| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Bush Tries to Prop Up Losers |
| 2005-06-28 |
| WASHINGTON - President Bush is using the first anniversary of Iraq's sovereignty to try to ease Americans' doubts about the mission and outline again a winning strategy for a violent conflict that has cost the lives of more than 1,740 U.S. troops and has no end in sight. And the end of the war on terror is in sight? In a prime-time address from Fort Bragg, N.C., home of the Army's elite 82nd Airborne Division, Bush was to argue Argue? With who? that there is no need to change course in Iraq despite the upsetting images produced by daily insurgent attacks. The terrorists make the images and you guys distribute them. Perfect. His assessment comes on the heels of a recent Associated Press-Ipsos poll that showed public doubts about the war reaching a high point — with more than half saying that invading Iraq was a mistake. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Tuesday that Bush will stress the need for patience as Iraq moves toward establishing a permanent democratic government. She acknowledged that continuing insurgent violence and the loss of life makes it hard for Americans "to focus on the quiet process that's going on in Iraq of building a political consensus toward a stable and democratic Iraq." "I know it's difficult and the president will acknowledge that," Rice said on NBC's "Today" show. "But the United States has been through difficult times before to come out on the other side with a more stable world." Although attacks frequently take the lives of American troops, Bush has said they will not leave until Iraqi security forces are trained and equipped to keep the peace. He has refused to give a timetable for troop withdrawal, even though some Democrats and a few Republicans in Congress are supporting a resolution that calls for Bush to start bringing them home by Oct. 1, 2006. Whether the job is done or not, like Somilia. "The key to success in Iraq is for the Iraqis to be able and capable of defending their democracy against terrorists," Bush said Monday, then turned to what has been the signature achievement of the conflict that began in Baghdad more than two years ago. "Parallel with the security track is a political track. Obviously, the political track has made progress this year when 8 million people went to the polls and voted." Bush's 2004 Democratic presidential opponent, Sen. John Kerry, urged the president to "tell the truth to the American people." What about your military records, John? "Happy talk about the insurgency being in 'the last throes' leads to frustrated expectations at home," Kerry, D-Mass., said in an op-ed piece that appeared in Tuesday's editions of The New York Times. And your kind of talk encourages the bad guys around the world, John. "The president must also announce immediately that the United States will not have a permanent military presence in Iraq," Kerry wrote. "Erasing suspicions that the occupation is indefinite is critical to eroding support for the insurgency." While encouraging the hard-liners at the same time. The administration appears to be shifting its strategy subtly, focusing more on political solutions to the insurgency. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has confirmed then denied that talks have taken place with some insurgent leaders, and the U.S. commander of the multinational coalition in Iraq has said the conflict will ultimately be resolved in a political process. Tapping into Americans emotions over terrorists attacks in the United States, White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Bush will talk about insurgents killing innocent people and how stopping the violence "will be a major blow to the ambitions of the terrorists." "This is a time of testing," McClellan said. "It is a critical moment in Iraq. The terrorists are seeking to shake our will and weaken our resolve. They know that they cannot win unless we abandon the mission before it is complete." Bush also scheduled two and a half hours to meet with families of soldiers who have died, as he usually does when he visits military bases. Outside the base, opponents of the war planned protests. "There's a groundswell against this war,'" said Bill Dobbs, spokesman United For Peace and Justice, an anti-war coalition of more than 1,300 local and national groups. "You can see it in Congress, you can see it in newspaper editorials and what young people are saying to military recruiters: 'No.'" Bush's speech is part of a new public-relations campaign from the White House to try to calm anxieties about the war. It comes after several conflicting or perplexing messages about the nature and duration of the conflict. Wassamatta? You can't all agree on the same lie? Vice President Dick Cheney made headlines last month with his assertion that the insurgency in Iraq was "in its last throes." He was later contradicted by the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, Gen. John Abizaid, and by Rumsfeld, who said the insurgency could drag on for years. Could be both. Rumsfeld also told an interviewer this month that Iraq is "statistically" no safer today than it was before the ouster of Saddam Hussein, although he maintains progress is being made. Could be both. If it's no safer than before Saddam was booted, then it's GOT to be a lot safer than last year, right? |
