White House insists war czar supports escalation.
White House insists war czar supports escalation.
Yesterday, ThinkProgress noted that President Bush’s new “war czar,” Gen. Douglas Lute, has said that reducing U.S. troop levels would “undercut the perception of occupation in Iraq,” and said “we would like to see a smaller, lighter, less prominent U.S. force structure in Iraq.” The New York Times reports tonight:
A spokesman said General Lute was not available for comment on Tuesday evening. Mr. Hadley said the general had expressed his doubts, but that he now supports the strategy.
“He said to me when he interviewed for this position, ‘Now, you need to understand that I was skeptical of the surge,’ ” Mr. Hadley recalled, using the administration term for the troop buildup in Iraq. He said that General Lute, who helped to develop the strategy, had raised questions about whether “Iraqi security forces would step up and contribute what they were supposed to do,” and whether the Iraqi government was committed to political reconciliation and providing economic resources.
“We developed a strategy that we thought answered those questions,” Mr. Hadley said, adding, “He’s saying that he supports the strategy, very clearly supports the strategy.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I wouldn’t be so sure, Hadley. Heh.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:14 amShorter: Lute is a yes man.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:15 amYes Bush’s “War Czar” is one of his stooges. The guy will do whatever he is told and nothing more.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:18 amGO GENERAL LUTE!!
May 16th, 2007 at 12:20 amOhhnn, here we go.
Smaller, lighter, skeptical, supports it, not available for comment, he said to me. Same bipolar, dual-duty (doody?) crap, diff day.
What fresh schizophrenia is THIS?
May 16th, 2007 at 12:26 am~Dorothy Schparker
Jake, you are a fucking idiot.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:26 amBecause I actually want to win the war, robbie? Were FDR, Churchill, and Truman idiots?
May 16th, 2007 at 12:32 amBecause I actually want to win the war, robbie? Were FDR, Churchill, and Truman idiots? Comment by Jake — May 16, 2007 @ 12:32 am
Oh, dear st*pid Jake*ss, we already won the *war*, we’re just failing to run a proper occupation. Then again when you Cons are involved, you always *fail*… But please, enough with the Churchill comparisons. This *war* and you Cons aren’t worthy of changing his shorts – Jake*ss loser.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:39 amBecause I actually want to win the war, robbie? Were FDR, Churchill, and Truman idiots?
Comment by Jake
robbie? Who ya talkin’ to, Jakey?
Concerned…..sorta. Well, not really…..not at all. Proceed.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:52 amBush wanted the war czar because he plans on starting a war with Iran. Same reason the troops are getting internet blocked and news groups are going to be censored on news they can report from the ME. Unless Congress impeaches Bush/Cheney soon then there is no stopping war with Iran. Thanks Pelosi for taking impeachment off the table giving permission to Bush to do whatever he wants ’cause now there will be no oversight. Unless you put it back on the table and get Bush removed from office he is going to attack Iran. That war will be partially on you shoulders for that little political antic. With the War Czar everything is in place, all preparations complete for Iran war.
May 16th, 2007 at 2:45 amSo the guy the Bush league hires says he agrees with the criterion the bush league used in hiring?
How … surprising.
May 16th, 2007 at 3:33 amthe Senate appropriations committee should call the WarCzar down for a talk and get his views on how to responsibly fund the war. They should tell him no more supplemental funding bills at the last minute. and if he can’t do that, he should be called out now, not in september when the next bill is due.
May 16th, 2007 at 7:15 amWHATS THE POINT OF HAVING A WAR CZAR FOR 1 MONTH
May 16th, 2007 at 7:26 amThank you, Admin, for deleting robbie’s personal attack.
May 16th, 2007 at 8:16 amWhy not rename the charge as ‘Blame Czar’? It’s a far better description.
May 16th, 2007 at 8:55 amCool Hand Lute?
May 16th, 2007 at 9:03 amNero played the fiddle…
Bush plays the Lute?
May 16th, 2007 at 9:12 am“White House insists war czar supports escalation.”
Of course he does. It was in the job description. Actually, that was the job description. Anything else is superfluous. They must be paying this guy an awful lot of money to crawl under the bus.
May 16th, 2007 at 9:44 amI’d call that, “putting the words in the mans mouth.” Does anyone in the bush administration speak for themselves? Obviously not.
May 16th, 2007 at 10:51 amThey ran out of sycophantic four stars, so they have found a yes-man with three stars.
May 16th, 2007 at 11:43 amHe has changed his mind–after having been duly “enlightened” by the White House — and now he agrees with them
#12 TT
May 16th, 2007 at 11:48 amOf course, it is because there is absolutly no intention of winding down this war in the foreseeable future.
In July, they will say, he’s only been there a month – he needs time.
In August everyone will take the month off.
In September, they will say he’s only been there since June – more time is needed. And more money too.
And on it will go in short hops and jumps into the future. Playing games and changing rules while people are dying.