Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

When will the administration ever speak honestly
Quote | Reply
So today, the former Iraqi PM (who was our guy) claimed that Iraq is slipping into civil war, and, to this, Cheney replied, there is no civil war, and all of this violence is only proof that the insurgents are reaching a point of desperation. In other words, we're really winning, and things are heading in a positive direction.

Do you think this administration will ever get tired of making dishonest assessments of the war? How refreshing would it be if a politician could just speak honestly and tell us the truth -- the truth that we all already know.

---------------------------
White House Disputes Iraq Is Sinking Into Civil War
By CHRISTINE HAUSER

Three years after the American-led invasion of Iraq, top Bush administration officials today reiterated their upbeat assessment of the American military effort and political progress in the country, insisting that the violence plaguing Iraq did not amount to civil war.

An escalation of sectarian killings since the bombing of a Shiite shrine in a city north of Baghdad last month has intensified assertions that the country is in the throes of a civil war. The latest came today from Iraq's former interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi, in an interview with the BBC.

Mr. Allawi said there had been a daily average of 50 to 60 people throughout the country being killed, "if not more" in the wake of the shrine attack in Samarra.

"If this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is," he said.

But Vice President Dick Cheney, asked about Mr. Allawi's remarks, disagreed and said that American military commanders on the ground in Iraq shared his view.

"I think the assessment that we get from Gen. George Casey, who's our man commanding in Iraq, from Zal Khalilzad, the ambassador, from John Abizaid, who is the general in charge of Central Command, doesn't square with that," Mr. Cheney said in an interview with the CBS News program "Face the Nation."

"Clearly there is an attempt under way by the terrorists, by Zarqawi and others, to foment civil war," he said, referring to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Al Qaeda's leader in Iraq. "That's been their strategy all along, but my view would be they've reached a stage of desperation from their standpoint."

Thousands of Iraqi civilians and military forces have been killed in insurgent attacks since the March 2003 invasion by troops from the United States and Britain as well as other nations that led to the toppling of Saddam Hussein. Almost daily images of car bombings, reports of American troops killed in roadside bombings and other attacks have dominated coverage of the war, and recently reports of dozens of bodies surfacing bound and executed in apparent revenge killings have added to the fare of violence.

Polls have been showing lower public support for the war than in years past and anemic approval ratings for President Bush.

Over the weekend, dozens of rallies have been held across the United States and around the world to protest the third anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, although they were far smaller than the large-scale marches that preceded the war.

American officials have pointed to the national elections in Iraq and the efforts by Iraq's Shiite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish factions to form a government as progress in a conflict that should be viewed in the wider context of a global war on terror.

President Bush, referring to the "liberation" of Iraq twice in a brief televised statement today, said that he was urging the Iraqis to continue to work on forming a unity government.

"Today as well marks the third anniversary of the beginning of the liberation of Iraq," Mr. Bush said.

"We are implementing a strategy that will lead to victory in Iraq. And a victory in Iraq will make this country more secure and will help lay the foundation of peace for generations to come," he added.

Mr. Cheney said that the bombing of the shrine in Samarra was an attempt by terrorists to stop the formation of a democratically elected government.

"So what we've seen is a serious effort by them to foment civil war, but I don't think they've been successful," he said.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said earlier this month that the United States would seek to avoid putting its forces in the middle of any civil war in Iraq and he has emphasized that America's goal was to prevent the violence from worsening into full-fledged sectarian fighting.

Mr. Rumsfeld wrote in a piece published in The Washington Post today that the fact that the Sunni Arab minority was participating in the new Iraqi government was one of the most important new developments in Iraq. He also pointed out that Iraqi political leaders themselves called for calm after the Samarra attack.

"The terrorists are determined to stoke sectarian tension and are attempting to spark a civil war," he wrote. "But despite the many acts of violence and provocation, the vast majority of Iraqis have shown that they want their country to remain whole and free of ethnic conflict."

Iraqi politicians have been working toward picking a prime minister and the newly chosen Iraqi parliament met for the first time this month.

Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the senior commander in Iraq, backed Mr. Cheney's assertion today, saying on "Fox News Sunday" that Iraq was not in the throes of civil war and that the violence in Iraq "is not necessarily widespread."

"There is sectarian tension and there is sectarian violence, but it's primarily focused in the center of the country around Baghdad," he said.

But Senator Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, disagreed with that assessment. "I think we have had a low-grade civil war going on in Iraq, certainly the last six months, maybe the last year," he said on the ABC News program "This Week" "Our own generals have told me that."

Mr. Allawi, who heads a secular alliance, said Iraq was moving towards the "point of no return" when the country would fragment.

