Bush stands behind current Iraq policy (OHIO speech today)

Source: ap



Bush stands behind current Iraq policy

By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer 26 minutes ago

CLEVELAND - President Bush, facing new pressure to start bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq, said Tuesday he won't consider it until hearing a fresh assessment from his top commander there this fall.


"That's what the American people expect. They expect for military people to come back and tell us how the military operations are going," Bush said. "And that's the way I'm going to play it as commander in chief."
.................

Bush, though, said he won't be swayed.

"We just started. We got all the troops there a couple of weeks ago," Bush told the Greater Cleveland Partnership, a coalition of Northeast Ohio companies.
.......
"I wouldn't ask a mother or a dad — I wouldn't put their son in harm's way if I didn't believe this was necessary for the security of the United States and the peace of the world," Bush said. "I strongly believe it, and I strongly believe we'll prevail."

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/bush;_ylt=AulBQwwYnLiZirW6lbm2Xcqs0NUE

---

bush is doing his duty again------making stump speeches

(Yes, just like Charlie Brown when Lucy pulls the football away).

I mean, of course his stance is not surprising. Stubborn idiocy spun by the media as "strong will and decisiveness."

Won't somebody impeach the bastard?

n/t

One key point stands out from President Bush's Iraq remarks in Cleveland this afternoon: Bush didn't say a single thing that could possibly help provide any wavering GOP Senators with any political cover at a time when they're heading into a series of bruising battles with Dems over the war.

Indeed, if anything, his remarks are likely to push antsy Republicans further away.

Take a look at link~

Bush's address to a Cleveland business organization was heavy on his old standards. Failure in Iraq will have "serious consequences for the security of your children." (And no, he didn't mean that as an apology.) al-Qaeda in Iraq attacked the U.S. on 9/11. The insurgents "can't stand the advance of an alternative ideology that will end up marginalizing them." (He meant democracy, not the Iran-aligned Shiite political structure that Sunni jihadists are currently fighting and that the U.S. is defending.)

If these cliches and misrepresentations were supposed to buck up nervous Republicans, they're unlikely to work. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) isn't going to reconsider her support for ending U.S. combat operations because of "an ideology based on light."

The strongest card Bush played was his appeal for Congress to wait on any Iraq action until General David Petraeus delivers his September progress report. But coupling that, as he did, with blithe assurances that soon we'll be in "a different position" with the war effort just serves to drain Petraeus's credibility by association -- and all in a bid for at most two months of Congressional calm on the question of withdrawal, which he's unlikely to get in any case.

Over the next few days, GOP senators are going to get pummeled with vote after vote on Iraq. Clips of them defending their votes will become instant campaign fodder for their opponents, particularly in antiwar states.

Bush could have allowed them a measure of breathing room by saying that there's a strategy in place after the surge -- maybe a reduction in troops, or a decline in combat operations, or renewed diplomatic efforts along the lines of the Iraq Study Group's recommendations. Instead, Bush gave the Senate GOP absolutely nothing. If the President understands their predicament -- or even cares about it at all -- he didn't show it in Cleveland.

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/jul/10/bush_digs_himself_in_deeper

on General Betrayus to make sure there's GOOD NEWS on the Iraqi front come September? :eyes: Like I'd believe a word Betrayus or Bush had to say anyway. Bush has demonstrated over and over that nothing he says can be taken at face value. He's a liar, a proven liar, and anyone not questioning his word is a brain-dead toady. It seems clear to me that Betrayus is just the newest Bush appointed water carrier in Iraq and will do anything to make his "commander in chief" look like a brilliant tactician. Of course nothing could be further from the truth. :mad:

Gotta love that. And why should he give those turncoats anything?

Remember the tears the Cheerleader shed at the funeral of the soldier who jumped on a grenade to save his comrades?

http://www.nysun.com/article/46543

I can only imagine that Bush felt that, in a sense, that soldier had taken a bullet for him.

George W. would also anoint himself keeper of his father's honor in politics – or as he put it, his "loyalty enforcer." During the 1988 and 1992 presidential campaigns, "Junior" – as he was sometimes called, inaccurately – made sure that everyone understood what he referred to as his "grenade" rule: If there was a grenade heading toward his father, their job was to jump on it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072799.htm

Note that the "grenade rule" applied to the campaign workers. So there can be no surprise if the Prince who became King allows his fellow Pukes to twist in the wind.

With grenades rolling around where are they now?

Until every one of us is dead.

Source: The Independent (UK)

The Independent

Bush finds no way out of Iraq as approval ratings plunge
By Rupert Cornwell in Washington
Published: 11 July 2007

On the ground in Iraq, George Bush's war may long ago have sunk into an unwinnable morass. But the second week of July 2007 is set to go down as the moment when he started to lose control of Iraq policy-making at home as well.

