A Dead-Ender’s Dead-Ender
Dear Leader sat around the campfire for a chat with some wingnuts; here are some excerpts:
The president made his intentions clear Friday afternoon. He’s not going to abandon the surge, despite all the talk of his administration being willing to move to the Iraq Study Group model of the Iraq war. He views “this period as fundamental for deciding whether or not this nation is going to be secure throughout a lot of the 21st century. And therefore when it comes to the war in Iraq, as you know, I made a decision not to leave but to put more in, and I will support our troops and support Gen. Petraeus, his plan.”
[…]
Pressed on whether the surge can be sustained despite all the difficulties, he said, “That’s the challenge, but I’m optimistic about it.” He said that back in January, “I suspect you’d be asked the same question, particularly since the outcry was quite significant.” But he went with the surge.“How can he possibly do this,” he said, characterizing what critics of the war were thinking. “Can’t he see? Can’t he hear?”
How dare they mock his steely resolve!
He worries about “exhaustion as we’re dealing with these radicals who have a lot of energy and who aren’t going to be tired.” But he said he has “tools” in the debate, including “the bully pulpit and the ability to convince the American people.” He wants both to convince them that success is still possible, and “remind my fellow citizens of what the consequences of failure will be.”
He’ll scare the shit out them — that’s how he’ll get them to support throwing more resources into the meat grinder.
He says he has four audiences when he broadcasts his commitment to the mission in Iraq: the American public; the American military and their families; the Iraqis (“because there are a lot of people who doubt America’s resolve”); and the enemy (“the enemy thinks that we are weak — they’re sophisticated people, and they listen to the debate”). As for that last audience, “I really think the additional forces into Iraq surprised them—a lot.”
He bravely defied the Democrat-traitor-appeasers, and struck fear into the hearts of the terrorists! Well, just look at the results!
He marveled at one of the media’s lines of questioning at his Thursday press conference, “They asked me yesterday ‘Are you sure it’s al Qaeda [in Iraq]?’ ‘Yeah, how do you know?’ ‘Because they swore allegiance to Osama bin Laden is how I know. Yeah, it’s al Qaeda.’ My point though to people is that it is the same crowd that killed 3,000 that is trying to drive us out of Iraq.”
‘I said it was al-Qaeda, and they didn’t believe me! The nerve! I know it’s al-Qaeda; I just do. Shut up, I am the President!‘
President Bush rejected the notion that he will be constrained by the availability of troops come next spring and will have to draw down the surge. He said, with a pointed ending to his answer, “The key factor that I’m confident that David Petraeus is looking at as he comes back is how to achieve the initial objective he set out, which is to provide enough security for the political process to move forward. I’m sure that in the bowels of the Pentagon people are looking at troop rotations and troop movements, but that is not the primary objective of our commander on the ground—next question.”
Asked specifically if that meant that Petraeus would get the troops to continue past the spring if he needed them, he said, “We will work as hard as we can. People said we couldn’t find the troops for the last reinforcement as well,” but he added that he’s mindful of troop rotations and time in theater.
The ability to conjure troops is only a question of will; never underestimate Dear Leader’s will.
George W. Bush remains committed to his overarching vision of freedom, with which he opened this afternoon’s discussion: “There is such a thing as the universality of freedom. I strongly believe that Muslims desire to be free just like Methodists desire to be free.” Some may doubt that, but no one can doubt this president’s resolve in Iraq.
Yes, they want to be free. From colonialists:
He said, eventually, “We need to be in a position that can sustain a long-term troop presence[.]”
Right. Only an evil-doer would resist that kind of project in his country.
You left out one of the best quotes. While sitting downstairs at the White House on Friday with the varied and diverse group of Bush worshippers, he said
and then the President said, “were those others, who said they supported me, a bunch of dumbasses, or what?”
“I’m sure that in the bowels of the Pentagon people are looking at troop rotations and troop movements, but that is not the primary objective of our commander on the ground—next question.”
OK, what would be the primary objective of our commander on the ground?
Gah. You’re right, I missed it totally. I’ve lost my blogging mojo and am trying to work my way back to it. So I fuck up with shit like that. Bear with me, please, until I find it.
Bush:I’m sure that in the bowels of the Pentagon people are looking at troop rotations and troop movements, but that is not the primary objective of our commander on the ground—next question.”
islamofascist said: “OK, what would be the primary objective of our commander on the ground?”
I think the primary objective of our commander on the ground would be to stay high on substances that allow him to believe that there is no connection between troop rotations and troop movements and his primary objectives. He must remain disconnected from reality to an extent that allows him to dismiss the relationship between the availability of resources and the ability to attain primary objectives. That way he can run out the clock and dump the whole mess into the lap of his successor.
In other words, he will ingest any substance rather than worry his pretty little head about ugly, gritty questions like “Are there are enough troops to accomplish the primary objective?” and “How will we know when the ‘primary objective’ has been achieved?”
Can’t you just see Bush in the role of the “Sorcerer’s Apprentice?” The complete moron trying to control events and powers he knows nothing about.
The Goddess help us all.
OK, what would be the primary objective of our commander on the ground?
…To smile and clap louder.
