There was actually a part of the press conference today when Bush, if you could get past the stammering, stuttering, etc., actually said something that made a great deal of sense:
But I understand why people, Richard, are concerned, because progress is hard to see. You know, it’s one thing to say, we’ve got Zarqawi, that’s progress; it’s another thing to say, I met with the man and I believe he can make the right decisions. And so somebody is going to say, sure, well, show me. And I understand that. And I understand how tough it is for the American people to reconcile death on their TV screens with the President saying we’re making incremental progress toward an important goal. But I hope they understand is how important it is we succeed in Iraq, that the country is more dangerous if we don’t — the world is more dangerous if we don’t succeed.
The bolded part is something I was unaware that this Administration realized- that public perception is based on more than them just saying everything is “A-OK.”
At any rate, I thought that was something I had not heard him publicly recognize before (or at least I don;t remember him making a similar statement). Your thoughts?
Wickedpinto
that public perception is based on more than them just saying everything is “A-OK.”
Actually sometimes it seems to be based on less than that. The press has removed itself from America’s arsenal of weapons it can use against it’s enemies.
Still, you’re right, they should not let themselves get diverted everytime someone says “karl rove” or “What about SS reform?” or anyone of the other diversions that have turned Iraq into a bullet point war.
Cromagnon
I think its more likely that most of the American people just simply recognize a colossal strategic blunder of the first order when they see it. I’m not seeing him recognize that reality
Pb
There’s your cognitive dissonance for ya…
So, all that death… is that part of the ‘incremental progress’? Do we slowly watch while more people die, or less? So far, it seems like more.
What would be considered success now? Less death? Maybe back to something resembling stability? Because I don’t think we’ll be seeing that in Iraq for quite some time.
Jim Allen
But, reverting to form:
Wallsten is blind.
(h/t DailyKos)
KC
Good find there, John.
The problem for the president is that most Americans are just through with his game. He can speak candidly now–and should–but the last five years of PR offensives have left their impressions, I think. I mean, I appreciate any success we have right now–and killing Zarqawi is definitely a success–but it’s tough for me to get excited when the president actually says something that everyone already knows. It speaks more about us and our pliability that we should celebrate the president for saying something commonsensical. After all, if I had a litany of five-year screwups behind me, major ones at that, then suddenly said something commonsensical one day, wouldn’t you just ask me where my brain was for the last five years?
norbizness
No, I’m pretty sure he’s told us we’re all idiots for believing the press before.
Marcus Wellby
What TV screen would this be? This idiot and embarassment of a president would be in the shitter if the media did its frigging job.
D. Mason
Baby steps.
John S.
Good catch finding something that almost has merit in that nearly unlistenable press conference. I myself couldn’t get past the incessant stammering and use of the jet lag scapegoat coupled with the usual answers Bush has been coached to give.
Punchy
So, Bush met with Zarqawi and thought Zarqawi was making correct decisions? Is there a misidentified pronoun here? WTF is up with the speechwriters? Must be some Ohio State journalism dropout penning these odes to asshattery.
Or is Bush ad-libbing? If so…ouch.
kchiker
Someone in the White House learned from Katrina that people actually tend to believe what they see on live TV. Am I supposed to be impressed with the fact that they know this, or with the fact that they admit they know this?
Cherub
Jim Allen, is that for real? I mean, was it said in that Bush like joking manner or did it seem he didn’t know the reporter was blind? If not, geesh.
Jim Allen
Not sure, Cherub, just saw the transcription, haven’t seen the tape.
ppGaz
Obviously he is being coached. Maybe this is the Tony Snow influence.
But it doesn’t matter. So far he is just paying lip service to “understanding.” I won’t, and dare not, believe that it means anything until I see policy change and action that is congruent with the talk.