"It will not only fall apart but sectarianism will spread throughout the region, and even Europe and the U.S. will not be spared the violence that results," he said.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [rundhc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What truth do you already know, and what is the basis of your beliefs?

Gee, a loser politician claims that all is disaster because he lost. Sounds like Al Gore.

You really have to deal with the fact that reporters are all over Iraq looking for the Civil War the NY Times declared. The only fly in the ointment is that they can't find it no matter where they look. Shops are open. Shelves are stocked with merchandise. Traffic jams abound. Satellite dishes and cell phones springing up everywhere.

I know you really, really want a civil war, rundhc. Keep declaring one. Someday, maybe you will actually be right.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It seems to be a slightly narrow definition of civil war to say that all commerce/traffic, etc. must cease for a state of civil war to exist.




f/k/a mclamb6
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [mclamb6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Look around France and you will find something a lot closer to civil war than in Iraq.

I guess it depends on what the definition of is is.

Keep cheering for a civil war and being manipulated exactly the way the Islamofacists desire. If you can get enough to agree with you, one day, you will be right.

Today is not that day.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am simply asking for some honest assessments rather than predictable orwellian political speak. Why draw the conclusion from that that I am also hoping for civil war? If you're content with having smoke blown up your ass, that's fine, that's your deal. But don't try to change the terms of the debate.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [rundhc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Why draw the conclusion from that that I am also hoping for civil war?"

Hmm, maybe because you cite post after post declaring a civil war.

I notice you aren't trying to defend that there is one. Nor do you cite the truths "that we all know" or your basis for them. Then you accuse me of changing the terms of the debate.

Funny.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Being manipulated? That's funny coming from one of the biggest Bush apologists around.




f/k/a mclamb6
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [mclamb6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
OK, fellow Islamofacists. Here is how it works. We can't beat the Americans, we can only use their media to defeat public opinion. This is how we will do it.

When the American reporters come to Iraq, they will never leave their hotel. They will cover news only by sending iraqis out to get news. The only news the American media will pay for is pictures of things burning and exploding, so lets give them a few photo ops every day.

After a few years, no matter what the reality on the ground, the media will declare a civil war and call for retreat by the Americans. Since the only pictures from Iraq will be our photo ops, we will be able to manipulate the stupid Americans to believe the phony images and give it up.

Then we get to really kick ass.

You are right, no manipulation there.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think I have cited articles talking about the prospect of civil war. I don't see that as cheering for a civil war. It is simply a matter of following the news and discussing it. That is what happens here all the time.

As an aside, you will note from previous posts that I have called for keeping the troops in Iraq, and not pulling them out. That is not because I want to see harm inflicted on them, but because I think we have an obligation to get Iraq under control since we fucked it up in the first place. It's Powell's Pottery Barn rule. Given that position, I am hardly rooting for a civil war.

Now back the original point, I am merely saying here that the adminstration has one MO. They constantly put the most positive but unrealistic spin on the facts. When you do that enough, you lose credibility. Except for a small bunch of Bush diehards, no one trusts these guys' assessments at this point. And it's just curious to see how long the administration will continue using failing tactics to manage the war. It all goes back to what I have said before: the administration knows one way of doing things and it can't adapt. The war plan remains the same, the spin remains the same. The plan keeps failing but it remains the same nonetheless. They just keep dithering their way toward irrelevance.
Last edited by: rundhc: Mar 19, 06 15:14
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [rundhc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm curious as to whether there is a specific reason you give more credibility to Allawi than to the Administration in describing the situation on the ground?

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [rundhc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
When you repeatedly post articles like this one saying that there is a civil war that the Administration denies, and go on to comment that Administrations never speaks honestly, it is hard not to conclude:

1. That you believe there is a civil war.

2. That you want a civil war.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Because he is Iraqi, because he is on the ground, because his facts don't seem exaggerated, and because, yes, he is not Bush and Cheney and doesn't have a history of puttiing only consistently positive spins on facts.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think that you can only conclude #1. Do I think we're falling into a civil war? Yes, that seems to be happening.

If I were to post numerous articles on global warming or bird flu, would that mean that I am rooting for either scenario? I mean, come on.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So why is it that, if things are getting better or improving, reporters are still forced to report only from the Green Zone or with large military escort?

Why do you assume that any and all news that comes from outside the Green Zone must be favorable such that the view is skewed as we see things from our vantage point here?

Aren't there people in the administration that have just as much incentive to emphasize the positive as Islamofascists need to emphasize the negative?




f/k/a mclamb6
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [rundhc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
OK, so you only believe that there is a Civil War.

Can you explain why no reporters seem to be able to find it?
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [mclamb6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"So why is it that, if things are getting better or improving, reporters are still forced to report only from the Green Zone or with large military escort?"

