VIDEO FLASHBACK: Bush Says Sending More Troops To Iraq Would ‘Undermine Our Strategy’
VIDEO FLASHBACK: Bush Says Sending More Troops To Iraq Would ‘Undermine Our Strategy’
On Wednesday night, President Bush is expected to announce plans to escalate the war in Iraq by sending more U.S. troops. On June 28, 2005 — just 18 months ago — Bush said that sending more troops to Iraq would “undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead” and “suggest that we intend to stay forever.” Watch it:
Bush prefaced his comments by saying that, “If our commanders on the ground say we need more troops, I will send them.” Last month, Gen. Abizaid revealed that he asked all the commanders on the ground and none of them wanted more troops. Shortly thereafter, Abizaid was replaced.
Transcript:
Some Americans ask me, if completing the mission is so important, why don’t you send more troops? If our commanders on the ground say we need more troops, I will send them. But our commanders tell me they have the number of troops they need to do their job. Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever, when we are, in fact, working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave. As we determine the right force level, our troops can know that I will continue to be guided by the advice that matters: the sober judgment of our military leaders.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
86 Responses to “VIDEO FLASHBACK: Bush Says Sending More Troops To Iraq Would ‘Undermine Our Strategy’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Just more lies for the history books.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:00 amjust add it to the list… Im not even shocked by the gall of these people any more… sad
January 8th, 2007 at 10:04 amWill these comments ever be seen by the public on MSM? Yeah, thought not.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:04 amGWB: Blah, blah, blah, mission, blah, blah, blah, troops, blah, blah, accomplished, blah, blah……
Who does those backdrops anyway? They’re getting beyond ridiculous.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:07 amJust read this morning that the 2nd in command also doesn’t want more troops, thinks it’s a mistake. Ooops, there goes another general…
Pretty soon they’re gonna have corporals running the show. Might not be such a bad idea.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:10 am“our troops can know that I will continue to be guided by the advice that matters: the sober judgment of our military leaders.”
As opposed to the dry drunk advice of the insane chymp.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:12 amDumbya Dunce The Decider!
January 8th, 2007 at 10:12 amBush dwarfs Reagan in his Flip-Floppiness.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:12 amHe was against troop increases before he was for it.
Even Barney is getting sick of this scumbag and I heard he is starting to shit in Dubya’s slippers.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:13 amBut that was way back when surging troops was the “Kerry Plan”. A plan to be ridiculed by the right wing Washington punditry.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:21 amThis is the “Bush Plan”, which means it’s a great plan, especially considering the timing.
Back when the stupid Kerry wanted to escalate the troops, it was way to early to do so.
But now that everything in Iraq is completely F’d up, it’s the right time to do it.
The “Surge”. Yup. GDumbya was against it before he was for it.
Look at this moron, for chrissakes –> http://thumbsnap.com/v/6YvXAPG0.jpg
This is a picture of GDumbya as he really is. Please spread this link by posting everywhere with your own messages. It is important to keep in mind that “the leader of the free world” is a complete and total imbecile.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:22 amThat was then this is now. Things change according to the political winds. Like how Bush always blows wind.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:23 amA youtube link would be helpful.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:23 amYesterday, that paragon of leadership in the Senate, Joe Biden, said that there wasn’t anything they could do to stop Bush’s escalation. What he should have said is that the Constitution MANDATES congress oversight of all appropriations and that if Bush’s escalation wasn’t approved by Congress then impeachment might be the only solution available. But instead he signaled to the president that he could ignore both the will of the people as well as a toothless congress. Great guy. Does he really think anyone will vote for him for president?
January 8th, 2007 at 10:24 amI really, really want to hear how the chymp tries to spin this shitter.
My fellow Amerikans, fear, fight them there so we don’t have to fight them here, win, victory, Mission Accomplished, evil, good, blowing up children, good news, rebuilding, billions of dollars, sacrifice more troops to my bloated ego, blah, blah.
I think that about covers it.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:26 amWhy is Congress so afraid to castrate this animal?
January 8th, 2007 at 10:28 amhe was against it before he was for it.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:30 amI really, really want to hear how the chymp tries to spin this shitter.