These people have proven themselves to be unrepentant manipulators. Excuse me for not bending over so that they can do it to me one more time. I am going to need to see some actual change, not just patronizing speech which is obviously aimed at shoring up support …. by people who supposedly don’t “govern by polls.” But apparently they are not beneath making speeches to polls.
Talk is cheap. Show me the money.
Jim Allen
John, my first thought when I saw your quote was the definition of a gaffe in DC (“A gaffe is when a politician tells the truth”). It’s not often that anyone in this administration, let alone Bush, makes references to reality. I’m not holding out much hope that this is the start of a trend or anything, but it’s kind of refreshing to see — like finding a flower in a vast desert.
jg
It sucks to have to endure 8 years of speeches from someone who isn’t talking to me and doesn’t respect my opinion.
SeesThroughIt
My first thought is that Bush will be severely reprimanded for going off message like that. My second thought is something like this:
Daniel K
It’s a recent strategy change. As the presidents poll numbers have dipped they finally realized that saying black was white simply made them look like they didn’t know the difference. Now the rap is more along the lines of “things are going much better than you think, but we’re not at liberty to say how or why.” I’m not predicting big poll bumps outta that one.
stickler
Pay no attention to what Bush says. Pay attention to what Bush does. His news conferences are completely useless because of this iron-clad dictum. His stammering incoherence adoesn’t actually matter, since it has no relation to his Administration’s behavior.
mrmobi
Did any of you see the C-SPAN coverage of the speech Bush gave (I assume to assembled troops) in the green zone yesterday?
He appeared very emotional, near tears at a couple of points, while he was praising the service of troops and private contractors. I don’t want to wax cynical about this, because the emotion seemed real (and all the more perplexing, since he’s a specialist at donning the most inappropriate facial expression most of the time). He seemed to be genuinely grateful to the folks he was addressing. BTW, if you haven’t yet seen “Baghdad ER” on HBO, prepare yourself and give it a look, it’s a grueling look at the end results of the “hard work” our men and women in uniform have to do every day.
I’ve always thought of Bush as being a supremely phony politician, but this brief speach gives me pause. Perhaps he is a true believer after all. This is all the more frightening because it means he’s probably not capable of learning from his mistakes. At all. Ever.
CroMagnon, you are so right.
Can’t we all just agree that Americans have bigger dicks than Al Quaeda? Can we stop now, or do we have to have Viet Nam, Part II? We got a lot out of that war, didn’t we?
p.lukasiak
Your thoughts?
my thoughts are that people like yourself, who spent nearly three years wallowing in the death of innocents in Iraq, was the intended audience. Bush needs the support of “intelligent” people like you who gleefully bought his lies, and the only way to do that is to appear to accept reality.
….and just as Snow and Rove intended, you fell for it hook, line, and sinker.
ppGaz
Fixed.
Wickedpinto
see what I meant about “less than that” yet?
lily
I think it is sort of rude to assume that support for the war decined merely because of the sight of bodies on TV. I don’t think support for WWII would have declined because of TV coverage. People in this country have the strength of character to support a war IF IT DESERVES TO BE SUPPORTED. Support declined after the reasons for the invasion were revealed as fraudulent.
Also I don’t think the TV news shows bodies to any significant degree.
tbrosz
And, to a unpleasantly large extent, put itself in the arsenal our enemies use against us.
Try and remember the last major news story on Iraq that would not have been mostly identical if al Qaeda had been the ones who actually wrote the copy.
ppGaz
Another DougJ sockpuppet?
Steve
Did you see Bush’s Katrina speech? Some didn’t like it, but I frankly did. I normally think Bush is 100% phony, but I thought he seemed sincerely pissed off at what a lousy job the government had done about Katrina and he was making a personal vow to fix it. Well, we saw how it all turned into a massive damage control effort to blame Blanco and Nagin while some of New Orleans remains flooded to this day; but yeah, I thought he sounded quite sincere at the time, and your comment reminded me of that.