“He worries about “exhaustion as we’re dealing with these radicals who have a lot of energy and who aren’t going to be tired.” ”
And, if you shoot them, their liquid metal bodies will just reform.
“I’m sure that in the bowels of the Pentagon people are looking at troop rotations and troop movements, but that is not the primary objective of our commander on the ground—next question.””
Umm… yes it is. He has to know who he has, where he has them, and when they’re going to be available. If he’s not paying attention to that, he’s, frankly, not fit to command.
Is anyone else getting the feeling like BushCo is name dropping Patraeus a little TOO much? I smell “fall boy”
George W. Bush remains committed to his overarching vision of freedom, with which he opened this afternoon’s discussion: “There is such a thing as the universality of freedom. I strongly believe that Muslims desire to be free just like Methodists desire to be free.”
Were Methodists ever in jeopardy?
“I’m sure that in the bowels of the Pentagon people are looking at troop rotations and troop movements, but that is not the primary objective of our commander on the ground—next question.””
Umm… yes it is. He has to know who he has, where he has them, and when they’re going to be available. If he’s not paying attention to that, he’s, frankly, not fit to command.
Is anyone else getting the feeling like BushCo is name dropping Patraeus a little TOO much? I smell “fall boy”.
According to Teh Deciderer, the “primary objective of our COTG” is to stall everything until January 2009, to keep the American troops from falling apart and the Iraqis from open revolt and the so-called mainstream media from asking too many impertinent questions before Dubya and his puppetmasters can bail out for Crawford or Paraguay and spend the rest of their unnatural lives blaming everything on the next President. If Petraeus wasn’t smart enough to see what a sackful of smouldering dogshit he was going to be handed, he’s not one-tenth as smart as his press releases — or else he’s got a better opinion of his own abilities (to change the ground rules of Operation Enduring FUBAR, or the minds of the fixated Oval Office occupants) than Cheney does of Halliburton.
Y’know, with such a target-rich environment, it seems a shame to concentrate fire on a non-issue. Petraeus, the “commander on the ground,” is, in fact, concerned with operations in Iraq. It is not his job to evaluate the availability of troops. He will request what he wants, and those above him will give him what they can find. He will then make do as best he can. That’s just the way it works.
As near as I have been able to determine, Petraeus is a smart, able, and dedicated general. When he commanded the 101st in Mosul, he apparently did an excellent job at rebuilding. He does not make policy. He is fulfilling his role as a military officer. I don’t think he deserves to be attacked. If anyone knows a reason why he does, I’d be interested to hear it.
Also, I agree he is being groomed to be the fall-guy. On a related note, I have been drinking. That is all.
Call me evil, but I hope the GOP wins in 08. I don’t want this cluster fuck to be blamed on the party of rationality and bring forth greater dolchstosslegende.
I don’t think he deserves to be attacked. If anyone knows a reason why he does, I’d be interested to hear it.
What if Petraeus’ legacy turns out to be that he acted as yet another Dick Myers, Peter Pace or Tommy Franks style cheerleader for Bush’s insane policies, if he has put his own career advancement above the lives of the soldiers under his command? Does he deserve to be attacked then? Because just by not resigning in protest a while ago that looks like the path he’s on. If he comes out with his progress report and shocks the White House by saying Iraq is a fucking disaster and we need to get the fuck out and then refuses to put his name to the White House version of his report then I’ll eat my hat.
“I’m sure that in the bowels of the Pentagon people are looking at troop rotations and troop movements, but that is not the primary objective of our commander on the ground—next question.””
I’m sure they’re looking at some kind of movements in the bowels of the Pentagon.
“It’s al-Qaeda we’re fighting, not Iraqis pissed off at a foreign ocuppier!”
“The surge just started yesterday! Give it a chance to work!”
Pathetic.
“I’m sure that in the bowels of the Pentagon people are looking…”
Colonoscopy on a grand scale!
OT, Shorter George Will:
If Republicans turn into Nazis fur real it’s all teh Defeatocrats’ fault.
Sure, these Methodists want freedom. But these are some of the worst Methodists in the world, really “the worst of the worst”. That’s why I’m holding them offshore, without access to courts, lawyers or even contact with their families. We’re feeding them extremely well, however, at least between harsh interrogation sessions. Sometimes after one of those babies, they can’t eat on their own for a couple weeks. Heh heh.
Eventually, we’ll win this generational struggle and then we can live in peace with our friends, the Methodists, as they enjoy their purple-fingered freedom. But until that time, we’re fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here…
mikey
“I really think the additional forces into Iraq surprised them [the enemy]—a lot.”
Yes, announcing the surge in January then saying it would be completed by June must have really surprised the enemy. Must have been a really pleasant surprise, too. At least we can find solace in the fact that they will never know when/if we leave because telling them when/if we’re leaving would simply embolden them.
Ding Ding Dingle berries
Methodist:
“Alex, I’ll take the Old Testament for $800.”
“I sure hope this one is about the Song of Solomon – it’s my favorite book in the Good Book. I read it a lot, there sure are some important insights. Me and the missus read it together at least twice a week these days. I’m sure glad my sister – she’s an atheist, but we have hope for her soul, she’s found Betty Bowers on the internet, so there’s hope – anyway, she got us the illustrated version and it’s a real page-turner!”