Iraq violence = sign of success (Blair)

[Hamel]

news.com.au

Iraq violence 'a sign of success'
From correspondents in Washington
April 17, 2004

THE violent insurgency in Iraq was a sign the US-led coalition was succeeding in its efforts to rebuild post-Saddam Iraq, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said today.

"We are trying to reconstruct the country," Blair, who met US President George W. Bush earlier in the day, said in an interview with NBC television news conducted at the British Embassy in Washington.

"Now, why are these people trying to stop us? They're trying to stop us because they can see that if we're allowed to continue this progress, then everything they stand for is defeated."

Asked about similar remarks in Iraq yesterday by General Richard Myers, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Blair said: "I know exactly what he means ... it's something I constantly say to people."

He said those at the root of the insurgency in Iraq were trying "to provoke a situation in which there's such chaos that they can tip the country into general disorder".

"And the political timetable and the transition ... to Iraqi sovereignty is actually an important condition of creating the right circumstances for security," he said.

"I think the very reason why we're working hard with the Iraqis (is) to make sure that we have a broad based government with the UN, to make sure we've got international support."

Blair said that, to ensure a successful transition to Iraqi sovereignty, "we need the military and the political reinforcing each other".

"We're not going to be able to do this without military action and without being prepared to be firm and tough."

Agence France-Presse

Can't think of anything to say about it.

[EmperorChrostas the Cruel]

Then don't.
Stick to facts, and keep you dick away from the stale bread.

[Stark]

Then don't.
Stick to facts, and keep you dick away from the stale bread.

Someone knows where their virginity is.

Does anyone know of any insurgency situations that were resolved in any satisfactory way (the US leaving not being satisfactory)? The campaign in Afghanistan seems to be going well, but that doesn't involve the levels of occupation in Iraq. I ask, because its difficult to critisize this instance of counter-insurgency if there aren't any successful examples.

[Vympel]

A US general said the same thing. They're fucking morons. Consider:

Violence= sign of success!

No Violence= sign of success!

No matter what shit is going down, these fuckwads will tout it as great progress.

[MKSheppard]

No matter what shit is going down, these fuckwads will tout it as great progress.

We're massacring the terorrists in Iraq now that they've abandoned
their "lets use roadside bombs to kill a few troops at a time!" or "lets
blow an entire crowd up with a car bomb!"

Lots of people are dying, but I think by the time this ends up, the indigenious
Iraqi insurgency may be broken simply because everyone's dead, captured,
or wounded, requiring foreign fighters supported by Iran and Syria to keep
the insurgency up......