by Mark Silva
President Bush, delivering a mixed report today about the progress of what he conceded is “an ugly war’’ in Iraq, called on Congress to allow the U.S. military time to show that his escalation of military forces can bring stability to the violence-wracked nation.
The president’s report, the first of two progress reports on several “benchmarks’’ that Congress demanded when it reluctantly approved $100 billion more for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan earlier this year, ranks the Iraqi government on 18 measures. Bush reported “satisfactory’’ progress on eight, unsatisfactory progress on eight and mixed reviews on two.
The president insisted that he, as commander-in-chief, and not the Congress, as financiers of the military, will run the war in Iraq. Yet he also acknowledged growing congressional and public opposition to the war in an hour-long press conference in the West Wing of the White House today.
“I understand why the American people’’ are concerned about the war, the president said. “They’re tired of the war. There is war fatigue in America. It is affecting our psychology…. It’s an ugly war.
“It doesn’t surprise me that there is deep concern amongst our people,’’ Bush said. “Part of that concern is whether or not we can win… I know we’ve got to achieve our objective.’’
And Bush, asked how he can continue to prosecute a war which has lost the support of a majority of the American people said he will retire – at the end of next year – comfortable that he has hewed to “principle.’’
“The question now is, do we pull back and allow the polls, allow the Gallup Poll or whatever, to determine the fate of our country?’’ Bush said. “Sometimes, you just have to make the decisions based upon what you think is right…. My most important job is to help secure this country.’’
“Everybody wants to be loved,’’ said Bush, leaning into the new podium of a renovated West Wing press briefing room getting its debut press conference. “Sometimes the decisions you make and the consequences don’t allow you to be loved… (When he retires) I will be able to look in the mirror and say I made decisions based on principle, not politics.’’
The president maintained that the “surge’’ of U.S. troops that he announced in January has only recently become fully deployed, and it is too soon to gauge its success. A fuller report of progress in Iraq will come, he said with the next report required by Congress – on Sept. 15. At the same time, Bush refused to “speculate’’ on what that may say or how he will act.
Bush insisted that withdrawing “precipitously’’ from Iraq would not only embolden terrorists operating there, but also invite a new attack against the United States from ‘the same people’’ who attacked on Sept. 11, 2001.
While acknowledging that al Qaeda operatives in Iraq today are not the same as those who attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001, Bush said they have “sworn allegiance’’ to Osama bin Laden, the still-elusive al Qaeda leader and remain intent on attacking the U.S. again.
Bush was asked bout his homeland security secretary, Michael Chertoff, saying this week that he has a “gut feeling’’ about a terrorist attack coming this summer – in the absence of any “credible intelligence’’ of such attack – and the president was asked what his own “gut’’ tells him.
"My gut tells me that -- what my head tells me as well -- is that when we find a credible threat, I'll share it with people to make sure that we protect the homeland,'' Bush said.
"My head also tells me that al Qaeda is a serious threat to our homeland and we've got to continue making sure we've got good intelligence, good response mechanisms in place, that we've got to make sure we don't embolden them by failing in certain theaters of war where they're confronting us, that we ought to continue to keep the pressure on them. We need to chase them down and bring them to justice before they come home to hurt us again.''
The president also downplayed reports that al Qaeda has rebuilt to its strongest levels since 9/11. “There is a perception in the coverage that al Qaeda may be as strong today as they were on September the 11th,’’ Bush said. “That is simply not the case… Because of the actions we have taken, they are weaker than they would have been… they are still a threat.’’
Calling the goal of bringing U.S. troops home “a goal shared by all Americans,’’ Bush insisted that troops need the country’s support in Iraq.
“They need the enemy to know that America is not going to back down,’’ Bush said. “Sometimes the debate over Iraq is cast as a disagreement between those who want to keep our troops in Iraq and those who want to bring them home.’’ That is not the true debate, he said.
“The real debate over Iraq is between those who think the war is lost or not worth the cause,’’ he said. “I believe we can succeed in Iraq and I know we must.’’
Securing the nation will “create the conditions that will allow our troops to start coming home,’’ the president said, insisting that he will start withdrawing forces when “commanders on the ground’’ say conditions are right – “not because pollsters say it will be good politics.’’
