We are in Year 4 of the Iraq War.
I wonder if any of these people or institutions will ever be called out for their stupidity? From the folks at FAIR:
Declaring Victory
“Iraq Is All but Won; Now What?”
(Los Angeles Times headline, 4/10/03)
“Now that the combat phase of the war in Iraq is officially over, what begins is a debate throughout the entire U.S. government over America’s unrivaled power and how best to use it.”
(CBS reporter Joie Chen, 5/4/03)
“Congress returns to Washington this week to a world very different from the one members left two weeks ago. The war in Iraq is essentially over and domestic issues are regaining attention.”
(NPR’s Bob Edwards, 4/28/03)
“Tommy Franks and the coalition forces have demonstrated the old axiom that boldness on the battlefield produces swift and relatively bloodless victory. The three-week swing through Iraq has utterly shattered skeptics’ complaints.”
(Fox News Channel’s Tony Snow, 4/13/03)
“The only people who think this wasn’t a victory are Upper Westside liberals, and a few people here in Washington.”
(Charles Krauthammer, Inside Washington, WUSA-TV, 4/19/03)
“We had controversial wars that divided the country. This war united the country and brought the military back.”
(Newsweek’s Howard Fineman–MSNBC, 5/7/03)
“We’re all neo-cons now.”
(MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, 4/9/03)
“The war was the hard part. The hard part was putting together a coalition, getting 300,000 troops over there and all their equipment and winning. And it gets easier. I mean, setting up a democracy is hard, but it is not as hard as winning a war.”
(Fox News Channel’s Fred Barnes, 4/10/03)
“Oh, it was breathtaking. I mean I was almost starting to think that we had become inured to everything that we’d seen of this war over the past three weeks; all this sort of saturation. And finally, when we saw that it was such a just true, genuine expression. It was reminiscent, I think, of the fall of the Berlin Wall. And just sort of that pure emotional expression, not choreographed, not stage-managed, the way so many things these days seem to be. Really breathtaking.”
(Washington Post reporter Ceci Connolly, appearing on Fox News Channel on 4/9/03, discussing the pulling down of a Saddam Hussein statue in Baghdad, an event later revealed to have been a U.S. military PSYOPS operation–Los Angeles Times, 7/3/04)
Mission Accomplished?
“The war winds down, politics heats up…. Picture perfect. Part Spider-Man, part Tom Cruise, part Ronald Reagan. The president seizes the moment on an aircraft carrier in the Pacific.”
(PBS’s Gwen Ifill, 5/2/03, on George W. Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” speech)
“We’re proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who’s physical, who’s not a complicated guy like Clinton or even like Dukakis or Mondale, all those guys, McGovern. They want a guy who’s president. Women like a guy who’s president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It’s simple. We’re not like the Brits.”
(MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, 5/1/03)
“He looked like an alternatively commander in chief, rock star, movie star, and one of the guys.”
(CNN’s Lou Dobbs, on Bush’s ‘Mission Accomplished’ speech, 5/1/03)
Neutralizing the Opposition
“Why don’t the damn Democrats give the president his day? He won today. He did well today.”
(MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, 4/9/03)
“What’s he going to talk about a year from now, the fact that the war went too well and it’s over? I mean, don’t these things sort of lose their–Isn’t there a fresh date on some of these debate points?”
(MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, speaking about Howard Dean–4/9/03)
“If image is everything, how can the Democratic presidential hopefuls compete with a president fresh from a war victory?”
(CNN’s Judy Woodruff, 5/5/03)
“It is amazing how thorough the victory in Iraq really was in the broadest context….. And the silence, I think, is that it’s clear that nobody can do anything about it. There isn’t anybody who can stop him. The Democrats can’t oppose–cannot oppose him politically.”
(Washington Post reporter Jeff Birnbaum– Fox News Channel, 5/2/03)
Nagging the “Naysayers”
“Now that the war in Iraq is all but over, should the people in Hollywood who opposed the president admit they were wrong?”