I was, honestly, surprised that Bush didn’t get more of a bounce in the polls from Zarqawi’s death, an inarguably positive event. I think this reflects that most of the electorate has simply had it with him; after all this time, he’s a known quantity to everyone, and the jury is no longer out. The media keeps setting up the narrative for the big turnaround but it just never happens.
ppGaz
It was positive, but it will turn out to be insignificant.
The big scary guy had less influence than he was represented to have. In the grand scheme of Iraq civil war things, a minor player with a big ego. It would be like Al Qaeda killing Bill O’Reilly and announcing that their war on us had turned a corner.
FoxNews would probably be glad to get out of his contract.
Mr Furious
I hear what your trying to grasp at there John, but the only part that jumps out to me is the end…
All I can think is that we should have left it alone. And most of the country now agrees.
Mr Furious
ppGaz-
I’m willing to give Zarqawi some credit. He’s at least equal to killing Rupert Murdoch or Rush Limbaugh…
ppGaz
From Kevin Drum, a blurb from Washington Post. A roundup of the “good news” for the White House. One doesn’t know whether to laugh hysterically, or cry.
ppGaz
Furious, Cole is saying about what I was saying here a year ago.
The problem is, the US has no control whatever over the outcome in Iraq at this point. Once one comes to that realization, the whole argument about staying in or getting out becomes one notch from moot. Either way, the country is going to have to fight its own battles internally. It’s just a question of wheter we want to stay there and get caught up in it and watch it from the Green Zone, or get the hell out and watch it from here.
Bush, of course, will do whichever he thinks will make him look better. That’s the part that helps us sleep at night, knowing that this alcoholic fuckhead is watching out for his presidency.
The Other Steve
Can I just say… is there anything in that quote, much less Bush’s entire little speech and all his answers which isn’t patently obvious? As if rattling off a bunch of cliches solves things?
This is one of the reasons why I have an evisceral hatred for this man. I don’t know if he’s just dumb, or if the American people really are dumb and need this, or Bush just thinks I personally am a moron. I don’t know, but I cannot fathom why on earth any leader would repeat statements like that.
So sorry. I just think it’s pathetic.
Mr Furious
Agreed.
Mr Furious
My agreed was for ppGaz, but Steve jumped in between. Guess what? I agree with him too.
ppGaz
Obviously Al Qaeda is writing your posts.
Americans need to choose: Which Al? Maviva, or Qaeda?
Richard Bottoms
My thoughts?
The man is a dunce, in over his head and again the faint hope the the suckers who voted for him might yet see this collossal blunder wrapped some time soon.
Pb
I know, right? Why, I was just reading this editorial in the New York Times:
Oh, I’m sorry, if you couldn’t tell, that was actually al-Qaeda writing the copy. I guess it’s “mostly identical”, though–sheesh. Actually if you really want to talk about ‘mostly identical’, we should have a “Pat Robertson or al-Qaeda” contest:
Pat Robertson or al-Qaeda?
mark
the Stupidization of america continues at a breakneck pace
The Other Steve
Yeah, say… whatever happened with the search for Weapons of Mass Destruction? Did we finally find them?
ppGaz
As long as we are still looking, there is hope. Why so negative, Steve?
Pb
Maybe because we stopped looking. Heh. Time to invade Syria!
Cromagnon
A smart leader never bases his strategy on things outside of his control. A smart leader will try to control events, not let them control him (in the military thats known as maintaining the initiative)… In that context, our current strategy in Iraq could be named ‘Operation Hope and a Prayer’… We hope and pray the Iraqies finally get their act together
ppGaz
Maybe because we stopped looking. Heh. Time to invade Syria!
قرابريطاني بمنع مقاضاولين سعوين
They just need to look for this sign, which translates to:
Weapons of Mass Destruction Are Us — Everything Reduced! Saturday Only!
More parking in rear.
Andrei
In a similar vein, John Derbyshire’s mea culpa.