Of the report delivered to Congress today – which White House spokesman Tony Snow described as “sober’’ – the president said: “We can report that satisfactory progress is being made in eight areas.’’ Iraqis provided the three brigades promised in and around Baghdad, he said by way of example and are spending money to train and equip forces.
“In eight areas the Iraqis have much more work to do,’’ he said, pointing to incomplete Iraqi legislation on the sharing of oil revenues.
“Those who believe the battle in Iraq will undoubtedly point to the unsatisfactory’’ ratings, he said. “The bottom line is that this is a preliminary report and it comes less than a month after the final reinforcements arrived in Iraq.’’
Calling a precipitous withdrawal of U.S. forces “dangerous for Iraq, for the region and for the United States,’’ the president predicted a scenario which U.S. intelligence assessments have made in recent months as well: “It would mean that we would be risking mass killings on a horrific scale.’’
“It would mean that American troops may have to return at some later date to fight an enemy that is even more dangerous,’’ he said.
“Iraqis do not want US troops patrolling their streets forever, any more than the American people do,’’ Bush said. “The best way to begin bringing them home is to make sure our new strategy succeeds.’’
Bush was pressed with questions about the conflict between his war strategy and public opinion about the war, after more than four years.
“Iraq has obviously… got the attention of the American people, as it should,’’ he said. “It’s a difficult war. It’s a tough war… It’s a necessary war to secure our peace.’’
And, while saying he is open to discussion with members of Congress questioning his war course, he maintained that the decision is his alone.
“I don’t think Congress ought to be running the war. I think they ought to be funding the troops,’’ Bush said. “Trying to run the war through resolution is a prescription for failure… The role of the commander-in-chief is of course to consult with Congress…
“Congress has all the right in the world to fund’’ the military, the president said. “That’s their main involvement in this war, which is to provide funds for our troops.’’ But allowing Congress to decide “how troops are positioned or troop strength’’ is not good for the country, he said.
As for public opinion:
“Of course I’m concerned about whether or not the American people are in this fight,’’ Bush said. “I believe, however, when they really think about the consequences of if we were to precipitously withdraw’’ people would question what would happen to Iraq. I think many people understand we must succeed.’’
“I understand that… this violence has affected them… and there are lot of people who don’t think we can win,’’ Bush said. “There are a lot of people in Congress who don’t think we can win.’’
The president said, as he has before, that he would not send the sons and daughters and husbands and wives of Americans into battle if he did not believe that the U.S. can prevail in Iraq.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Excellent, fair reporting by Mark Silva.
Obviously, the popular course in some quarters would be to retreat and withdraw. That worked great in SE Asia where millions were slaughtered after the U.S. pulled out. It is important to support the present surge by our troops and press the Iraqi government to fully step up to the plate so it can
take over in the near future. Then our troops can come home with heads high.
Posted by: Mahalo | July 12, 2007 12:37 PM
Bush : "Mixed Progress But Victory Still Possible In Ugly War"
What alternative universe does this dope live in?
He changes the way he grades "his benchmarks" on Iraq so that they look more favorable for him and then he starts crowing about "victory in Iraq" again?
What does "victory in Iraq" mean, are the insurgents going to lay down their arms and bombs and start throwing flowers and candy at us?
These pro-war Neocons are delusional.
Posted by: John E | July 12, 2007 12:45 PM
I don't know if I am alone, though I doubt I am, when I question what exactly we would be winning? Is the major driving force of this war not the civil war? How can we win another countries civil war? What will "winning" this war actually do for the U.S.? How can we "win" when thousands of our soldiers are dying? At least Bush refered to his gut instinct instead of what he heard God say when he prayed...
"Now if we had the power
To bring our neighbors home from war
They would have never missed a Christmas
No more ribbons on their door
And when you trust your television
What you get is what you got
Cause when they own the information, oh
They can bend it all they want
It's not that we don't care,
We just know that the fight ain't fair
So we keep on waiting
Waiting on the world to change"
Posted by: Mindi | July 12, 2007 12:45 PM
You could see this coming a mile away. The glass is always half full in the Bush Administration--at least concerning Iraq. So what if they keep moving the goalposts. The end justifies the means. So what if another couple of hundred soldiers are killed along the way. After all, progress is beinng made, right? Right?
