Letters to the Editor
-
Rock, I'd like to introduce you to Hard Place
ISTR that Petraeus recently said we HAD TO reduce troop strength because the troops are stretched too thin. Now he is saying that we don't dare give the troops a break. He appears to be in a predicament that has no good solution.
-
Bush said the troops would "return on success."
Does suspending the drawdown mean he's calling the troops failures? Why do you hate the troops, President Bush? Why do you hate America?
And the surge is revealed for what it was all along--a stall tactic to dump responsibility for the Iraq War off onto the next president.
Newsflash: we have to withdraw major combat troops from Iraq sometime. It's long past time to get serious about how we're going to do this with minimum damage and some measure of success.
-
So if I understand this correctly
"The officials said that Mr. Bush and General Petraeus, recognizing public and Congressional wariness about the toll of the war, would publicly hold out the possibly of withdrawing more troops, but only if conditions allowed it," the Times reports.
They're going to hold this carrot in front of the public, even though by their own admission this will never result in conditions where troops can be withdrawn. That was the ostensible point of the "surge", right?
So the "take away" here is that they've decided yet again to simply lie about everything, throw a few hundred more American lives away and mark off the days until November.
-
Patraeus opinion
is largely influenced by domestic political considerations. I think the Bush Administration would like to hand any incoming Democratic administration a broken military. That way they can spend the next 4 years comfortably criticizing the Dems. You can bet they'd like nothing better than putting the Dems in a position where it is necessary to reinstitute the draft.
Should the Republicans win the next election, they can use the noise-n-spin machine to confuse the issue and distract our attention to new and scary menaces.
-
Yesterdays nation debt figure was $9,392,558,361,529.10
Maybe we'll come home a second before America goes into receivership. Perhaps after Bush leaves office he can travel the world on our behalf to ask to world to forgive our debt.
-
...and you, Bush, are a idiot!
Quote in the NYT, GWB sez: "in fact, there is a outcome that will merit the sacrifice that civilian and military alike have made..."
I couldn't resist. I love it when reporters and editors quote him verbatim.
-
Promises Made, Promises Broken
That seems to be the Bush legacy.
Why did I have the feeling that the "surge" was just another marketing ploy by an Administration that has lied its way into infamy.
-
Petraeus is the new Colin Powell ... he was always intended to be the "new Colin Powell" ...
in terms of capturing the public imagination as "the face" ... however, I think anyone paying any attention will recognized, sooner or later, he just faced a "critical juncture" and sold-out ...
Frontline last night made mincemeat of Colin Powell and Condi Rice, exposing both -- again -- as the powerless "empty suits" they really were in the face of the reality of Cheney's whim.
-
ZOMFG THIS IS SURPRISING NEWS!!
Petraeus wants to delay any decisions about further U.S. troop withdrawals
Like, no wai gaiz!! Who could have possibly seen this coming!???!?!!?!
-
Troops Levels As Election Tool
The troop levels will be raised or lowered in order to help McCain as needed in the General Election.
That is why they are being vague now, in order to give themselves whatever wiggle room they need.
-
siebecker's right -- this is all about running out the clock
Long ago (roughly 2005), it became apparent to anyone with access to the real data that the situation in Iraq was beyond a solution our current military could effect.
Since then, the Bush Admin's goal has been to try to keep everything from boiling over until Jan '09. Then, whatever happens afterward (such as the collapse of our military and/or the abandonment of Iraq) will be the fault of the next (hopefully Democratic) admin.
This isn't about trying to win an unwinnable war; it's all about making sure GWB can leave the White House without having (technically) suffered a defeat in Iraq.
The last 3-4 years of this war has been fought exclusively for the sake of George's ego -- ironic, when you consider how often he proclaims that public opinion doesn't matter to him.
(Which of course, is why his palatial half-billion prez library will house a think tank devoted specifically to polishing up Bush's image for all posterity.)
-
Either...
...we are winning so well that we have to stay, or we're losing so badly that we have to stay. Different movies; same lack of ending. I wonder how they resolve these things in countries where the government is actually accountable to the people...
-
@Strangely Enough
Our government is more or less accountable to the people. It was also designed to change direction very slowly -- a reasonable goal when the last big experiment in democracy was Athens’ topsy-turvy failure. Unfortunately, America re-elected G.W. Bush over Kerry, so basically we eff'ed ourselves. A sobering thought for those who would rather see McCain in office than the Democrat they don't like as much as the Democrat they do like.
-
Our government is more or less accountable to the people
Really? Where does the "more" part come in? As an example my happy as a pig-in-shit congressman never even shows up in his district. He won't deign to respond to questions that don't suit him either. Oh, send him an email about those dirty brown people coming across the border or them damn tax-and-spend liberals or why rich people shouldn't have to pay taxes and he'll grace you with a prefabricated email pat on the head. Anything else he ignores.
Given that he has to run every two years you'd think he's be at least a bit more responsive, but the voters who previously lined up to vote for our ex-Congressman (now serving a prison term) don't seem to see the pattern here. And that's in my own district - try communicating with someone not "answerable" to you. They won't even accept the comment, whatever it is.
Sorry, but our system of government has completely excluded the "people" from the process, but that's OK because the "people" don't seem to care anyway.
-
This "pause" is so much more than about the presidential election or Bush
It is convenient to place the entire blame for the Iraq War on Bush. I agree that the "surge" (we need a new description here like “escalation“) was a strategy solely designed to postpone responsibility for the war onto the next administration and Congress (which will likely be Democratic.) Bush is running for nothing; he is not an asset; his ego or vanity is irrelevant to the GOP. Virtually every Republican running for office in November is distancing themselves from this administration. McCain does not want Bush associated in any way with his campaign. At this juncture, the GOP is in self-preservation mode and trying to hang onto as many of its base as they can.
The American people must not let any Republican off the hook for nearly 8 years of failed leadership with regard to foreign policy, the economy, health care, social security, education., taxes, fiscal restraint, the environment, alternative energy, homeland security, Katrina, and lobbyist reform. Of course Bush and his administration share in the blame but virtually every REPUBLICAN Senator and Representative deserves to be crucified for their blind allegiance to the worst President in history and for totally abdicating their Constitutional responsibilities.
Bush is on his best day a lame duck and is no longer relevant. It would be a huge mistake to dismiss the past 8 years of incompetence by placing all the blame on Bush.