(Fox News Channel’s Alan Colmes, 4/25/03)
“I doubt that the journalists at the New York Times and NPR or at ABC or at CNN are going to ever admit just how wrong their negative pronouncements were over the past four weeks.”
(MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, 4/9/03)
“I’m waiting to hear the words ‘I was wrong’ from some of the world’s most elite journalists, politicians and Hollywood types…. I just wonder, who’s going to be the first elitist to show the character to say: ‘Hey, America, guess what? I was wrong’? Maybe the White House will get an apology, first, from the New York Times’ Maureen Dowd. Now, Ms. Dowd mocked the morality of this war….
“Do you all remember Scott Ritter, you know, the former chief U.N. weapons inspector who played chief stooge for Saddam Hussein? Well, Mr. Ritter actually told a French radio network that — quote, ‘The United States is going to leave Baghdad with its tail between its legs, defeated.’ Sorry, Scott. I think you’ve been chasing the wrong tail, again.
“Maybe disgraced commentators and politicians alike, like Daschle, Jimmy Carter, Dennis Kucinich, and all those others, will step forward tonight and show the content of their character by simply admitting what we know already: that their wartime predictions were arrogant, they were misguided and they were dead wrong. Maybe, just maybe, these self-anointed critics will learn from their mistakes. But I doubt it. After all, we don’t call them ‘elitists’ for nothing.”
(MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, 4/10/03)
“Over the next couple of weeks when we find the chemical weapons this guy was amassing, the fact that this war was attacked by the left and so the right was so vindicated, I think, really means that the left is going to have to hang its head for three or four more years.”
(Fox News Channel’s Dick Morris, 4/9/03)
“This has been a tough war for commentators on the American left. To hope for defeat meant cheering for Saddam Hussein. To hope for victory meant cheering for President Bush. The toppling of Mr. Hussein, or at least a statue of him, has made their arguments even harder to defend. Liberal writers for ideologically driven magazines like The Nation and for less overtly political ones like The New Yorker did not predict a defeat, but the terrible consequences many warned of have not happened. Now liberal commentators must address the victory at hand and confront an ascendant conservative juggernaut that asserts United States might can set the world right.”
(New York Times reporter David Carr, 4/16/03)
“Well, the hot story of the week is victory…. The Tommy Franks-Don Rumsfeld battle plan, war plan, worked brilliantly, a three-week war with mercifully few American deaths or Iraqi civilian deaths…. There is a lot of work yet to do, but all the naysayers have been humiliated so far…. The final word on this is, hooray.”
(Fox News Channel’s Morton Kondracke, 4/12/03)
“Some journalists, in my judgment, just can’t stand success, especially a few liberal columnists and newspapers and a few Arab reporters.”
(CNN’s Lou Dobbs, 4/14/03)
“Sean Penn is at it again. The Hollywood star takes out a full-page ad out in the New York Times bashing George Bush. Apparently he still hasn’t figured out we won the war.”
(MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, 5/30/03)
Cakewalk?
“This will be no war — there will be a fairly brief and ruthless military intervention…. The president will give an order. [The attack] will be rapid, accurate and dazzling…. It will be greeted by the majority of the Iraqi people as an emancipation. And I say, bring it on.”
(Christopher Hitchens, in a 1/28/03 debate– cited in the Observer, 3/30/03)
“I will bet you the best dinner in the gaslight district of San Diego that military action will not last more than a week. Are you willing to take that wager?”
(Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly, 1/29/03)
“It won’t take weeks. You know that, professor. Our military machine will crush Iraq in a matter of days and there’s no question that it will.”
(Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly, 2/10/03)
“There’s no way. There’s absolutely no way. They may bomb for a matter of weeks, try to soften them up as they did in Afghanistan. But once the United States and Britain unleash, it’s maybe hours. They’re going to fold like that.”
(Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly, 2/10/03)
“He [Saddam Hussein] actually thought that he could stop us and win the debate worldwide. But he didn’t–he didn’t bargain on a two- or three week war. I actually thought it would be less than two weeks.”
