PamRotella.com

Bush's latest speech: His tired old excuses for the Iraq War, and Pam's translation
[Posted 1 December 2005]

The format of this rant is going to be a little different. Yesterday, "President" Bush read a speech about Iraq, basically a list of tired old excuses and spin doctoring written by someone other than Bush, of course. Bush only reads speeches... poorly. He doesn't write them.

Today I've decided to take a transcript of his speech, paragraph by paragraph, and shine some light on the issues, basically offer my own translation. See if you share some of my observations on Bush's latest heap of the same old stuff:

Transcript of 30 November 2005 speech delivered by George W. Bush, as published on ft.com:
"Six months ago, I came here to address the graduating class of 2005. I spoke to them about the importance of their service in the first war of the 21st century -- the global war on terror. I told the class of 2005 that four years at this Academy had prepared them morally, mentally and physically for the challenges ahead. And now they're meeting those challenges as officers in the United States Navy and Marine Corps."
--One interesting observation I heard on NPR (public radio) yesterday was that Bush held his speech at a military academy because he wouldn't have to face protesters there. Bush does his best to run and hide from protesters, who follow him everywhere they can.

"Some of your former classmates are training with Navy Seal teams that will storm terrorist safe houses in lightning raids. Others are preparing to lead Marine rifle platoons that will hunt the enemy in the mountains of Afghanistan and the streets of Iraqi cities. Others are training as naval aviators who will fly combat missions over the skies of Afghanistan and Iraq and elsewhere. Still others are training as sailors and submariners who will deliver the combat power of the United States to the farthest regions of the world - and deliver compassionate assistance to those suffering from natural disasters. Whatever their chosen mission, every graduate of the class of 2005 is bringing honour to the uniform -- and helping to bring us victory in the war on terror."
--Basically, the previous graduating class has been shipped to Iraq. They are both killing people AND being killed themselves...

"In the years ahead, you'll join them in the fight. Your service is needed, because our nation is engaged in a war that is being fought on many fronts -- from the streets of Western cities, to the mountains of Afghanistan, the islands of Southeast Asia and the Horn of Africa. This war is going to take many turns, and the enemy must be defeated on every battlefield. Yet the terrorists have made it clear that Iraq is the central front in their war against humanity, and so we must recognize Iraq as the central front in the war on terror."
--Bush admits that he'll be shipping this class of soldiers off to Iraq, too.

"As we fight the enemy in Iraq, every man and woman who volunteers to defend our nation deserves an unwavering commitment to the mission -- and a clear strategy for victory. A clear strategy begins with a clear understanding of the enemy we face. The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists, Saddamists and terrorists. The rejectionists are by far the largest group. These are ordinary Iraqis, mostly Sunni Arabs, who miss the privileged status they had under the regime of Saddam Hussein -- and they reject an Iraq in which they are no longer the dominant group."
--The Iraq war was never actually won, is still going on every day with mounting casualties on both sides. But Bush declared victory a few months into the war, and so is now doctoring the "enemy" to fit his past claims. According to Bush, the war was won, but we still need to be there because of a few misfits.

"Not all Sunnis fall into the rejectionist camp. Of those that do, most are not actively fighting us -- but some give aid and comfort to the enemy. Many Sunnis boycotted the January elections -- yet as democracy takes hold in Iraq, they are recognizing that opting out of the democratic process has hurt their interests. And today, those who advocate violent opposition are being increasingly isolated by Sunnis who choose peaceful participation in the democratic process. Sunnis voted in the recent constitutional referendum in large numbers -- and Sunni coalitions have formed to compete in next month's elections -- or, this month's elections. We believe that, over time, most rejectionists will be persuaded to support a democratic Iraq led by a federal government that is a strong enough government to protect minority rights."
--"Rejectionist camp?" What, the college stoner has turned into a professor now? If you analyze the wording here, obviously written by someone other than Bush, the author is claiming that most opposition will eventually come around and join in the new "democracy" forced on Iraq by America's bombs -- an arrangement known to people other than Bush as a "puppet government." Too bad for Bush that almost everyone else, including his father's old agency the CIA, think that Iraq will turn into one big Civil War. Many analysts feel Iraq's civil war is already in progress, with our soldiers in the middle of it all.

"The second group that makes up the enemy in Iraq is smaller, but more determined. It contains former regime loyalists who held positions of power under Saddam Hussein -- people who still harbor dreams of returning to power. These hard-core Saddamists are trying to foment anti-democratic sentiment amongst the larger Sunni community. They lack popular support and therefore cannot stop Iraq's democratic progress. And over time, they can be marginalized and defeated by the Iraqi people and the security forces of a free Iraq."
--This is nothing more than wishful thinking. Saddam's old militia is still killing more US soldiers every day, fighting the war in ways Bush doesn't understand because Bush never bothered learning about Vietnam. Bush is trying to sell Americans on his fantasy so that they'll support the war a little longer, parting with their children a little longer, just long enough for the Bushies to steal oil a little longer...

