All the President’s Speeches
June 29, 2005
A friend of mine says to me today, “I know the mess in Iraq is bad, but shouldn’t we stay and fix it? Wouldn’t it be worse to leave the job undone?”
Under different circumstances, I’d agree with him. We _should_ stay and do it right. But staying and doing it right is not an option because George W. Bush is in charge, and Dick Cheney is in charge, and Donald Rumsfeld is still calling the shots. If we stay, we will continue to do it wrong.
You remember the cliché about what to do when you find yourself in a hole, right? You stop digging. This administration is not going to stop digging.
bq. Bush signaled no shifts in policy, as Democrats such as Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.) and John F. Kerry (Mass.) have called for in recent days. Instead his goal was to reeducate Americans on his view of the stakes involved in Iraq and the consequences to the Middle East and U.S. security if the insurgents prevail. [ ??"Lessons of September 11 Again Take Center Stage":http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/28/AR2005062801530.html??, Washington Post ]
Political commentary here at Thudfactor has been much more restrained than it was before the election or even when I first opened. It’s been difficult finding new things to say about Iraq, domestic policies, or for that matter anything relating to this President. Prior to going into Iraq I argued here that any of the multiple-choice justifications for war with Iraq were sound, this team was not the team to do it. And this was certainly not the time.
Let me make this perfectly clear: I was not opposed to war in Iraq because I am a Democrat or because it was Bush’s idea. I certainly did not oppose the war in Iraq because I sympathize with terrorists — I don’t — nor because I was a racist who felt Iraqis did not deserve to gorge themselves on the CheezIts of Liberty.
I was opposed to the Iraq war because I thought it was a distraction from the real war. And because I thought this team — with their demonstrated unwillingness to listen to advice or expert opinion — would screw it up. And they screwed it up.
And you know what? They screwed it up even worse than I would have thought possible. When their strategies failed, they didn’t make new ones. If they had said “whoops!” and turned back to the experts they laughed at previously, maybe they could have fixed it. Maybe they could _even have proved the neo-Conservative vision right_. They could have even left off the saying “whoops” bit out — quietly changed course, not admited error, but started paying closer attention.
But _this administration can not be told_. Anything. And Bush proved that last night. His message: stay the course. Do not falter. In other words, keep digging.
Yes, we should stay and get the job done. But this President _can’t_ get the job done because he does not know enough to stop digging.
Posted in Politics
content rss
June 29th, 2005 at 5:49 pm
OK If the Administration could be told, what should they be told? They have screwed it up so bad that its worth letting the remainder of Saddams men, the Terrorist who are infiltrating there plus the Syrians who keep replenishing the numbers, letting these guys win. Everyone of the 7000 dying so we can just forget it because Bush is a screw up right? OK, what is the answer? What should he be doing? Getting international help? Don’t tell me he and the whole administraton haven’t been utilizing all they have to try and make allies. It wouldn’t be so hard if it weren’t for that damn “Oil for money” business our war messed up.
I’d just like to hear a logical alternative to what we could to to win this war instead of ignorant metaphores. I wasn’t for this war either but Im not stuck in “no WMD” world. I just can’t believe someone would admit to saying our military should wuss out. I guess its another way to label the president with a new term or two like “loser” and “failure” Right? Maybe we can get on with finding something here to impeach him for. Then we’ll be even.
June 29th, 2005 at 6:19 pm
If we had someone who had an iota, even just a smidge, of a sense of responsibility for people’s lives to balance out that over-developed sense of entitlement Bush has gained from his scripted political events, then certainly I think we should stay and finish. But this man can only make things worse. Because he refuses to change tactics when it’s clear those tactics are not working.
How many more American soldiers do you think should die because the President is too good to admit he’s wrong about something? How many more American civilian lives do you think should be put at risk because this President is busy playing personal power games instead of protecting our ports and our aircraft?
This so-called war on terror has not made us any safer. It has put us in more danger. And I would just like him to please. just. stop. Before the situation gets any worse.
But don’t worry, Carla. He won’t stop. He’ll keep doing what he’s been doing. Maybe you are right and if he just keeps on keeping on things will eventually “turn the corner” and what we are seeing are the “last throes.” And maybe monkeys will fly out of my ass.
July 4th, 2005 at 7:57 pm
Fantastic post. If you ever want to do some guest blogging on my site let me know.
Carla, this isn’t about wimping out.
An insurgency is a political problem, not a military problem.
You want answers instead of “ignorant metaphors” then here goes.
The original plan was for upwards of 600 000 troops for the invasion and more for the occupation. It also called for the retention of the Iraqi army. People already trained who speak the language. You’d also need at least that to guard the borders.
