Bush speech hails Iraq 'victory'

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by edesignuk, Mar 19, 2008.

  1. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #1
    BBC.

    Yeeeeeah, everything seems to be running along just tickety-boo.
     
  2. NAG macrumors 68030

    NAG

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2003
    Location:
    /usr/local/apps/nag
    #2
    Was he wearing a flight suit this time with a huge banner over his head?
     
  3. riscy macrumors 6502a

    riscy

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Location:
    China
    #3
    Such a success that CNN runs this headline :
    "Five years later, Bush says Iraq war must go on"

    CNN
     
  4. Peace macrumors Core

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #4
    Personally I hope Bush talks more to the public. It can only hurt McCain. Especially since McCain doesn't know the difference between the Sunni and Shiite.
     
  5. edesignuk thread starter Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #5
    Just a heavily modified version of SJ's reality distortion field in which actual goings on and opinion do not apply.

    Time to get back to the ranch me thinks...
     
  6. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #6
    There. Fixed that up for you.
     
  7. Qoxiivi macrumors regular

    Qoxiivi

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Location:
    London, UK
    #7
    It still never ceases to amaze me that in a supposedly free society politicians can get away with saying stuff like this and not, at the very least, be drowned out with laughter. And in front of the world's media as well!

    To me, that's the real story here; the real outrage. Not that a powerful, corrupt politician is spouting nonsense, but that the "free press" tolerates and broadcasts such hypocritical bull**** without significant comment.

    These people are supposed to be our objective experts on 'what's happening in the world' with a responsibility to uncover and expose dangerous lies and distortions that would otherwise be foisted upon us unchallenged by those whose actions we either collectively fund or acquiesce to. Instead they're little more than just the stenographers of established doctrine.

    Oh, and just to preempt people taking what I've written as an endorsement of Saddam Hussein - I'm not disagreeing that it's good he's gone. What I'm saying is that statements to such an effect by the mouthpiece of the very same people that supported him right throughout his worst atrocities (just as long as some money or political capital could be made out of them) is hypocritical in the extreme.
     
  8. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
  9. Qoxiivi macrumors regular

    Qoxiivi

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Location:
    London, UK
    #9
    Very good. Very good indeed :D
     
  10. Peace macrumors Core

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #10
    Personally I believe having Saddam in power was less harmful to the people of Iraq than having the US military there.
     
  11. Teh Don Ditty macrumors G4

    Teh Don Ditty

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland
  12. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #12
    And ignored, and irrelevant.
     
  13. Qoxiivi macrumors regular

    Qoxiivi

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Location:
    London, UK
    #13
    While writing my post I was going to qualify the section you've highlighted in anticipation of comments like the one you've made. It's an incredibly complicated thing to quantify whether or not they're 'better off'. All things considered though, I'm probably inclined to agree with you.

    The reason I didn't qualify my post is that as soon as one gets drawn into some kind of 'are they better off, aren't they' argument with someone arguing the war's justification on humanitarian grounds (removal of Saddam), one has already tacitly succumbed to an idealogical premise that I consider invalid. The war was NEVER about removing him because he was a bad person and thus the innocence, guilt, correctness or otherwise of those who perpetrated it cannot be assessed on such terms.

    Removing him was only ever a means to another amoral and self-interested end. The fact that he was a bad person makes the war easier to sell to the public. That we (US, UK) supported him throughout his worst crimes seems, although well documented, to merely be a mildly inconvenient and easily ignored historical gadfly.
     
  14. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #14
    I wonder what ever happened to that Bin Laden fella, you know the one Who Did Attack Us? Our President is simply a hypocrite and many other words. There was no reason for an Iraq war but Bushco,Billary,and McCaine dont get it.

    Bin Laden did 911 Mr President, not Saddam.
     
  15. fridgeymonster3 macrumors 6502

    fridgeymonster3

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    #15
    What makes matters worse is that even after the connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam was shown to be non-existent, the majority of Americans still believed (1 yr and 2yrs later) that Iraq had ties to Al Qaeda and was directly involved in 9/11. The Bushco PR campaign was great at convincing the average American that Iraq was involved.
     
  16. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #16
    Tell a lie enough times from the bully pulpit and you can have the people thinking anything you want.
    Saddam and Al Qaeda were working together.........Cheney,Bush & Rumsfeld all should be in Jail on this one. They lied, but then they lied over and over and over and even now Bushco maintains this lie.