To Bush and the GOP they're all expendable. They'll just get some more to kill. Maybe next time in Iran.
The question is how much longer will we look the other way and go about our day-to-day lives too busy to do something?
Posted by: Gibster | July 12, 2007 12:50 PM
And George Bush is a liar.
Posted by: Valerie Harrison | July 12, 2007 1:05 PM
There's no "war fatigue" at Haliburton, profits have never been better. There's no war fatigue for the chickenhawks on this blog (maybe keyboard fatigue), it gives them a chance to act tough.
Posted by: dt | July 12, 2007 1:20 PM
I have no interest in anything that man has to say unless he's announcing his (and Dick's) resignation.
Posted by: Cheryl | July 12, 2007 1:44 PM
I am discusted with many members of congress, I feel they are anti-Americans, and only concerned about their own personal welfare, and of their party. I feel our president is concerned about his country, and cares for the people.
Posted by: Edward Nahigan | July 12, 2007 1:45 PM
I am discusted with many members of congress, I feel they are anti-Americans, and only concerned about their own personal welfare, and of their party. I feel our president is concerned about his country, and cares for the people.
Posted by: Edward Nahigan | July 12, 2007 1:45 PM
I am discusted with many members of congress, I feel they are anti-Americans, and only concerned about their own personal welfare, and of their party. I feel our president is concerned about his country, and cares for the people.
Posted by: Edward Nahigan | July 12, 2007 1:45 PM
Report card mixed? Seeing this most recent White House pathetic attempt to find some speck of optimism in this dreadful Iraq situation made me wonder how Bush's spin doctors would have tried to alter the perception of some of the past's greatest disasters. Here's how the headlines would have looked if this administration had been in charge when the event occurred.
Real World Event: The sinking of the Titanic
White House Headline: Passengers Enjoy Icy Dip In Atlantic
Real World Event: The Challenger Disaster
White House Headline: Challenger Touches Down Ahead of Schedule
Real World Event: 1906 San Francisco Earthquake
White House Headline: Bay Area Wakes Up To Loud Rock and Roll
Real World Event: 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami
White House Headline: Slum Dwellings Cleared From Oceanfront Properties
Real World Event: Nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima
White House Headline: It WORKS!
Real World Event: Chernobyl Disaster
White House Headline: 4-Legged Chicken Flocks Lessen Russian Hunger
Feel free to add your own :)
Posted by: Dan M | July 12, 2007 1:59 PM
He's never been able to define victory -- and won't be able to achieve it. Democracy? They've got it -- warts and all. Radicals laying down arms and embracing Western values? Never gonna happen, especially now that he opened that can of worms so much wider.
Safer? NO.
Posted by: Kenny Bunkport | July 12, 2007 2:04 PM
Excellent, fair reporting by Mark Silva.
Obviously, the popular course in some quarters would be to retreat and withdraw. That worked great in SE Asia where millions were slaughtered after the U.S. pulled out. It is important to support the present surge by our troops and press the Iraqi government to fully step up to the plate so it can
take over in the near future. Then our troops can come home with heads high.
Posted by: Mahalo | July 12, 2007 12:37 PM
Our troops can come home with "heads high" right now, Mahalo. They have obeyed their orders to fight, no matter murderous and ill-conceived those orders were. They have thus demonstrated our military might.
It is obscene for chickenshawks like you and the Murderer-In-Chief to set up a false dichotomy: retain honor by fighting or withdraw in shame. The only shame and blame lie with the scum that started this ill-conceived war in the first place, and the equally loathsome people who advocate continued slaughter. Not one additional drop of blood needs to be shed for our military to return home with the highest sense of honor and dignity. They have not failed their country -- their country has failed them.
I of course cannot avoid noting certain ironies in your position (which is not unique). One, you never gave a second thought to the Iraqis' lives before we started the slaughter, because it's clear beyond any dispute that war was not the "last resort." Two, however "important" you may claim the present surge to be, it evidently was not important enough for you to be in it.
