Rumsfeld vs. Cheney vs. Bush vs. Reality on Iraq
By: Lowell
Published On: 6/27/2005 1:00:00 AM
Don Rumsfeld (8/25/03): "The dead-enders [in Iraq] are still with us, those remnants of the defeated regimes who'll go on fighting long after their cause is lost."
(2/3/05): "The insurgency has clearly been at a level that has been more intense than anticipated."
(6/26/05): "[The insurgency] could go on for any number of years" and "I would anticipate you're going to see an escalation of violence between now and the December elections" and "Coalition forces, foreign forces are not going to repress that insurgency." (hmmm....must be all those "unknown unkowns" again!)
Dick Cheney (4/29/91):"I think that the proposition of going to Baghdad is also fallacious....it would have been a mistake for us to get bogged down in the quagmire inside Iraq."
(3/16/03): "My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators [in Iraq]."
(6/20/05): "I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency."
George W. Bush (5/1/03): "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended.'' (NOTE: since then, nearly 1,600 American service personnel have been killed and more than 6,000 wounded in Iraq)
(10/30/04): "We are shrinking the area where terrorists can operate freely. We have the terrorists on the run.''
(4/28/05): "We're making really good progress in Iraq,"
(5/31/05): The insurgents are "frustrated and desperate."
CENTCOM Commander Gen. John Abizaid (6/23/05): "I believe there are more foreign fighters coming into Iraq than there were six months ago....We are not trying to paint a rosy picture [of the situation in Iraq]."
Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Richard Myers (4/27/05): "I think [the insurgents'] capacity stays about the same and where they are right now is where they were almost a year ago."
OK now, everybody, you got that straight? Here's a little multiple choice test to check. 1) The insurgency in Iraq is winning/losing/staying about the same/who the hell knows? 2) Bush Administration officials did/did not predict that this would happen? 3) You should/should not believe a word these people have to say now about Iraq?
The answers are obvious.
Comments
Well, what are we go (JOE SNYDER - 4/4/2006 11:27:08 PM)
Well, what are we going to do... fighting a conventional war would take a decade, if we nuke them we will probably be sanctioned by alot of countries, and if we do nothing I have little doubt that the Iranians nuclear weapons would be going off in this country at some point. No easy answere.
Making matters ev (Brian Chandler - 4/4/2006 11:27:08 PM)
Making matters even more suspicious is the fact that Iran has the second-largest natural gas reserves in the world, and the third-largest oil reserves. So what does Iran need nuclear power for? Inquiring minds want to know.
IF they were trying to acquire WMDs then it would be another issue which would have to be delt with. Why is any country developing nuclear energy, the simple anwer for your enquiring mind is that oil is at 60 dollars a barrel now. Enquire no longer, we have used half the known oil reserves in the world and every single nation has plans to build reactors. The fuel to fuel these 100s of nuclear reactors has to come from some where. One of your options is to go to war. Do you think Russia or China will stand down if they see their energy future sealed. Sure if our military could go in and occupy Iran, it would be a windfall for all Americans. For an enquiring mind what do you think Russia's response would be. We would have another Cuban missile crisis. Attacking Iran will drive up the price of oil to $100 dollars a barrel easily and will not accomplish any thing else. With a 100% assurity you can bet that we will not attack Iran like we did Iraq. Congressmen may make tough statements in front of cameras so that their supporters will take note but a war with Iran by the US or Israel will never happen. An attack will not happen. Iraq did not have any substantial fighting force, Russia and China both have been supplying Iran with the most state of the art missile defense and offense weapons. This would not be another Iraq war, it simply want happen. A couple of years from now look back at these events and you will see, a war with Iran will not happen. Actually it is the key to the Middle East undoubtly but never the less it will not happen because it would be too much for Russia and China to loose. If we want Iran the way would be through Russia and China, it will not happen, 100% assurity. Brian
Aside from the fact (Teddy - 4/4/2006 11:27:08 PM)
Aside from the fact you cannot trust anything "these people" say there was, don't forget, General Shinseki who warned them ahead of the invasion of Iraq that it would take at least double the number of troops for a successful occupation of the country, and he was forcibly retired (i.e., fired). There were other lonely voices raised against Chalabi's predictions. I recall that his comments were treated as gospel before he, too, was forcibly retired out of his office in Baghdad. "These people" are not educable.