Bush addresses the nation on Iraq policy

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
OK well let's revisit what we told about the surge back in January. The Administration tells us we are going to double down, that we have defined 18 or benchmarks that must be met by the Iraqi's in order for our continued support. So they've been saying, wait till September and rate the surge on the progress of said benchmarks.

Fast forward to the present day, Snowjob gets on the podium yesterday and declares that the benchmarks were invented by Congress and are essentially meaningless and that we need to look at the larger picture.

Synopsis:

1. We are setting benchmarks, grade us in September and shut up till then.

2. September rolls around, 3/18 benchmarks have been completed.

3. Benchmarks are meaningless and invented by Congress to trap us, shut up.

This is a game that most of us aren't willing to play anymore.

There were quite a few diehard supporters of the war here who said this was pretty much it for them and if the surge didn't work then they were willing to admit that it's time to get out.

Well the surge hasn't worked based on the metrics that the Administration asked to be judged on, so now what, we wait another 6 month Friedman unit? We've been asked to do this like 6 times already.





 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
I'm kinda out of the loop, politically, these days... but if what the Left says is so obvious, and 70% of Americans are for it, why doesn't Congress block (or at least make a serious effort to cut) funding for Iraq? If they're so damn sure, and angry, and they have 2/3 of the population on their side, then stand up and do what you think is right.

Maybe it's all just manipulative political maneuvering? Sure seems hard to measure their sincerity.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: cwjerome
I'm kinda out of the loop, politically, these days... but if what the Left says is so obvious, and 70% of Americans are for it, why doesn't Congress block (or at least make a serious effort to cut) funding for Iraq? If they're so damn sure, and angry, and they have 2/3 of the population on their side, then stand up and do what you think is right.

Maybe it's all just manipulative political maneuvering? Sure seems hard to measure their sincerity.

I agree that congress has up until now been the cowardly lion. But from what I am reading
they may now summon up the balls to do something major to tell the decider who decides. Likely it will be contingent on two things. (a) The quiet back room deals that will deliver at least nine republican senators willing to break with GWB. Yielding a veto and filibuster proof Senate. (b) Wait patiently for the the big news events showing that the surge is not making any of the progress the all of GWB's rosy predictions are based on. And that last nights address had all the validity of being greeted by flowers and candy.

Please note that this is my prediction which has nothing to do with making any assessments about it being wise national policy. Because, proving GWB is an idiot does not endow the congress with any genius and both strategies seem short cuts to disaster. But GWB seems to be cruisin for a brusin from congress and when the congress strikes back, they are likely going to be angry enough to go for overkill.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,987
1
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Yep. They have so little control that they voted Bush back into office again in '04.

:laugh:

It's amazing how out of touch with reality some of the people in this place are.

Not really. Liberals have always had a bias against reality.

In their world, Bill is still smoking cigars in the Oval Office (in his golf trunks), Al is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Reno is keeping the nation in check.

 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
In their world, Bill is still smoking cigars in the Oval Office (in his golf trunks), Al is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Reno is keeping the nation in check.

It goes without saying that such a world would certainly be an improvement to the current sad state of affairs.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
I sincerely hope that the news coming out of Iraq continues to be good; and that it gets better as the year progresses.

I hope and pray for victory and success in Iraq. I also ask the rest of you to do the same.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,285
6,026
126
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Regarding the reality dictate that troop cuts are going to be forced anyway TLC writes---You are talking about the people who make the rules. If they needed to change those rules and extend tours of duty because they felt the troops were necessary then they would do that very thing. The fact that they aren't tells you what you really need to know but somehow that's being overlooked because so many in here seem to despise the fact that there's progress in Iraq. Maybe it calms their nerves just to spin it and deny it instead?

Actually the constitutional responsibility to set such rules on extensions on tours of duty rests with congress and not the executive. And that has been demonstrated on other threads.

And if GWB tries to extent tours of engagements congress probably will explicitly stop GWB if they don't restrict him beforehand. What is GWB going to claim? The congress is not protecting our troops?

So in a sense, the TLC argument is weak sauce also. The illusion is that the President can infinitely keep doubling his bet every time he loses. If the promised progress of the surge shows a sudden backslide, it may be curtains for GWB as the decider. And its very likely that congress will do what is required.
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/for...stitution-time-for.php

The Dept. of Defense determines tours of duty and extensions, and the President has control over force strength during a conflict.

Yes, Congress could act if they felt the need but I think the Democrats in Congress are a bit gunshy right now over messing with anything military. As recent polls have shown the public overwhelmingly believes it should be the generals who determine what we do in Iraq. It's those generals who make the rules about tours of duty and extensions and they can change the rules if they feel the need.

So let's stop with the pretense that the only reason Bush is bringing these guys home is because he MUST. That's just FUD and isn't based in reality. It's just a lame attempt to rob Bush of even a small victory. You guys whine incessantly about bring the troops home and when we finally do you still whine. Is it that there's no pleasing you or is a minmum daily allotment of pessimism required for ya'll to function for the day?

I believe for all your technical correctness you are wrong. Generals can command an army to continue firing empty weapons, but when they are empty they are empty. The army has run out of time to extend tours and they can't extend them even if they can because there are political and emotional realities and endurance limitations to an army just as there is a limit to ammo in a gun. The neocons, and their easy dream of a New American Century have squandered their psychotic visions and dreams. The jig is up and the troops must leave. It is the will of the American people.
I'm right, technically, yet I'm wrong because the outraged American people will rise up en mass and force the evil Bushie to recind any changes, so says Moonie. Amazing predictive powers you have. Good thing we don't have to worry about that, huh?

It's usually not fun to respond to you because you make so little sense. I said nothing about the people rising up, I said they no longer support this war but they do support the troops and any extension of the already extended tours in Iraq won't sell. Nobody is going to force Bush to do anything, but he can't change this reality and he can't extend the tours. I don't think I am predicting, I think I am stating fact. As for your last line, "Good thing.................that..., what the hell does 'that' refer to.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,613
47,222
136
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/for...stitution-time-for.php

The Dept. of Defense determines tours of duty and extensions, and the President has control over force strength during a conflict.

Yes, Congress could act if they felt the need but I think the Democrats in Congress are a bit gunshy right now over messing with anything military. As recent polls have shown the public overwhelmingly believes it should be the generals who determine what we do in Iraq. It's those generals who make the rules about tours of duty and extensions and they can change the rules if they feel the need.

So let's stop with the pretense that the only reason Bush is bringing these guys home is because he MUST. That's just FUD and isn't based in reality. It's just a lame attempt to rob Bush of even a small victory. You guys whine incessantly about bring the troops home and when we finally do you still whine. Is it that there's no pleasing you or is a minmum daily allotment of pessimism required for ya'll to function for the day?

How is this bringing the troops home? We wanted the troops home before the surge started. Then they add 20,000 or so MORE troops. Now you expect us to thank Bush for taking those 20,000 extra back and leaving us where we started? Who the hell is fooled by something THAT stupid?

Just because someone is not forced by the letter of the law to do something does not mean that the realities of the situation do not strongly force his hand in one direction. I am not impressed in the slightest that Iraq is going so well that we haven't been forced to make a catastrophic personnel decision and have instead decided to accept the limitations of our current force structure and send the troops home that must go under it.

And if you think we should listen to the generals on the ground, then why does Bush keep replacing the generals that don't agree with him with ones who do? It's high time this myth was dispensed with. If one general disagrees with the surge and your plan (Abazaid) and then you replace him with one that does (Petraeus) you can't then go out and say that we should listen to the Generals On The Ground.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,613
47,222
136
Originally posted by: Pabster

Not really. Liberals have always had a bias against reality.

In their world, Bill is still smoking cigars in the Oval Office (in his golf trunks), Al is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Reno is keeping the nation in check.

Pabster, you truly have taken the nonsensical troll post to an art form.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
As Murtha points out congress does has the constitutional power to set tours of duty limits. As long as GWB operates within the limits set by congress, he can make adjustments,
but the congress has the power to radically move the entire football stadium limits. And if congress says you can't force this person to redeploy to Iraq without giving the person more time between tours, thats a power congress has and the President can't legally do anything.

As it is, unless tours of duty are even more radically extended and soon, GWB hits the wall next spring anyway and has to scale back the surge under existing rules.
 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
Well, here's an excerpt from CNN today:

Q: How long are we going to be in Iraq? Because the President last night was setting the stage for a long-term relationship with the Iraqis, which would include a U.S. military presence there.

SNOW: Yeah, well, the Iraqis want that.


[.......]

No they fucking don't and neither do the American people.

There is no clearer example of the Administrations complete disconnect from reality than that statement right there.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Yep. They have so little control that they voted Bush back into office again in '04.

:laugh:

It's amazing how out of touch with reality some of the people in this place are.

Not really. Liberals have always had a bias against reality.

In their world, Bill is still smoking cigars in the Oval Office (in his golf trunks), Al is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Reno is keeping the nation in check.
BDS is a terrible disease. It just wastes minds away, minds with actual potential too. Apparently it begins by distorting various connections with reality and then moves on to the lower brain functions. It's a real shame because it's a self-acquired affliction but once one has it I guess there's just nothing anyone can do.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,285
6,026
126
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Yep. They have so little control that they voted Bush back into office again in '04.

:laugh:

It's amazing how out of touch with reality some of the people in this place are.

Not really. Liberals have always had a bias against reality.

