Show me where the governments info on the war has been debunked as unreliable or untrue.
Even so, it does not change the fact that you are a hypocrite of the highest regard for two reasons.
#1 By your own admission a couple weeks ago you said you support your sons efforts in the war, but you do not suppoort the war.
I dont like what you are doing, but you are doing it well ?
==================================================================
#2 You praise the info from the government as reliable when it supports your position on climate effects in the future.
But their info is not credible when it comes to the war. When their main purpose is to fight wars, not predict the weather or its future impact.

You are the one who cannot stand to be wrong to the point that you fudge info and hypocrisize yourself. And when that doesnt work , you launch childish personal attacks out of nowhere.
You are the looser only because you argue relative terms with emotionally based opinions.
your personal attack is proof of the emotion over riding the logic.
The gentleman who said that you need to get past your freshman year in college was right

My recollection is that you thought the global warming report was completely bogus, so if the government either is or is not reliable, well, you can fill in the rest.

There’s also an obvious big difference here, which I suspect even you can see. In the case of Iraq, the government position has been repeatedly debunked as unreliable or untrue and there is a pretty solid body of evidence that has demonstrated a pattern of falsehoods on the part of the Bush Administration towards Iraq. If the Pentagon report you refer to was the only source against a sea of contrary reports, I would of course look at it with a lot more skepticism. However, it follows mainstream science, and, in any event, I would never use it as the only — or even a major — source of scientific thought on global warming.

Funny that you should critisize the government as a non-reliable or non-credible source when it comes to Iraq.
But I just went over the debate we had on the subject of climate change/gerbil warming and you use the government repeatedly and quite often , actually almost always as your confirming and credible source to back up all your arguements on the subject.
So let me get this right Greg.
When it comes to an issue you believe in, the government has the final word and is the ultimate in terms of credibility and reliability in truth.
But when it comes to the war, they are not to be believed. Hmmm… interesting.

Below you will see a portion of this hypocrisy for yourself.

Today you said;
“and it is crystal clear that our government is not a credible source.”

greg said,
November 5, 2007 at 11:24 pm

As for micky2’s comments about the 2003 climate change report, it was commissioned by Andrew Marshall of the Department of Defense. Since 1973 he headed a think tank within the Pentagon whose role was to envision future threats to national security. The DoD’s push on ballistic-missile defense is known as his brainchild. Donald Rumsfeld picked him to lead a sweeping review on military “transformation,” the shift toward nimble forces and smart weapons that was the hallmark of Rumsfeld’s strategic vision. He’s hardly a liberal pansy.

And yes, Schwartz and Randall are futurists, which is good because that was what the report was about – the future. That’s what we need from our governmental planners – vision and hard thinking about what the future holds. It’s better to be proactive than reactive and what would scare me is if no one in the military wasn’t thinking about the future.

The report’s conclusions have also been echoed by others in the defense industry. In March, the U.S. Army War College, again not your namby-pamby liberal front group, funded a two-day conference at the Triangle Institute for Security Studies titled “The National Security Implications of Global Climate Change.” In April, the Military Advisory Board, consisting of eleven senior retired U.S. admirals and generals, including some close advisers to VP Cheney, said much the same thing. Micky2, you may not like what the reports are saying but it’s really hard to deny that our military is paying serious attention to global warming.

YOU CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS GREG !
The government either is or is not reliable, make up your mind.

Credible sources prove my point Greg. And you cant stand it !
That is a personal statement. When you say “who” you are refering to a person.
My sources sre the “source” not the independant like you with ideals.
My references are a hell of lot more reliable than taking your word for it greg.
The evidence that the surge is and has worked is plentiful and factual on a massive scale.
As far as honesty goes. You would be honest to accept the massive concencous along all lines of media.
Huffington post , NY times and all the liberal rags including every left wing TV broadcast is saying the same thing. As I said in closing that statement ” theres plenty more out there”.
You would be honest to say (IMO) that you just cant stand to see us do anything right in Iraq.

I asked; ( with typo correction)
You would rather see your way as right even if it makes our country look like a bunch of losers. What does that make you ?”
Greg replied;
“Honest”

I believe you honestly would want our country to fail, just so you can have the selfish pleasure of saying you were right.

Your definition of “credible sources” is anyone who agrees with you.

“In my low brow fashion I guess it would be appropriate to say that you wont bother to look for the good news.”

No, I look for good news. It’s just hard to find with regard to Iraq and it is crystal clear that our government is not a credible source. And then you have to weigh the good news with the cost of having achieved it.

“You would rather see as you right even if it makes our country look like a bunch of losers. What does that make you ?”

Honest.

The point behind the sources was not to show you they all agreed on anything other than the fact that the surge has worked and achieved what it set out to do which I stated in my first response to you. Different media’s will of course report different degrees of success in different areas depending on the publication and its authors feelings and standing. And that the intention of the surge was to give the Iraqi parliament room to breath so they could govern with some degree of fluidity.
The “objective” was to bring a level of stability that actually allowed the people and its country to get some footing.

