Does anybody listen to him anymore? At this stage he could talk about little green men and martian cheese and nobody would care. Or should say the wingers will lap it up, the VSP will pontificate, the blogs will go, "that's outrageous" or "insane," congress will schedule another hearing and the sane people in this country will turn the channel now that "reality TV" is more real than anything else around.
Posted by Marie at September 13, 2007 04:21 PMHe's apparently going to announce a drawdown of more than 20,000 troops by July (23,000 apparently), which is 7000 LESS than Patraeus recommended, but he wants us to support Patraeus' plan. So by next July, we'll still have 7000 more troops there than when the surge began.
Who's going to count how many times he says "9/11" and "progress"? I'm going to attempt to watch the speech, but I'm worried I might break the TV throwing things at it. The husband wants a new one anyway.
Posted by CG at September 13, 2007 04:47 PMBush's bubble is so obvious. Sorry for yet more armchair analysis of the hamster running the little wheels in Bush's brain, yet ...
Now that all his cronies have gotten what they asked for, it's obvious that the Chickenhawk in Chief considers his remaining time in office as being solely for "his" legacy in the history books.
He no longer needs Congress for anything, or voters, or, well, anyone's permission. He's a rogue asshole doing whatever the fuck he wants. This means that as far as war goes, he "gets" to have the metrics that other presidents have had: in time, lives lost, and perceived national support. It's what's behind his mantra that History Will Judge The Success of This Goatfuck.
WWII 5-yr time exceeded? No problemo, let's 'Nam this fucker so Bush "gets" five more years and XX,XXX lives before people are allowed to deem his War on Whatever a failure! Plus, it's the opposition's fault for whatever tragedies occur because, dudes, they pulled out too soon!!!
Posted by Ellie at September 13, 2007 05:07 PMEven McNamarra finally admitted he made mistakes in Viet Nam and showed some remorse.
Not in the simian world. Not now. Not ever.
So now the chimp is indirectly blaming the Iraq War as well as the Korean War on the United Nations?
Posted by TIKI AL at September 13, 2007 05:24 PMI did not listen to Colin Powell's dog and pony show in 2003, nor did I listen to the endless media "analyses" of same.
I did not listen to the Petraeus/Crocker dog and pony show this week, nor did I listen to the endless media "analyses" of same.
I have not listened to a single one of Bush's speeches, nor haved I listened to the endless media "analyses" of same.
And I will duly ignore the speech tonight as well.
It's all bull****, it's all propaganda, it's all meaningless. and it always has been. So why bother?
Posted by Shirin at September 13, 2007 05:33 PMEdwards' commercial was good. And Olberman and Matthews totally trashed the speech. Huckabee said "the surge is working." Surprise!
Posted by iamcoyote at September 13, 2007 06:55 PMAnyone wanna venture a guess as to who these other 36 countries are that are fighting with us in Iraq? What the hell? This was one truly bizarre speech. Does he believe this stuff? Is someone writing this for him? And if so, why? Why not let Petraeus' appearances speak for themselves for a while? He's a little scary at this point. He lives in a different reality than the rest of us. Is he mentally ill?
And, Coyote, yeah, I thought Edwards' ad was good, too, but why pay money to put it on the air, there were probably plenty of networks tonight that would've allowed him to criticize Congress for free.
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at September 13, 2007 07:27 PMAmazingly, only one mention of September 11.
Posted by Meteor Blades at September 13, 2007 07:50 PMWe lost Davy in the Korean War.
And I still don't know what for
Don't matter anymore
--John Prine
I guess Mr. Bush is equating the current debacle to the forgetable Korean War. I'm sure he hopes to be that lucky; Iraq as a forgotten war but it won't.
Posted by William Jensen at September 13, 2007 08:45 PMBush's use of the Korean War as an analogy for the Iraq War is laugh out loud funny and particularly ironic coming in the wake of this news item from last week's APEC summit. Bush, Roh Have Testy Exchange at Summit: (South Korean President) Roh challenged him (Bush) to make a declaration to end the Korean War. That conflict ended in a truce in 1953, not a peace treaty, so the two sides technically remain at war.
The Decider didn't take this ally's request so well. After some back and forth: Bush, now looking irritated, replied: "I can't make it any more clear, Mr. President. We look forward to the day when we can end the Korean War. That will end—will happen when Kim verifiably gets rid of his weapons programs and his weapons."