In their world, Bill is still smoking cigars in the Oval Office (in his golf trunks), Al is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Reno is keeping the nation in check.
BDS is a terrible disease. It just wastes minds away, minds with actual potential too. Apparently it begins by distorting various connections with reality and then moves on to the lower brain functions. It's a real shame because it's a self-acquired affliction but once one has it I guess there's just nothing anyone can do.

You can hear a lot of talk about reality in a mental institution. Your grasp of reality, in my opinion, is as distorted as some you point out on the left. I don't know why you don't just argue the issues and make your points modestly without this need to prop up your position with the appeal to the abstract. You use a word, reality, you have no claim on.
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,834
1
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Yep. They have so little control that they voted Bush back into office again in '04.

:laugh:

It's amazing how out of touch with reality some of the people in this place are.

Not really. Liberals have always had a bias against reality.

In their world, Bill is still smoking cigars in the Oval Office (in his golf trunks), Al is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Reno is keeping the nation in check.
BDS is a terrible disease. It just wastes minds away, minds with actual potential too. Apparently it begins by distorting various connections with reality and then moves on to the lower brain functions. It's a real shame because it's a self-acquired affliction but once one has it I guess there's just nothing anyone can do.

You can hear a lot of talk about reality in a mental institution. Your grasp of reality, in my opinion, is as distorted as some you point out on the left. I don't know why you don't just argue the issues and make your points modestly without this need to prop up your position with the appeal to the abstract. You use a word, reality, you have no claim on.

Not only that, the term originated in 2003, if anything the supposed Bush haters have been proved correct over the last 4 years.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Yep. They have so little control that they voted Bush back into office again in '04.

:laugh:

It's amazing how out of touch with reality some of the people in this place are.

Not really. Liberals have always had a bias against reality.

In their world, Bill is still smoking cigars in the Oval Office (in his golf trunks), Al is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Reno is keeping the nation in check.
BDS is a terrible disease. It just wastes minds away, minds with actual potential too. Apparently it begins by distorting various connections with reality and then moves on to the lower brain functions. It's a real shame because it's a self-acquired affliction but once one has it I guess there's just nothing anyone can do.

You can hear a lot of talk about reality in a mental institution. Your grasp of reality, in my opinion, is as distorted as some you point out on the left. I don't know why you don't just argue the issues and make your points modestly without this need to prop up your position with the appeal to the abstract. You use a word, reality, you have no claim on.

Not only that, the term originated in 2003, if anything the supposed Bush haters have been proved correct over the last 4 years.
As long as you only hang out in a forum where you have a majority of other BDSers around to slap you on the ass and give you affirmation that your thinking is correct then no doubt you'll continue to keep on imagining that too. Truthfully though, the only thing you've proven is that you and many others are definitely out of touch, as my discussion with another in here who believes ATP&N is a reflection of standard public opinion demonstrated. Reality is so distorted in here you guys actually think you're the political mainstream, which is a complete riot. You don't even come close.
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,834
1
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Yep. They have so little control that they voted Bush back into office again in '04.

:laugh:

It's amazing how out of touch with reality some of the people in this place are.

Not really. Liberals have always had a bias against reality.

In their world, Bill is still smoking cigars in the Oval Office (in his golf trunks), Al is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Reno is keeping the nation in check.
BDS is a terrible disease. It just wastes minds away, minds with actual potential too. Apparently it begins by distorting various connections with reality and then moves on to the lower brain functions. It's a real shame because it's a self-acquired affliction but once one has it I guess there's just nothing anyone can do.

You can hear a lot of talk about reality in a mental institution. Your grasp of reality, in my opinion, is as distorted as some you point out on the left. I don't know why you don't just argue the issues and make your points modestly without this need to prop up your position with the appeal to the abstract. You use a word, reality, you have no claim on.

Not only that, the term originated in 2003, if anything the supposed Bush haters have been proved correct over the last 4 years.
As long as you only hang out in a forum where you have a majority of other BDSers around to slap you on the ass and give you affirmation that your thinking is correct then no doubt you'll continue to keep on imagining that too. Truthfully though, the only thing you've proven is that you and many others are definitely out of touch, as my discussion with another in here who believes ATP&N is a reflection of standard public opinion demonstrated. Reality is so distorted in here you guys actually think you're the political mainstream, which is a complete riot. You don't even come close.

Blah, blah, blah. If you don't like it here don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. I'm sure your double talk will be appreciated somewhere????
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Well if we want to believe basic real opinion polls, GWB started with a basic 50%, reached a popularity poll peak of 90%, and now has managed to disillusion 60% of the American people because he is down to about 30%.

And now with last nights address to the nation, GWB has painted himself into a corner, because if the surge does not continue to show improvements, or goes dramatically worse, we are talking GWB's last stand. And the point where no one except the wacko right wing will give a damn about what the decider decides. And the rational GOP will bolt faster than anyone else.

That is the only operant reality of the matter right now.