The beleaguered, hugely unpopular President made yet another defence of his troop "surge" yesterday. At a public appearance in Ohio, he insisted that troop levels in Iraq "will be decided by our commanders on the ground, not by political figures in Washington DC". He conceded: "I fully understand that this is a difficult war. It's hard on the American people. But I will once again explain the consequences of failure to the American people."

As he spoke, Congress was preparing to vote on a host of mainly Democratic amendments on a $650bn (£320bn) Pentagon funding bill. All of them would to some degree curtail Mr Bush's authority. Now, as Republican defections multiply, for the first time some of them may succeed.


Read more: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article2753378.ece

---

"Unwinnable morass." I like it. Popcorn, please.

what the American People think? When is he running for office again? And to all the GOPers, Christians, Islamophobics out there that voted for him in '04- you've been had, misled, bamboozaled, pwned, but we told you so.

"Forcing his hand is the gathering pace of Republican defections on Capitol Hill. At least 10 Republicans have in varying degrees broken ranks. Were they to vote with the 49 Democrats opposed to the war, the bloc would be close to the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster. A few more Republican rebels would bring it close to the two-thirds majority that overrides a presidential veto."


I heard Harry's press conference and he made it clear the funding bill will take us out of iraq. If you heard any of today's Iraq "debate" it sounded like the GOP is fillibustering. But they don't want to admit it.

Harry says he's going to force a cloture and make them take sides.

Go get them, Harry. It's time.

Sinking faster than a speeding bullet...The circle of wagons gets smaller and smaller....soon those pesky Liberals will come with the rubber suit to whisk him away to the funny farm...

and there he was today...trying like hell to sell his Iraq strat...he sounded so weak and ineffective...like a noob car saleman

He is w/o hope...

"GET THE HOOK"

Make every living moment sheer torture. He did it to us.

"The beleaguered, hugely unpopular President made yet another defence of his troop "surge" yesterday."

"Back in their states and districts, senators and congressmen have had a first-hand taste of public discontent with the war and President Bush - and how identification with either could cost them re-election in 2008."

"Mr Bush vetoed one war-funding bill that contained such a provision."

hmmm and the article keeps calling him "mr. bush" instead of president.

Damn! If only those ignorant Americans would listen to the President, he's willing to explain the fallout to them once again!


:sarcasm:

how benevolent of him. :eyes:

banana republican bush is such an asshole!!

Source: Independent (UK)

Bush finds no way out of Iraq as approval ratings plunge

By Rupert Cornwell in Washington
Published: 11 July 2007
On the ground in Iraq, George Bush's war may long ago have sunk into an unwinnable morass. But the second week of July 2007 is set to go down as the moment when he started to lose control of Iraq policy-making at home as well.

The beleaguered, hugely unpopular President made yet another defence of his troop "surge" yesterday. At a public appearance in Ohio, he insisted that troop levels in Iraq "will be decided by our commanders on the ground, not by political figures in Washington DC". He conceded: "I fully understand that this is a difficult war. It's hard on the American people. But I will once again explain the consequences of failure to the American people."

As he spoke, Congress was preparing to vote on a host of mainly Democratic amendments on a $650bn (£320bn) Pentagon funding bill. All of them would to some degree curtail Mr Bush's authority. Now, as Republican defections multiply, for the first time some of them may succeed.

At the end of this week, moreover, the White House will deliver an interim report on political and military progress in Iraq, that will show - as headlines and television pictures confirm - that the sectarian violence continues, armed militias flourish, and that the government of Nouri al-Maliki is failing to take the promised steps towards national reconciliation.


Read more: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article2753378.ece

Priceless. pin point accurate.

amazing how RW talking points can swim across the ocean--fuckers.

who will pay for this disaster
WHO ???

the http://monkeydyne.com/bushresume/resume.html">consequences of failure to the American people."


okay, ya got that right.
dp

decisions on wars ARE made by politicians. The military follows orders, that is it! They do not set policy, they do not decide policy, they follow policy, they perhaps enact in a limited sense policy but they do not decide policy.

so all of this talk that the commanders on the ground somehow make decisions baffles the hell out of me.

I'll believe that you are sincere about your wonderful "just cause" when I see your two precious darlings in uniform. Don't tell us that you feel for those who have lost family or friends, you don't feel a thing. And tell your wife to shut the fuck up, too. (I know that she wasn't there today when he gave his little speech, but I'm still pissed off about the remarks she made recently.)

And, Mr. Bush, it isn't a "just cause" anymore. Not that the war in Iraq EVER was. It is a lost cause. And I don't know how you sleep at night.