Stop the Presses!! Bush Admits Mistake re:Iraq!!

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/4950461.html
Bush also acknowledged for the first time that he made a "miscalculation of what the conditions would be" in postwar Iraq. But he insisted that the 17-month-long insurgency that has upended the administration's plans for the country was the unintended byproduct of a "swift victory" against Saddam Hussein's military, which fled and then disappeared into the cities, enabling it to mount a rebellion against the U.S. forces far faster than Bush and his aides had anticipated.

He insisted that his strategy had been "flexible enough" to respond and said that even now "we're adjusting to our conditions" in places such as Najaf, where U.S. forces have been battling one of the most militant of the Shiite groups opposing the U.S.-installed government.

It's a byproduct of a "swift victory"??

Leave it to Bush to f-up an admission of a mistake and try to cover it up with a bullsh*t response that even he can't believe to be true.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/4950461.html
Bush also acknowledged for the first time that he made a "miscalculation of what the conditions would be" in postwar Iraq. But he insisted that the 17-month-long insurgency that has upended the administration's plans for the country was the unintended byproduct of a "swift victory" against Saddam Hussein's military, which fled and then disappeared into the cities, enabling it to mount a rebellion against the U.S. forces far faster than Bush and his aides had anticipated.

He insisted that his strategy had been "flexible enough" to respond and said that even now "we're adjusting to our conditions" in places such as Najaf, where U.S. forces have been battling one of the most militant of the Shiite groups opposing the U.S.-installed government.

It's a byproduct of a "swift victory"??

Leave it to Bush to f-up an admission of a mistake and try to cover it up with a bullsh*t response that even he can't believe to be true.

Nothing would be good enough for you anyway so drop the indignation act.

CkG
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Nothing would be good enough for you anyway so drop the indignation act.

I agree. You don't want his contrition or honest self-assessment of the decisions he made. All you care about is him admitting fault, any fault, and being able to say that means you were right and he was wrong.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/4950461.html
Bush also acknowledged for the first time that he made a "miscalculation of what the conditions would be" in postwar Iraq. But he insisted that the 17-month-long insurgency that has upended the administration's plans for the country was the unintended byproduct of a "swift victory" against Saddam Hussein's military, which fled and then disappeared into the cities, enabling it to mount a rebellion against the U.S. forces far faster than Bush and his aides had anticipated.

He insisted that his strategy had been "flexible enough" to respond and said that even now "we're adjusting to our conditions" in places such as Najaf, where U.S. forces have been battling one of the most militant of the Shiite groups opposing the U.S.-installed government.

It's a byproduct of a "swift victory"??

Leave it to Bush to f-up an admission of a mistake and try to cover it up with a bullsh*t response that even he can't believe to be true.
Nothing would be good enough for you anyway so drop the indignation act.

CkG
Coming from Mr. Condescension himself? :roll:

I've said for a long time that if Bush were to completely admit he was wrong re:WMDs, re:the cleanup in Iraq, re:the lack of diplomacy and giving into the neocons then I could forgive him. I can't forget but I could forgive.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,267
126
Originally posted by: glenn1
Nothing would be good enough for you anyway so drop the indignation act.

I agree. You don't want his contrition or honest self-assessment of the decisions he made. All you care about is him admitting fault, any fault, and being able to say that means you were right and he was wrong.

I don't want it either. I would not believe the man if he said good morning.

Tony Blair said every time he looks at a dead Brit, he questions his actions. Every sane person should. When Bush was told this his response was that he sleeps very well, and never has doubts.

I have no use for Bush's excuses.
 

Crimson

Banned
Oct 11, 1999
3,809
0
0
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: glenn1
Nothing would be good enough for you anyway so drop the indignation act.

I agree. You don't want his contrition or honest self-assessment of the decisions he made. All you care about is him admitting fault, any fault, and being able to say that means you were right and he was wrong.

I don't want it either. I would not believe the man if he said good morning.

Tony Blair said every time he looks at a dead Brit, he questions his actions. Every sane person should. When Bush was told this his response was that he sleeps very well, and never has doubts.

I have no use for Bush's excuses.

Any leader who DOESN'T value the life of every soldier should be questioned.. however, you can't say an action was wrong because 1 soldier died as well.. thats their job. THe job the leader is to make sure as few of them as possible die and that they are given all the resources possible to keep them alive. You are twisting Blair's words if you are trying to imply he regrets going into Iraq..
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,267
126
Originally posted by: Crimson
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: glenn1
Nothing would be good enough for you anyway so drop the indignation act.

I agree. You don't want his contrition or honest self-assessment of the decisions he made. All you care about is him admitting fault, any fault, and being able to say that means you were right and he was wrong.

I don't want it either. I would not believe the man if he said good morning.

Tony Blair said every time he looks at a dead Brit, he questions his actions. Every sane person should. When Bush was told this his response was that he sleeps very well, and never has doubts.

I have no use for Bush's excuses.

