5 years ago today our commander in chief flew onto a naval carrier in full pilot regalia and vowed that our mission in Iraq had been accomplished!
What would that banner read today?
"What is our mission in Iraq?" or "Bush's tragic legacy"? "Next Step Iran"?
Come on. I know you can make a stab.
"Anybody else for President"
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
5 years ago today our commander in chief flew onto a naval carrier in full pilot regalia and vowed that our mission in Iraq had been accomplished!
That's simply not true. He told the crew that
their mission in Iraq had been accomplished. That craft was returning from deployment in Iraq and in fact, their mission of toppling Saddam's government had been accomplished. IMHO, he was trying to congratulate the crew.
Not that it wasn't idiotic to have a blanket statement behind him at the time on a giant banner, no one cares about the story if the picture can be drawn with a headline (and photo) for years to come. Really, why bother with the details...
Please don't make me defend Bush.
You just did.
What would you have on the banner, "Almost Mission Accomplished" or "Saddam Was Hanged" or
"The Surge Is Working"?
If I were a PR guy I would have put USS Enterprise (or whatever), Operation Iraqi Freedom, MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.
Saddam was not hanged at that time, the surge was never even thought of, and that crew had completed their mission. So your suggestions don't even make sense.
And telling the truth is really not defending someone. If you told me Hitler ate babies I'd have to point out that by all accounts, he was a vegetarian. That's not exactly defending him.
How about "We Will Always Remember" for anyone not at the WTC that day.
I wouldn't exactly call it fate that in the nearing seven years hence, there's been no major terrorist attack on the U.S. Something someone's doing is having an effect. I'm betting a great deal of it is those troops we have in the Middle East.
Mission Accomplished.
okay, I just don't believe what they're saying. You really have to swallow a lot to believe he meant "that mission" and "that ship". Think back to that time and be honest with yourself. We all thought he meant the fighting was over. So did he.
And, as long as we're being honest, I don't recalling anyone arguing the point at the time. It wasn't until later as fighting continued.
So, things didn't go quite as planned. Wars are kind of like that.
quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle
And, as long as we're being honest, I don't recalling anyone arguing the point at the time. It wasn't until later as fighting continued.
So, things didn't go quite as planned. Wars are kind of like that.
Yeah, because same as now, not much opposing discussion around here was tolerated. But there was plenty of disagreement nationally as to how much trouble we had gotten ourselves into with no real understanding of the potential for civil war. We're about to observe how history gets revised.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle
And, as long as we're being honest, I don't recalling anyone arguing the point at the time. It wasn't until later as fighting continued.
So, things didn't go quite as planned. Wars are kind of like that.
Yeah, because same as now, not much opposing discussion around here was tolerated. But there was plenty of disagreement nationally as to how much trouble we had gotten ourselves into with no real understanding of the potential for civil war. We're about to observe how history gets revised.
Are you talking about before or after the war began?
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
okay, I just don't believe what they're saying. You really have to swallow a lot to believe he meant "that mission" and "that ship". Think back to that time and be honest with yourself. We all thought he meant the fighting was over. So did he.
Clearly it had overtones of the invasion in general - which was accomplished. Operation Iraqi Freedom was mission accomplished. In fact, the invasion was one of the finest examples of a land based invasion in history. That was what the ship was returning from. Mission Accomplished.
Now the aftermath and the occupation, well... turns out it wasn't the love fest some jackass in the pentagon told us it would be. I don't believe he ever said "we have quelled all resistance and there is nothing but love in Baghdad now."
- - -
Here are some exerts from that speech.
George W. Bush, May 1, 2003.
quote:
Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended...
. . .
We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We are bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous. We are pursuing and finding leaders of the old regime, who will be held to account for their crimes.
. . .
Other nations in history have fought in foreign lands and remained to occupy and exploit. Americans, following a battle, want nothing more than to return home. And that is your direction tonight. After service in the Afghan and Iraqi theaters of war — after 100,000 miles, on the longest carrier deployment in recent history — you are homeward bound. Some of you will see new family members for the first time — 150 babies were born while their fathers were on the Lincoln. Your families are proud of you, and your nation will welcome you.