Reporters are prime targets in order to execute the plan described above. If they can't bottle up the reporters, they can't control the news that gets reported.

"Why do you assume that any and all news that comes from outside the Green Zone must be favorable such that the view is skewed as we see things from our vantage point here?"

I can't undestand this question, but I am going to guess that noting that the only news that gets reported is pictures of the latest fire or explosion addresses it.

"Aren't there people in the administration that have just as much incentive to emphasize the positive as Islamofascists need to emphasize the negative?"

I don't really think so since facts on the ground leave them too vulnerable to being disproved.

I think the best information comes from the top officers anyway. Anytime I hear one of our senior military officers speak, I always have the impression that he is telling everything exactly as he sees it. No spin. No word games. Just the truth explained to the best of his outstanding abilities.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Do you know the difference between a gerund and a present tense verb? Did they learn you that at Princeton?

"Do I think we're falling into a civil war? Yes, that seems to be happening."
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BTW, Art, while I don't want a civil war, I do hope that you and your party continue this hollow spin for the next couple years. The president has clearly lost his teflon. The words don't work anymore. They just piss people off. Keep it up, as you would say, and you may be welcoming some more democrats to government.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[quote]I am going to guess that noting that the only news that gets reported is pictures of the latest fire or explosion addresses it. [/quote][quote]

Maybe you should read more. I've read several sources that suggest things are worse than is being reported in the MSM.

What do you suggest is happening when there is a discovery of 15, 20, or 30 Iraqi bodies that were executed? A crime wave? Or does that fit a definition of low grade civil war?


And you don't think that you are so enamored with the speeches of the military officers is at all related to the fact that you support the war completely? Preaching to the choir so to speak?

What about the retired military folks that have a decidedly different view of Iraq? "Loser politicians" like Allawi apparently?

The facts on the ground can't "disprove" what folks in the administration have to say? Last throes and all that?




f/k/a mclamb6
Last edited by: mclamb6: Mar 19, 06 16:07
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [rundhc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Because he is Iraqi, because he is on the ground, because his facts don't seem exaggerated, and because, yes, he is not Bush and Cheney and doesn't have a history of puttiing only consistently positive spins on facts."

I guess I was just curious because Allawi has been previously pointed to as being a puppet of the administration and not to be trusted, and now he is being held up as reliable. I'm not sure how you have reached the conclusion that his facts aren't exaggerated, especially when he says that even Europe and the U.S. will not be spared the violence that will come from the Iraqi civil war. Quite the statement of impending doom. I think your last reason is most likely the closest reason to why you hold the opinion you do, which is fine. I would guess that, by the strictest definition, we are bringing about Civil War. Civil War is war inside a country by opposing factions, and we are training the Iraqi army to do just that. If we accomplish our goal of turning over defense of the country to itself, we will have, by definition, turned this into a civil war. I would guess that part of the reason the administration is saying it's not a civil war is because they believe the insurgency is largely made out of non-Iraqis.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [rundhc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes, I know the difference. The present tense verb was your initial obvious implication.

The gerund is your backtracking.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [mclamb6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"I've read several sources that suggest things are worse than is being reported in the MSM."

I don't read the Daily Kos.

"What do you suggest is happening when there is a discovery of 15, 20, or 30 Iraqi bodies that were executed? A crime wave? Or does that fit a definition of low grade civil war?"

Unfortunately, I would classify this as the Iraqi method of negotiation. The groups are posturing for position, mostly to control oil revenues. Americans carry banners and write letters to the editor. The French burn cars. The Iraqis stage attacks on the helpless and kidnappings.

This is not a low grade civil war any more than the demonstrations in France yesterday. Interesting that you use the qualifier "low grade" now when you haven't before, and you likely won't later.

"What about the retired military folks that have a decidedly different view of Iraq?"

I haven't heard any non political senior military people speak in terms I thought were anything other than what they honestly believed. That is not the same as saying they are necessarily correct.

The last throes analysis was obviously wrong. No question about that. You haven't heard it repeated.
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It seems rather ridiculous for you to try to tell me what I think, especially when you can't point to any hard facts. If I thought that this was a civil war, I'd say it. But my impression right now is that it's too close to call. I'd more say that we're on the brink. But clearly the situation is not good and it is getting worse.

Your declarations about what I really think (or don't think), beyond being presumptuous and just plain twittish, also distract from the main point -- this administration will always try to put lipstick on a pig, no matter how obvious it is. It's just in their DNA to not tell the truth.
Last edited by: rundhc: Mar 19, 06 17:46
Quote Reply
Re: When will the administration ever speak honestly [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 




f/k/a mclamb6
Quote Reply