<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Obama Refuses to Credit Surge Strategy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://progressconservative.com/2008/07/23/obama-refuses-to-credit-surge-strategy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://progressconservative.com/2008/07/23/obama-refuses-to-credit-surge-strategy/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2012 18:45:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Progressive Conservative</title>
		<link>http://progressconservative.com/2008/07/23/obama-refuses-to-credit-surge-strategy/#comment-422</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Progressive Conservative]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:23:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thebigstick.wordpress.com/?p=292#comment-422</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The stated purpose of the surge from the beginning was to create breathing room for the government to get things in better shape. It was also intended to give the Iraqis a chance to get better trained so they could fight for themselves. On both fronts that has been accomplished, so I call that a pass. 

If you&#039;re talking about acting as a buffer, I would point to the continuing presence troops have in places like Bosnia, North Korea and elsewhere. You will note that the public doesn&#039;t seem to mine military deployments when our troops are relatively safe.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The stated purpose of the surge from the beginning was to create breathing room for the government to get things in better shape. It was also intended to give the Iraqis a chance to get better trained so they could fight for themselves. On both fronts that has been accomplished, so I call that a pass. </p>
<p>If you&#8217;re talking about acting as a buffer, I would point to the continuing presence troops have in places like Bosnia, North Korea and elsewhere. You will note that the public doesn&#8217;t seem to mine military deployments when our troops are relatively safe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ames</title>
		<link>http://progressconservative.com/2008/07/23/obama-refuses-to-credit-surge-strategy/#comment-421</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ames]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:12:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thebigstick.wordpress.com/?p=292#comment-421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I remain utterly unconvinced that the Surge *has* worked.  Though we&#039;re no doubt facing remarkable peace brought about by having an overwhelming amount of force there to begin with, do we have a guarantee that our soldiers are doing anything but buffer the factions against each other, such that without the buffer, we&#039;re back to square 1?  I question the legitimate, lasting success the Surge has had.... this was Hillary&#039;s talking point for a while, and I think she was on to something.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I remain utterly unconvinced that the Surge *has* worked.  Though we&#8217;re no doubt facing remarkable peace brought about by having an overwhelming amount of force there to begin with, do we have a guarantee that our soldiers are doing anything but buffer the factions against each other, such that without the buffer, we&#8217;re back to square 1?  I question the legitimate, lasting success the Surge has had&#8230;. this was Hillary&#8217;s talking point for a while, and I think she was on to something.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Progressive Conservative</title>
		<link>http://progressconservative.com/2008/07/23/obama-refuses-to-credit-surge-strategy/#comment-419</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Progressive Conservative]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:49:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thebigstick.wordpress.com/?p=292#comment-419</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t have any interest in pumping money into Afghanistan, which is essentially a lawless place and not really worth our time. I DO have an interest in pumping a few hundred special forces operators into Pakistan though.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t have any interest in pumping money into Afghanistan, which is essentially a lawless place and not really worth our time. I DO have an interest in pumping a few hundred special forces operators into Pakistan though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: totaltransformation</title>
		<link>http://progressconservative.com/2008/07/23/obama-refuses-to-credit-surge-strategy/#comment-417</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[totaltransformation]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:34:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thebigstick.wordpress.com/?p=292#comment-417</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;that’s money that could have gone into Afghanistan&quot;

What is this obsession with Afghanistan?  Does he really believe that in the geopolitical grand scheme the stability of Afghanistan is more important than that of Iraq?   What would happen if we lost Iraq (the world&#039;s third largest oil producer) to an Al Q. led insurgency?  Or if Iraq basically became a puppet regime of Iran?  

Losing Afghanistan would be serious, but nowhere near as serious as Losing Iraq.  Afghanistan can be isolated and quarantined, Iraq can&#039;t.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;that’s money that could have gone into Afghanistan&#8221;</p>
<p>What is this obsession with Afghanistan?  Does he really believe that in the geopolitical grand scheme the stability of Afghanistan is more important than that of Iraq?   What would happen if we lost Iraq (the world&#8217;s third largest oil producer) to an Al Q. led insurgency?  Or if Iraq basically became a puppet regime of Iran?  </p>
<p>Losing Afghanistan would be serious, but nowhere near as serious as Losing Iraq.  Afghanistan can be isolated and quarantined, Iraq can&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