He won’t have to. The media will spin it for him.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:36 amDoes this mean Bush is a flip-flopper?? Where oh where are the Swift Boat Veterans for Lies when we need them?
January 8th, 2007 at 10:41 amno one will ever dare confron The King about it, & if they do, he’ll squint & say “i dont play GOTCHA”
January 8th, 2007 at 10:54 amRUCerious, I’m getting a reading on both my lyingbastard-o-meter and my flipflop-o-meter on this one - how about you?
January 8th, 2007 at 10:54 amFOX network should have shown this to Senator Mitch McCollum yestreday,to see how his reaction would be. Mccollum said yesterday he is supporting the president on the Surge/escalation issue….
January 8th, 2007 at 10:54 amThis is a story that the MSM needs to carry and to hit hard. Are there any groups or organizations pressuring the MSM to report these lies and inconsistencies. Of course, we can all individually contact news outlets - and I will - but I think organized and sustained pressure might be more effective. How much longer will this administration not be called to account? And, please note this item, carried by Raw Story, that all charges against Saddam Hussein are now dropped.
http://www.rawstory.com/ showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fapnews.myway.com%2Farticle%2F20070108%2FD8MH0V480.html
What is going on? What is being covered up and why?
January 8th, 2007 at 10:57 amGeorge Bush eh, well since he’s not the elected leader of my nation i’ll leave it too you guys too put crap on him, but ultimately I hate too admit it but once your stuck in a situation like ,the current civil “conflict” in Iraq that one must reasonablly assume was preceded by the unsanctioned invasion by “the coalition of the willing”, there is a slight bit of moral responsability that the invading nation must take ,I believe and I think i’m right that the greater victims of this entire debacle are not Americas good name nor even the 3000 dead American service-men and women, but the even greater numbers of Iraqi civilians whom are dieing in the streets of there own cities and towns in there “own country”. Too simply pull out now would be far more damaging too America’s foreign credibility than anything else. But there is still hope that Iraq could indeed become a great democracy in the heartland of the middle east!!! now personally I don’t know much but I do know what a great kick in the teeth it would be too the so called religious ‘leaders’ who enjoy both a class and standard of living far greater than the average arab or kurd, whilst continually venting a stream of unsubstantiated claims of abuse and how evil the western world is. Like hows that for generalising. And if any one should be brought low out of this debacle it should be these stagnant evil minded tyranies. And as for people always talking about the 11th of september, the world very well should!!! It was a world changing event , a singular attack of such evil malice unleashed upon people from all walks of life. To get ‘our’ attention ,well I say let them know they have our attention, let them realise that the people they claim too represent don’t like them. And won’t be so easily duped into believing that them having there own freedoms of choice is “evil”. Let Iraq and its people rise up out of the ashes rebuilt , renewed, revamped and illuminated into the actions of their “friendly” neigbours when they were in turmoil, then it will be far harder for these enlightened individuals too dupe there own followers into the worthiness of their cause.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:57 amDamn i’m banging on with some crap here ,ultimately I hope that some thing good can be salvaged from this mess, and my best wishes go too the working and middle classes of Iraq for the long job ahead of them, but I have faith that they will be the deciding factor in the fate of their own nation, and that they shall over come all the evils been perpetuated upon their own soil.
George W. Bush will say anything to support his misguided war efforts and he will spare no expenses in blood and treasure to try to ensure his legacy.
What a pud.
-GSD
January 8th, 2007 at 11:02 amThe Deciderer sounds….well, indecisive. What a maroon.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:06 amNice post, #25,
but maybe you should change your name a little bit so that you are not confused with this wise-cracking trueblue!
:)
Welcome to the posts.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:08 amahahah yah will do lol
January 8th, 2007 at 11:10 amComment by TrueBlue — January 8, 2007 @ 10:57 am
I prefer the original ‘trueblue’.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:18 amTrueBlue sez:
More than a slight bit, yes.
Again, you are correct.
To do anything but pull out now would be far more damaging to America’s foreign credibility than anything else.
Explain your reasoning behind that assumption.
Granted, it may be satisifying, but how is it possible?
Again, satisfaction is not a strategy.
And this is related to Iraq how?