(NBC reporter Fred Francis, Chris Matthews Show, 4/13/03)
Weapons of Mass Destruction
NPR’s Mara Liasson: Where there was a debate about whether or not Iraq had these weapons of mass destruction and whether we can find it…
Brit Hume: No, there wasn’t. Nobody seriously argued that he didn’t have them beforehand. Nobody.
(Fox News Channel, April 6, 2003)
“Speaking to the U.N. Security Council last week, Secretary of State Colin Powell made so strong a case that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein is in material breach of U.N. resolutions that only the duped, the dumb and the desperate could ignore it.”
(Cal Thomas, syndicated column, 2/12/03)
“Saddam could decide to take Baghdad with him. One Arab intelligence officer interviewed by Newsweek spoke of ‘the green mushroom’ over Baghdad–the modern-day caliph bidding a grotesque bio-chem farewell to the land of the living alongside thousands of his subjects as well as his enemies. Saddam wants to be remembered. He has the means and the demonic imagination. It is up to U.S. armed forces to stop him before he can achieve notoriety for all time.”
(Newsweek, 3/17/03)
“Chris, more than anything else, real vindication for the administration. One, credible evidence of weapons of mass destruction. Two, you know what? There were a lot of terrorists here, really bad guys. I saw them.”
(MSNBC reporter Bob Arnot, 4/9/03)
“Even in the flush of triumph, doubts will be raised. Where are the supplies of germs and poison gas and plans for nukes to justify pre-emption? (Freed scientists will lead us to caches no inspectors could find.) What about remaining danger from Baathist torturers and war criminals forming pockets of resistance and plotting vengeance? (Their death wish is our command.)”
(New York Times’ William Safire, 4/10/03)
Damn that liberal media. They really gave the administration what for on each and every one of its claims. How do the Republicans retain power in this climate?
Every comment correct. Distinguish between the major shooting war, in which our troops kicked butt and accomplished their mission(!), and the insurgency which is ongoing at a reduced casualty rate.
Dugger, I’ll Say It!
Classic Dugger.
Yes, please, let’s distinguish between removing Hussein’s regime from power and the ongoing fighting with the remnants of Hussein’s regime after they were removed from power.
Dugger, did you not read this article in the New York Times:
“The paramilitary Fedayeen were numerous, well-armed, dispersed throughout the country, and seemingly determined to fight to the death. But while many officers in the field assessed the Fedayeen as a dogged foe, General Franks and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld saw them as little more than speed bumps on the way to Baghdad. Three years later, Iraq has yet to be subdued. Many of the issues that have haunted the Bush administration about the war the failure to foresee a potential insurgency and to send sufficient troops to stabilize the country after Saddam Hussein’s government was toppled were foreshadowed early in the conflict.”
We’re still fighting the same god damn people but Dugger’s Gut tells him it’s not the same war so it isn’t. Idiot.
Let’s hear it for the end of the war! For, people have stopped dying…so quickly.
Hip hip…
If Bush says “Mission Accomplished” then Dugger believes it’s all over and done with. After all, “Bush has not told one documented lie, not one.” Dugger will have you believe Bush was telling the truth when he said the only mistake he made was trading Sammy Sosa. How could W have anticipated Sosa would start juicing himself up and hitting more home runs?
DUg, there is no distinction because if Bush had listened to the numerous warnings of if this exact post-war scenario, we may not be in this mess right now. The administration pushed the idea that the war would be quick and bloodless and the media enabled it. The arbitrary line you draw only serves to make you feel right. Do you think the media’s defense to these statements should be along the lines of, “were were only talking about the invasion, any insurgency is beside the point”? Would that convince anyone? Even you wouldn’t believe it.
And the only purpose for blind cons to say things like “Bush has not told one documented lie” is to make them feel “in on the joke” and that they are doing their part to stave off the liberal hounds intent on wrecking this glorious god-blessed republic. They know that even if that were true (which we all know it isn’t), they would not use the same burden of proof for a Democrat. Dugger, have fun eating at the cool kids’ table until they find your sycophancy not useful anymore, then it’s back to your old table.
mjb said, “… if Bush had listened to the numerous warnings of if this exact post-war scenario, we may not be in this mess right now.”