Any leader who DOESN'T value the life of every soldier should be questioned.. however, you can't say an action was wrong because 1 soldier died as well.. thats their job. THe job the leader is to make sure as few of them as possible die and that they are given all the resources possible to keep them alive. You are twisting Blair's words if you are trying to imply he regrets going into Iraq..

If that is what I was implying, I would be wrong. Blair had the human reaction of self doubt. He thinks he did the right thing, but he isn't glib about it.

I know about a soldiers duty. They die when needed. The fact that one dies a noble death should not lead another to dismiss it lightly. Any commander ought to look uneasily and questionly when his actions lead to deaths.

That was my complaint about Bush. He had no doubts. That is spooky.
 

CycloWizard

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
12,348
1
81
I've said for a long time that if Bush were to completely admit he was wrong re:WMDs, re:the cleanup in Iraq, re:the lack of diplomacy and giving into the neocons then I could forgive him. I can't forget but I could forgive.

Great, so he was wrong. Did anyone actually predict what would happen during or after the war accurately? I could have sworn Miss Cleo got shut down a while ago, so I doubt it. Unless you can do better or can point me to someone who predicted all these shenanigans, then you're just running in circles.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
I've said for a long time that if Bush were to completely admit he was wrong re:WMDs, re:the cleanup in Iraq, re:the lack of diplomacy and giving into the neocons then I could forgive him. I can't forget but I could forgive.

Great, so he was wrong. Did anyone actually predict what would happen during or after the war accurately? I could have sworn Miss Cleo got shut down a while ago, so I doubt it. Unless you can do better or can point me to someone who predicted all these shenanigans, then you're just running in circles.

For starters:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=52&threadid=1021268&arctab=arc
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,503
564
126
Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/4950461.html
Bush also acknowledged for the first time that he made a "miscalculation of what the conditions would be" in postwar Iraq. But he insisted that the 17-month-long insurgency that has upended the administration's plans for the country was the unintended byproduct of a "swift victory" against Saddam Hussein's military, which fled and then disappeared into the cities, enabling it to mount a rebellion against the U.S. forces far faster than Bush and his aides had anticipated.

He insisted that his strategy had been "flexible enough" to respond and said that even now "we're adjusting to our conditions" in places such as Najaf, where U.S. forces have been battling one of the most militant of the Shiite groups opposing the U.S.-installed government.

It's a byproduct of a "swift victory"??

Leave it to Bush to f-up an admission of a mistake and try to cover it up with a bullsh*t response that even he can't believe to be true.

Unlike the Allies of WW2, The US didn't have four years to plan a post-war Iraq. I think many also forget including the current Congress and Administration that post-war anything isn't easy or quick...cases in point...we still have troops in Germany from post WW2 and post-Coldwar (though not the "same" troops ;) ) We still have troops in Kosovo. We kept troops in Saudi Arabia 12 years post Gulf War.

I think the Nintendo Generation spending too much time on the Internet and watching 24 hour news channels has caused them to lose their patience and appreciation for the difficulties and the time consumingness of war and post-war
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
I hardly think copping to a "miscalculation" is the same as admitting there were mistakes made. Remember: show NO weakness is the mantra.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/4950461.html
Bush also acknowledged for the first time that he made a "miscalculation of what the conditions would be" in postwar Iraq. But he insisted that the 17-month-long insurgency that has upended the administration's plans for the country was the unintended byproduct of a "swift victory" against Saddam Hussein's military, which fled and then disappeared into the cities, enabling it to mount a rebellion against the U.S. forces far faster than Bush and his aides had anticipated.

He insisted that his strategy had been "flexible enough" to respond and said that even now "we're adjusting to our conditions" in places such as Najaf, where U.S. forces have been battling one of the most militant of the Shiite groups opposing the U.S.-installed government.

It's a byproduct of a "swift victory"??

Leave it to Bush to f-up an admission of a mistake and try to cover it up with a bullsh*t response that even he can't believe to be true.

Unlike the Allies of WW2, The US didn't have four years to plan a post-war Iraq. I think many also forget including the current Congress and Administration that post-war anything isn't easy or quick...cases in point...we still have troops in Germany from post WW2 and post-Coldwar (though not the "same" troops ;) ) We still have troops in Kosovo. We kept troops in Saudi Arabia 12 years post Gulf War.

I think the Nintendo Generation spending too much time on the Internet and watching 24 hour news channels has caused them to lose their patience and appreciation for the difficulties and the time consumingness of war and post-war

They had about a year and a half and Iraq is just a bit smaller than....Europe.
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,503
564
126
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/4950461.html
Bush also acknowledged for the first time that he made a "miscalculation of what the conditions would be" in postwar Iraq. But he insisted that the 17-month-long insurgency that has upended the administration's plans for the country was the unintended byproduct of a "swift victory" against Saddam Hussein's military, which fled and then disappeared into the cities, enabling it to mount a rebellion against the U.S. forces far faster than Bush and his aides had anticipated.

