Bush says for first time that U.S. is not winning in Iraq

WASHINGTON - Shortly before the elections that cost his party control of Congress, President George W. Bush asserted that "absolutely, we’re winning" in Iraq. Now, for the first time since the war began in 2003, Bush says that American forces are not winning.
Bush also agreed with those who contend that the military is stretched too thin to deal with the global war on terror, saying that he has asked Defense Secretary Robert Gates to come up with a plan for increasing the overall number of troops.
And the president acknowledged that he is considering a short-term surge in the number of troops in Iraq, an option that by some accounts worries top generals because of its questionable payoff and potential backlash.

http://news.bostonherald.com/politics/view.bg?articleid=173005

Not sure if this is really news, or just reality being admitted... which would be NEWS.

Slow on the uptake. As usual.



America does not need a President who is a Connecticut preppy AWOL C student cheerleader pretending to be a Texan cowboy war hero scholar.

I mean, sheesh. What a pack of propaganda crap he and his corporate handlers have catapulted into the US of A.

Though he did say he liked the phrase, W has never had a meaningful original thought in his life. It'd be news if he actually had done so.

"You know, I think an interesting construct that General Pace uses is, 'We're not winning, we're not losing.' There's been some very positive developments. And you take a step back and look at progress in Iraq, you say, well, it's amazing constitutional democracy in the heart of the Middle East, which is a remarkable development in itself," he said.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2739792

In an interview Tuesday with The Washington Post, Bush borrowed the phrasing of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, to describe his current outlook on the war: "You know, I think an interesting construct that General Pace uses is, ’We’re not winning, we’re not losing.’ There’s been some very positive developments."
However, Bush said he was concerned by the ongoing sectarian violence, saying that part of the policy review for Iraq that his administration has undertaken will deal with how to help the Iraqis provide for their own security.
"And I’ll come forward with a plan that will enable us to achieve that objective," he said.
Asked to reflect on his Oct. 24 statement that "absolutely, we’re winning," Bush said that response was "an indication of my belief we’re going to win."

"You know, I think an interesting construct that General Pace uses is, ’We’re not winning, we’re not losing.’ There’s been some very positive developments."

they squashed "Stay the Course" and now they are telling him "we are not winning in Iraq" after this man has said this so many times, they really think they are BS'ing the American People to believing this stuff, it is sickening, again it shows their total ignornance and arrogance towards us and what they think of us.

How're you doing learning to tie your own shoes?

so she stops blaming the media.

We aren't winning because we don't have enough troops, so let's increase the military. That is the only reason he is saying it.

Disgusting. More troops in Iraq so it can appear more "stable" before a reasonable Dem pulls us out in 09.

They weren't supporting the troops! They hate 'murica!

:(

our involvement in Viet Nam?

Many of us "conspiracy theorists" compared Iraq to Vietnam before the invasion. Unfortunately that position was "poo-pooed" like all reasonable dissent. Sadly, some never learn from history.

http://www.counterpunch.org/vietnam203102003.html

CounterPunch
March 10, 2003
Cleared to Taxi
Vietnam 2 Pre-Flight Check
By CounterPunch Wire
1. Cabal of oldsters who won't listen to outside advice? Check.
2. No understanding of ethnicities of the many locals? Check.
3. Imposing country boundaries drawn in Europe, not by the locals? Check.
4. Unshakable faith in our superior technology? Check.
5. France secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.
6. Russia secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.
7. China secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.
8. SecDef pushing a conflict the JCS never wanted? Check.
9. Fear we'll look bad if we back down now? Check.
10. Corrupt Texan in the WH? Check.
11. Land war in Asia? Check.
12. Right unhappy with outcome of previous war? Check.
13. Enemy easily moves in/out of neighboring countries? Check.
14. Soldiers about to be dosed with our own chemicals? Check.
15. Friendly fire problem ignored instead of solved? Check.
16. Anti-Americanism up sharply in Europe? Check.
17. B-52 bombers? Check.
18. Helicopters that clog up on the local dust? Check.
19. Infighting among the branches of the military? Check.
20. Locals that cheer us by day, hate us by night? Check.
21. Local experts ignored? Check.
22. Local politicians ignored? Check.
23. Locals used to conflicts lasting longer than the USA has been a country? Check.
24. Against advice, Prez won't raise taxes to pay for war? Check.
25. Blue water navy ships operating in brown water? Check.
26. Use of nukes hinted at if things don't go our way? Check.
27. Unpopular war? Check.
Vietnam 2, you are cleared to taxi.

good stuff! Thanks for posting.

Viet Nam.

What I find interesting is that no sooner is rumspuke is out; suddenly moron* thinks we need more troops over there. If you recall rumspuke was fond of claiming that we had enough troops over there. Yet, generals kept saying they needed more, but none were sent because rumspuke told them to basically fuck off, yet now that he’s gone, in go more troops even though the Iraqi Study Group said that the best option is pulling the troops out.

Either moron* changes with the wind like most blowhard politicians do or as I believe more to the truth, that rather than him* being leader, he* has all this time, been led.

If there ever was a more glaring apparent example of him* not being in charge it’s now.

when he talks about losing - the troops are losing

The troops were misused by a corrupt and criminal government in a doomed mission rooted in lies and deception.


The U.S. government lost in Iraq. The U.S. government gambled their corrupt and criminal ideas and lost.

The Iraqis aren't to blame.(for not "standing up")
The American people aren't to blame.(for not "supporting" the war enough)
The U.S. troops aren't to blame.(though the Pentagon & DoD do share in the blame)

The U.S. government IS to blame.

A corrupt and criminal U.S. government is to blame.

A corrupt and criminal U.S. government waged war on a nation for absolutely no reason. A corrupt and criminal U.S. government sent troops into a country for lies, greed and deception.

A corrupt and criminal U.S. government betrayed the troops and the rest of the American people.

A corrupt and criminal U.S. government killed Iraqis for lies. A corrupt and criminal U.S. government detained and tortured Iraqis - and not just Iraqis.

Yes, quite a few of the troops turned out to be no better than the corrupt and criminal government that sent them into Iraq and they should be punished for their crimes...but so should the corrupt and criminal U.S. government that sanctioned those crimes.

If anyone is looking for someone to blame for Iraq - they have only to look at the U.S. government. Start with the Bush administration and go from there...