    Trillions of dollars down the drain , 4,000 dead Americans and Bin Laden still free and the wrong guy ( Saddam ) caught. Way to go George, a real Hero, a real Christian and hows the Torturing going? Still spying on law abiding Americans? Still trampling our Constitution with signing statements? Its Embarrassing to be a American these days. Shameful indeed.
     
  17. chrmjenkins macrumors 603

    chrmjenkins

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    CA
    #17
    How can he, with a sound conscience, proclaim the war a success when both the expressed (free people n stuff) and latent (moar oils!) intentions have failed to bear good fruit?

    Oh right, I said conscience :D
     
  18. Mike Teezie macrumors 68020

    Mike Teezie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    #18
    He linked Iraq to 9/11 again?? RIght after his own Pentagon said that there was no connection?

    WOW.

    And people still believe this. No wonder idiots think Obama is a Muslim.
     
  19. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #19
    Sadly. I've barely heard this in the MSM. I must not be watching the right shows or reading the right papers or something. Maybe people just don't care anymore and just want him gone, or we're just so used to it it doesn't even faze us, but really, at least a mention and some fact checking would be nice.

    As would the Iraqi people according to every poll I've read.

    Bush said several times he wasn't concerned about him. Not that the MSM picked that up at all at the time. I didn't even know until Kerry mentioned it and a few people started playing a scene from a MM movie where he says it.

    Yeah. Unbelievable isn't it. Cheney too. Yet we were so focused on Obama's pastor and Spitzer's prostitutes it was barely covered. Almost 4,000 troops dead, people don't even realize it. Look at the threads about Iraq, barely a reply.

    Sorry to come across to pissy, but this is still a big issue and it just seems like no one cares anymore. :(
     
  20. MACDRIVE macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #20
    I still think Iraq was all about getting the oil. The U.S. Government has turned into a large oil company with weapons.
     
  21. Iscariot macrumors 68030

    Iscariot

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Toronteazy
    #21
    It's just issue burn-out, I think. What can anyone reasonably do at this point?
     
  22. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #22
    The media's bandwidth is limited. Everybody's bandwidth is limited. I believe it's well understood that we're more interested in who is going to replace Bush than what he says over the next few months. Based on his recent behavior, I think even Dubya knows that he's a short-timer, and more irrelevant with every passing day.
     
  23. stevegmu macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    A stone's throw from the White House.
    #23
    Do you have any proof of this? How much oil is the US getting from Iraq? Have US oil companies received the Iraqi oil contracts? If we are stealing all of their oil, why gas the price gone up? Tell me, which US oil companies have invested in Iraq's oil infrastructure?
     
  24. Mike Teezie macrumors 68020

    Mike Teezie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    #24
    I don't think you sounded pissy. I know what you mean - I think about my little brother in Iraq 10 times a day. It's obvious the focus has shifted, but as Iscariot said - what the hell are we supposed to do at this point?

    We're all burnt.

    It's such an unbelievably sad situation.
     
  25. fridgeymonster3 macrumors 6502

    fridgeymonster3

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    #25
    The NYT acknowledged in late 2007, I think November or so, that there is little evidence that American countries have been given an inside track to oil within Iraq. The only slight evidence would be the Russian oil company Lukoil that Iraq voided for their southern oil fields of West Qurna - which was the first deal of a major oil company that had been reversed since the beginning of the war.

    However, this doesn't mean oil wasn't a factor in invading Iraq. Perhaps our government thought if Iraq could be successfully turned into a democracy, than we could get cheaper oil imported from Iraq since it would, presumably, be our ally. I am against the war, but if our government was convinced that WMD's were there, and oil was a secondary reason, I don't see a major problem with that. As long as oil was not the primary reasons, because that would be reprehensible; losing the lives of our courageous soldiers and the lives of Iraqi civilians, just so Americans back at home wouldn't have to pay the extra $1 per gallon or so American corporations could get oil contracts (which as I said above hasn't really happened, to our knowledge or happen yet) and reap the benefits, would be one of the worst things ever. I'd happily pay my $4 a gallon if it saved our soldiers lives and Iraqi civilian lives.
     

Share This Page