Whole text available at:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/01/iraq/main551946.shtml
Of course, he also says:
quote:
The war on terror is not over, yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide.
Which, one could argue, he has changed his tune on.
The banner was a stupid simplification and totally ignored the ongoing battles after toppling the standing military. But, per the facts, the Mission was accomplished. The crew was going home.
Do you see what I was talking about having read (at least parts) of the speech?
Yes. And from a disection by a legal mind it makes sense and was accurate. I think few outside of Bush supporters, including myself, thought of it in those terms at that time. To be gracious, one could say it was a PR blunder (or PR genious gone bad) but I just don't feel gracious to the man. After watching his press spokeswoman speak last night it just looks like spin.
I'm sure those guys on the ship felt sure they knew what he was saying as their particular mission was accomplished. The general public wasn't in on the joke.
You mean to say you think W didn't communicate something clearly? Remember, childrens do learn.
[:P]
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
You mean to say you think W didn't communicate something clearly? Remember, childrens do learn.
[:P]
He won't measure well against Roosevelt, Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton for communicating to the masses.[;)] However, I doubt he came up with the whole pr moment. Except perhaps for piloting the jet.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
You mean to say you think W didn't communicate something clearly? Remember, childrens do learn.
[:P]
He won't measure well against Roosevelt, Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton for communicating to the masses.[;)] However, I doubt he came up with the whole pr moment. Except perhaps for piloting the jet.
Yes he can pilot a Jet.
For some, simple buttons are baffling!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C9bkuJliMY
Sorry RM but it was just funny. Looks like my mom (71) trying to use the coffee makers at QT.
Spinning Iraq
Published: May 3, 2008
"President Bush will never live down "Mission Accomplished" — and should not. When the White House's spinners spun that claim five years ago (remember the aircraft carrier?), it seemed cocky and premature. As Mr. Bush continues his $526 billion war-without-end in Iraq, it seems stunningly deceitful.
The only mission that needs to be accomplished is an orderly exit from Iraq, and Mr. Bush is no closer to acknowledging that reality. Neither is Senator John McCain. All Congress seems capable of is hand-wringing.
So it is up to Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton to revive the national debate on Iraq — and up the pressure on the White House. While it is clear that Mr. Bush has no intention of coming up with an exit strategy, there are things he could do to give his successor a better chance at containing the chaos after American troops leave.
A rational debate must first recognize that Iraq is still a very dangerous place. An increase in American forces last year initially produced a steep decline in insurgent attacks. But attacks in April killed more than 50 United States troops — the highest death toll for a single month since last September.
Americans also need a full accounting of the American-financed and American-led military training programs in Iraq, and a better explanation of why Iraqi forces remain so weak. Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki's decision to finally challenge some Shiite militias was a good thing, but it exposed how the Iraqi Army remains unprepared — even now — to fight by itself.
We are encouraged that Mr. Maliki chose to talk to Tehran about its role in arming and financing militias. It is long past time for Iranian leaders to hear directly — and firmly — from their Shiite brethren in Baghdad that such destabilizing behavior must stop. The United States also needs to engage Iran, Syria and all of Iraq's neighbors. They need to understand that more chaos in Iraq is not in their interest.
It is shocking that the United States and Iraq still have no strategy for dealing with more than 4 million Iraqis who have been driven from their homes; 2.7 million people are internally displaced, and there are another 1.5 million or more refugees in Syria and Jordan. This is not only a question of human suffering. It threatens to spread Iraq's chaos far beyond its borders.
Both Iraq and the United States must take responsibility. Baghdad, awash in oil profits, must provide more aid to its own people. Washington must provide more aid and allow in many more than the 12,000 refugees it has pledged to accept for this year. We fear that it is unlikely to meet even that meager target.
The list of failings and missions not accomplished doesn't stop there. Millions of Iraqis still don't have clean water and medical care, thousands are jobless, the government is still dragging its feet on important reforms like an oil sharing law.
Mr. Bush no longer declares "Mission Accomplished." Quite the opposite. He has made clear that he will keep troops in Iraq until he leaves office — and then abandon the mess to his successor. The three senators who want his job should insist that he address these problems now."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/03/opinion/03sat1.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin