Bush: ‘Troops Are Coming Out’ (And Staying) Because ‘We’re Successful’
Bush: ‘Troops Are Coming Out’ (And Staying) Because ‘We’re Successful’
In a press conference today, President Bush was asked to explain how his views on Iraq fit with new Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s belief that Australian troops should withdraw from Iraq. Bush said there was no conflict, adding that the U.S. is also “withdrawing troops” because of a “return on success”:
And by the way, we are withdrawing troops. It’s called return on success. And our intention is to pull down five — you know, five battalions by July. Troops are coming out — five brigades, excuse me. Troops are coming out, because we’re successful. And so, I would view the Australian decision as return on success — returning home on success.
Watch it:
According to Bush, “troops are coming out because we’re successful,” but they’re also staying in Iraq because we’re successful. On the anniversary of the war, Bush said he will not order further withdrawals because he refuses to “jeopardize the hard-fought gains” of the past year.
This week, Bush was presented with a plan for a “pause” in troop reductions from top military officials, in order to preserve recent “security gains.” The New York Times reported:
Troop levels in Iraq would remain nearly the same through 2008 as they have been through most of the five years of war there .. But it now appears likely that any decision on major reductions in American troops from Iraq will be left to the next president.
In reality, this week’s spike in violence across southern Iraq reflects how the U.S. presence — particularly the surge — has done little to bring long-term security to Iraq.
The small withdrawal isn’t a “return on success.” Rather, in the face of increasing pressure from military officials about the strain on soldiers from the war, Bush is being forced to withdraw some troops because it is the only way to sustain his surge while giving troops some rest.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
lol, bush please just stfu.
March 28th, 2008 at 2:56 pmBush tries to put a positive spin on the return of troops. Bush’s detractors try to put a negative spin on the return of the troops. Take your pick. Apparently, troops are returning. Good news?
March 28th, 2008 at 2:59 pmNo, troops are coming out because you either have to bring them home or extend their 15 month extended deployment to something like a 24 month extended deployment. Considering the fact that he has worn out our military in the worst way, I really don’t see how he can call this a “return on success”.
Only in Bush’s dream world.
March 28th, 2008 at 2:59 pmOur “wartime president” doesn’t know the difference between a brigade and a battalion. I feel SO proud.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:01 pmTry not to hurt yourself, George — that kind of spin should only be tried by serious contortionists.
On the other hand, you may have taken a (very) small step toward doing the obvious thing — withdraw the troops, but declare victory while doing so.
If only I could believe you are doing it for the right reasons. I suspect that your motives have more to do with the fact that you are running out of human battle fodder.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:01 pmSounds like a couple too many Fosters w/ Australia’s new PM.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:03 pmHave another pretzel Georgie.
But withdrawing is treason!!! The only answer is a surge, after another surge, after another surge… til you win, 95 years or so in the future.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:04 pmOver fourteen months after the start of the “surge”, the extra troops are slowly being brought back and a few of them will not be replaced, which will bring the post-surge troops levels down to only 20,000 more than were there when the surge began.
Meanwhile, our troops are exhausted, ignored and stop-lossed, and the cost of enticing to re-up, those whose enlistments are up is astronomical. Good news?
March 28th, 2008 at 3:04 pm#2, try re-reading what TP has written. I will help by copying one critical passage:
“Troop levels in Iraq would remain nearly the same through 2008 as they have been through most of the five years of war there .. But it now appears likely that any decision on major reductions in American troops from Iraq will be left to the next president.”
Get it now? The reduction is purely nominal, and is coming from a level that is near the all-time high.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:06 pmMore used-car salesman garbage.
Nothing more, nothing less - ever - from that pathological liar.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:07 pmIt wasn’t so long ago that the Chimperor’s mouthpieces were talking about a reduction to 100,000 by the election. The level right now is close to 170,000, and that is just what is officially reported. Special forces are not counted; we can assume these amount to another 40,000 or more. Private mercenaries are estimated conservatively at another 40,000, but I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that it is double that. So let’s just call it what it is: circa 300,000 armed combatants from the U.S.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:09 pmCaptain - trying to frame this as a “spin vs. counterspin” issue is the most dishonest thing I may ever have seen you do.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:11 pm“Return on Success?”
Then the returns on your presidency have been very few and very far between, Chimpy. Just ask NOLA.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:11 pm“Return on Success” is nothing more than another catch phrase created by his own administration.
It has no substance or focus. It’s a hold over from the previous leadership thru slogans this pitiful excuse has used in the past.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:14 pmSounds like maintaining the troop levels is the recommendation of ‘the senior American commander and the top American diplomat in Iraq’.
If Bush is serious about returning the five brigades, it sounds like the five brigades that where sent for the surge.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:15 pmking george was taught that “success” is a word taken from the Texican dialect, succ, meaning “suck”
March 28th, 2008 at 3:16 pmand cess, as in “cess pool”
backup Says:
March 28th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Sounds like maintaining the troop levels is the recommendation of ‘the senior American commander and the top American diplomat in Iraq’.
If Bush is serious about returning the five brigades, it sounds like the five brigades that where sent for the surge.
Well, your first mistake, Cap’n, is to take at face value anything Bush says. I mean, if this article doesn’t demonstrate that, nothing will. Words mean nothing to him by now. They’re just tools to keep his head above water until they drain the pool in January.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:19 pmSo you have decided to just be one of the trolls….spouting the same bs while knowing it isn’t true?
March 28th, 2008 at 3:19 pmHow many of these returning soldiers are so seriously maimed, mentally and physically, that they can’t even find jobs and support, much less return for another tour?
March 28th, 2008 at 3:25 pmNot to mention the flag draped returnees…
…backup is and always been a troll…
March 28th, 2008 at 3:26 pmHe is Captain Mantastic’s incontinent alter ego.
Both sides of the mouth talking at the same time and both with the BIG LIE!
March 28th, 2008 at 3:29 pmReturn on success means they ain’t never coming home. Victory happens when wars end, not when they drag on forever.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:39 pmIf there is any draw-down from Iraq they will simply be redeployed to Afghanistan.
I do believe Bush is a pathological lying dry drunk.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:42 pmTroop levels in Iraq would remain nearly the same through 2008 as they have been through most of the five years of war there .. But it now appears likely that any decision on major reductions in American troops from Iraq will be left to the next president.
Then why are we waiting for the next president? Let’s impeach, cinvict, and remove these two criminals as soon as possible so that the next president can start withdrawing troops.
Impeach Cheney first.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:45 pmApprove his replacement
Impeach Bush second.
Swear in Cheney’s replacement.
Fewer people die.
Simple.
“Return on Success” is actually a play on the business term: “Return on Investment.” Looked at from that angle, it’s been a huge loss of investment in both lives and treasure for the American public. If this war/occupation was a stock offered in the financial markets, it would be worth about $-0.2. The only profitability has been for the war profiteers and stock holders in THOSE criminal corporations.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:48 pm#24-
March 28th, 2008 at 3:49 pmWayne. Makes perfect sense to me.
Speaking of withdrawals, if only G.H.W. Bush had pulled out early, we wouldn’t have had premature Iraqulation by his Son.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:51 pmIt’s sad that Bush didn’t finish the triple play. He talked out of both sides of his mouth and he could have made it a triple by speaking out another orifice.
Just once I wish a reporter would stand up and call bullsh*t on his illogic babble.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:54 pmViolence up = We’re Winning
Violence down = We’re Winning
More Troops = We’re Winning
Less Troops = We’re Winning
Just makes the head spin, does it not?
Bush/Cheney
March 28th, 2008 at 4:09 pmHague Trials ‘09
29 - what’s the prob then? not enough mexicans to do the work?
nola has billions of dollars of empty promises
March 28th, 2008 at 4:09 pmralph.
you may be right. I’ll try to keep my eyes open. remind me in July.
March 28th, 2008 at 4:13 pmThis is Bush-speak again. Troops coming home are doing so because of troop rotation and length of tour of duty. These rotated troops were coming home anyway — the bottom line is that we will still have the increased number of troops in total as have always been - actually, a bit more.
Bush is not considering a reduction in force in Iraq - far from it.
When violence went up, he “surged”
When violence went down, he continued the surge for insurance
Violence is up again, so the surge continues
No matter what happens, there will be no rif in Iraq.
March 28th, 2008 at 4:18 pmIf and when al Sadr ends the cease-fire, Iraq is going to be in the world’s biggest shit-storm, and US casualties will skyrocket.
March 28th, 2008 at 4:22 pmWhat is Arabic for Tet offensive?
Making war and criminally occupying foreign countries for fun and profit. Bush’s fun and Cheney’s profit.
March 28th, 2008 at 4:24 pmFred, How do you know? If the idea is to keep enough troops in Iraq to facilitate a secure handover of power (and limit genocidal bloodshed), how many troops is enough? How soon do you start pulling the troops? How quickly do you do it?