| Posted by:Bobby |
| #9 Damn, currency, it's even better than oil. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-06-28 20:05 |
| #8 After reading Mountian Man's comment, I googled "UN iraq euros currency" and found some actual news about Iraq's switch from dollars to Euros in 2000 and a bunch of tinfoil-hat type sites, including ZMag, a far-far-far-left publication. So color me unconvinced. Bobby's comments from the original post confused me -- what is the right thing to do, Bobby? Leave or stay? I couldn't figure out what you would prefer. Not that I care. On the other hand, Cyber Sarge's comments were crystal clear. |
| Posted by: Tibor 2005-06-28 18:57 |
| #7 Why do you think so much of the Iraqi national banks money was in Euros? And yet our troops found stashes of millions in US currency. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-06-28 18:39 |
| #6 he went to war over currency Damn, that explains it. Fear the Federal Reserve. |
| Posted by: Alcoa Good Things Ya 2005-06-28 18:01 |
| #5 Hey Yahoo, thanks for reminding me to tune in tonight. I almost forgot. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-06-28 16:53 |
| #4 Jesus, cant we just kill our enemies like the good old days? Freakin pep talk on Bush's war. The war's timing was the mistake, we should have been concentrating on 2007 in Iran, and saved our political capital for that war, a good war with a nation state to fight, not this non linear Jihadi crap. We could have cleaned up Iraq anytime after that with little or no problem, and we wouldn't have really needed an excuse either, besides, "well, we were already here". Was that an option, maybe not. But here's where things got tricky... Bush didn't go to war over WMD, he went to war over currency and regional dominance which are one in the same. Iraq requested that the UN make its oil for food payments to Iraq totally in Euros beginning in May of 2003, and the Saudis had hinted that they wanted to transfer their reserves into Euros as well, that's why the Europeans were so favorable to Saddam, they wanted to stall long enough to establish the Euro as the new trading currency for the Middle Eastern oil producers in order to squeeze the Americans out for good. This would have created significant inflation and eventually a significant devaluation of the dollar had it happened. No dice though, Bush pushed the timetable of the war up by six months and proceeded to end all currency "transitions". The Iraq war was a statement by the US that we would destroy anyone who even thought about transferring their reserves to Euros. After all, going to war with the dollar means going to war with America. Why do you think so much of the Iraqi national banks money was in Euros? Because the whole deal was about American dominance over middle eastern commodities including currency, and we refused to play by anyone else's rules. The problems that have resulted from this decision include a nuclear armed Iran and a weaker middle east,(revolutions are bad for oil and gas output) but as long as there aren't car bombs in Chicago who cares? At least that seems to be the administration's logic. The terrorist are an excuse to stay in the region, and ten more years of strategic placement against Iran, Syria and the gang seems to be the order of the day. If Bush and Dicki were smarter they would listen to McCain and prepare folks for the long haul as that's reality, but George ain't ever been accused of being too smart...he's just acting as the trigger man for the industries that would have been hit the hardest by the currency transfer. Anyway, what's he care he's a lame duck and Dick ain't ever running. The money's has been made, the deals done, and the next joker will have to deal with the problem, not them. More war to come. MM |
| Posted by: Mountain Man 2005-06-28 16:33 |
| #3 "...The administration appears to be shifting its strategy subtly, focusing more on political solutions to the insurgency..." HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Tell that to any insurgent in the crosshairs! |
| Posted by: Tom 2005-06-28 13:20 |
| #2 "There's a groundswell against this war,'" said Bill Dobbs"You can see it in Congress, you can see it in newspaper editorials and what young people are saying to military recruiters: 'No.'" Good. Then you should have no trouble winning them thar elections in 2006. |
| Posted by: Dreadnought 2005-06-28 13:19 |
| #1 Yes I fully agree we should leave Iraq post haste and also retreat from Japan, Korea, and Germany. In fact we should bring all of our troops home and leave the world to stew in its own mess for a while. This worked very well in the late 18th and early 19th centruries. All those European and Asian powers managed drag the world into two global confilcts. It was only through engagement and containment that we avoided a third War against the Communists. I am sure that we can leave the world to the un and eu and they will keep us secure and ward off any attacks by rouge states of organization. Heck after we return ALL of our troops to U.S. territory I bet all the bad guys in the world lay down their arms and begin a chorus of "Kum-by-ya". End dripping sarcasm. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2005-06-28 13:08 |