"The third group is the smallest, but the most lethal: the terrorists affiliated with or inspired by al Qaeda . Many are foreigners who are coming to fight freedom's progress in Iraq. This group includes terrorists from Saudi Arabia, and Syria, and Iran, and Egypt, and Sudan, and Yemen, and Libya, and other countries. Our commanders believe they're responsible for most of the suicide bombings, and the beheadings, and the other atrocities we see on our television."
--This type of language reminds me of false stories put out before the Iraq War under Bush's father, for example Iraq soldiers killing babies in hospitals, which was later proved untrue -- just propaganda to get Americans behind the war. Notice emotional language like beheadings. And of course no mention that al Qaeda was a CIA-founded organization, not able to function in Iraq under its adversary and CIA asset Saddam Hussein.

"They're led by a brutal terrorist named Zarqawi -- al Qaeda's chief of operations in Iraq - who has pledged his allegiance to Osama bin Laden. Their objective is to drive the United States and coalition forces out of Iraq, and use the vacuum that would be created by an American retreat to gain control of that country. They would then use Iraq as a base from which to launch attacks against America, and overthrow moderate governments in the Middle East, and try to establish a totalitarian Islamic empire that reaches from Indonesia to Spain. That's their stated objective. That's what their leadership has said."
--Even if I'm gullible enough to believe that Zarqawi DOESN'T work for the CIA (his alleged activities providing the excuse to invade and occupy Iraq, for the sake of oil and Halliburton profits), the ability to draw Americans to the Middle East in order to fight them was an objective of the very "terrorist" groups Bush claims to be fighting. Bush's war has also given "terrorist" groups new supporters, namely people brutalized by the Americans and now ready to fight them.

"These terrorists have nothing to offer the Iraqi people. All they have is the capacity and the willingness to kill the innocent and create chaos for the cameras. They are trying to shake our will to achieve their stated objectives. They will fail. America's will is strong. And they will fail because the will to power is no match for the universal desire to live in liberty."
--Killing the innocent? Isn't that what America did, to the tune of over 100,000 in the first year of the Iraq war? And people in Iraq want this kind of "freedom" -- the "freedom" to die, or have family members killed by American air strikes? Actually, "terrorists" still fighting the war, some of whom may also be known as "nationalists," can offer Iraqis freedom from American bombs, American occupation, and American humiliation. It's only a matter of time before the US's puppet government in Iraq fails. The groups fighting in Iraq now are fighting for power AFTER the American forces are driven out, and some may actually be much better for Iraq than Saddam or American yes-men. Furthermore, America's will is NOT strong. As soon as most Americans realized we'd invaded Iraq based on lies, they had the personal integrity to withdraw their support for the war. The only people with strong will for the war are those profiting from the war yet not having to fight it themselves, namely George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

"The terrorists in Iraq share the same ideology as the terrorists who struck the United States on September 11. Those terrorists share the same ideology with those who blew up commuters in London and Madrid, murdered tourists in Bali, workers in Riyadh, and guests at a wedding in Amman, Jordan. Just last week, they massacred Iraqi children and their parents at a toy give-away outside an Iraqi hospital."
--Oh yeah, when you're totally failing and desperate to get people behind you, just mention 9-11 yet again. "Buy Coca-Cola, remember 9-11." Republicans just can't stop exploiting the deaths of 9-11 for their own personal gain. In REALITY, the majority of New Yorkers now believe that the US government was behind 9-11, which was a government operation meant to whip up support for unjust and cruel oil wars in the Middle East. It's questionable whether any of the other events Bush mentioned were actually done by "terrorists" -- there was mounting evidence in Spain that their "attack" was also a government operation, and led to the ousting of that particular government in subsequent elections."

"This is an enemy without conscience - and they cannot be appeased. If we were not fighting and destroying this enemy in Iraq, they would not be idle. They would be plotting and killing Americans across the world and within our own borders. By fighting these terrorists in Iraq, Americans in uniform are defeating a direct threat to the American people. Against this adversary, there is only one effective response: We will never back down. We will never give in. And we will never accept anything less than complete victory."
--Actually, most Iraqis were sitting at home minding their business before Bush started bombing them to death. The fanatics he's talking about are very few, and before Bush took office, America was ADMIRED all over the world for its freedom, pop culture, etc. Guess how they feel about us now?