It’s not like many wars. The nature of the effort is much more subjective.
Obama has a line something like getting out carefully as we were reckless getting in.
He understands the answers are not black and white.
He has also said (to the effect) he will not commit to withdrawing the troops absolutely, but will maintain descretion to withdraw them based on the information and the situation when he would become the commander in chief.
I understand you disagree. That’s okay. But, instead of conveniently dismissing the comments, give me your take.
Should we pull the troops out immediately, regardless of the circumstances. Or should we use a more subjective gauge, suggested by Obama?
March 28th, 2008 at 4:25 pmReparations to NO have been a dismal failure not matter how you gage it. The average citizens have been tossed on the trash pile just like their homes and someone else(with money)will take thier place…..
March 28th, 2008 at 4:26 pmthis is what you said……..it is not true and we all know it. The surge was an escalation disguised as ….well, a surge. No one is coming home until bush goes home.
March 28th, 2008 at 4:29 pmBush is full of crap. The 5 brigades were scheduled to come out in July.
March 28th, 2008 at 4:39 pmwho’s on first?
March 28th, 2008 at 4:40 pmsjcoo1; I prefer the classic; The GUILLOTINE!
March 28th, 2008 at 4:43 pmCaptain - There’s no pretty way to pull an arrow out of your ribcage. It’s going to bleed - now, later, or otherwise. There is no way to pull it out and leave a healed wound behind, and time will not change that unfortunate fact.
March 28th, 2008 at 4:46 pmAs Prof Juan Cole notes, the recent outbreak of violence is linked to the call for October elections, and probably Cheney’s advice to attack and marginalize the al Sadr faction prior to those elections.
March 28th, 2008 at 4:57 pmAin’t pretending to have a democracy in Iraq great?
“Come down and I’ll personally show you what your ignorance doesn’t allow you to see.”
Where? New Orleans, New Jersey?
If you see Tony Soprano, flip him off for me, k?
March 28th, 2008 at 5:08 pmI’m not in Iraq either but I know more about what is going on there than most Americans….sad but true.
I don’t have to see a robbery to know one has been committed. Please tell us more about how every one that was in NO has moved back into their old neighborhood and everything is getting back to normal for our American citizens who suffered the loss of everything……
Funny how your first hand information fly’s in the face of everyone else’s first hand information.
I will not rely on any one person’s word that everything is going great in NO any more than I would rely on any one person’s word that the surge is working in iraq.
March 28th, 2008 at 5:14 pmIt was the same song and dance when the Brits withdrew their troops BY 50% from Basra in Sep/Oct 2007 (would you call this iraqi interruptus?). Anyway, the Brits could leave because they had done a jolly good job, and with their duty now done, ta ta and away we go.
BUT, there had not been so much success that the US troops could also return home to their kid’s birthday parties. Turns out that WE were so successful, we had to stay to hold on to that success. To leave would have jeopardized those hard fought and bloody gains.
Huh? Why is success sometimes a reason to go, but also a reason to stay?
And know we hear this again. It’s yet another example of the rhetoric and twisted Alice-in-Wonderland-like logic that befuddles us all and continues to be spewed by this foul President and his administration.
March 28th, 2008 at 5:23 pmHeh, heh, heh. see. things are bad because they are really so good, heh, heh, see, what I mean to say is things are really much better than… Uh, we’ve got a little sayin’ uh, fool me … aw shucks, can’t git fooled agin… heh, heh, heh.
The chimp speaks. And it’s like a dog whistle only the dumb can hear or understand.
March 28th, 2008 at 5:40 pmFred.
Not many here, but there seems to be a general acceptance that the surge has promoted some stability in Iraq (for whatever reason).
Wouldn’t that be a measure of success?
If the surge was intended to promote stability, is it possible that the situation is stable enough that the surge troops can redeploy?
I’m open minded enough (and skeptical enough) to understand that Bush may be spinning a need to bring troops home as success. Are you open minded enough to consider the possibility that the surge troops have done the job they were sent for and can now be brought home?
March 28th, 2008 at 5:45 pmtom. I would agree that if we knew that our efforts in Iraq were a waste of time and that a more profound civil war and genocide will eventually occur, I would agree that we should pull our troops out today (yesterday).
But, the problem is; we don’t know that.
The elected leadership of Iraq seems to want us there (at least for now). And even the democratic candidates for president won’t commit to a hasty troop withdrawl, regardless of the circumstances. And that’s their position during the primary.
There is real concern that if/when we bring our troops home, we will leave a vacuum filled with even more violence than we have now.