The plan from the war college also said it was important to keep order and prevent looting and chaos.
All they protected were the oil ministries and it didn’t take the Iraqi people long to figure out that this occupation wasn’t about making their lives better.
Especially considering all the jobs were going to American contractors.
There was also a version of “The Marshal Plan” that mandated the Iraqi people be put to work rebuilding their country to prevent an insurgency.
Iraq was a relatively modern country before the war. People want to portray it as a desert full of illiterate people, it’s not.
They have universities; they have engineers to build bridges and buildings. They have people that can work construction, work in power plants, sewage plants and water treatment plants. They have modern highways and people that can drive trucks.
All this advice was disregarded and has come back to haunt.
They gave the US occupiers a year to make things better before the insurgency took off.
Ok enough history, you want answers.
Immediately stop the construction of the 14 permanent military bases.
Announce the date of withdrawal of all US troops and personnel to show that you have no intention of occupying their country.
The country will fall into a civil war when the US withdraws if it hasn’t already started. The window of opportunity to win the hearts and minds has closed. This is Vietnam of the mid-East.
No one on either side is questioning the troops but it seems that Liberals are the only ones that don’t want them to die for nothing.
To me supporting the troops involves keeping them alive, I’m weird like that.
At some point a radical Islamic government similar to Iran’s will take power and the 15 million Iraqi’s aged 18 and younger will be taught to hate Americans.
That’s the reality. The only question is how many US soldiers are you willing to sacrifice to delay the inevitable?
They were never given the resources to complete their mission. That’s not their fault; it’s the fault of the administration.
July 5th, 2005 at 12:25 pm
First of all, John,
What do you mean about “maybe IM right about turning the corner…” I never said that. I said alternative answers, Im not a Bush parrot.Silent Bob (love your movies lol) You said it was a political problem and not a military problem. Well, It has definitely become a political problem, but I dare you to go to Iraq and tell some soldiers that it isn’t a military problem.
I also think that the execution of the war is changing and that we aren’t stuck back in the beginning when the statue first fell. I think it was Bremmer and Rumsfield that are the ones to blame for the stupidity in how the war has been executed. Of course we don’t know anything for sure. For instance, who knows what kind of Government Iraq will have in the future? Also, this modern water, sewage and electrical operation in Iraq that supposedly we destroyed, who to believe? This modern country we drove into before the war on the way to Bagdad was poverty stricken. We had embedded reporting. Lastly Americans are not the only ones that got contracts for jobs obviously since contractors have gotten kidnapped several times from other countries. Each side has there own truth. I’m waiting for the real one. Not the Micheal Moore version. See,I know he’s full of shit, I grew up in Detroit, very close where he spiced uh, cut, filmed Roger and me. There was film in there ten yrs old.
Which brings me to my one last comment. You talk about worried about troops dying and worried about them being put out there unnecessarily. Between Your extreem left and the extreem right war of words, and the name calling, bringing up stuff like Nazi, liar, and them with their “unpatriotic” and it gets even worse, this gets broadcasted all over the mid-east. So yeah, there are a lot in the mid-east that hate Bush, but he’ll be gone in three and a half years, but the world is losing all respect America and we are becoming the laughing stock of the world. because of this silly war at home.
July 5th, 2005 at 12:49 pm
I’m still not sure what the value of “alternative answers� is, especially considering the people who rejected the PREVIOUS alternative answers ( outlined by Silent Bob above and in various other places ) are still in charge, our President has publicly said they are doing a fantastic job, and his last speech and current refrain emphasizes the need to keep on keepin’ on at whatever it is we’re doing. Alternative answers just get ignored.
Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings has as feasible a suggestion as one could hope at http://tinyurl.com/cks6a . But I still think it fails at the same level any other alternative answer will fail, which is Bush & Co. are incompetent. Incidentally, I don’t think that incompetence is based in stupidity but breathtaking arrogance.
Also incidentally, we’ve been called Nazis and Communists and worse by the folks on the right. And they are the ones who are pro-torture, which—no matter what anyone says—is a position I associate rather more strongly with Nazis and Communists and two-bit dictatorships like Cuba and North Korea than I do the United States.
You are right that this is a “silly war at home,� but unfortunately it’s what we’ve got. If you think there’s a better solution, then let’s hear it. And i assure you that if your solution is anything different than “the Democrats better line up behind the President right now� you will be called a goddamn hippy-freak extreme liberal. Hey, maybe someone will put Michael Moore’s words in your mouth, too.