"To achieve victory over such enemies, we are pursuing a comprehensive strategy in Iraq. Americans should have a clear understanding of this strategy -- how we look at the war, how we see the enemy, how we define victory, and what we're doing to achieve it. So today, we're releasing a document called the 'National Strategy for Victory in Iraq.' This is an unclassified version of the strategy we've been pursuing in Iraq, and it is posted on the White House website -- whitehouse.gov. I urge all Americans to read it."
--If Bush actually had a strategy in Iraq, it's pretty clear that it has failed miserably. Why would anyone be interested in hearing about the same failed policies?

"Our strategy in Iraq has three elements. On the political side, we know that free societies are peaceful societies, so we're helping the Iraqis build a free society with inclusive democratic institutions that will protect the interests of all Iraqis. We're working with the Iraqis to help them engage those who can be persuaded to join the new Iraq -- and to marginalise those who never will. On the security side, coalition and Iraqi security forces are on the offensive against the enemy, cleaning out areas controlled by the terrorists and Saddam loyalists, leaving Iraqi forces to hold territory taken from the enemy, and following up with targeted reconstruction to help Iraqis rebuild their lives."
--Yet another fairy tale. I think it's pretty clear at this time that Bush's idea of "Democracy" is a puppet regime that'll give American corporations all the oil they want. Whenever Bush uses the word "Democracy," just substitute it with what he really means -- "Oil and money for me... ME... MEEEEEE!!!!"

"As we fight the terrorists, we're working to build capable and effective Iraqi security forces, so they can take the lead in the fight -- and eventually take responsibility for the safety and security of their citizens without major foreign assistance."
--This would be an ideal situation, but it's hard to find people to fight for you when they can't believe in you. Most Iraqis can't believe in any government the Americans have set up, not after the cruel invasion and occupation. Even if they were willing to forgive the massive airstrikes which killed their friends and families, Rumsfeld pretty much blew any remaining trust when he set up torture camps for "enemy combatants." As soon as the US leaves, genuine leadership will emerge, with followers who have something to believe in. The hired guns we're trying to train will go home as soon as their pay stops. So who's going to win that final battle?

"And on the economic side, we're helping the Iraqis rebuild their infrastructure, reform their economy, and build the prosperity that will give all Iraqis a stake in a free and peaceful Iraq. In doing all this we have involved the United Nations, other international organisations, our coalition partners, and supportive regional states in helping Iraqis build their future."
--Actually, I don't think any administration has been more negligent about cleaning up a war zone that it was personally responsible for. Other than Bush's father, of course -- they're still finding remains on the "Highway of Death" in Southern Iraq, George the Elder's legacy. In the latest Iraq Bush-War, contracts to rebuild the country have often been awarded no-bid to Dick Cheney's old company, Halliburton and its subsidiaries like KBR. According to many news reports, the money is awarded, but little is spent on actual rebuilding. While Iraq had a fine infrastructure before the war, Iraqis after the war have problems getting basics like city water/sewage and electricity. Again, is that "helping," or "neglecting?"

And why does Bush even bother mentioning the United Nations and other countries, when Bush is PERSONALLY responsible for alienating them to the point of withholding or withdrawing their support for Bush's war? These were traditional allies and supporters, like France -- a country that had paid for and won our independence, costing the King his head for spending roughly half of France's revenue at the time on winning the American Revolution for us. Then France gave us the Statue of Liberty, etc. It takes a lot to ruin centuries of good relations... but the combined stupidity and arrogance of George W. Bush can piss off any country in 5 seconds flat. Which means little to no help with his misadventures like the Iraq War.

"In the days ahead, I'll be discussing the various pillars of our strategy in Iraq. Today, I want to speak in depth about one aspect of this strategy that will be critical to victory in Iraq -- and that's the training of Iraqi security forces. To defeat the terrorists and marginalize the Saddamists and rejectionists, Iraqis need strong military and police forces. Iraqi troops bring knowledge and capabilities to the fight that coalition forces cannot."
--"Pillars of our strategy"??? What strategy is that, a really half-assed one? And it has pillars now? Sure, training Iraqi security forces is one of the few things that could help Bush's puppet government remain in power, at least temporarily, after the US withdraws from Iraq. But those same Iraqi security forces are the target of numerous roadside bombs and other attacks by the Iraqi resistance. It's tough finding good people to work for you when they know there's a good chance of being blown up as a result. And being blown up so often really decreases the number of people you do manage to find. In the end, you have to consider -- when the US leaves and someone better wants to come into power, are the people you trained going to back the puppet government or leave for the better side?

"Iraqis know their people, they know their language, and they know their culture -- and they know who the terrorists are. Iraqi forces are earning the trust of their countrymen -- who are willing to help them in the fight against the enemy. As the Iraqi forces grow in number, they're helping to keep a better hold on the cities taken from the enemy. And as the Iraqi forces grow more capable, they are increasingly taking the lead in the fight against the terrorists. Our goal is to train enough Iraqi forces so they can carry the fight -- and this will take time and patience. And it's worth the time, and it's worth the effort -- because Iraqis and Americans share a common enemy, and when that enemy is defeated in Iraq, Americans will be safer here at home."
-- In 2 words, FANTASY LAND. He's trying to sell people on the idea that the newly hired and trained Iraqi security forces are entirely different from the Iraqis they're supposed to be fighting. There's no evidence that they're entirely opposed to the people they're fighting. The people they're supposed to fight are their own countrymen, those not yet willing to accept American occupation. The only thing setting the Iraqi hirelings apart is their willingness to work for an American-backed regime, at least temporarily, in order to obtain a paycheck. We won't know what they really want to do until the US leaves the country. Bottom line: both sides just had their country bombed by America, saw the destruction firsthand and probably had family members die as a result. Yeah, sure... Tell me one side loves America because they're GOOOOOD Iraqis, and the other doesn't because they're BAAAAAAD Iraqis. There ya have it... FANTASY LAND.

"The training of the Iraqi security forces is an enormous task, and it always hasn't gone smoothly. We all remember the reports of some Iraqi security forces running from the fight more than a year ago. Yet in the past year, Iraqi forces have made real progress. At this time last year, there were only a handful of Iraqi battalions ready for combat. Now, there are over 120 Iraqi Army and Police combat battalions in the fight against the terrorists -- typically comprised of between 350 and 800 Iraqi forces. Of these, about 80 Iraqi battalions are fighting side-by-side with coalition forces, and about 40 others are taking the lead in the fight. Most of these 40 battalions are controlling their own battle space, and conducting their own operations against the terrorists with some coalition support -- and they're helping to turn the tide of this struggle in freedom's favor. America and our troops are proud to stand with the brave Iraqi fighters."
--You know, it'd be tempting to believe Bush at least once in a while, if he didn't have a reputation for ALWAYS LYING. If these battalions are so effective, then how come our casualties are mounting daily as if nothing at all was changing for the better? What about the TEN MARINES who were blown up at roadside right after Bush made this speech? Is anything in Iraq going to change at all?

"The progress of the Iraqi forces is especially clear when the recent anti-terrorist operations in Tal Afar are compared with last year's assault in Fallujah. In Fallujah, the assault was led by nine coalition battalions made up primarily of United States Marines and Army -- with six Iraqi battalions supporting them. The Iraqis fought and sustained casualties. Yet in most situations, the Iraqi role was limited to protecting the flanks of coalition forces, and securing ground that had already been cleared by our troops. This year in TAL Afar, it was a very different story."
--Fallujah was a bomb-fest, don't know how he could compare any real battles with that slaughterhouse. As if anything the Iraqis could have done at the time would have made a difference.

"The assault was primarily led by Iraqi security forces -- 11 Iraqi battalions, backed by five coalition battalions providing support. Many Iraqi units conducted their own anti-terrorist operations and controlled their own battle space -- hunting for enemy fighters and securing neighbourhoods block-by-block. To consolidate their military success, Iraqi units stayed behind to help maintain law and order -- and reconstruction projects have been started to improve infrastructure and create jobs and provide hope."
--Who knows if any of this is really true. Considering Bush's track record, probably not.

"One of the Iraqi soldiers who fought in TAL Afar was a private named Tarek Hazem. This brave Iraqi fighter says, 'We're not afraid. We're here to protect our country. All we feel is motivated to kill the terrorists.' Iraqi forces not only cleared the city, they held it. And because of the skill and courage of the Iraqi forces, the citizens of TAL Afar were able to vote in October's constitutional referendum."
--Oh, here comes the personal story, with a quotation and all. Even if this is a real quote by a real person, the overall picture is the one that really counts. American soldiers make similar statements all the time, but that doesn't mean anything overall in Iraq has changed as a result.

"As Iraqi forces increasingly take the lead in the fight against the terrorists, they're also taking control of more and more Iraqi territory. At this moment, over 30 Iraqi Army battalions have assumed primary control of their own areas of responsibility. In Baghdad, Iraqi battalions have taken over major sectors of the capital -- including some of the city's toughest neighborhoods. Last year, the area around Baghdad's Haifa Street was so thick with terrorists that it earned the nickname 'Purple Heart Boulevard.' Then Iraqi forces took responsibility for this dangerous neighborhood -- and attacks are now down."
--Yeah, maybe I'll believe this one when American soldiers stop coming home in body bags.

"Our coalition has handed over roughly 90 square miles of Baghdad province to Iraqi security forces. Iraqi battalions have taken over responsibility for areas in South-Central Iraq, sectors of Southeast Iraq, sectors of Western Iraq, and sectors of North-Central Iraq. As Iraqi forces take responsibility for more of their own territory, coalition forces can concentrate on training Iraqis and hunting down high-value targets, like the terrorist Zarqawi and his associates."
--This is Bush trying to wear his audience down -- namely all of us -- with "good news" stories. Basically, he wants us to think he's making progress so that we'll allow him to keep our soldiers there longer. Despite his fairly lame attempts at painting Iraq with a positive brush, casualty reports seem to indicate that whatever he thinks is positive just isn't making the difference when it comes to preventing deaths of American servicemen. This is why so many people just want to leave. Despite claims of progress, we're just not seeing good results, and don't feel justified being there based on lies anyway.

"We're also transferring forward operating bases to Iraqi control. Over a dozen bases in Iraq have been handed over to the Iraqi government -- including Saddam Hussein's former palace in Tikrit, which has served as the coalition headquarters in one of Iraq's most dangerous regions. From many of these bases, the Iraqi security forces are planning and executing operations against the terrorists -- and bringing security and pride to the Iraqi people."
--More "good news." You'd think the war would be over by now, there's so much "good news" in this speech.

"Progress by the Iraqi security forces has come, in part, because we learned from our earlier experiences and made changes in the way we help train Iraqi troops. When our coalition first arrived, we began the process of creating an Iraqi Army to defend the country from external threats, and an Iraqi Civil Defense Corps to help provide the security within Iraq's borders. The civil defense forces did not have sufficient firepower or training -- they proved to be no match for an enemy armed with machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades, and mortars. So the approach was adjusted. Working with Iraq's leaders, we moved the civil defense forces into the Iraqi Army, we changed the way they're trained and equipped, and we focused the Army's mission on defeating those fighting against a free Iraq, whether internal or external."
--Notice the spin-doctoring (a/k/a "lying"), the stuff that made the Bush administration famous in its attempts to mislead people. In this paragraph, Bush claims the Iraqi resistance is fighting against a "free" Iraq. Is that a "free" Iraq, or an "occupied" Iraq? That's right, the Iraqi resistance is fighting against American OCCUPATION, not a "free" Iraq. There is no "free" Iraq right now -- only an occupied Iraq. That's what our soldiers are there for. If Iraq were free, it wouldn't be controlled by foreign soldiers.

"Now, all Iraqi Army recruits receive about the same length of basic training as new recruits in the U.S. Army -- a five-week core course, followed by an additional three-to-seven weeks of specialized training. With coalition help, Iraqis have established schools for the Iraqi military services, an Iraqi military academy, a non-commissioned officer academy, a military police school, a bomb disposal school -- and NATO has established an Iraqi Joint Staff College. There's also an increased focus on leadership training, with professional development courses for Iraqi squad leaders and platoon sergeants and warrant officers and sergeants-major. A new generation of Iraqi officers is being trained, leaders who will lead their forces with skill -- so they can defeat the terrorists and secure their freedom."
--"...so they can defeat the terrorists and secure their freedom." Oh, is THAT why we're training Iraqi forces? Or is it to hold down the country a little longer, keeping American casualties down, while Iraq's puppet government allows American corporations to take as many Iraqi assets for themselves as the puppet regime can give them time to take? Regardless of WHY we're training Iraqi forces, HOW they decide to use that training is what matters in the end. When the US leaves, if they're not entirely in control, they may have to make a choice as to which side to take. Their new skills, courtesy of the US government, could be used to fight the puppet government, or even our own US forces if Bush decides to invade the country again in all of his infinite insanity. Or should I say, infinite lack of historical knowledge? As if this same scenario of training our own enemies hasn't been a mainstay of CIA operations, and the fabric of many brutal dictatorships, all over the world.

"Similar changes have taken place in the training of the Iraqi police. When our coalition first arrived, Iraqi police recruits spent too much time of their training in classroom lectures -- and they received limited training in the use of small arms. This did not adequately prepare the fight they would face. And so we changed the way the Iraqi police are trained. Now, police recruits spend more of their time outside the classroom with intensive hands-on training in anti-terrorism operations and real-world survival skills."
--Notice how the job of Iraqi "police" involves small arms training more than classroom training. That should tip you off -- they're not there to understand and enforce the laws as much as OCCUPY A COUNTRY for their new masters.

"Iraq has now six basic police academies, and one in Jordan, that together produce over 3,500 new police officers every ten weeks. The Baghdad police academy has simulation models where Iraqis train to stop IED attacks and operate roadblocks. And because Iraqi police are not just facing common criminals, they are getting live-fire training with the AK-47s."
--Being trained in a foreign country... Equipped with AK-47s... Also notice how many police they have to train. It takes a lot to put an army together and keep it supplied with fresh fodder. Because, after reading the statistics in Bush's own speech, you can see that the Iraqi police are indeed being trained as an occupying army. Now, does this fit the profile of a country that supports its new government? Is fighting for "freedom"? Well, they're fighting for a certain kind of "freedom" -- freedom from us!

"As more and more skilled Iraqi security forces have come online, there's been another important change in the way new Iraqi recruits are trained. When the training effort began, nearly all the trainers came from coalition countries. Today, the vast majority of Iraqi police and army recruits are being taught by Iraqi instructors. By training the trainers, we're helping Iraqis create an institutional capability that will allow the Iraqi forces to continue to develop and grow long after coalition forces have left Iraq."
--America is famous for leaving military "trainers" in countries before and after actual military operations. He's trying to tell us things are different in Iraq, that this is not his father's Contra-mobile. That we're really pulling out this time, no CIA planes full of drugs or Ollie North involved. Nope, this time it's just us sitting in Kuwait, a-watchin' them oil wells in Southern Iraq. Yup, no drugs involved this time around. Just oil. That's where it's at. And no-bid contracts for Halliburton. Screw the rest of the country. Iraqi Police were trained to do that. They got the guns. We got the oil. Oh yeah.

"As the training has improved, so has the quality of the recruits being trained. Even though the terrorists are targeting Iraqi police and army recruits, there is no shortage of Iraqis who are willing to risk their lives to secure the future of a free Iraq."
--Yeah, I guess the job market is pretty tough in Iraq, too. And we thought we had it rough over here, with a Bush in office again...

"The efforts to include more Sunnis in the future of Iraq were given a significant boost earlier this year. More than 60 influential Sunni clerics issued a fatwa calling on young Sunnis to join the Iraqi security forces, 'for the sake of preserving the souls, property and honor' of the Iraqi people. These religious leaders are helping to make the Iraqi security forces a truly national institution -- one that is able to serve, protect and defend all the Iraqi people."
--The Sunnis and Shi'ites. I hadn't heard about them since my college days... until the Bushies decided to steal their oil, that is. For everyone out there who didn't take college classes in history, here's a good comparison. If Islam were Christianity, you'd be calling the Sunnis and Shi'ites the Catholics and Protestants. They're just different branches of the same religion. Notice how Bush tries to whip up religious conflicts in our country AND the ones he invades. Nothing like the old "Divide and Conquer" technique, the exact same strategy used by the British to build their huge empire that quickly fell to pieces. And it takes many forms -- rich vs. poor (tax cuts), black vs. white (affirmative action), religious fanatics vs. moderates (abortion), and anything else that'll dupe people into fighting against each other, instead of the people really responsible for their problems.

"Some critics dismiss this progress and point to the fact that only one Iraqi battalion has achieved complete independence from the coalition. To achieve complete independence, an Iraqi battalion must do more than fight the enemy on its own -- it must also have the ability to provide its own support elements, including logistics, airlift, intelligence, and command and control through their ministries. Not every Iraqi unit has to meet this level of capability in order for the Iraqi security forces to take the lead in the fight against the enemy. As a matter of fact, there are some battalions from NATO militaries that would not be able to meet this standard. The facts are that Iraqi units are growing more independent and more capable; they are defending their new democracy with courage and determination. They're in the fight today, and they will be in the fight for freedom tomorrow."
--Here Bush is asking for infinite time and money to make the Iraqi police successful. Is it reasonable to give Bush everything he wants indefinitely, or has he already proved too much of a failure to support at all, that anything else provided him will be wasted on negligible improvements? Does this FINALLY prove the need to put limits on Bush's power, and ask a REASONABLE ADULT to plan the withdrawal that Bush refuses to consider?

"We're also helping Iraqis build the institutions they need to support their own forces. For example, a national depot has been established north of Baghdad that is responsible for supplying the logistical needs of the ten divisions of the Iraqi Army. Regional support units and base support units have been created across the country with the mission of supplying their own war fighters. Iraqis now have a small Air Force, that recently conducted its first combat airlift operations -- bringing Iraqi troops to the front in TAL Afar. The new Iraqi Navy is now helping protect the vital ports of Basra and Umm Qasr. An Iraqi military intelligence school has been established to produce skilled Iraqi intelligence analysts and collectors. By taking all these steps, we're helping the Iraqi security forces become self-supporting so they can take the fight to the enemy, and so they can sustain themselves in the fight."
--Equipping an entire country at the American taxpayer's expense... in addition to the massive debt foisted upon their children. All for a puppet government to keep the oil flowing... from a country always willing to sell it to us in the past, even when we slapped sanctions on them... but whose oil profits weren't going to the "right" (American) companies. A tremendous amount of money, lives, and time for the sake of profit redistribution.

"Over the past two and a half years, we've faced some setbacks in standing up a capable Iraqi security force -- and their performance is still uneven in some areas. Yet many of those forces have made real gains over the past year -- and Iraqi soldiers take pride in their progress. An Iraqi first lieutenant named Shoqutt describes the transformation of his unit this way: 'I really think we've turned the corner here. At first, the whole country didn't take us seriously. Now things are different. Our guys are hungry to demonstrate their skill and to show the world.'"
--He protesteth too much. If the situation were really coming under control, he wouldn't have to babble on and on, making excuses for the same old problem.

"Our troops in Iraq see the gains that Iraqis are making. Lieutenant Colonel Todd Wood of Richmond Hill, Georgia, is training Iraqi forces in Saddam Hussein's hometown of Tikrit. He says this about the Iraqi units he is working with: 'They're pretty much ready to go it on their own ... What they're doing now would have been impossible a year ago... These guys are patriots, willing to go out knowing the insurgents would like nothing better than to kill them and their families... They're getting better, and they'll keep getting better.'"
--Well hey, if they're ready to go it on their own, then why are we still there? Let's leave now!

"Our commanders on the ground see the gains the Iraqis are making. General Marty Dempsey is the commander of the Multinational Security Transition Command. Here's what he says about the transformation of the Iraqi security forces: 'It's beyond description. They are far better equipped, far better trained' than they once were. The Iraqis, General Dempsey says, are 'increasingly in control of their future and their own security the Iraqi security forces are regaining control of the country.'"
--It's not hard to be better than before, when you didn't exist before. Or to have better control over something, when you had no control before. Any organization starting from the ground up will have comments like this made, and it doesn't mean that they're capable of, or willing to, handle the job when Americans are no longer backing them up. Or that they'll ever be capable or willing once we're gone.

"As the Iraqi security forces stand up, their confidence is growing and they are taking on tougher and more important missions on their own. As the Iraqi security forces stand up, the confidence of the Iraqi people is growing -- and Iraqis are providing the vital intelligence needed to track down the terrorists. And as the Iraqi security forces stand up, coalition forces can stand down - and when our mission of defeating the terrorists in Iraq is complete, our troops will return home to a proud nation."
--Now see, here's the problem. Take a good look at this quote: "...and when our mission of defeating the terrorists in Iraq is complete, our troops will return home to a proud nation." Bush still sees occupying a formerly sovereign nation as an exercise in "defeating terrorists." And so how long will it take to defeat these "terrorists?" In other words, how long will it take to make the occupation of Iraq permanent and self-sustaining? How long to eliminate all Iraqi patriots fighting against American control of their country? To rebuild Iraq in the image of a loyal corporate American oil supplier? Well, in Vietnam, it couldn't be done. We lost. And we're losing in Iraq, too. As the British found out with us over 200 years ago, it's very difficult to supply enough soldiers to continuously control a hostile territory. But George W. Bush doesn't know history, and may not actually want to leave Iraq anyway. He may want to keep us there for many years to come, diverting as much American money as possible to the defense industry to generate more profits for his own father and Dick Cheney. As long as Bush's family gets a good chunk of money, he doesn't care what the rest of the country has to pay -- in the form of money, debt, or lives. War is profitable to his family and their big donors. And even if Bush intends to end the war someday, he just doesn't have the knowledge to make it happen. He's the wrong man for the job now, and always was, from the first day of his stolen election.

"This is a goal our Iraqi allies share. An Iraqi Army Sergeant named Abbass Abdul Jabar puts it this way: 'We have to help the coalition forces as much as we can to give them a chance to go home. These guys have been helping us. [Now] we have to protect our own families.' America will help the Iraqis so they can protect their families and secure their free nation. We will stay as long as necessary to complete the mission. If our military leaders tell me we need more troops, I will send them."
--Even if this quote is legitimate, things change after an occupying force leaves the country. Today the Iraqi Sergeant is saying exactly what his occupiers want to hear, displaying an attitude that he needs to have in order to keep his job. I'm sure his story will change when he has to please a different employer, if he's given that chance.