Okay OW.com commenters, here’s your next quote-mining assignment: put together a list, as long as Oliver’s here, of “all the numerous warnings of this exact post-war scenario” — published before March 2003 — that the Bush administration willfully ignored.
Show us the prophecies from Democrat leadership that predicted exactly how remnants of the Taliban and Al Qaeda would flood into Iraq after the Ba’athists were routed. Let us read once again how the Democrats predicted that Al Zarqawi would rise to power. Explain to us how Democrats predicted the Fallujah campaign. Show us the plan Democrats introduced prior to March 2003 that outlined a simple and effective way to end Sunni/Shiite sectarian violence that was sure to erupt once the suffocating hold of the Ba’athists was removed.
Now that would be an interesting read.
Also, with respect to some of these quotes: it appears that many of them are taken pretty far out of context, especially the Chris Matthews quote (2nd under “Mission Accomplished). This looks much more like Matthews trying to emulate Republican spin, rather than him personally gushing praise for the President.
Finally, with respect to the WMD quotes, be careful what you wish for. It would be very damaging to the Democrats for average people to rediscover how much evidence we had linking Saddam to Islamic terror, and to rediscover exactly what we found in Iraq post-invasion. 16 artillary shells filled with cyclosarin is just the tip of the iceburg.
Hey Mike –
Would you believe Bush’s own State Department tried to warn the President about dangerous post-war possibilities and advised on how to avoid them?
Because it did and he ignored it.
http://www.thememoryhole.org/state/future_of_iraq/
mjb,
There was no “exact” post war scenario. Only predictions. Bush would have had to have made a guess as to which prediction was accurate. I a ctually believe we won a major combat victory, defeated the regular forces of a major mideast power. Mission accomplished! as far as I am concerned. Yes, the insurgency continues. May ebb and flow for some time. Bush may have guessed thw rong post war scenario. Iraq may have been a bad idea from the start. I don’t know. But I know the military accomplished their mission and did it d*mned well.
And again. Not one lie has been documented. All you can do is cite things you don’t like and apparent (to you) discrepancies. When it get down to thoughtful analysis – the lie part does not hold up. See imminent threat for example.
Dugger
Dug,
yet you still support people who question the integrity and patriotism of the critics who turned out to have “guessed” correctly. I’ll stand by my previous statements.
Mike,
You must be deep in the morass of winger blogdom if don’t know that there were at least three post-war assessments done by State and CIA which warned of this. I’ll stand by my previous statements.
Not one lie has been documented.
“We know where they [Iraq's WMD] are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat.” –Donald Rumsfeld.
I a ctually believe we won a major combat victory, defeated the regular forces of a major mideast power. Mission accomplished!
What’s worse than a panty-waste? Someone who sucks up to a panty-waste.
A “major mideast power”? Iraq’s military was badly depleted and ridiculously overmatched by the U.S. That’s why fake fly-boy Bush and Co. went after Saddam; they knew he was no match for the U.S. military. As to the WMD ‘fears,’ if Saddam had such horrible doomsday weapons at the ready, and he was evil enough to use them, why didn’t he?
To cowardly school-yard bullies, every nickel of milk money taken from a puny kindergartener is a “major combat victory.”
I could go on, but why bother? Accusing you shameless, lickspittle Bush supporters of intellectual dishonesty is like accusing a rabid dog of being impolite.
Cheney and Rice said numerous times that there was “no doubt” that WMD existed or various permutations on that. When in fact there was doubt and they knew of that doubt. Lie.
“Okay OW.com commenters, here s your next quote-mining assignment: put together a list, as long as Oliver s here, of all the numerous warnings of this exact post-war scenario published before March 2003 that the Bush administration willfully ignored.”
Dugger’s right, no one could predict an exact scenario. But this guy had the right general idea:
Trying to eliminate Saddam…would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible…. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq…. there was no viable “exit strategy” we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations’ mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land.