Agreed, although you still haven’t made a connection between 9/11 and Iraq (hint: our administration hasn’t either, despite its best efforts, so don’t strain yourself).
I’m confused….which leaders are you talking about here? This statement sounds like it comes right off a 9/11 Truth website.
Huh?
AGREED.
As do I…although we seem to differ on how this ‘good’ can be accomplished.
Amen.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:20 amI prefer the original ‘trueblue’.
Comment by Quality controll
What?
You like me?
You really, really, like me?
**blush**
January 8th, 2007 at 11:31 amhahaha okay I can see some one strained themselve’s reading that saga I typed, I did call the whole Iraq thing a debacle as only the biggest fool would think that Iraq had anything too do with the 11th of september. So please spare me putting your own crap in my mouth. I already have enough coming out of it without people trying too put more in there. And if you think just hopping out is going too leave a sweet taste in everyones mouth what planet are you living on ?But hey that’s cool I guess its fine too have a responsibile attitude of invading a nation ripping its entire military and police structure apart, and then desert when the entire nation collapses into chaos.Hey theres a idea you could even slap a trade embargo on their arses as they try too rebuild!
January 8th, 2007 at 11:34 amhahahahahah! Does he realize what a fool he looks like when the video clips come back to haunt him? How many faux pas is this now? Or more importantly, is anyone keeping track of the outright lies??
January 8th, 2007 at 11:44 amTo paraphrase Tony Snow, Bush needs to wait to hear what his plan is before he speaks out against it.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:44 amYou really, really, like me?
**blush**
Comment by trueblue — January 8, 2007 @ 11:31 am
Sure I do.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:46 amI prefer the original ‘trueblue’.
Comment by Quality controll
Of course. ;)
To do anything but pull out now would be far more damaging to America’s foreign credibility than anything else.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey
And this is based on what? Your opinion, nothing more. Let me tell you this from a guy who doesnt live in the US. US worldwide reputation cant get worse. You have to pull off now, no matter what. Your boys will be safe from harm and iraqis will find a way, as they always do. They have centuries having a civilization in contrast with us. NOw, US have to take responsibility and that means US government should pay all damages they have done, but we all know thats wishful thinking.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:48 amTrueBlue2 sez:
Only as much as you strained yourself typing it, Chachi.
I agree 100%. So why did you bring it up?
Hey, you’re the one who brought up 9/11 in the context of a discussion about Iraq…not me. If it wasn’t your intent to attempt a link between the two, perhaps you should have been clearer.
Three things:
1. Did your shrink ever tell you you were ‘orally fixated’?
2. I don’t believe I said it would leave a ’sweet taste in everyone’s mouth’, thanks. I direct you to your own request regarding the oral insertion of fecal matter.
3. What’s your suggestion, then? Just how much longer do you insist that we continue our illegal and immoral occupation of this country, continuing to destabilize the region while serving as a lightning rod for all the hostility in the area?
How much longer? Two Freidmans? Three?
Barring time travel back to 2002 and actually LISTENING to those of us who shouted ourselves hoarse enumerating all the reasons the invasion was a bad idea, the next most responsible thing we can do is get the HELL OUT as soon as possible to end our continuing destabilizing influence on the country. However, the Decider has quite different plans for Iraq…plans that don’t include stability, so don’t expect us to leave any time soon, even if the Dems grow a collective pair and cut the purse strings.
Hey…here’s an idea…in the future, when you attempt to throw straw man attacks my way, at least make them good.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:49 amComment by TrueBlue2 — January 8, 2007 @ 11:34 am
To avoid confusion,try this moniker:
TrollBlue2
January 8th, 2007 at 11:50 amI couldn’t agree more wholeheartedly that we’ve torn this country apart and for all of the most illegitimate of reasons and now feel a responsibility for our actions; however, if we’re talking about responsibility, why not spread it around to ALL of the places it realistically belongs then? How about New Orleans right here in our own country for openers, eh??
I’m of the equally realistic opinion that, if something happened for all of the wrong reasons, simply staying the course and continuing the genocide for all the wrong reasons simply makes it inherently more disastrous and exponentially.
Two wrongs never made a right and never will. It’s not cutting and running….it’s cutting our losses at this point and admitting that we were wrong in what we did and that we will not continue this disastrous escapade any longer.
