Remember, Bush said in his January 10 speech (in which he proposed the surge) that the Iraqi government would have control of the country by November. He said 18 Iraqi brigades would take the lead in the surge, with the U.S. troops merely backing them up. So far only six brigades are established and working independently, and our own commanders say the Iraqi forces are not only infilitrated by militias, but not loyal to Al-Maliki. U.S. military strategists have said that "only" 800 sectarian killings a month would be considered "success", and the definition of "victory" has changed from a stable, prosperous democracy that would serve as a positive example to the entire Middle East to an essentially failed state in which large numbers of U.S. troops chase Al-Qaeda from one province to another in a bloody whack-a-mole surge.
Bush continually lowers the bar for "success", and each time he says "it's what we've said all along". Does he not realise that his speeches are public and recorded? Or does he feel he still has credibility with the American people?
This is not "Bush Derangement Syndrome", as the neocons term anyone guilty of not unquestioningly lapping up each new distortion the Decider speaks, but rather a simple credibility gap. We have heard all of this before, and it never gets better in "another six months". Each time that he asks for another six months he is optimistic about success, and each time the threat of failure is "grave". Years and years go by, but that last optimistic promise is as bad as the next. Bush is trying to referee a football game with baseball umpires, and we just have to give him "more time", or so he says.
In the meantime, his shills insult the vast majority of Americans by implying that lack of support for Bush is equivalent to supporting Al-Qaeda. They speak of nebulous "good news" that the media doesn't want us to hear. They point at specific bright spots and ignore the previously bright spots, such as Kurdistan and Basra, that are steadily growing dark. They ignore the current civilian casualties, while claiming concern for potential civilian casualties should we withdraw. They ignore the desperate situation this conflict has placed our allies in, and call for even greater sacrifices from those nations that have already aided us. To these shills, the only thing that is important is that "their guy" doesn't go down in disgrace, but he already has. These shills constantly say that it is "far too early" to evaluate the surge, but then proceed in the same virtual breath to evaluate it in a positive light. And they sincerely believe that nobody will notice this contradiction.
Bush tries to portray Iraq war linked to al-Qaida
Amid low public support for his handling of the Iraq war, U.S. President George W. Bush on Tuesday tried to link the rampant violence in Iraq to the al-Qaida terrorist organization.
"Al-Qaida in Iraq is a group founded by foreign terrorists, led largely by foreign terrorists and loyal to a foreign terrorist leader: Osama bin Laden," Bush said at the Charleston Air Force Base, South Carolina, one day after Democratic presidential candidates called at a debate in the city for withdrawal from Iraq.
"The merger between al-Qaida and its Iraqi affiliate is an alliance of killers and that is why the finest military in the world is on their trail," Bush said.
In his speech, Bush cited declassified intelligence to demonstrate that al-Qaida's operation in Iraq was a direct threat to the United States, and criticized lawmakers for calling for pulling American troops out of Iraq.
"I've presented intelligence that clearly establishes this connection" (between Iraq violence and al-Qaida), Bush said.
"Some say that Iraq is not a part of the broader war on terror ... They claim that the organization called al-Qaida in Iraq is an Iraqi phenomenon, that it's independent of Osama bin Laden and that it's not interested in attacking America," he said.
"That would be news to Osama bin Laden," Bush said.
U.S. intelligence has showed that al-Qaida had no active cells in Iraq when the United States launched war against Iraq in March 2003, and that the group's operation in Iraq is much larger now than before the war.
Despite efforts to rally support for his war policy, the U.S. public see Bush as intransigent on Iraq and prefer that the Democratic-controlled Congress make decisions about a possible withdrawal of U.S. forces, a new poll showed.
The Washington Post-ABC News poll published on Tuesday found 55 percent of those surveyed said they trust congressional Democrats on the war, compared with 32 percent who said they trust Bush. And by 2 to 1, Americans said Congress, rather than the president, should make the final decision about when to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq.
Overall attitudes about the war in Iraq continue to be decidedly negative, with more than six in 10 saying that given the costs, the war was not worth fighting, and 55 percent said they support legislation that would set a deadline of next spring for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq, according to the poll.
Source: Xinhua
No comments:
Post a Comment