In Speech, Bush to Ask Americans and Allies for Teamwork on Iraq

Washington Post ^ | 9-7-03 | Mike Allen

[GraniteStateConservative]

There's a conspiracy theory in there I bet.

;-}

[GraniteStateConservative]

Because voters aren't that sophisticated. How many voters know that Karzai basicly just rules Kabul? Once we internationalize this occupation, voters will be aware we are over there, but Iraq will kind of fade from their consciousness. Voters have always given approval to UN sanction of OIF and the occupation. Bush is just giving them what they want. Besides, Americans would rather blame the UN than our president for any missteps over in Iraq-- this gives them the ability to do so. I think this is perfectly practical politically.

[PeoplesRepublicOfWashington]

If you're an enemy of the U.S., looks like the Mogadishu strategy is a winner.

[Mo1]

Will he even mention the status of WMD? We are owed at least that!

I don't think so .. it was reported that will come out on a report by Kay sometime in the fall

[Finalapproach29er]

Democrats will scream that Bush is a failure. He'll hear about it for the next year. Just like we hear about Bush 41 not going all the way to Baghdad;Democrat hypocrisy is infinite. I worry people are starting to believe them through sheer repitition.

[GraniteStateConservative]

I think we may start to hear the Bush spin on this tonight. He has the chance to frame this however he wants before the Dems do. He can say that it was always his intention to seek out the UN-- he was just waiting for the right benchmarks to happen before doing so.

[ARCADIA]

We have resources to engage in pre-emptive war-- just not pre-emptive liberation/occupation.

How do you justify that statement. We have around 150,000 troops in Iraq; which is about 1/10,000% of our population. What rational basis can there possible be for claiming that we are tapped out? We would even be perfectly within our right to demand and obtain compensation from Iraq for our nation building effort. So it is not even a question of dollars.

We might as well pull the flag down and fly our pink bloomers.

[GraniteStateConservative]

And I don't think voters will pay attention to the "I told you so's" from the Dem candidates until the debates next year when it will be a single nominee making the statement. I think most voters will just be glad that he ended up doing the right thing in their minds-- regardless of how long it took for him to get there.

He can say we are at a new stage of Iraq's development (with the post-OIF Cabinet being sworn in, for example) and so it's time for a transition administered by the UN to begin.

[alnick]

Is anyone reading the WHOLE article???

They don't have to. These are the same people who go from thread to thread for the sole purpose of smearing the president. They already know that they will attack what the president says and does tomorrow, next week, next month, and next year, and the fact that they don't yet know what he'll be doing at those times is just a technicality.

[GraniteStateConservative]

Regarding active personnel, we are "tapped out" as defined by being able to do everything we want to do in Iraq and Afghanistan. We can draft others, of course. I'm talking about what we can use now.

We are not going to take money from Iraq. We are trying to show we aren't motivated by money. We are even asking nations holding Iraqi debt to forgive the debt. Besides, oil revenues are a fraction of what we need. The money Iraq gets from the UN's oil for food program goes to the Iraqis-- rebuilding schools and power plants and such-- and not to reduce our budget deficit.

Flying our pink bloomers? That's about right as it relates to this new resolution.

[ARCADIA]

1/10000% s/b 5.45/10,000%

[GraniteStateConservative]

Don't worry about the words in a speech. Look at the actions. I have written already on this thread regarding the negotiations we are in with the UNSC. We are publicly saying that we are wanting to cooperate to get UN support and nations like the French are acting like we are good friends-- always a bad sign.

[GraniteStateConservative]

I didn't bother to check, so you didn't need to adjust your percentage.

[MJY1288]

"Regarding active personnel, we are "tapped out" as defined by being able to do everything we want to do in Iraq and Afghanistan. We can draft others, of course. I'm talking about what we can use now."

Would you mind backing up this claim? not to mention that the only people clammering for more troops are pundits and media maggots, No request for more troops have come from those running the operation in Iraq

"The money Iraq gets from the UN's oil for food program goes to the Iraqis-- rebuilding schools and power plants and such-- and not to reduce our budget deficit.

The U.N. "Oil for Food" program was eneded months ago

[MJY1288]

March 17th, 2003 the U.N. ended all operations in Iraq and since April 9th, 2003 the US & UK forces have been in control of Iraq

[ARCADIA]

PNAC ?

[JamminJAY]

Regarding active personnel, we are "tapped out"
?
as defined by being able to do everything we want to do in Iraq and Afghanistan

The “active” folks I meet everyday appear to want pay back IMO.
Theres the usual “bailey complex” with newbies.
I'm a civi

Jammer

[section9]

But we don't have to give them everything they want. And we won't. You're proceeding from the assumption that every move to compromise is an unmitigated disaster. We need some help. If we need to compromise to get some help, I don't see the problem.

Politics is the art of the possible.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[MJY1288]

PNAC = People for a New American Century

[MJY1288]

Yikes

Make that Project for a New American Century....... Not "People"