Posted by: a blinkin | July 12, 2007 2:07 PM
Everytime I hear Bush speak it depresses me. He can't get out of office fast enough for me. A nation lead by a fool.
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | July 12, 2007 2:14 PM
President Bush gave one of his best speeches today on the progress in the Iraq War on Terrorists. The Dems and the driveby media will harp on political lack of success in Iraq but, they need to consider after our Declaration of Independence in 1776 it tooks us till 1789 to elect George Washington our first president. The problem with the Dems they have invested in defeat they own defeat. I hope Bush succeeds in Iraq to help all of us in the middleeast. Instead posters here go on and on about a civil war this is said by your leaders to ignore the fact that AlQuaeda is alive and well in Iraq and it's not Bush's fault its Osama and Al Zawquari's design they even say so in their videos.Today, Joe Lieberman suggested bombing in Iran to take out 3 bases where the Iranians are training soldiers to kill Iraqi's and Americans. Lieberman is a good Senator unlike schemers Chuckie Schumer and Dickie Durbin. We need leaders in the Senate not schemers on steroids. Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | July 12, 2007 2:19 PM
Hi, my names Dubya.
I got caught in Iraq ugly. Chewed three of my legs off. I'm still trapped.
Damned Democrats.
Posted by: Doug Zook | July 12, 2007 2:40 PM
Once and for all, there is no win. This war was lost before it began. A war cannot end when there is no individual or group to raise the white flag of surrender. It never happened and cannot happen. Get over it George. Come Jan 09 you will have the rest of your life to undo in your mind what you started with your arrogance.
Posted by: GW | July 12, 2007 2:47 PM
Dan M, it's more like this:
Reality: 60,000 killed at Normandy Invasion
Loon Left: Run and hide, we've lost the war!
Reality: 5,000 killed in one day at Iwo Jima
Loony Left: Run and hide, we've lost the war.
Reality: Thousands die at Gettysburgh.
Loony Left: Give up, we've lost the war!
Reality: Challenger blows up.
Loony Left: No more space missions, too many die.
Reality: Thomas Edison fails with first light bulb.
Loony Left: Stop the madness! Man cannot create light.
REality: Ford first car bombs.
Loony Left: Cars, we need no stinkin cars. No horses either. Man must walk!
Reality: Hundreds get rich in California Gold Rush.
Loony Left: Kill those money-hungry capitalist pigs!
Reality: Mommy, mommy, I got an F in remedial reading.
Loony Left: Thanks, mummy for letting me quit first grade. It was just too hard. I'll just stay in the basement and be stupid, ignorant and deranged my whole life. Long live John Hinckly, mummy, he's my idol!!!
Posted by: John D | July 12, 2007 2:56 PM
Our troops should come home w/their heads held high regardless of the outcome of this war. They went there and did the job they were asked to do. Previous posts imply they could only do this if we stay the course. This is most likely a war that we will not "win" but our troops should never feel ashamed of the job they did when the day comes that we finally bring them home. The shame should only be felt by those who sent them there and then kept them there long after the whole thing became a lost cause.
Whether President Bush will be able to leave office with his head held high is what remains to be seen.
Posted by: Stephanie | July 12, 2007 3:03 PM
Buush is obviously delusional. How can a country "win" another country's civil war. Many experts have said that there can be no military solution to this conflict only a political one. Bush does not appear to be pushing for a poltiocal solution.
Posted by: Alan Schwartz | July 12, 2007 3:05 PM
Why does Bush dismiss the report's claim that AQ is built itself back up to pre-911 strength by using Afganistan as a base? Because it would be like him admitting he was terribly wrong about focusing on Iraq. Of course Tony Snow has his back saying that the fact that AQ has built itself back up in Afganistan proves that we need to keep fighting them in Iraq. I wish I got paid as much as he does to make totally illogical statements for a living.
Posted by: kb | July 12, 2007 3:24 PM
Why does Bush dismiss the report's claim that AQ is built itself back up to pre-911 strength by using Afganistan as a base? Because it would be like him admitting he was terribly wrong about focusing on Iraq. Of course Tony Snow has his back saying that the fact that AQ has built itself back up in Afganistan proves that we need to keep fighting them in Iraq. I wish I got paid as much as he does to make totally illogical statements for a living.