THAT is the only civilized, rational thing to do now. If we continue to spend more lives and money in a demented direction of wrongdoing, we will only reap what we sow - that’s a natural law and a “given”. The only truly “moral” solution is to admit our wrongdoing and leave before we are responsible and have the blood of even more Iraqis and american casualties on our hands (and our collective national karma in the world view) and do so right now.
Nothing can bring back the lives of those already lost but we can save the lives of those which will, inevitably, be lost if we continue this diabolical charade. Nothing can reverse the damage which has already been done to this country but we can prevent a further escalation of the killing there and the increased damage which will occur. That “time” is right NOW.
When the majority of americans speak (now at 77%) against further escalation, this administration needs to listen or it will find itself impeached by the same people who elected them and who have spoken through the election process.
The handwriting is on the wall….if Bushco fails to heed the warning of the american people, the american people will find it their democratic duty to impeach him. It’s all up to him.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:51 amyep….you nailed TruBlue ….er…Troll Blue as blue all trolls are today with their tail between the legs after the lashing they received at the polls…hahahah! It’s tough to be a rethug these days, isn’t it? Nothing but pure drivel to spin and detritus to spew! Get a life, Trolls!
January 8th, 2007 at 11:52 amJust wondering - when Buscho reviews recommended strategies in search of the “right” one, are they looking for what’s best for the Iraqi people, the American people, or which helps the Republican chances in ‘08?
January 8th, 2007 at 11:53 amBush is only trying to keep up the “tell them what they want to hear” doctrine. It’s not an easy one to follow. Also, consider Plato, Greek philosopher, who stated that great politicians don’t just give the public what it wants. Great statesmen frequently see the need to go against the wants of the public in order to really serve the “public” interest. Furthermore, Plato stated that it would be foolish for any ruler should he ask the public approval for its reign, as happens in democracy. If a government is worthy of anything, it does not bother to ask the people if they wants to be ruled by them. It should be the people themselves who ask the best politicians to please govern them. People with money should be knocking on the doors of people with insight and not the other way around.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:56 amNot only is Bush “the Great Destroyer” and the “Master of Incompetence”, he is also “the Master of Flip-Flop”. Not only does he not read newspapers, he doesn’t review his past speeches.
January 8th, 2007 at 12:01 pmI think it would be a good idea, after Bush has announced his plan to escalate, if Pelosi and Reid ask him publicly to reveal who the advisers were that recommended it. Since, we know that the Joint Chiefs, Abizaid, Casey, and the divisional commanders were all against it, who was for it and why did their recommendations carry more weight than the generals?
Not that I think he’ll answer the question, but it needs to be out there followed by his conspicuous refusal to answer it. “I can’t tell ya. It’s a secret. If I told ya, I’d have to kill ya. Heh-heh. Heh-heh. Heh.”
January 8th, 2007 at 12:22 pm#
Just wondering - when Buscho reviews recommended strategies in search of the “right†one, are they looking for what’s best for the Iraqi people, the American people, or which helps the Republican chances in ‘08?
Comment by Mikey — January 8, 2007 @ 11:53 am
None of the above. GW is doing whatever he can to avoid admitting that he made a HUGE mistake. It’s called trying to save his “legacy.” He’s also delaying things for the next President to have to deal with it in Jan. of 2009. We continue to be there and have it escalated for one reason…for Bush and his administration to save face. Same B.S. happened during the Vietnam war, and it resulted in 58,000 American deaths, double or triple that in life-long disabilities, both physical and mental. And, needless to say, uncounted deaths of Vietnamese civilians. It’s time to stop this NOW and it’s time to IMPEACH!
January 8th, 2007 at 12:23 pmThe million dollar question is, will the “Liberal Media” play this for the public to see???
January 8th, 2007 at 12:30 pmill the “Liberal Media†play this for the public to see???
Comment by marcus robinson — January 8, 2007 @ 12:30 pm
I am sure The Daily Show will be all over it. Since they are the only true “liberal media”. I am not sure what Colbert will do, if he has to keep up the B.O. act anymore his head might explode.