July 5th, 2005 at 5:55 pm
Well,first of all, I don’t like things sent to my e-mail box. But at any rate, I thought about what you said about alternative plans. I don’t have another answer but I know we can’t just leave it as it is. The only suggestion I have is that the U.S. our allies and N.A.T.O. (who I think is already doing this) should have training sites set up outside the country in friendly zones to train the Iraqi military. Then start sending our military home as they complete training. Send the Iraqi army back in as they are ready to completely defend the country. They have their government started, then they will have their army. There will be no need for us. Their oil export and other things they manufactor can help pay their people to do the many construction projects.
Thats, all I can think of to keep more of our men from dying yet finishing the job. BTW When I mentioned Micheal Moore, I wasn’t trying to accuse you of being like him. I was strickly saying, I wasn’t going to cut and paste a scenerio together like him. Good day.
July 6th, 2005 at 5:12 pm
Hi Carla, I won’t send this to your email because I don’t want to annoy you but I do hope you read this.
First of all I’m not the real Silent Bob (insert scene from Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back where Aflec talks about “fictional characters”. Funny scene and not meant to be an insult in any way but rather a funny comment.)
Ok, real first thing, I owe you an apology. You’re not a “sheeple”. I don’t take back anything I said but I did interpret your original comment incorrectly. I mistook your frustration at the lack of an exit strategy for typical right-wing blame the democrats for our mess rhetoric.
You weren’t doing that, I apologize. We don’t have to agree on everything but we should treat each other with respect and listen to both sides.
Insurgency or freedom fighting, depending on your point of view.
When Americans did it we gained independence.
When the resistance were doing it in occupied France they were heroes. And yes there were foreign fighters helping and supplying them.
So point-by-point, military problem vs. political problem.
If you need army A to defeat army B then it’s a military problem.
If you need to clear a building or city it’s a military problem.
Once the opposition’s military is defeated then it becomes a political problem.
There is no army to defeat. There are individuals who oppose the occupation volunteering to blow themselves up.
The urban Iraqi insurgency has a sanctuary in the Iraqi population. Our forces are occupiers, they now know this.
The average Joe Iraqi isn’t on our side. Even if they don’t participate in the insurgency they provide aid and comfort.
Unless the military has machines to read the mind of each individual Iraqi and determine his or her intent there is no way to defeat the insurgency short of a political resolution.
Especially when Rumsfeld says they could stay for 12 more years.
Put it in perspective. If Australia invaded the US for regime change and was successful I would welcome them like the Iraqi’s welcomed US forces initially.
But if Australia said they weren’t going to let us write our own constitution or run our own elections in a short period of time I would start worrying.
And if during this time they ignored restoration of basic essential services like sewage, water and electricity in favor of removing the natural gas in Texas I would start questioning their motives.
And finally if a few years pass and they show no intention of leaving but instead reinforce their position by building permanent military bases I’d be signing up for the insurgency.
Seeing soldiers on every street corner a few years AFTER regime change would only reinforce my position.
The military can conduct operations and damage individuals or groups with bad intentions but it’s much like the drug war. You can make a few busts, catch a few bad guys but you will never stop it.
It’s only getting worse.
Many dismissed the relationship between the justification for war and the cause of the insurgency but they are linked.
What is the official justification for war this week?
Is it regime change? Well that happened a long time ago. Remember the “mission accomplished” poster a few years ago? Hence insurgency.
Is it because of WMD’s that every other country in that region OTHER than Iraq had? The population rises up to fight the occupiers.
Is it for liberation of the Iraqi people?
You remember all those mass graves? Mass graves filled with people the US were training and funding to form an insurgency to overthrow Saddam only to be left behind by Bush Sr.?
Sure, the neo-cons just love poor brown people and will spend 400+Billion and the blood of American soldiers to help them.
That’s believable. I’m sure the pre-invasion Iraqi population were worse off than every other country in the region or in Africa.
Does the justification involve terrorism? There were more known terrorists in Buffalo at the time of the invasion so let’s pick something else.
So what is this week’s official justification for war?
Is there a single Iraqi that doesn’t know someone who’s died or been injured as a result of this war?
As much as we talk about it we’ll never know the horror these people have gone through. The chance to win hearts and minds faded long before 10 year olds were sodomized in Abu Ghraib.
I’ll concede Saddam was an evil guy. That puts him on a list with 50+ other dictators.
If you look at a map circle the countries that had the following.
Military dictator,
WMD’s (usually gas agents),
Kills his own people,
Hates America,
Has at one point met with and/or supported terrorists logistically or financially.
How many countries did you circle? Maybe 30?
Iran, Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia all meet these criteria.
Iraq didn’t.
Lets stop pretending the Iraqi people are stupid. That little area between the Tigris and Euphrates has been the target of foreign invading forces for over 1000 years.
Unlike Americans these people have a sense of history.