If it was easy, it would have happened by now. We can listen to Obama, Clinton, and McCain and decide who has the best plan for the situation. And then watch and hope, whoever it is, will make the best decisions for us and the Iraqi people.
March 28th, 2008 at 5:56 pmSudden Man, I hope you’re making better progress than the surge. Good Luck.
March 28th, 2008 at 6:08 pm“… five battalions by July. Troops are coming out — five brigades, excuse me.”
proof he is wearing an ear piece…
March 28th, 2008 at 6:16 pmalways thought so anyway…
just sayin…
The point Captain is that you do not know that will happen, either. No one can know that. Why is doubt a one-way thing with you? As long as there is doubt we have to stay? Why not cut to the chase and declare we have to stay there forever because no one can know the future with certainty??
Your grandchildren’s future is being pissed away, while other people’s grandchildren and grandparents are dying for no good reason. Our wealth and our military are finite things - I know some people take that as treason, but it’s just a brute fact. Will you be ready to leave when the dollar is finally worth the same as a peso? A rupee? Will you be ready to leave after reading about another young soldier losing his mind after years of stop-loss and 10 combat tours?
My point was - no matter how long you wait, and apply gauze, and administer antibiotics and salve and prayers and whatever-else-you-can-think-of, when that arrow gets pulled out it will not - ever - leave behind a healed wound.
March 28th, 2008 at 6:51 pm“Not many here, but there seems to be a general acceptance that the surge has promoted some stability in Iraq (for whatever reason).”
That Bush, Cheney, McCain, and Rush Limbaugh all agree on Iraq ain’t sayin’ a hell of a lot.
That’s the same as saying that all the salesman at the car lot told you it would be really smart to go ahead and buy a car from one of them, therefore there was a “general acceptance” that buying a new car is what you should do.
If I knew of some dumb liberals you could go practice your stuff on before trying it here I’d do it, but I don’t know of any.
March 28th, 2008 at 6:56 pmk, bud, if you say so. surge - totally worked.
iraq will be a beacon of freedom and democracy in 6 months
6 months after that we will be turning a profit on iraqi oil
we have more than enough money to keep 140000 troop is in the middle east indefinitely
it won’t matter when the dollar is worth half a Euro
Anything else you require capitulation on, smart guy??
March 28th, 2008 at 8:56 pm> You don’t get to criticise others
> for avoiding reality, when
> this place avoided acknowledging
> the sharp drop in violence.
That cracks me up. Acknowledging the drop, without acknowledging the primary cause of that drop, (bribery of former enemies on a massive scale) is counterproductive.
Its like someone reporting how good a cancer patient is feeling while failing to mention that all the doctor did was shoot him up with massive doses of morphine. Without that critical piece of knowledge one might be mistakenly lead to believe that whatever the doctor did was actually addressing the problem instead of finding a temporary solution .
Personally, I would have taken a different tact. I would have acknowledge the reduction in violence but show how is was achieved only by turning what is the logistical equivalent of the Iraqi Taliban into multimillionares.
March 29th, 2008 at 2:08 amBut I dont run this board, and in my mind, not acknowedging fasle and misleading “reductions” is the second best tact.
For too long this administration held the view that they could withdraw troops as things seemingly got better. It was the whole “clear, hold and build” strategy gone awry - after we rid an area of rebel fighters, we were supposed to “hold” that area and “build” it economically (jobs), politically, and militarily (Iraqi forces). Well, we would clear, but then fail to hold and build. Now that we seem to have gotten it right, as demonstrated in places like Anbar and Baghdad Provinces, I hope we won’t screw up again and withdraw too soon.
March 29th, 2008 at 7:34 am#52, Southern man, said
“I never said things were great, I said there not as bad or as you write, ” a dismal failure”. Much progress is being made and it’s mostly being ignored by the media. And the garbage they do write, is only the negative garbage. Kind of like Iraq…”
I’ve gotta say that I was trying hard to give you the benefit of the doubt in reading this thread but you really lost me with the Iraq point of view. Yeah that’s it, Iraq is incredibly stable and prosperous, the media are just distorting the situation through their coverage, right?
You’ve lost all credibility with me.
Iraq is the worst blunder in American history. We have destabilized a critical area of the world and have strengthened the hand of Iran, our arch enemy whereby we have no good options whatsoever, we cant leave and we cant stay, and you are of the perspective that reporting from Iraq or about Iraq is what, not rosy enough?
March 29th, 2008 at 11:03 am