Davebo
He lost me totally when he yet again tossed out his flypaper strategy. Better over there than over here. Which was especially idiotic since he was over there when he said it.
TBone
John, just the fact that you would say…
…makes me realize how ignorantly prejudiced some people can be towards the current administration. There is ample room for criticism of the current regime on other points, but I thought you were more enlightened and level-headed than to assume Bush and crew are all heartless. Do you seriously believe the President and his people don’t understand the gravity of the current situation in Iraq? Do you believe they are emotionless zombies intent on world conquest without regard for anyone? We in the military (the folks I know at least) certainly don’t believe that our efforts are in vain, or that we are being sacrificed for selfish political motives. C’mon people.
Additionally, the comments above by your readers are sooooo biased, and sooooo brainwashed by MoveOn-like talking points that it makes me wonder if they can brush their teeth on their own, let alone think independently. The only reason I come to this site anymore is to laugh at all the moonbats who spew their anti-Bush bullshit and pontificate about subjects they have zero substantive knowledge about. They have a right to their opinion, but most of them in here are based on hate and ignorance. Like the saying goes: opinions are like assholes, everyone has them and they all stink. Seems appropriate here.
ppGaz
So maybe by “there” he meant “here.”
In other words, better to fight the terrorists in the US Senate than over “here” (which was “there”).
With friends like Feingold and Kerry, who needs enemies, right?
Pb
Woo, that Derbyshire guy is a dick.
Not that I’m surprised or anything–NRO Online? Yeah, of course he’s a dick.
Davebo
Having served five years I can understand that.
But being an adult, I also understand why it’s important that you feel that way for reasons far beyond simple patriotism.
But neither changes the fact that there’s a heck of a lot of truth in the statement you take umbrage to.
Sundy
You know, what is happening right now between everyone (us)involved in this discussion is one of the great things about America- FREEDOM. Freedom of opinion, speech, choice, religion, employment (EVEN THE CHOICE NOT TO WORK, AND LET OTHERS SUPPORT YOU AND YOUR FUTURE GENERATIONS), and many, many other freedoms that Americans currently enjoy.
Now, whether or not the war in Iraq is “right or wrong”, is beside the point, don’t you think? The fact is someone forced their way (killing thousands of Americans- 1 is too many) into OUR backyard and RAPED US (911). Not just the people of New York, but the people of the UNITED STATES. We were robbed of our brothers, sisters, mothers, dads, grandparents, and even future generations. They crossed the line-period.
We as a nation cannot forget that, and also we must always remember FREEDOM IS NOT FREE. We must ALL remain committed to perserve this fundamental philosophy, and attempt (at least try) to keep this a “free” nation for as long as we can. God bless all of you.
Jim Allen
What a fucking weasel.
Pb
Well, they didn’t understand it going in, and at every turn, the decisions they have made have shown that they’ve continued to not understand it. Given the situation they’ve put our military in, and their utter lack of justification for it, no, I don’t think they get it at all, really.
Oh, ha ha, and given *that* opinion, it must suck for you to be consistently wrong on the issues that really matter, and thus, get consistently shown up by us. My god, man, if *we* can’t brush our teeth, and we were the ones who were *right* about Iraq, how did *you* even manage to write that post!
Jim Allen
BTW, the “weasel” remark was directed at Derbyshire.
Perry Como
This administration has been in power for 6 years. Any judgements about their motivations, actions and words are based on experience. “Prejudice” is not the word you are looking for.
tBone
Sheesh. Speaking of ignorance . . .
Read the quote again. John was saying he didn’t think the disconnect between public perception of the war and the White House’s proclamations about progress in Iraq.
John didn’t say the Bush team is heartless or that they, personally, don’t understand the problems in Iraq. He has commenters who will do that for him.
tBone
Err, insert “the Administration understood the” before “disconnect” above.
Mr Furious
Pb, Jim–
You read that whole Derb column and didn’t pick this out to mark his dickness?
