But the Democratic-controlled Congress is growing increasingly frustrated with the slow pace of political reform in Iraq. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, have called for [Iraqi Prime Minister] al-Maliki to be replaced.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070902/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_us;_ylt=Apd0axmjofs6vrnUKcMWMYwUewgF
Democrats - please don't choose Clinton. :'(
Interestingly, this is evidence that the media is not necessarily liberally biased.
Originally posted by AThousandYoung[/i]Wait, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Democrats kind of tend to criticise others for meddling in the affairs of foreign states, yeah?
[i]But the Democratic-controlled Congress is growing increasingly frustrated with the slow pace of political reform in Iraq. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, have called for [Iraqi Prime Minister] al-Maliki to be replaced.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070902/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_us;_yl on. :'(
Interestingly, this is evidence that the media is not necessarily liberally biased.
If that's the case, why are they now suggesting a prime minister is ousted? If he had been killing a load of people, fair enough, but he hasn't, he's a guy who isn't doing things fast enough for certain democrats to be happy. Screw them, if the democrats want to get out of Iraq, then they'll have to just accept that shuffling a foreign government isn't going to help.
Not cool.
The democrates do have serious problems within Iraq, but slightly different. When they push hard to oppose the occupation(fight the repub) then you will see a definite rise of deaths within Iraq. This meddling from a distance controls what happens to the system.. kind of like immunity killings.
America shouldnt have gone into Iraq.. they should leave.
30,000 innocent Iraqi deaths. LOL. 1,028,907.
By BASSEM MROUE; The Associated Press
Sunday, September 2, 2007; 7:21 AM
BAGHDAD -- Iraq's beleaguered prime minister lashed out Sunday at his U.S. critics, saying they don't appreciate the country's achievements and fail to understand how difficult it is to rebuild after decades of war and dictatorship.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said some of the criticism from Washington in advance of this month's progress reports has been counterproductive.
"Such statements sometimes cross the limits and send signals to terrorists luring them into thinking that the security situation in the country is not good," al-Maliki told reporters without offering a specific example.
He said U.S. critics may not know "the size of the destruction that Iraq passed through" and do not appreciate "the big role of the Iraqi government and its achievements, such as stopping the civil and sectarian war."
Originally posted by AThousandYoung2 months ago they said we lost the war, but that didn't go over well. Now they change gears and blame it on politics. The fact is that the Iraq government has gotten more done since January than the Democrats in our Congress. And the Democrats are growing frustrated by the slow pace?????
[i]But the Democratic-controlled Congress is growing increasingly frustrated with the slow pace of political reform in Iraq. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, have called for [Iraqi Prime Minister] al-Maliki to be replaced.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070902/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_us;_yl ...[text shortened]... on. :'(
Interestingly, this is evidence that the media is not necessarily liberally biased.
I bet the Iraq congress has a higher approval rating in the US than the Democrat congress does. (16 percent)
Originally posted by ChancealotThe French don't have troops in Iraq in the first place, so it's not as morally repugnant for them to be making comments such as this (though they shouldn't be making them, and thus it's right that they apologised). It's important for the Democrats to realise, IMO, that they're not inheriting a blank slate to do with as they wish, but must work with what they have if their claims of caring about what America does overseas are to ring true. So doing things which undermine what's been done so far (however much or little it may be) are counterproductive.
The same happened with the French Government and Maliki told them off.
They appologised.
So if it had been the opposition in Britain that had said something, yes, it'd be closer to the same thing, but it was the French, so I don't think it's "the same".