Predictably the MSM has not made this connection.
AF
Many here say he's 'the worst president ever'. If he is, he will be joining Harry Truman at that level. I don't mind being in Harry's company. He did send our first service member to die in Vietnam, back then French Indochina.
Germany
Japan
South Korea
Kuwait
Bosnia
Kosovo
Afghanistan
Iraq
Just another place to be.
Drunk off your ass again, eh, peter, you disgusting GOoPer stooge. Have another one, Harry.
In several months, we will be deep in the Bush recession. The dollar will be destroyed, never to return. We may experience the worst inflation in 30 years. Oil will be through the roof, deficits at record levels, interest rates spiking, with home forclosures at rates not seen since the Great Depression.
And Bush will have his Iraq war. But BushAmerica's days as a great power are numbered. I have a feeling that Bush's final year will be a Bataan death march for him. And the idea that his "reputation" will ever rise ala Harry T: so preposterous that only a cretinous retard like peter could even imagine it.
Posted by euzoius at September 13, 2007 09:56 PMWhere's that chickshit crook Cheney been hiding?
By the way. Is there a way to look at Bush's investments and personal positions in the market and whatnot since he's taken office? What I'm getting at, is how obvious it is the guy is a freakin idiot. Without being told what to invest in and when (and with all the inside knowledge that comes with being THE FLIPPING PRESIDENT), any normal investor able to disregard reality as well as Bush - would be FLAT BROKE! The family estate would be worthless! I bet that info alone would bring to light some amazing examples of insider trading by Bush Inc. and all those in this coup of an administration. Hey, it put Martha in jail...
It would also make clear where Bush's true motivations lie (as if we ever had any doubt). War for money. American lives for money. A presidency for money. Follow the money.
I didn't mean to stress only American lives in my comment above. We should also make clear how many Iraqi civilians are being killed. Not to mention the millions of refugees - and the lives lost (mostly children) during the economic sanctions before the war. mass media sucks...
Posted by dishwashing engineer at September 13, 2007 10:52 PMThanks, dishwashing engineer, for mentioning the terrible cost of all this to the Iraqis. The price most Americans are paying is nothing compared to what each and every Iraqi has paid already. And remember that Iraqis are the one party in all this who have absolutely no choice in the matter. The American troops who are there - even the ones who are there unwillingly - DO have choices ever step of the way, and some of them are making the very courageous choice of saying "no thanks". They are the heroic ones in my estimation because it takes a lot more guts to say no than it does to drop bombs on Iraqi cities, or blow holes in Iraqis.
And one more point. You specified Iraqi civilians being killed, but if you think about it you realize that most of the Iraqi resistance fighters are civilians who have had no choice but to take up arms against the invaders and occupiers of their country. They have every right and every reason to attack occupation forces. They are not the bad guys in this case. They are in their country where they belong and have every right to be. They are the good guys. Your American troops are the ones who have no right to be there and even less right to do what they are doing. Your American troops are the bad guys.
Posted by Shirin at September 13, 2007 11:55 PM
Peter, they have no answer for you.
Don't be so hard and factual on them.
It befuddles them.
Posted by jj at September 14, 2007 06:29 AMThe Korea Analogy: another piece of evidence that Bush invaded Iraq to set up a permanent oil protectorate, and transfer American military bases in the region to Iraq.
WMDs, Madman Saddam and his bosom buddy Osama, spreadin' democracy---all shown to be complete lies by this 50 year Korea "model". A permanent military garrison was clearly intended from the very beginning.
Why? Oil. It's the end of the line for any other explanation. At least Bush has basically admitted it. Seeing that actual (secret) Cheney documents "proving" Bushco's motivation is becoming less and less important.
shirin, thanks for your coments as always. What is your take on what the Iraqi parliament will do in December after having passed the law saying that they must approve any extension of "UN" coalition troops "authorized" to occupy Iraq?
The Korean government (and people) approved of their 50-plus year occupation, obviously.
Posted by euzoius at September 14, 2007 06:39 AMAnd the almost inconceivable fact that the Clown-in-Chief would use, in a national speech, a 50 year occupation model, given the colonial and post-colonial history of Iraq and the entire ME, shows that his "bubble" is simply impenetrable, as Ellie observes.