Yeah, fuck those non-whites and women. Who needs ’em?
Sad thing is, he had lots of good stuff in there. But once a dick…
mrmobi
Indeed, Steve. I think it’s logical, in a way. Even the most partisan on the left (I include myself) want us to succeed somehow, and I think the press is no exception. Everybody loves a comeback. I don’t believe we can “cut and run”, but how many more have to die or be permanently disabled before we consider a plan which might result in a decent way out, if not a victory?
Why should any of us believe that “stay the course” is a plan, and not just part of a “smear the weak Democrats” re-election strategy? Watch what happens in Congress this week, as the right uses “debate” on an Iraq statement to portray all Democrats as weak and quitters. (9/11 and Saddam, terrorists, terrorists!) Dems are going to have to come clean on their war positions. Why, with over 60% of folks hating this war, are they so afraid of admitting that the war in Iraq was a mistake. Just because Bush can’t admit one shouldn’t make all of us delusional.
But this brings me (finally) to my point. We have problems, lot’s of them. What is the Republican controlled government doing about them? Why, smearing their political opponents as weak, of course! Why address the problem when you can distract the populace with “the democrats have no plan?”
I would much rather than no plan than the one we have now, but I’m just a weak Democrat, and a quitter.
Mr Furious
While it’s true “all men” might very well have meant “all men sitting around wearing powdered wigs” but to subscribe to that two hundred-plus years later is pretty fucking originalist.
TBone
To: tBone (small “t”),
Bolded part John referred to as follows:
John’s statement as follows:
Okay, John says “I was unaware that this Administration realized- that public perception is based on more than them just saying everything is “A-OK.” John’s statement implies he thought the administration didn’t have the qualities to understand that public perception is based in part on their reaction to loss versus gain in Iraq (“…reconcile death on their TV screens…”). If we make the assumption that the administration doesn’t acknowledge the value of lives lost in Iraq when it comes to public perception, then we could logically assume that John believes the administration doesn’t value human life enough to take it into consideration (= administration is heartless).
Understand my statement now?
tBone
With you so far.
Now you’re reaching, but OK.
Whoa, one giant leap too far. You’re implying bad faith on John’s part based on a huge and unsupportable assumption.
Anyway, John must have hit on something with this post, since he’s got both you and p.luk attacking him with diametrically opposed arguments.
Andrew
Hell yeah we found them! Er, well, at least we HAVEN’T NOT found them! Curt Weldon is on top of this one, as usual.
Pb
Mr Furious,
I can’t speak for Jim, but no, I stopped reading after a while.
Andrew
Derb is really smacking down the Bushites over at the Corner:
RSA
Here’s the odd thing: This may be an example of Bush admitting that he needs to do more than say, “Everything’s great!” when asked about Iraq, but it’s certainly not an admission that anything at all has gone wrong. Bush says, “incremental progress,” but what many (most?) Americans see is “bad intelligence” and “recent wave of violence” and “bad apples” and “unexpected difficulties”. That’s not what most people think of as incremental progress. It’s more like “persistence in the face of repeated setbacks”. It doesn’t mean eventual failure, necessarily, but I think Bush is significantly handicapped in explaining the reality of Iraq to the public by his refusal to admit mistakes.
John S.
I find John’s best posts are the ones where he pisses everybody off.
tBone
Clearly we need to genetically engineer a SheehanCoulter hybrid for John to write about.
Krista
Brr…
Wickedpinto
” evisceral ”
then you call the President of The United States of America
“stupid”
It’s VISCERAL!
Your hate clouds your mind little paduan.
Perry Como
Bush has already made his position very clear on manimals.
tBone
It’s PADAWAN!
Fear is the path to the dark side, btw.
tBone
Coulter definitely puts the “man” in “manimal.”
Par R
It looks like another somewhat typical day at Balloon Juice, what with one moron after another trying to be oh-so-clever in their critical and redundant comments about the President. I wonder if they feel the same way about the individual who made the following comments:
“The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last four years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for four years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation.”–Oct. 9, 2002
ed
Does cognitive dissonance mean anything to you?
Fledermaus
Oh, you got us, Par R. Well played with the nameless quote and all.
Seriously, what is that hack-kneed tactic supposed to prove?
ppGaz
Spoofing is hard work, and Par doesn’t do hard work.
He’s the Brownie of spoofing.
Sojourner
Most Americans believe that the POTUS should embody the best of America. Ironically, the current POTUS is a mirror that reflects back the ugly side of our country.
Look in Bush’s mirror and you see entitlement, selfishness, intentional ignorance, and greed. You see resistance to truth when that truth contradicts what he wants. You see antagonism to those who are more knowledgable than he. You see belligerence and divisiveness instead of inclusiveness. You see ego dominate competence. You see self-satisfaction substituting for hard work.
You see a country that, at least for now, is in decline. This country ranks first on military strength but nothing else. Bush is a barometer of where this country and its people are at.
I have confidence that this country, once shaken from its slumber, will do the work needed to make this country once again the leader of the free world. And I look forward to seeing the face of who that leader is who embodies the best that this country has to offer.
Joey
I’m glad I’m not the only one who saw that…
Pooh
You know, I guess I’m inured enough to the Derb’s usual dose of “screw the dirty wogs” that the first passage that really set me spinning was this one:
Republicans argue that government doesn’t work and start wars to prove it? Paging Mr. O’Rourke…
tBone
Fly your nerd-flag proudly, brother.
Richard 23
So Par Rot, let me guess. That unattributed quote was from a democrat? Proving…what exactly?
My guess is John Kerry for the ultimate gotcha.
Zifnab
Bullshit. This is yet another Republican pawn-off. The CIA gave the White House intelligence, and if you read the Downing Street Memos or any of the other insider briefings that lead up to the war, you’ll note that Bush Co was intentionally deaf to every intelligence report that contained information contrary to what they wanted to hear.
The Bush administration has made a practice out of not listening to their intelligence directors. They ignored the outgoing Clinton administration terrorism reports in 2000 and 2001, they ignored intelligence on Al-Queda hide-outs when we invaded Afganistan looking for Osama, they ignored reports on the (non)existance of Iraqi WMDs, and they’re ignoring every ounce of intelligence that comes out of North Korea while they aggressively sift for every shred of evidence against Iran.
The Bush White House has made the worst possible use of the NSA, CIA, and FBI since it took office. They spy on civilians and peaceful political dissidents while they toss out information vital to national security. You can’t possible blame the CIA for that.
Steve
I think it is a Bill Clinton quote. It would be instructive, you know, to also compare what Bill Clinton was saying in 2002 about Iraq’s nuclear program, with what the Bush Administration was saying.
Of course, that might establish that Bush did, in fact, exaggerate the intelligence, which is why clowns like Par always settle for the drive-by cheap shot.
ppGaz
Par is a spoof.
Richard 23
Fixed.
And yeah, I know, I’m a leftie who expresses the left’s intolerance. Whatever.
Steve
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Everyone’s a spoof in your world. Entire planets of spoofs, surrounded by spoofy dark matter.
ppGaz
Yes, Darrell.
The Other Steve
No. It’s eVisceral! I only hate him on my computer, and as we all know, computer based things start with e or i.
The Other Steve
I hate to break it to you, but…
Santa Claus isn’t real.
The Other Steve
Crazy Curt? Isn’t he still out trying to find his own marbles?
The Other Steve
Andrew, I’ve got Derby coverd…
We all know that Iraq isn’t Vietnam.
Iraq is a desert, there’s no jungle there to get bogged down in.
RonB
T-Bone, I think John was saying that it was surprising to him that Bush seemed to jump into our shoes for a second. John did not imply he was heartless. I do think he is saying it has lacked empathy in the past. It has missed connections with the public, not given it enough to go on.