January 8th, 2007 at 1:03 pmThe million dollar question is, will the “Liberal Media†play this for the public to see???
Comment by marcus robinson
I’m thinking only Olbermann will run it.
January 8th, 2007 at 1:04 pmThis isn’t about Iraq.
January 8th, 2007 at 1:28 pmIt’s about getting the Dems into a vote against the ‘Surge’.
Then they can claim weak on terror, not supporting the troops and National Security are all things Dems don’t support / understand.
It’s all about the ‘08 election, folks.
One has to wonder what the measurements for success will be for the chymps “goals” in Iraq?
January 8th, 2007 at 1:37 pm20 -1 there aren’t any.
Zimzone sez:
Although I don’t know if it’s all about the ‘08 election, posturing for the benefit of the election down the road is a huge factor here.
If Dems stop this idiocy, Repubs can claim Dems are weak on terror (whatever the hell that means), and that if the Dems had only allowed those x number of troops, we would have achieved our goal of ‘liberating’ Iraq. Never mind that it’s plainly impossible….these sleazeballs make up their own reality as they go.
If, however, the Dems acquiesce, Repubs can claim ‘hey, the Dems were for it before they were against it’ in a replay of all the crap that went down after 9/11.
It’s a beautiful Catch-22. Given the elegance of this plan, it’s not at all surprising that Bush is doing the absolute worst thing for the U.S., Iraq, and the world at large. If the only goal was posturing for the ‘08 elections, that would be enough reason. Of course, there are many more reasons for the U.S. to remain firmly mired in Iraq, but that’s a topic for another discussion.
January 8th, 2007 at 1:42 pmNew marketing catch-phrases:
1. “Stay The Course Plus!”
January 8th, 2007 at 2:08 pm2. “Stay The Course Redux”
3. “Super-Sized ‘Stay The Course’ “
Bushiva is a scientific marvel…
…ticks usually fall off their prey when gorged with blood…
…this sombi*ch has a helluv’an (sic) apetite…
Greedy bastich!
January 8th, 2007 at 2:31 pm“Would you care to donate a dollar to the Save the Course fund, you get your name on the wall”
January 8th, 2007 at 3:03 pm[…] Think Progress » VIDEO FLASHBACK: Bush Says Sending More Troops To Iraq Would ‘Undermine Our Strategy’ Some Americans ask me, if completing the mission is so important, why don’t you send more troops? If our commanders on the ground say we need more troops, I will send them. But our commanders tell me they have the number of troops they need to do their job. Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever, when we are, in fact, working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave. As we determine the right force level, our troops can know that I will continue to be guided by the advice that matters: the sober judgment of our military leaders. […]
January 8th, 2007 at 3:09 pmThat was then, this is now, according to Bush. He has flip-flopped so often he must be exhausted. Maybe he should take some time off - like two years.
January 8th, 2007 at 3:29 pm#57 Marie -
January 8th, 2007 at 3:54 pmAnd I know a lovely European vacation spot.
Nestled in a quaint little country call the Netherlands, a quiet spot in the South Holland district. Called Den Haag, or as we know it, The Hague.
[…] Think Progress has the video and the words of the President from June of 2005. Back then, Bush was going to listen to the military commanders. Back then, sending more troops would send the wrong signal. Back then, sending more troops would “undermine our strategy”: […]
January 8th, 2007 at 7:35 pmYour writers sound completely uneducated….not in their comments, but in the simple use of the English language.
If they had a contest with GW, they might lose….good gosh, where did they go to school??? ….Maybe the political ideas are more important, but the way they express them is so bad, I can’t believe anyone would take any credence in anyhing they write. Some people think that it’s cool to speak and write flagrantly and with terrible spelling…but it loses it’s value to many readers. Not cool….
January 8th, 2007 at 8:59 pm[…] The change in tactics Earling refers to here involves having American soldiers take a more hands-on approach to security in Baghdad. This is an approach that President Bush said in June 2005 would undermine our strategy. The typical talking point around that time was that we didn’t want the Iraqis to be reliant on American forces, and so they’d stand up as we stood down. Now, all that’s changed. What’s going to be different about the inevitable transition back to the Iraqi forces once the escalation is over? I have no idea. Some people seem to believe that putting more troops on the streets of Baghdad will magically achieve stability in a country where the populace overwhelmingly wants us to leave. I guess some people also believe that pro wrestling isn’t scripted. […]
January 8th, 2007 at 11:22 pmTrueblue-”George Bush eh, well since he’s not the elected leader of my nation i’ll leave it too you guys too put crap on him”
Yeah, my country (USA) didn’t elect him either… at least not the first time.