The Korea Analogy is frankly overtly lunatic, and if we had a functioning press, Congress and democracy, we would be removing the "team" from office based on last night's "speech"--the emperor has shit himself on national television, wiped it on the TV camera and intends to yoke us to a certain disaster. And it's just another day in BushAmerica!
He knows nothing about anything, he just "knows" what he wants to do. The ink is dry even before he leaves office: Worst President in history. There is a serious question whether this country can survive this administration.
Posted by euzoius at September 14, 2007 07:14 AMThe thing with Korea is at least it's a truce. The Korean people are much more tolerable. They were grateful that we rescued them from the Japanese during WWII and an impending communist China. A time when our standing in the world wasn't tarnished by this idiot from Tejas.
The U.S. has created the quagmire in Iraq. We are the invaders. There will never be a truce with the religious leaders and their followers in Iraq. The Iraqi's will never let foreign occupiers be at peace in their land. We will continue to be sniped at, bombed and never allowed to walk freely and safely among the streets of Baghdad or any other Iraqi city.
(And dare I ask the trolls if this happened in the U.S., would we, the American people, be doing anything different than the disgruntled Iraqi's?)
We have spent all our money on bases for U.S. interests and agendas, contracts with bu$h cronies and our embassy.
A pittance for the Iraqi infrastructure and their people. There are still no water treatment or sewer plants up, the country is down to 5% total potable water for it's people. Cholera is rampant, one just needs to google the WHO reports in Iraq. Electricity is at an all time low. Why, because workers are not safe and when it does get installed the insurgents quickly eliminate it.
Let's not forget the contamination from Depleted Uranium.
Is it any wonder why 2.5 million have left for Syria and Jordan.
Oh, and some reports have the fatality list for Iraqi's at 1 million!
It's unreal to me that the GOP and bu$h followers can still justify this invasion and the damage it has caused to the innocent Iraqi people for it's non-link to Al Qaeda!?!?
Somehow, this all got ommitted in the "He-failed-us" report before congress.
And not one MSM outlet has the nerve to bring it up for the public to hear.
After all, if it's not in the MSM, congress will never know about it!
We have been in Iraq for 4 1/2 years. We've been told the same lies over and over again by this thing called a pResident. "We're making good progress... I see good progress..." continually with no accomplishments. Only making the Islamic world hate us more.
Bring our troops home NOW!!!
Rant over!
Posted by Seven of Six at September 14, 2007 07:55 AMSOS, great command of the actual facts of the matter, and hardly a "rant".
Would anything different "happen" if even half of America knew what you posted? I wonder. I'm all out of "faith" in the Murican people. And our final fall-back will be to blame it all on the Iraqis. Oh, and MoveOn, too.
Posted by euzoius at September 14, 2007 08:23 AMAnd our final fall-back will be to blame it all on the Iraqis. Oh, and MoveOn, too.
Yes euzoius, and all us liberals who really want peace and prosperity for everyone in America and the World.
I guess I should have added that we would pay the Iraqi's reparations for our destruction of their country. Mainly for infrastructure and industry start up. Give them job opportunities, a chance to build their own backhoe's, Cats, cast iron and PVC pipe, etc.
Immediately force a sit down session of all the current tribal leaders of every sect, tell them we're leaving and to start rebuilding.
At least we would be out and the Iraqi's can settle it among themselves.
And I can't help but think, there is only one thing holding us back from leaving Iraq: A single picture in the minds of Americans... celebratory Iraqi's dancing in the streets.
Posted by Seven of Six at September 14, 2007 09:22 AM"our final fall-back will be to blame it all on the Iraqis."
But that is exactly what politicians, pundits, and self-appointed experts - including a lot of people who ought to know better - HAVE been doing for at least the last year or so.
It is as if you broke someone's arms and legs, chained him to a stationary object, and then blamed him for not "stepping up to the plate".
sorry pants-pissing peter (and jj), but here's the shorter version of Bush's speech: give me 750 more dead American soldiers and call me in 6 months
Posted by Gay Veteran at September 14, 2007 09:49 AM"What is your take on what the Iraqi parliament will do in December after having passed the law saying that they must approve any extension of "UN" coalition troops "authorized" to occupy Iraq?"
Well, the Iraqi make-believe parliament is somewhat interesting at times - certainly more interesting than the make-believe prime minister (lower case intentional) and his make-believe cabinet. Their "failure" to cave (so far) on the oil laws, which as I am sure you know put the control of, and the profits from about 75% of the oil into the hands of American corporations, is somewhat interesting, as was their passing the law that you mentioned.
