AP (via Drudge):
Despite calls for change [in Iraq policy], Bush said, "Our goal has not changed. Our goal is a country that can defend, sustain and govern itself, a country that which will serve as an ally in this war. Our tactics are adjusting." ... Presidential spokesman Tony Snow said that while Bush might change tactics, he would not change his overall strategy. ... Bush, at a political fundraiser in Washington for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, railed against Democrats who criticize the war. Calling the Democrats the party of "cut and run," Bush said voters need to ask: "Which political party has a strategy for victory in this war on terror?'" ... [REPEAT:] Presidential spokesman Tony Snow said that while Bush might change tactics, he would not change his overall strategy.
Tom Petty:
Well I wont back down, no I wont back down.If you want your country to backdown while under attack by the jihadothugs, then vote Democrat. If you want to fight until we win, then vote GOP. It's that simple. Just ask Ned Lamont.
You can stand me up at the gates of hell, But I wont back down
Gonna stand my ground, wont be turned around, and Ill keep this world from draggin me down. Gonna stand my ground and I wont back down
Hey baby, there aint no easy way out. Hey I will stand my ground, and I wont back down.
Well I know whats right, I got just one life. In a world that keeps on pushin me around, but Ill stand my ground and I wont back down
1 comment:
"Our goal has not changed. Our goal is a country that can defend, sustain and govern itself, a country that which will serve as an ally in this war."
This was not the goal. After all, before America attacked this country it was defending, sustaining and governing itself. It was doing so despite foreign intrusions into its airspace, a starvation inducing trade embargo and the sound and thorough WMD inspections. Of course, this was accomplished by a dictator but nonetheless, it was the U.S. that rendered the country - indefensible, unsustainable and in the midst of a civil war and foreign invasion, that makes governing near impossible.
Further, Saddam was actually an ally in the "war against terror" as it was also in his interest of defending, sustaining and governing Iraq that it not be infiltrated by terrorists such as Al Qaeda.
A change of tactics not of strategy?
The strategy: Secure Iraq's oil supply. Tactics: U.S. friendly regime change.
Since the U.S. attacked Iraq back in 2003, its number one accomplishment was securing the oil supply. Orderly, U.S. friendly regime change, however, has proved a dismal failure. So, a change of tactics - maybe, drop Maliki?; accept the disintegration of Iraq into three federations?. Whatever the change in tactics, the strategy remains intact - secure the oil supply. Do this irrespective of: civil war, tens (maybe hundreds) of thousands killed, the billions spent, the loss of U.S. influence world wide.
"If you want your country to backdown while under attack by the jihadothugs, then vote Democrat. If you want to fight until we win, then vote GOP. It's that simple. Just ask Ned Lamont."
-It isn't a Democrat versus Republican problem. Democrats and Republicans share a decades long foreign policy outlook differing only on how to put a face on it. They share the strategy of securing the oil supply. Neither will back down from this. Since securing the oil supply is largely accomplished, the U.S. has already "won" although not without all the costs that readers may or may not care less about.
-the U.S. is attacking Arabs, it is not under attack although its attack has produced a counter-attack; the U.S.s attack has been numerically and materially devastating; the U.S. has paid a small cost relatively speaking in human and material terms.
-"backdown"? What a way to characterize such a complex and massively destructive event as perpetrated by the U.S. against the people of Iraq. Untold killing reduced to a simplistic metaphor of not giving in when the "giving in" would really be an acknowledgement that the scale of the atrocities and destruction wrought on Iraq by the U.S. cannot be justified.
Post a Comment