Posted by: kb | July 12, 2007 3:25 PM
Feel free to add your own :)
Real World Event: Katrina
Bush Headline: New Orleans residents wake up to new swimming pool
Posted by: Richard S. | July 12, 2007 3:40 PM
Let's face it, when it comes to Iraq, Bush will always see it his way, it does not matter what the world tells him, just as long as he listens to himself...the man is crazy, when will America do something about Bush and Cheney. Hell, when we will have the power to do anything, with Bush, never.
Posted by: Gisela | July 12, 2007 3:48 PM
It is important to support the present surge by our troops and press the Iraqi government to fully step up to the plate so it can
take over in the near future. Then our troops can come home with heads high.
Posted by: Mahalo | July 12, 2007 12:37 PM
Mahalo Mahalo! With all due respect our troops can come home with heads high tomorrow. They've done us proud. The surge is whack a mole. I'm o.k. with letting it play out but in the end I have no faith in the so called Iraq government meeting any goals. I also don't believe our troop strength can be sustained or is enough to carry out a successful campaign in Iraq. That is one of many reasons why this fiasco was doomed from the start.
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | July 12, 2007 3:49 PM
Fair reporting. I wonder how FDR or Truman would jhave done poll wise when 7,000 died on Iwo Jima in a few days or when thousands died in Normandy in a few days. No one expected a miracle when the invasion began. Everyone seems to have lost all foresight here. A democratic Iraq and a democratic Afganistan on the other side of Iran are worth fighting for.
Posted by: lutherfarknagel | July 12, 2007 4:01 PM
Richard S - Had to laugh at that.
John D - There might be hope for you yet. I think I actually saw a glimmer of humor there.
Posted by: Dan M | July 12, 2007 4:09 PM
Chimpy McFlightsuit -- Worst....President....Ever
Posted by: kramer | July 12, 2007 4:21 PM
Hey John D.
You aware that Normandy happend when the "Looney Left' was in charge of things?
Posted by: Jim G | July 12, 2007 4:24 PM
Edward Nahigan and others like him, I am tired of you saying I don't support our Troops, because I do, I cry for each and everyone we lost, and I pray everyday that we do not lose anymore, and you should do the same; I am proud to those in Congress who are standing up to Bush and fighting for all Americans who no longer want to lose their children to this war. As for our president, he does not have the best interest of America in mind, he is only in it for himself and Cheney, they are profiting off of this war. And if it is such a just war and he would never send off our sons and daughters if we could not win, so why is his daughters not signed up to go to Iraq? If we are going to win, they should be there, unlike their father who only showed up for a photo shoot. And what would we win? Nothing. So for all those out there who see only Bush's side, get your head out of his ass and see the light.
Posted by: Goose | July 12, 2007 4:33 PM
Killing does not change people's minds, does it?
Bush has to come clean on his reasons for starting the Iraq invasion and maybe people will support the mess he has created.
No connection to Iraq and 9/11.
No threat to USA from Iraq. So... what was the reason GWBush escalated the containment of Iraq?
Posted by: Shhaz4 | July 12, 2007 4:33 PM
Interesting how some posters here ignore the point made by Mahalo concerning the millions slaughtered in Camboda, Vietnam and Thailand when the U.S. pulled out of SE Asia. I doubt that the potential victims in Iraq and the Mideast would wish to ignore that fact, even though the American left wishes to do so. So much for "compassion" for the downtrodden.
Posted by: Sierra | July 12, 2007 4:34 PM
Edward Nahigan, Jerry White, and others like him, I am tired of you saying I don't support our Troops, because I do, I cry for each and everyone we lost, and I pray everyday that we do not lose anymore, and you should do the same; I am proud to those in Congress who are standing up to Bush and fighting for all Americans who no longer want to lose their children to this war. As for our president, he does not have the best interest of America in mind, he is only in it for himself and Cheney, they are profiting off of this war. And if it is such a just war and he would never send off our sons and daughters if we could not win, so why is his daughters not signed up to go to Iraq? If we are going to win, they should be there, unlike their father who only showed up for a photo shoot. And what would we win? Nothing. So for all those out there who see only Bush's side, get your head out of his ass and see the light.
