Marijuana.com

Higher Logic

Bush: No Iraq Pullout Without Victory

The White House held out the prospect Tuesday that U.S. troop levels in Iraq could be reduced soon, but President Bush insisted he would not withdraw U.S. forces "without having achieved victory."

Bush is scheduled to make a Wednesday address that will launch a new series of speeches aimed at bolstering public support for the increasingly unpopular conflict.

On Tuesday, during a visit to the U.S.-Mexican border, he said any decisions he makes will be based on the recommendations of top U.S. commanders.

"If they tell me we need more troops, we'll provide more troops," he said. "If they tell me we've got a sufficient level of troops, that'll be the level of troops.

"If they tell me that the Iraqis are ready to take more and more responsibility and that we'll be able to bring some Americans home, I will do that."

But he said he would not let the U.S. troops killed in Iraq "die in vain" by withdrawing before a stable, democratic Iraq emerges.

"That's what's important for the American people to understand—that, one, we are not going to cut and run; two, we'll achieve our objective; and three, the president is going to listen to those who are on the ground who can make the best assessment," Bush said.

About 159,000 American troops are in Iraq, up from about 138,000 in the summer, as the country prepares for its third round of voting this year.

Iraqis are set to select a permanent National Assembly December 15, after choosing a transitional parliament in January and approving a constitution in October.

The Pentagon has said that the level of troops is likely to go back down to the summer's level after the election.

The United States invaded Iraq in March 2003 on the contention that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was trying to obtain nuclear weapons and had concealed chemical and biological weapons stockpiles from U.N. weapons inspectors.

No such weapons were found once Hussein was toppled, and American troops have been battling a persistent insurgency since his government collapsed in April 2003.

The Bush administration now says U.S. troops must help stabilize Iraq's fledgling government and prevent the country from becoming a haven for Islamic militants linked to the al Qaeda terrorist network.

HL: The Administration now says that the US troops must help establish a democracy. I could have sworn it was the goal all along.

The U.S. death toll reached 2,110 Tuesday when a roadside bomb killed two U.S. soldiers north of Baghdad, and support for the conflict has dropped sharply in recent months.

Only 35 percent of those surveyed in a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll taken earlier this month said they approved of Bush's handling of the conflict, and 54 percent said the invasion had been a mistake.

From El Paso, Texas, Bush flew to Denver for a Republican fundraiser Tuesday.

A crowd of anti-war demonstrators met him after he landed, waving signs urging Bush's impeachment and a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. Some waved their middle fingers at reporters traveling with the president.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Bush would outline "real progress" in the training of Iraqi security forces during his Wednesday speech at the U.S. Naval Academy—the latest in a series of speeches this year meant to shore up public opinion.

In 2006, McClellan said, "the expectation is that conditions will be changing on the ground—we've been making real progress with the training of Iraqi security forces—and that conditions will permit us to be able to reduce our presence."

McClellan said the the White House will release a "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq," which he called an unclassified version of the plan the Bush administration has been following.

HL: Let me guess, this one really was never there, they are just going to put it together real quick; just like they put together the NIE report a month before making the case to invade Iraq.

Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat, told reporters Tuesday Bush has to close a "growing credibility gap" by offering a detailed explanation of what remains to be done in Iraq, not just what has been accomplished so far.

"It's easy to sloganize and talk about 'Everything's going well,'" said Reed, a member of the Armed Services Committee, in comments to reporters ahead of Bush's speech Wednesday.

"But I think those speeches over the last two years have left a big gap between the American public—what they hear from the president and what they see every day on television and read in the newspapers—and that gap has to close," he said. "This has got to be unvarnished."

In Washington, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters at the Pentagon that Bush will outline "in some detail" the U.S. plan to hand over increased control of the country to Iraqi authorities.

He said Iraqi troops are doing "a darn good job" but have to assume more responsibilities from Americans.

"They have to do it for themselves," Rumsfeld said. "There isn't an Iraqi that comes into this country and visits with me that doesn't say that. They know that. They know that they're the ones that are going to have to grab that country, and it's time."

Reed said Iraqi troops have become more technically and tactically adept, but questions remain about their makeup and loyalty to the elected government.

"If you've got competent units but they're basically militias in national uniforms, and you're uncertain of whose orders they're taking, that's not the security force you want," he said.

__________________
Crucial Web Hosting · Garden's Cure · Marijuana Recipes · Drug Testing Facts

Dilution · Substitution · Urine Testing · Hair Testing · Drug Testing FAQ

 

Mamabudz

Will we have a Banner again?... You know Victory Accomplished... Wanna make sure we don't miss the photo op.

Cassius

Nah, if there's a banner, I'm sure it will have been the idea and responsibility of the camera crews or some such, and that Bush will just happen to be standing in front of it without being aware of it, even if the subject of his speech is progress in Iraq.

__________________

{ Cassius, Your Humble Narrator }
{ Posting Guidelines | Erowid Drug Information Resource | instantfilehosting.com }

WNB

If victory means establishing a stable democracy, we're going to be over there a long time. Like, decades.

__________________
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

Higher Logic

@ Mama and Cassius.

And yeah, we always hear the "we won't leave until victory" soundbyte, but what exactly is a victory? If it's establishing a democracy, then like WNB said, we could literally be there for decades. It's an open-end statement.

My theory: victory is when Bush leaves office. He gets to walk away from another project and let someone else clean it up.

 

Buzzby

Bush has vowed that we won't leave Iraq until the Iraqi military can handle the insurrectionists and terrorists. If the full weight and power of the US military can't handle them (which it can't), I'd say that the Iraqi army will never be able to do it either.

As we learned in Vietnam, it is virtually impossible to "fight a war" against guerillas who fade back into the general population and never present a target. They show up wherever you are least prepared, strike, and disappear. Gaining good intelligence is almost impossible because these guys trust only the people with whom they've grown up, family and tribe. Subverting insiders has not been an easy task.

We be in Iraq until Hell freezes over or GWB leaves office, whichever comes first.

__________________

killer12382

Why can't we just declare peace with honor and go the H.ell home? Worked in Vietnam.

Higher Logic

Because a man like Bush cannot admit (a) defeat or (b) that he was wrong. It must be a Texas thang...

Murdock

Strangly enough, it seems like that's a Bush Supporter thing too.. Nothing is ever Bush's fault or responsibility...

S2

one year later

Boy if only Bush was so consistent.