He insisted that his strategy had been "flexible enough" to respond and said that even now "we're adjusting to our conditions" in places such as Najaf, where U.S. forces have been battling one of the most militant of the Shiite groups opposing the U.S.-installed government.

It's a byproduct of a "swift victory"??

Leave it to Bush to f-up an admission of a mistake and try to cover it up with a bullsh*t response that even he can't believe to be true.

Unlike the Allies of WW2, The US didn't have four years to plan a post-war Iraq. I think many also forget including the current Congress and Administration that post-war anything isn't easy or quick...cases in point...we still have troops in Germany from post WW2 and post-Coldwar (though not the "same" troops ;) ) We still have troops in Kosovo. We kept troops in Saudi Arabia 12 years post Gulf War.

I think the Nintendo Generation spending too much time on the Internet and watching 24 hour news channels has caused them to lose their patience and appreciation for the difficulties and the time consumingness of war and post-war

They had about a year and a half and Iraq is just a bit smaller than....Europe.

True...Europe is bigger

Here is a link though to put that in perspective.

The Marshall Plan

It was designed to aid in the post-ww2 reconstruction of europe and to fight communism via cash...

It wasnt even announced until 1947 and not authorized until 1948

Thats becuase they were less concerned about reconstruction and more concerned about the war crimes trials. . .Here

Here is an interesting fact that I just learned:

Aug 8, 1945 - Soviets declares war on Japan and invade Manchuria.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: conjur
They had about a year and a half and Iraq is just a bit smaller than....Europe.

True...Europe is bigger

Here is a link though to put that in perspective.

The Marshall Plan

It was designed to aid in the post-ww2 reconstruction of europe and to fight communism via cash...

It wasnt even announced until 1947 and not authorized until 1948

Thats becuase they were less concerned about reconstruction and more concerned about the war crimes trials. . .Here

Here is an interesting fact that I just learned:

Aug 8, 1945 - Soviets declares war on Japan and invade Manchuria.

There was also absent one huge component:

Insurgents.

Was there a sizable force of rebellious soldiers lying in wait in Germany or in Japan?
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,503
564
126
Originally posted by: rextilleon
I get it--if we won slowly Iraq would be a peaceful place now.

We didnt win....we never got a surrender.

We needed Saddam to sign surrender papers.

The best time was at the "hole"....if he wouldnt have signed then "BAM" right to the noggin.

Instead what we got was a duck, cover, and strike end to the war thats really still going on...kind of a new thing we have to deal with here.
 

rickn

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
7,064
0
0
Bush to his top aides, "Read my lips, we can't admit we did anything wrong"
 
May 10, 2001
2,669
0
0
Leave it to Bush to f-up an admission of a mistake and try to cover it up with a bullsh*t response that even he can't believe to be true.
central city taken in 2 weeks, not swift, got ya.

Any other re-education on definitons you care to give us?
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,503
564
126
While we are talking about war...here is some more perspective

Vietnam Timeline

That war lasted 30 years.

The French start it...get there butts kicked...take off and we take over...

What I would like to hear is why didnt we win? From a real military strategist...
 
May 10, 2001
2,669
0
0
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
While we are talking about war...here is some more perspective

Vietnam Timeline

That war lasted 30 years.

The French start it...get there butts kicked...take off and we take over...

What I would like to hear is why didnt we win? From a real military strategist...

we didn't have the will to kill enough Vietnamese.
 

smashp

Platinum Member
Aug 30, 2003
2,443
0
0
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
While we are talking about war...here is some more perspective

Vietnam Timeline

That war lasted 30 years.

The French start it...get there butts kicked...take off and we take over...

What I would like to hear is why didnt we win? From a real military strategist...

we didn't have the will to kill enough Vietnamese.

Yup "More Body counts"....... That was the reason.:roll:
 

Klixxer

Diamond Member
Apr 7, 2004
6,149
0
0
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
While we are talking about war...here is some more perspective

Vietnam Timeline

That war lasted 30 years.

The French start it...get there butts kicked...take off and we take over...

What I would like to hear is why didnt we win? From a real military strategist...

we didn't have the will to kill enough Vietnamese.

NOt the will to sacrifice as many as it would take, oh, i forgot it is the christian way KILL THEM ALL.
 

arsbanned

Banned
Dec 12, 2003
4,853
0
0
You don't want his contrition or honest self-assessment of the decisions he made. All you care about is him admitting fault, any fault, and being able to say that means you were right and he was wrong.

No. What we need is Bush to leave the Whitehouse. Considering the damage he has done to this country, an apology won't accomplish squat. Do you think all those burned Iraqis would accept an apology?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
While we are talking about war...here is some more perspective

Vietnam Timeline

That war lasted 30 years.

The French start it...get there butts kicked...take off and we take over...

What I would like to hear is why didnt we win? From a real military strategist...

we didn't have the will to kill enough Vietnamese.
Lt. Calley, is that you?