January 9th, 2007 at 2:44 amVIDEO FLASHBACK: Bush Says Sending More Troops To Iraq Would ‘Undermine Our Strategy’…
On Wednesday night, President Bush is expected to announce plans to escalate the war in Iraq by sending more U.S. troops. On June 28, 2005 — just 18 months ago — Bush said that sending more troops to Iraq would “undermine our strategy of encourag…
January 9th, 2007 at 3:02 amI am not necessarily a Bush fan, but every comment here is just Bush bashing. It is not a mistake to admit that a previous strategy did not work, and that a change is necessary. Is it the right change? I am not a military expert and cannot comment. However, the fact that one changes tactics is not in and of itself an incorrect approach.
January 9th, 2007 at 8:57 amsooooo:
Where are the weapons of mass destruction that Bush went to war on?
The war is better soap opera than the TV show Dallas.
More twist & turns and the reasons keep changing.
Tooooo bad we have a Democratic Congress, they may actual cancel this soap opera.
No wonder Chavez is winning the popularity contest.
Any bets takers on Chapter II - the new war with Iran
January 9th, 2007 at 9:45 amThe president is allowed to change the meaning of “troops” with a simple signing statement, now referring to the troops as “the bunny rabbits” instead. WE NEED MORE BUNNY RABBITS DAMNIT!!!!
January 9th, 2007 at 12:01 pm[…] VIDEO FLASHBACK: Bush Says Sending More Troops To Iraq Would ‘Undermine Our Strategy’ hmm… (tags: politics video bush iraq bullshit liar) […]
January 9th, 2007 at 12:17 pmBUSH et al, congress and all of Washington are so full of shit lies and propaganda that I have written the U.S. off as a waste of time even thinking about anymore.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:30 pmIt is more absurd every day the idiocy that comes out of the corrupt death machine that america is,I only hope my friends leave before KARMA comes to clean up the whole ugly mess,because politicians are not well renowned for their cleanliness or anything actually decent at all so you’d better not depend on them.
Good luck,I’d leave the outhouse it is full of shit.
The U.K. had a headline in one of thier papers: U.S. Orders The Dead To Reenlist. Maybe Bush’s plan is to send zombies over to Iraq and have them eat the terrorist insurgents. That is about his speed of comprehension. Another plan of attack could be to gas them to death with some of his farts. I hear that he is really good about that sort of thing, too. In conclusion and with all idiocy aside, the man-child is a moron and incapable of orchestrating a simple sentence or complete thought. I pledge allegiance to impeachment proceedings.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:52 pmI blame the morons that voted for him. “How can 59,017,382 people be so DUMB?” We’re the USA…It’s easy.
January 9th, 2007 at 1:41 pmi hope yoos peoples int making sillies of me. i didntttt get to whitehouse becoz im unclevered. yoo seez yooz ar misunderstandings of me and frends of mee contribute lots to reconstructioning eyeraq. without the help of the haliburtons and carlye group, eyeraq woulds stil be maybe richers, buut people would be less securitied and my friend Dick Cheyney mights have sold saddam even more of the chemical that kills kurds. we just ester-undermated the level of resistisance to our plans to steel the eye-raqi oils. but these stoopid eyeraqi dont need none of there own oils anyways, since they now buy there oils from haliburton makes us all happy.
January 9th, 2007 at 1:51 pmi look forward to imposing martial law so that i can stays supreme leader at the next presidentshishal erection. at least i can relys on my voting machines made by my frends at diebold to votes for me whichever buttons my subjects press.
King George W
Hail, to dumb ass.
January 9th, 2007 at 2:31 pmYou guys are hilarious! Excellent comments!
January 9th, 2007 at 3:16 pmthe truth is here!!
http://www.ralphige.com
http://www.raphige.com
http://www.raphige.com
http://www.ralphige.com
you wont beilieve your ears!!!!