God, you’re such a lifer. I kid you T-Bone, but this is part of the mindfuck. Step away from the AFN commercials slowly. ;)
stickler
Ye gods, do the random numbers 1964-1973 ring a bell?
Or, how about “turning the corner?”
“Light at the end of the tunnel?”
“Peace with honor?”
Fortified hamlets, body counts, democratic elections, COSVN, domino theory … ad infinitum, world without end, Amen.
Most of the worst blunders our uncles made were not because of any military goal — they were to preserve domestic (perhaps selfish?) political motives. Is this stuff not taught in our military academies?
rachel
So which is it?
e-Visceral hatred: detestation expressed on the Internet.
or
Evisceral hatred: loathing of an enemy so profound that you want to see his guts ripped out and steaming on the ground.
Beej
Despite the mangling of Padwan, Wickedpinto is correct in this respect: It is “visceral” not “evisceral”. I think the confusion is with “eviscerate” which is to remove the guts-literally.
searp
This administration is simply engaged in defining down success. It is almost difficult to remember the original
Remember the Phillipines? We first killed a bunch of Filipinos over a lengthy period right after the Spanish-American war, then we created a de-facto colony that lasted until WWII. I try to discern what a “win” means, and this seems to me to be the most likely objective.
I suppose that is a lack of imagination on my part – I cannot understand how or why we would spend a trillion dollars and sacrifice the lives of tens of thousands of Americans simply so that Iraq can have a government, any government that isn’t Saddam. The reason I say any government is that if we really mean to “let the Iraqis decide”, then that is literally what it is – any government the Iraqis decide to have.
We should be both angry and anguished. Angry with the mediocrity in the White House, who used our patriotism to actually harm the country, and anguished that things have come to this point. Certainly nothing Bush says can change that.
ppGaz
Very well stated. The only thing missing is the civil war that Iraq is now going through, and will continue to go through, before it reaches a stable state … if it does. And the nature of the stable state …. we are not even close to knowing what that will be.
That latter fact, which is irrefutable, along with the other monster fact in the case … the absence of WMDs … are the principle reasons why this war will go down in history as one of the greatest fuckups ever. To start a war for reasons that turn out to be dead wrong, and then have the thing end up in some unpredictable way which is not very likely to be favorable to our interests … it doesn’t get much worse.
And the beauty part? All of this , and I mean 100% of it, was predictable, and predicted … and they went ahead anyway. Full steam ahead, as if the realities of the situation just didn’t exist or didn’t matter. Even when brought face to face with those realities by no less a military man and statesman than Colin Powell — their own guy — they barged ahead.
Amazing, and breathtaking. If we ever needed an example of how easily the American Experiment could be completely shot to hell, this is it. This is as bad as it gets before you break the experiment.
But we still have a proprietor here talking as if his concern is whether he can explain a vote for Democrats to his righty friends. See, that’s what counts here. The smack talk. The country can go shit in its hat, but if you can smack talk the libruls, you win. in this trailer trash version of reality.
Par R
ppGaz, otherwise known as the spoof God, has really developed into a Johnny one-note, with nothing new to say. Perhaps XXXXX is right and ppGaz is a REAL LIVE SPOOFTER. Is it possible that he also posts under the DougJ moniker.
I just reread what I typed and it reads like a typical comment from ppGaz. Maybe I’m ppGaz….
Jim Allen
And Par R is now a no-note with nothing to say at all.
searp
I am most angered by the fact that the Republicans are still at it, still using our patriotism to back down the opponents of a ghastly policy. Did anyone catch the “debate” on Defense Appropriations the day before yesterday? Is anyone listening to the “debate” on the House resolution today? It insults our intelligence, it really does.