– George Herbert Walker Bush, from his memoir, A World Transformed (1998)
It may be night or it may be day. I don’t know. But I do know that the sun performs it’s job like a large gaseous star should.
Dugger your observations on the war are less than worthless. All you offer are a series of slanted qualifications in the face of reality.
See attached.
http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/03/18/thought-id-say-it-now/
who have I supported that has questioned the patriotism of war criticcs.
Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Condoleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzales, Colin Powell. Richard Armitage, Karl Rove, Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limburger, Sean Hannity, Ann “the Man” Coulter….
mjb, I or you might well ’support’ someone ‘ who has done something else we disagree with. But who have I supported that has questioned the patriotism of war criticcs.
Dugger
“Cuz Dugger said so.
He said Otherwise I m not impressed by cut and paste. on another thread.
Don’t get me wrong, killer quote.
Dugger s right, no one could predict an exact scenario. But this guy had the right general idea:
Sorry, Jsa, it doesn’t count if you copy and paste.
“Don t get me wrong, killer quote.”
I’m a little slow on the uptake sometimes.
“Sorry, Jsa, it doesn t count if you copy and paste.”
Why? I mined a quote (and a pretty prescient one) as per Mike’s assignment.
There should be a new kind of TV …..”Non-Reality Television.”
Oh, that’s right. It’s called Fox News. I was watching Fox on Sunday…I thought Brit Hume was going to pop an artery when someone suggested that none of the key people on the Senate were given intelligence on WMD prior to invading Iraq. Brit had steam coming off his head. And then no less than BILL KRISTOL, comes out and says that Russ Feingold’s “censure” idea is good politics. Brit nearly had to be hospitalized at that point. (Kristol had another agenda, of course.)
In light of Dugger’s continual butt-sucking, however, I may have to re-think my position on the most ardent supports of Bush’s little war having to go fight it themselves if they’re so gung-ho about it.
JK
Eh, bite me, asshat.
I proved my point. You have yet to refute anything I posted, you’ve just attacked me for how I put the facts here.
I know, you have truthiness on your side.
The sad thing is you have no idea how big a pawn you really are.
You have yet to refute anything. You have yet to prove that no lie exists, only because you say so.
I posted numerous lies with sources and verifiable facts, not “thoughts.” Whether they were copied and pasted is irrelevant and you know it.
What does it take, Doogie?
Hey duros. Got that ‘lie’ yet.
Ought to be easy. By the way I could get you a ‘cut and paste” that illustrates how terroists didn’t really fly a jet into the Pentagon.
Must be true, huh?
Dugger
And I’m sorry if I hurt your feewings.
but you’re still an asshat.
duros,
No lie, then. All you had to do was come up with one. You had your chance and all you could do was cut and post somebody else’s thoughts (and then curse and call names).
Dugger, Where’s the Lie?!
Dug, still haven’t addressed how you’ve supported people who questioned the patriotism of those who were right.
>>Any time, though, you would like to actually debate the issue as opposed to cutting and pasting other s opinions, fine by me.
You have got to be kidding me. So the “views” of the 41st President of the United States should not be part of any reasonable discussion? (The fact that he’s W’s Father isn’t really important.)
Talk about cherry picking your argument.
You just got your butt kicked by George Herbert Bush, Dugger.
If 2,300 American troops weren’t dead, I’d be gleefull.
JK
He stated I remember campaigning in Chicago and one of the reporters said, Would you ever deficit spend? I said, Only only in times of war, in times of economy insecurity as a result of a recession or in times of national emergency. Never did I dream we d have a trifecta. The White House repeated this trifecta claim throughout 2002.
FACTS: Bush never made such a statement in Chicago nor anywhere else during the 2000 campaign. In fact, these three caveats on deficits were stated on several occasions by Vice President Gore. Bush s attempt to pin the deficit on the war also is a misstatement, since the cost of the Bush tax cuts is three times the cost of the response to 9-11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Source: New Republic 07.01.02
duros, You didn’t hurt anything. Made me look good (thanks!). This is the Internet and name calling and foul language is often used as a dodge to avoid a weak debate position. But I don’t harass people, so I will back off. Any time, though, you would like to actually debate the issue as opposed to cutting and pasting other’s opinions, fine by me.
