance, combined with a total lack of any critical thinking skills are astounding.

You can't read or answer simple questions. You also wage a constant battle between hating me and wanting to pamper my loins.

[Brootsquad]

A real by definition recession began I believe right as Clinton left office. I say I believe because I think that one was subject to debate as the GDP figures have been disputed. Anyway things were great during the clintion years economically but it had nothing to do with him other than balancing the budget for which he deserves some credit. So they were great then and very good for most of the bush years. If the unemployment rate continues to rise I will be alarmed. But in terms of the past 40 years we are in real good shape right now unless energy continues its exponential rise. If it does we will really be fucked. We are approching 1980 levels of fuel costs but inflation and unemployment are not there yet.

But this is my point...I don't live my life saying, "Boy, thank goodness I have it better than the Carter years".

And your absolute adherence to this "real" definition of a recession that a huge number of economists say doesn't tell the real story about being in a recession is what troubles me.

I live RIGHT NOW. And things are bad. Because they aren't as bad as the were at some point in time does not mean they are good and people shouldn't be worried or complain if things are hard for them.

I want things to be better. I want to make more money. I want my 401K to explode. I want to retire early. I want to go on vacations and buy nice things I enjoy.

It's the American way. If you want your country to be in a slump so people who buy expensive baby clothes will learn a lesson and you can ay you told them so, you have set the bar far too low and are a petty person.

[benhamean]

waste of time talking to this bonehead, Broot. I can't help but wonder if his wife, or co-workers wish he would just shut up. mama mia, the attention whoring and righteous self importance, combined with a total lack of any critical thinking skills are astounding.

You can't read or answer simple questions. You also wage a constant battle between hating me and wanting to pamper my loins.

Substantive!!