You however ask why no one has claimed “victory” And I asked you what the victory was supposed to be about. What would that victory be ? You never answered me.

Greg wrote;
“So it doesn’t look like it is possible for us to declare victory.

The point you missed was that we did victoriously clear the path for the Iraqi Parliament to do what they are supposed to do, and so far they have not been victorious in their endeavors.
But our soldiers sure as hell did what they were supposed to do, no question about it.

Any fool knows that victory in Iraq is a ways off.
If that victory was to be a completely stable and sovereign Iraq the same fool would surely realize that an escalation on troop size would not do that. And that no single component in the war could possibly do that.

Greg wrote;
“Yes, there is evidence the surge is working from a military standpoint, but even that is open to debate as we have seen in the past other “surges” where the opposition simply drew back until it was over and then resumed their activities,”

Not only has the opposition drew back, a lot of it has disappeared as a result of Iraqi citizens retaliating against Al Queda. The best example being Anwar province.This movement started in Anbar province and has now spread to Diyala, Nineveh, Babil and other provinces, including parts of Baghdad.
Once again,in addition commerce is on the rise, more kids are going to school and refugees are returning to a safer Iraq.
So… It is working from more than a military standpoint. It is now working from at least these standpoints I just mentioned.

Patreaus himself whom you seem to have some respect for said in his address to congress that the surge has worked so far. And if continued on the same course will continue to work.
But I’m sure you will find semantic way to alter that to another meaning.
That would be your brand of “high brow” disingenuous presentations.

A perfect example would be this pathetic attempt at discrediting me.

I said; “That’s right Greg ! I surely didn’t try to disguise it ! I put it right up there.

You replied; ” No you didn’t”
” No you didn’t.”

That’s a lie Greg. I did put it right up there (its plain as day) with no attempt to hide the fact that those links were from 2003. Otherwise I would of deleted the dates or altered them. Once I realized what had happened I did not ask Eric if he would edit it out for good reason, because I think it should be proudly displayed what all we have accomplished since the war began, not just the surge.

Greg wrote;
“But I’m sure you’ll respond with your usual brow-beating approach,”

I may not carry my dialogue as you would and you can call it what you want.
but at least I don’t act as if everyone is an idiot if they don’t agree with me and take everything out of context , which at times is almost as good as a lie.
And I surely don’t insult peoples intelligence by arguing against things that are undeniably true and then expect people to believe it.
The best piece of evidence that the surge is working is the change in the Dems criticisms.
It used to be “the war is lost”
Now its ” the surge is working , but!”

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1107/Murthas_comments_on_surge_may_be_a_big_problem_for_House_Democrats.html

Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), one of the leading anti-war voices in the House Democratic Caucus, is back from a trip to Iraq and he now says the “surge is working.”
Murtha’s latest comments are also a stark reversal from what he said earlier in the year. The Pennsylvania Democrat, who chairs the powerful Defense Subcommittee on the House Appropriations Committee, has previously stated that the surge “is not working” and the United States faced a military disaster in Iraq.

Here’s one from the L A Times , the moonbatheart beat of Cal.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-boot8sep08,0,1085443.story?coll=la-opinion-center

It’s obvious what accounts for the more cooperative mood. Notwithstanding all the political hype and hyperbole, events on the ground do matter, and there is no denying that events in Iraq have been moving in the right direction since the surge started. Not even the Democrats deny it. Sens. Jack Reed, Hillary Clinton and Dick Durbin, among others, have acknowledged that, as Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin put it, “The military aspects of President Bush’s new strategy in Iraq . . . appear to have produced some credible and positive results.”

These results include, according to a well-placed officer in Baghdad, a 48% decline in civilian deaths across the entire country since December 2006 and a whopping 74% reduction in Baghdad, the focus of American and Iraq security efforts.

Heres alittle more proof that its not just a military success.
Go to the link, these below are all individual articles

http://www.iraqupdates.com/p_articles.php/article/13770
U-turn as US tries to revive Iraq state industry (8th Mar 2007)
FIRST IRAN-IRAQ TRADE COOPERATION COMMISSION MEET HELD IN TEHRAN (7th Mar 2007)
U.S. official says network of Iraqi and world businessmen underway (4th Mar 2007)
Car washing… good job for the jobless (4th Mar 2007)
Successful Iraq rebuilding effort could end in 18 months (4th Mar 2007)
1000 companies and 50 countries in the 2007 exhibition of reconstructing Iraq (4th Mar 2007)
The Fair of (Made in Iraq) will be held in Baghdad next April (4th Mar 2007)
King of Spain confirms his country’s commitment to reconstruction (4th Mar 2007)
Reconstruction projects provide Iraqis with big improvements to essential services (4th Mar 2007)
Halliburton sees Iraq contract awards in 2nd qtr (2nd Mar 2007)
Advanced rates of international Baghdad - Basra project (28th Feb 2007)
IRAN’S KISH FTZ INKS COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH IRAQI KURDESTAN (28th Feb 2007)