Dugger, Still haven’t found a ‘lie’
WTF, how is it opinion? You haven’t told me that. You’re sidestepping.
I appreciate that, JK. I realize the pointlessness of trying to shed light on the truthiness. Black is white, up is down, ignorance is bliss.
And they call Liberals Moonbats. I don’t get it.
“By the way I could get you a cut and paste that illustrates how terroists didn t really fly a jet into the Pentagon. Must be true, huh?”
How does cutting and pasting something automatically negate its validity? I could cut and past in the Pythagorean Theory. Would that make it invalid? Let’s see:
“In a right triangle the square of the measure of the hypotenuse is equal to the the sum of the squares of the measures of the legs.”
Nope, it’s still true. Dugger sometimes your lunacy amazes me.
Duros….Bush also ran on a policy not to “nation-build.”
But then they scream 9/11. As if 9/11 has anything to do with invading Iraq. To paraphrase Dugger…”not one connection documented.”
Look…man, it’s like banging your head against all wall. One very astute person in here said it’s like that movie “Groundhog Day.”
Today, on Imus, Tim Russert said that virtually EVERYTHING this administration has said about the war, has not come to pass. It simply hasn’t become “truth.” They have a huge credibility gap on this war, and FINALLY, the American people seem to be waking up.
I don’t expect a policy change from this group of clowns at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. However, as long as people like us keep hammering them on it, that is, we’ll get rid of this group of clowns, for another group, hopefully less clown-like.
JK
mjb,
Yeah I did. Said it was possible but asked for examples. Got a bunch of general names. Whats the real point. Is each conservative guilty of the sins of every other conservative? Only conservatives. Are you guilty becasue of the unabomber? Be more specific. I can’t guess at what the point is.
Dugger
>>Whats the real point. Is each conservative guilty of the sins of every other conservative? Only conservatives. Are you guilty becasue of the unabomber?
Dugger…you’re not making sense at this point.
Take a breath. Relax. Respond.
Wow. That’s out there.
JK
Dugger, duros listed a bunch of people who questioned the patriotism of people like me, so I didn’t feel the need to do it again. You know what these people said, it’s too time consuming to again provide the same examples you’ve seen on OW in the past. Either you can deny these people questioned our patriotism or admit they did and address why you support them in doing so. i’m done with this thread.
OK by me. I won’t do your research for you. Re patriotism, check out Howard Deans quote on Karl Rove – thats challenging someone’s patriotism.
Dugger
Again, change the subject.
Dugger –
Dean’s said a lot of things about Karl Rove. Want to actually provide the quote? Or don’t you do your own research?
“Howard Dean: Karl Rove only has a White House job and a security clearance because President Bush has refused to keep his promise to fire anyone involved in revealing the identity of an undercover CIA operative. The truth is, Karl Rove breached our national security for partisan gain and that is both unpatriotic and wrong. ”
Dugger
I see nothing wrong with that. It’s true.
Just because it is against the law doesn’t neccessarily make it unpatriotic, right?
And how is that questioning his patriotism? He probably thought it is a patriotic act to reveal the indentity of a covert CIA operative to get back at her husband for being critical of the admin.
Though I don’t profess to read minds.
“And how is that questioning his patriotism?”
“Hodean: The truth is, Karl Rove breached our national security for partisan gain and that is both unpatriotic and wrong.”
Your Honor, the prosecution rests.
Progressives, do you intend to put on a defense?
First thing your honor, we would like to fire our attorney.
Dugger Cochrane, If Hodean has a fit, you must acquit!
Hodean: The truth is, Karl Rove breached our national security for partisan gain and that is both unpatriotic and wrong.
I still fail to see the inaccuracy of the statement.
Does the prosecution contend that breaching national security is a patriotic act?
I’m not an attorney, but I’ve seen one on TV.
duros,
“I still fail to see the inaccuracy of the statement.”
I completely agree that you fail to see the inaccuracy of that statement.
Dugger