As for johnny one-notes: listen to what the diehard Iraq war supporters has been saying. Fight them there… no attacks here… crazy evil islamo-fascists… Saddam/9-11. Talk about johnny one-notes, and these are the people that are really running the country. They sound like my poorly informed 15 year old.
Now to the anguish part: plenty of anguish for the soldiers, for all kinds of reasons. One less cited reason: soldiers have to put up with “private” security folks, often people who have already done a tour in uniform, back making $150K a year to do less dangerous work. My nephew may do that shortly, he isn’t stupid, and he already did a tour in uniform. He came back to a roofing job.
What kind of a country would do that to their best? What kind of country are we leaving to our kids? A heavily militarized country? A country whose standing in the world, once a beacon for freedom and justice, is now diminished to the point where much of the world sees us as an unpredictable, greedy bully? A country where obvious lies form the very basis of our national dialogue? I won’t go on, this makes me feel horrible enough. Back to work.
Kimmitt
I think the problem is that it doesn’t.
MikeLucca
That is the thing here, the difference. Bush is reaching out to the anti-war folks, but they don’t seem to be responding.
Catching Zarqawi is a big step. If we had cut and run a few months back, he would still be there, he would still be blowing up IEDs and kidnapping journalists and generally adding to the mayhem. This should be the time when you see people like Murtha, who sometimes seems like a reasonable guy, admitting that there is an argument against just up and leaving. But you don’t see that, even though you see the president trying to meet the war critics halfway.
BDS is a powerful thing.
searp
MikeLucca:
I have a hard time understanding your characterization of Bush as reaching out to the anti-war folks. Perhaps you can provide some meaningful examples. Saying he shares our pain doesn’t really mean much if we’re being asked to cough up more of our heros and more tax money to support his folly.
If we had cut and run a few months ago, the Iraqis would have taken care of Zarqawi. It is a fantasy to think that he could ever have been a political force within the country. After all, 60% of the population (Shia) were his sworn enemies, if you count the Kurds you are probably up to 80%. Now add in the secular Sunnis and religious Sunnis that vehemently disagreed with his crap and you are at well over 90% of the country.
The argument against up and leaving is simple: we have so screwed the place up that it is now a basket case, probably for the long term. Think of Lebanon with a lot of oil.
Next observation: why does it make sense to hand the job of straightening it out to the very idiots who caused the mess in the first place? Why should we have any confidence at all in their capabilities?
You want Iraq fixed, vote every single Republican out of office.
MikeLucca
Searp says:
If we had cut and run a few months ago, the Iraqis would have taken care of Zarqawi.
Why do you say that? He had been there for years and he certainly had supporters. Why would they suddenly turn on him? That seems like wishful thinking, to me.
And as for reaching out to anti-war folks, it seems like the following statement from the president is pretty conciliator:
And I understand how tough it is for the American people to reconcile death on their TV screens with the President saying we’re making incremental progress toward an important goal. But I hope they understand is how important it is we succeed in Iraq, that the country is more dangerous if we don’t—the world is more dangerous if we don’t succeed.
He’s admitting that the war is tough. When have we heard Pelosi, Murtha, Kerry, etc. admit that cutting and running would be tough, in a different way, too? They haven’t.
searp
MikeLucca: Telling us things are “hard to reconcile” is not reaching out, it is simply recognizing a fact. Reaching out implies a dialogue with the potential to revise views. This president is famous for precisely the opposite. He may not think clearly, but once he decides something, it takes an act of God or Karl Rove to change his mind.
I was making two points about Zarqawi. (1) “Having supporters” is not the same as being any kind of national factor. My family loves me, I think that has little impact on US politics. Zarqawi was never going to be an appreciable factor in Iraqi politics, precisely because he didn’t have enough supporters. (2) Given that at least 90% (and growing, since he turned on the Sunni tribes) of the Iraqi public loathed Zarqawi, it seems to me more likely than not that he would have been removed one way or another whether or not we are in Iraq.
RonB
Oh, man. Spoof or simpleton?