Kerry Press Release: Bush Can Hide But He Can't Run From the Truth

For Immediate Release
October 11, 2004

BUSH CAN HIDE BUT HE CAN’T RUN FROM THE TRUTH

Today, two more pillars of George Bush’s fantasy land came crashing down around him. It turns out that the commanders in Iraq have in fact requested more troops but been turned down. And another major report confirms that the war in Iraq was a major distraction from the war on terror. The truth is sometimes hard to hear. George Bush keeps hoping that if he runs fast enough, it won’t catch up with him. But we’ve got news for your Mr. President. You can run but you can’t hide from the truth.

BUSH FANTASY LAND: QUESTION: ... what's your answer to General John Abizaid's statement that, "I think we will need more troops than we currently have"? BUSH: “If that's what he says -- he was in my office this morning; he didn't say that to me, but if he were to say that, I'd listen to him, just like I've said all along, that when our commanders say that they need support, they'll get support, because we're going to succeed in this mission." (Bush Remarks, Rose Garden Press Conference with Interim Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi, 9/23/04)

REALITY: “Because the enemy is persistent, we need additional forces. We asked twice." (Brig. Gen. Oscar B. Hilman, commander of the 81st Brigade Combat Team as reported in Baltimore Sun, 10/11/04)

“But Hilman said he was told that "there are no additional forces," and that U.S. soldiers are needed elsewhere, particularly to battle insurgents and cover a large area to the north that includes the rebellious cities of Tikrit and Samarra.” (Baltimore Sun, 10/11/04)

“Hilman said he requested additional forces in the spring and again in the summer from 13th Corps Support Command, which is responsible for LSA Anaconda and all other multinational supply and transportation facilities in Iraq. Maj. Richard W. Spiegel, a spokesman for the 13th Corps, confirmed that Hilman put in the request and that it was endorsed by the command's top officer, Brig. Gen. James E. Chambers. The request was forwarded to Multi-National Corps Iraq headquarters, which assesses troop requirements and makes the final decision, Spiegel said. The request was denied, he said, declining to provide details. Sharon Walker, a spokeswoman for the U.S. military headquarters in Baghdad, said officials had no comment on why the request was not approved. (Baltimore Sun, 10/11/04)

BUSH FANTASY LAND: “Knowing what I know today, I would have made the same decision.” (Bush, Remarks at Lea County Event Center, Hobbs, New Mexico, 10/11/04)

REALITY: “The U.S.-led war in Iraq has become a distraction in the international war against terrorism, Israel's leading strategic think tank said in its annual report released Monday. The Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University said that instead of striking a blow against Islamic extremists, the war "has created momentum for many terrorist elements, but chiefly al-Qaida and its affiliates."” (AP, 10/11/04)


“Jaffee Center director Shai Feldman said that the vast amount of money and effort the United States has poured into Iraq has deflected assets from other centers of terrorism, such as Afghanistan. Intelligence expenditures made necessary by the large U.S. troop deployment in Iraq "has to be at the expense of being able to follow strategic dangers in other parts of the world," he said.” (AP, 10/11/04)


”Shlomo Brom, a retired Israeli army general, said the U.S.-led effort was misdirected on the strategic level. If the goal in the war against terrorism is "not just to kill the mosquitoes but to dry the swamp," he said, "now it's quite clear" that Iraq "is not the swamp." Instead, he said, the Iraq campaign is having the opposite effect, drawing Islamic extremists from other parts of the world to join the battle against the occupiers. "On a strategic level as well as an operational level," Brom concluded," the war in Iraq is hurting the war on international terrorism." ” (AP, 10/11/04)

Paid for by Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc.

you can't keep criticizing Bush for his hard-headedness while you and Edwards maintain to this day that you would have cast the same vote regardless of what you know today.

A declaration of war would have looked much different.

Not rush to war without letting the inspections finish, not misleading people on the level of the threat, etc. It is true that there were problems with the sanctions and oil for food, doesn't mean we needed to rush into an ill-conceived war. They did not vote to do that, it was not a Declaration of War against Iraq. It was an Authorization to use force if all peaceful means had been exhausted. Bush did not do that.

Washington Post Columnist gives insane reason to vote for Bush: This is my email reply to him.

To Sebastian Mallaby:
RE:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23014-2004Oct10.html

"But if you are willing to read the tea leaves on how Bush and Kerry would prosecute the next phase in this war, then Bush comes out better."

The tea leaves? The tea leaves??????

Are you crazy? Are you nuts?

You are asking us to assume that Bush will do the exact opposite of everything that he has up until now done. He has NEVER rectified a mistake. He NEVER will. This country cannot take the chance that this out-of-control madman will do the right thing. You should be ashamed of yourself.

This election is not just a game and your job should mean something more to you than just taking home a paycheck. You are in this thing, too. Whoever wins the election will also affect you. Don't you care about your country?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=896409&mesg_id=896409

Could there be more obvious evidence that this war is ALL about the re-selection of Bushco?