January 9th, 2007 at 4:00 pmIf president Bush recommends a surge are we to assume that he wishes to undermine Iraqi leadership and signal that we intend to stay forever?
January 9th, 2007 at 4:51 pmJoe Biden is right. Chimpster is just trying to buy time till he leaves office.
January 9th, 2007 at 9:23 pm[…] story No Comments so far Leave a comment RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI Leave a comment Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTMLallowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> […]
January 9th, 2007 at 9:53 pmGreat comments!
Of course they dismissed all the charges against Saddam for killing the Kurds…they would have had to bring up the fact that the US was deeply involved in supporting Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war. Here’s a chronological list of what happened and when:
http://www.iranchamber.com/ history/ articles/ arming_iraq.php
I wouldn’t doubt that the “sudden” execution of Saddam was at least in part prompted by the need to pre-empt any testimony about the US involvement in supporting Saddam, which led to those killings. That testimony would have involved Reagan, Bush 41, Rumsfeld and many others.
As far as the “surge” goes…of course this is just another way for the administration to prolong the conflict until Dumbass is out of office…when they can try to pin the problems caused by leaving on the next president. There’s no possible way adding 20,000 troops is going to have any real impact…except on the ones who are killed and maimed, of course…but that doesn’t matter to Bush and his buddies.
Someone mentioned Impeachment? Worst possible idea. First thing is it will never work. The Republicans couldn’t impeach Clinton when they had a much bigger majority. The only result would be to energize Bush’s conservative base leading up to the elections in 2008, making it much harder for Democrats to increase their majority…and making it more difficult for a Democrat to win the presidency.
Look at it this way…Imagine you are walking with other parents and children in the countryside, when one of the children is bitten by a poisonous snake. Some of the parents and children may insist that you need to go after the snake…but a smart and caring parent knows that the most important thing to do is care for the child. Bush is the snake and the child is our country, constitution and civil rights. The most important thing to do is repair the damage as much as possible, not expend energy on a useless effort to impeach him. (Although, I would LOVE to see it - it’s still the wrong thing to do!)
The fact is that Bush is going to go down in history as the WORST president EVER! He’s also going to be the only one to have started a war of choice…and lose it all by himself, in just his two terms of office. That’s going to have to be good enough.
January 9th, 2007 at 10:55 pmbush is doing a great job!!!!
January 10th, 2007 at 12:09 am[…] On Wednesday night, President Bush is expected to announce plans to escalate the war in Iraq by sending more U.S. troops. On June 28, 2005 — just 18 months ago — Bush said that sending more troops to Iraq would “undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead†and “suggest that we intend to stay forever.†Video is here […]
January 10th, 2007 at 7:02 amMore on Bush’s surge…
Via Think Progress, it turns out that Bush was against a troop surge before he was for it. Last June, Bush argued that "sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Amer…
January 11th, 2007 at 5:07 pm[…] Posted by whig on January 12th, 2007 Watch this video on Think Progress. Via Donna Woodka. […]
January 12th, 2007 at 4:31 am[…] President Bush on June 28, 2005: “Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever, when we are, in fact, working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave.” […]
January 18th, 2007 at 6:33 pmhowever bush makes a good point about wanting to “protect” the people but how many people have to be sacrificed for the iraqi’s to have a government to protect them.
February 23rd, 2007 at 1:01 pmwhats to say that the iraqi people wont attact use the skills were teaching them to attack us again and take another 3000 thousand of our people like when the twin toweres fell whos to say or even promise us that wont happen again.
60 years ago when we were have problems with iraq goerge bushes father disided not to go to war because he knew there would be complications with them and it would cost us.
george bush is just trying to cover his ass by sending more troops to iraq because he doesnt want to adment he made a mistake be going to war with them.
[…] breathing space for this democratically elected government to succeed.” This from the man who said in 2005: Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in […]
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:47 pm[…] bQuoteBazaar - Iraq War “Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever, when we are, in fact, working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave.” - President Bush in 2005 […]
April 7th, 2007 at 5:09 pmGay Sex Gay Ass Gay Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 25th, 2008 at 1:01 am