Heres another exaple of it not only being a military success.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OGY2OTc2ODg2ZGMwZWNiYjVlYTQ5N2YwMjNlYzFjYTY=

There’s more, but you get the idea. I stopped the mayhem at Garma because I came across a recent story from that town, from the Marine Corps News. I haven’t seen it on al-Reuters, and don’t expect to, but it seems to me an important story nonetheless. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and Ron Paul and the editorial board over at the New York Times should look at it too:

Dec. 12, 2007

GARMA, Iraq (Dec. 12, 2007) — Residents here celebrated a success for their livelihoods, with the grand reopening of a marketplace central to the city’s economy, Dec. 1.

Marines with 3rd Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment, Regimental Combat Team 6, and other Coalition Forces joined Garma citizens and local dignitaries in the celebration of the market reopening, marking progress toward economic growth for the community.

“It’s a sign of progress and hope for a new tomorrow,” said Capt. Quintin D. Jones, commanding officer with Company L. “The mayor and I wanted to make an immediate impact in the area by making goods readily available, helping improve commerce. Now, the market can work as a crossroad for Garma to tie back into other cities.”

One will get you five that there are many Garmas with similar stories. They are not hard to find, nor is it particularly dangerous for Western reporters to go there and have a look for themselves. There aren’t many terrorist attacks in Anbar Province any more, because al-Qaeda has been defeated there, and the Marines are devoting a lot of their time — indeed most of their time, if some Marines I hear from are to be believed — to projects like the Garma market, developing wells, repairing broken electrical grids, and working on scores of microinvestment projects.

It isn’t just Garma, or just Anbar Province, it’s going on all over the country. Meanwhile, the critics of the war — I heard Biden carrying on about this just a couple of hours ago — intone that, yes, we may be making military progress, but there is still no political reconciliation. But they are wrong, too. Take, for example, this recent story from Taji, a locale best known for the several weapons programs conducted there during Saddam’s time:

Sunni and Shia tribal sheiks, local government leaders, senior Iraqi Army officials and local Iraqi police officials from throughout the Taji area recently met at the Prayer Town Hall to continue reconciliation efforts and celebrate the “awakening” — a term used to describe a turning away from sectarianism and violence.

More than 200 attendees from the villages of Hor Al Bosh, Sheik Ahmer, Shat Al Taji, Falahat and other areas dined as they discussed issues affecting their villages and ways in which they can improve the quality of life for the people living there.

“They decided to have a Sawa (lunch) to bring both Sunni and Shia tribal leaders together for solidarity,” said Anchorage, Alaska native Capt. Martin Wohlgemuth, commander for Troop D, 1st Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery Regiment, which is attached to the 1st Squadron, 7th Cavalry Regiment. “This is a continued extension of the Sunni and Shia partnership which has truly spread to every corner of North Taji.”

“As the security situation continues to improve, Sunnis are able to travel to mainly Shia areas and the Shia can go to Sunni areas. In many cases, these are places they have never been before or never dared to go before,” added Wohlgemuth, whose troops patrol in Assiriyah. “They are only able to do this because of reconciliation and forgiveness. This is a continued sign of progress.”

Indeed it is.

Stories like these are enormously important for several different audiences. They are important for us, because we will shortly cast votes in an election that will probably define the course of the war in the next few years. They are important for our elected representatives, who insist on distorting the events in Iraq and elsewhere, and are pretending to “solve” problems that often do not exist. They are important for the peoples of the Middle East, who are lied to daily by their leaders, by their media, and by some of our media as well. They need to understand the defeat of al-Qaeda, and the emergence of an Iraq in which the old red lines between Sunni and Shiite are daily eroding, in favor of joint efforts, political debate, and hard work on behalf of their common country.

Meanwhile, the country’s leading religious leaders seem on the verge of issuing an historic document: a fatwa condemning violence. The signatories would be two towering figures, one Sunni, one Shiite. The Sunni leader is Sheikh Ahmed al Kubaisi, whose Friday sermons from Dubai reach 20 million of the faithful. The Shiite will be Ayatollah Sayyid Ammar Abu Ragheef, chief of staff for Grand Ayatollah Ali al Sistani, whose influence extends from Iraq deep into Iran.

The fatwa will represent the culmination of years of dialogue with religious leaders behind the scenes in Iraq and throughout the region by Anglican Canon Andrew White, who works in Baghdad. Once the fatwa has been formalized, further meetings will be held among a wider circle of Iraqi clerics.

It may even be reported.

These are all credible sources Greg, so dont start with that “is that all you got?” crap, because there is plenty more out there.
In my low brow fashion I guess it would be appropriate to say that you wont bother to look for the good news.
You would rather see as you right even if it makes our country look like a bunch of losers.
What does that make you ?