Whether they will really be able to successfully use that law to resist the continued occupation of the country, I just don't know. The U.S. has the ability - and the will if they find it necessary - to scrap this make-believe government and create another, and has with the collusion of Maliki et al. kept vital information away from the parliament. The oil laws are a good example of the latter. According to Ra`ed Jarrar, they knew nothing about it until he sent copies to them.
PS It is important to know, for those who do not, that the deceptively-named "revenue sharing law" was drafted in English by Bearing Point International with input from U.S. government and U.S. oil interests, and THEN it was translated to Arabic.
Posted by Shirin at September 14, 2007 10:01 AMThanks for your thoughts, shirin.
Unfortunately, it seems to me that we in America have sort of come to the end of the line with what can be done politically, with our two supine national "parties", and that the Iraqis (even burdened with a make belive government) are going to have to somehow change the equation.
I had thought that maybe the Parliament would refuse further "authorization", fictional as it may be, because Bushco puts so much stock in our "invitation" to stay. Bullshit, but that's the "storyline" that needs to change.
Posted by euzoius at September 14, 2007 11:34 AMjj, the reason we have no response to Peter's comment is because it makes no damn sense.
Posted by Steve Soto at September 14, 2007 11:43 AMI agree peter's post is at his usual level of frightfully aimless illogic, but I'll give a fucking response to peter the GOoPer fool's "point"---none of his "places to be" are countries in which we attempted to put down a fucking guerilla/civil war on behalf of a "government" we installed. We only did that in Vietnam, which somehow doesn't make it on peter the GOoP's "list".
Wonder why not?
jj never posts one thing that has a sliver of content to it, it's all at the level of writing "Honor" and "Integrity" and leaving it at that. Like most Bushists, he has opinions, but no facts supporting them. Faith based thinking. Slogans that cannot be discussed or even understood. The usual routine of brain dead dittoheadism.
Posted by euzoius at September 14, 2007 12:04 PMI am not sure that Bush ACTUALLY puts stock in the "invitation". I think the "invitation", as long as it isn't directly and explicitly withdrawn or contradicted by the make-believe government is important for P.R., but that the Bush regime's multi-million dollar retainers to their P.R. firms will manage to purchase a justification for staying on without an "invitation" if necessary. OR they will find an excuse to scrap the current make-believe government and create a new, more compliant one.
It has always been up to the Iraqis to expell the Americans. The Democrats always have been and still are as wedded to imperialism as Republicans, and no viable Democratic candidate would ever bring about a full withdrawal. At the very last they would certainly keep the Regional Command and Control Center - aka embassy - in Baghdad fully staffed and operational.
Keep in mind that both Hillary and Obama have been careful to talk only about withdrawing "combat troops", who constitute only about half the troops in Iraq. That means they could leave 60,000-80,000 troops - plenty to populate those gigantic, elaborate military bases they have been building and equipping with all the comforts of home (including such things as a miniature golf course, and - get ready! - a car dealership). Both of them have also stated that they would leave an unspecified number of troops in Iraq for an unspecified period of time.
Of even more concern is the fact that both Hillary and Obama have stated clearly that they intend as president to significantly enlarge the military. The only reason the U.S. could need a larger military would be to 1) maintain troops in Iraq while 2) invade and occupy additional countries.
The bottom line is that the Democrats are not going to save the situation.
Posted by Shirin at September 14, 2007 12:47 PMThe bottom line is that the Democrats are not going to save the situation.
Shirin, Granted, but what happens if a republi-con is elected? We have to elect the lesser of evils.
The Dems will only have one chance at getting this right. Then it will be all over for them.
I'm hoping for a new Progressive party myself.
We don't just need a Dem for Iraq, we need a Dem for the U.S. If you haven't looked lately we are in dire straits.
Posted by Seven of Six at September 14, 2007 12:58 PMThat's just it. When it comes to foreign policy, the Dems are NOT going to get it right. Their agenda is virtually the same, they are just apt to be less brazenly in-your-face about it, which in a way is worse, because they can hide their horrible actions under a veil of respectability.
When it comes to Domestic matters the Dems ARE likely to be an improvement.
There is simply no way I would vote for either Hillary or Obama unless they change their foreign policy positions significantly. I just can't.
Posted by Shirin at September 14, 2007 01:08 PM