Posted by: Goose | July 12, 2007 4:46 PM
Sierra...
Whether Iraq has more chaos and hardship before US invasion or after US withdrawal has little or no bearing on the lies, misinformation and half-truths used by GWBush and his people to get the US involved in the escalation of Iraq's containment.
And the parallels to Vietnam, show how little Bush, Cheney learned from not being in harms way in that conflict.
Posted by: Shhaz4 | July 12, 2007 5:00 PM
President Bush is the best recruiter al Qaeda has.There was no al Qaeda in Iraq before this war. This war was started base on lies fabricated by this administration. When will the American people wake up to the fact that Bush and Cheney are lying war profiteers?
Posted by: Jeff P | July 12, 2007 5:28 PM
A democratic Iraq and a democratic Afganistan on the other side of Iran are worth fighting for.
Posted by: lutherfarknagel | July 12, 2007 4:01 PM
They're also a pipe dream!
President Bush is the best recruiter al Qaeda has. Jeff P, I hate to say but your right.
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | July 12, 2007 5:37 PM
Just ask "Scooter". Oh I forgot he wasn't pardoned so he can still plead the 5th.
Posted by: Jeff P | July 12, 2007 5:37 PM
John D.,
Me? Nope, not me. I'ma notta gonna do it.
Too much propane, too little time.
Posted by: Doug Zook | July 12, 2007 5:45 PM
Little Johnny Deranged,meet Jerry White from Springfield.
Now both of you go have a seat in the rubber room and discuss politics.
The white coats will be here shortly.
Posted by: Raving Loon | July 12, 2007 5:55 PM
Time for the Midwest left to get some new lines. "Bush lied," "Cheney and Halliburton," "No Al Queda in Iraq before the war," calling Bush second grader names. That's ancient stuff here in San Francisco and was on signs in our parades three years ago. The Midwest is so far behind the curve.
Posted by: Truckee | July 12, 2007 6:09 PM
Flawed reasons for invading aside, wouldn't it be nice if we could just spend a few more months and a few hundred billion more dollars and a few hundred more American lives and fix this thing? But look at the dismal track record: a) ignore top brass troop level requests, try it on the cheap b) disband the Iraqi army and ignore all those rural militias in the rush to Baghdad c) fail to provide domestic policing d) fail to repair infrastructure... and the trajectory during the past WWII-length period is downward. Why should we expect a military solution to succeed? It failed, it is failing, it will fail. The international community needs to take over. Or replace the troops with oil company staff - these cos. can afford it, and they have the biggest stake in the game.
Posted by: MidRoad | July 12, 2007 6:36 PM
Personally Iraq was a bad choice to fight the war on terrorism; it was meant to be "feel good" quickie catharsis for a shellshocked post9/11 America. What happened was in planning and in execution the numbskulls in charge of the war were more concerned over their victory dance than they were over the war; more "heckuva job" performance there rampant in the Bush administration. But I also see the benefits of stabilizing Iraq now that we're there--and if we suffer losses well there's no one else to blame but ALL YOU "Americans" who voted Bush BACK into office--you have NO ONE ELSE TO BLAME BUT YOURSELVES! But we're there. The Iraqi people DO need us considering we just thrusted instability on them and since you voted for Bush again and this war, you losers have got to suck it up and be accountable for your vote. Period.
Posted by: Tony | July 12, 2007 6:50 PM
In the 52 years I've been on this planet I've never
witnessed a President so hated as George Bush.
It's going to take decades for the Republican Party to recover from him. But in truth we are all to blame for him. After all... we re-elected him to a second term. Which I think the majority of the American public wish it could end right now. January 2009 can't come soon enough for me when a new President will be sworn in.
Posted by: Tim | July 12, 2007 6:51 PM
How about "Impeach" that's a really old one.Or "Leaders start wars,People stop wars" from desert storm? Or "Your either with US or against US"ooops wrong quote
Posted by: Jeff P | July 12, 2007 6:55 PM
Ignoring the U.N. to bomb Iraq for ignoring the U.N.
Pathetic.
Posted by: nixsys | July 12, 2007 7:37 PM
The Raving Loon is a nick name for Durbin and Schumer get lossed--Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | July 12, 2007 7:43 PM
Jimmy G, sorry, but Harry Truman was not a Loony Lefter, nor was FDR. In fact Truman today would receive the same treatment you Loony Lefters give to Joe Lieberman.
And Danny Boy, me gots lots o humor. I have to in order to keep responding to the deranged Left weirdos in here.
Posted by: John D | July 12, 2007 7:44 PM
"Mixed Progress"? I wonder what color the sky is on Mister Bush's planet. By my count:
KIA: 3,996 WMD:0
Posted by: Ish K. Bibel | July 12, 2007 7:58 PM
An ugly war? Yes. Butt-ugly. I truly wished that Bush had as an effective exit strategy for Iraq as the one he had for Viet Nam.
Posted by: rcierras | July 12, 2007 8:08 PM
OK, ReTHUGlicans, lets see if I got this right....
5 1/2 years into the War on Terror, after the USA was attacked by Al Quaida on 9/11/2001... Al Quaida is gaining strength...
Our borders are not secure...
And we are quagmired into a 4+ year war in Iraq to overthrow a government that was fully contained by UN sanctions...
Policing a civil war that the commander-in-chief created...
As far as I am can see, the Republican members of Congress are merely joining the side of the People who saw this coming 4 years ago...
This is your idea of how to run the US Government?
And you expect the American People to re-elect you again??
ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!
Posted by: Smirky McFlightsuit | July 12, 2007 8:30 PM
This war is winnable.
I can please 3 women an hour for 6 days straight.
Santa will bring me a pony.
My friends all want to be me.
Oh, c'mon, lighten up. george started it.
Posted by: Barry | July 12, 2007 9:50 PM
To all those "patriotic" people who post in this blog, I have one question. WHY DON'T ALL OF YOU SIGN UP AND VOLUNTEER FOR THIS WAR FOR US? Since you all think we are not that brave. why don't you all put your children grandchildren to fight your "caring" for his country president's war. Since you accuse us lib as not patriotic. Where are all yours?
Posted by: yeahright | July 12, 2007 9:52 PM
This war is winnable.
I can please 3 women an hour for 6 days straight.
Santa will bring me a pony.
My friends all want to be me.
Oh, c'mon, lighten up. george started it.
Posted by: Barry | July 12, 2007 9:53 PM
Posted by: Edward Nahigan | July 12, 2007 1:45 PM
President Bush
Office of the Press Secretary
Press Conference by the President
August 21, 2006
"I will never question the patriotism of somebody who disagrees with me. "
"And so we'll -- Jim, we'll continue to speak out, in a respectful way, never challenging somebody's love for America when you criticize their strategies or their point of view."
Those with the base apparently didn't get all the memos.
Posted by: AR | July 12, 2007 10:42 PM
‘Waiting for Petraeus’ sounds like a good title for George W. Bush’s nightstand. But for those really fighting the war (dead and maimed), it provides little solace and certainly based on the history of past promises and roadmaps, one would have to have the mental acuity of the president or maybe—room-temperature I.Q. to believe this latest “Surge” will result in more substantial progress compared to the successes of previous four and five star Hectors promulgating nation-building from the end of a spear-headed diplomacy.
What our president is really waiting for is a miracle to save his legacy. Perhaps if he prays hard enough, the same thing that happened to the Assyrians, on their way to Jerusalem, will happen to Al-Qaeda; except, Willard’s entire family of rats and an indiscriminate plague will not be sufficient to eradicate a borderless Jihad.
If there is one accomplishment GWB has made, it is certainly his elocution. Over the past six years, with the help of his former librarian First Lady holding the flash cards included in the “Help with Phoneics” program, he has progressed from mono-syllabic words, such as “Cut and Run,” to capitulation and absconding. Notwithstanding that tour de force Mr. President, please practice the saying the word hubris. It is only two syllables, and it will most likely be included in the history books, whenever your name appears in print.
York Van Nixon III 7/13/07 YorkVanNixonIII.Com
Posted by: York Van Nixon III | July 13, 2007 1:39 AM