"For example, we have increased our force levels in Iraq to 160,000 -- up from 137,000 - in preparation for the December elections. My commanders tell me that as Iraqi forces become more capable, the mission of our forces in Iraq will continue to change. We will continue to shift from providing security and conducting operations against the enemy nationwide, to conducting more specialized operations targeted at the most dangerous terrorists. We will increasingly move out of Iraqi cities, reduce the number of bases from which we operate, and conduct fewer patrols and convoys."
--Bush was forced into providing elections and setting up a new government, and even so, it's unlikely that the elections are legitimate. This is just a game of smoke and mirrors to make it look as though there's an end in sight, that Iraq can stand on its own again, and everyone can come home someday.

"As the Iraqi forces gain experience and the political process advances, we will be able to decrease our troop levels in Iraq without losing our capability to defeat the terrorists. These decisions about troop levels will be driven by the conditions on the ground in Iraq and the good judgment of our commanders -- not by artificial timetables set by politicians in Washington."
--Here's the thing about the "politicians in Washington" who Bush has always despised. They're also a part of the leadership of this country. Despite his stolen elections, Bush is not all-powerful. If Washington "politicians" (a/k/a ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE) decide that it's time to come home, then they have certain powers allowing them to move in that direction. Even though Congress has already given Bush the power to start the war, they can cut Bush's war funding, impeach Bush, pass legislation, and so on. They don't have to put up with a failed war, based on lies, coming from a political criminal. And their will is not just an "artificial timetable" as Bush likes to call it. The fact is, Bush doesn't have ANY timetable, and events in Iraq don't indicate a more "natural" timetable anytime soon. At some point, more sensible people will have to take control, and their timetable will become law, despite Bush's stubborn incompetence and complete lack of good judgement.

"Some are calling for a deadline for withdrawal. Many advocating an artificial timetable for withdrawing our troops are sincere -- but I believe they're sincerely wrong. Pulling our troops out before they've achieved their purpose is not a plan for victory. As Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman said recently, setting an artificial timetable would 'discourage our troops because it seems to be heading for the door. It will encourage the terrorists, it will confuse the Iraqi people.'"
--Oh sure, trot out Senator Lieberman, a man who should really be in the Republican party. Even conservative Democrats think he's too conservative. Yet Republicans seem to love him somehow... Again, Bush is trying to brand a withdrawal as "artificial." This is the type of slander & spin-doctoring that the Bushes engage in, desperately trying to cover for their criminal activities. The fact is, the troops haven't achieved their purpose because it's difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. And achieving their original goal is not the honorable thing to do. People have learned that weapons of mass destruction were a lie, that Bush deliberately misled everyone in order to get his oil war, in other words that the war is actually a war crime. Bush still refuses to admit that he either made a mistake, or willfully misled the American people in order to start the war. Either way, America owes Iraq an apology, lots of money to rebuild, and a return of sovereignty. That's the honorable thing to do, and that's what honorable people want to do. People wanting to withdraw don't have "artificial" ideas about the war -- they have good intentions, and are willing to admit when they're wrong. Unlike the Bushies, they're not willing to conduct crimes against humanity in order to get a little extra oil & defense industry money.

"Senator Lieberman is right. Setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would send a message across the world that America is a weak and an unreliable ally. Setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would send a signal to our enemies -- that if they wait long enough, America will cut and run and abandon its friends. And setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would vindicate the terrorists' tactics of beheadings and suicide bombings and mass murder -- and invite new attacks on America. To all who wear the uniform, I make you this pledge: America will not run in the face of car bombers and assassins so long as I am your Commander-in-Chief."
--Think back... back... to a time when countries like Russia and France were telling Bush that invading Iraq was a huge mistake. Back to when everyone wanted monitoring and sanctions, and no one wanted the invasion. To when the UN rejected Bush's resolution, despite threats to desperately poor countries that Bush would cut off their aid if they voted no. When the only thing swaying Tony Blair to be our one viable ally was rumored to be billions of dollars in pay-off money. Back to when Bush was calling former allies "old Europe" and the UN "irrelevant," in his usual methods of malicious slander-bullying, trying to get his way using the same methods of an angry toddler.

This is why Bush is so incompetent that he's a danger to our nation (and everyone else in the world). He's just so freakin' STUPID! Here he's talking about sending a message of weakness to the world if America were to leave Iraq now. But what kind of message was the world sending to America, back when they were telling Bush that the invasion was a really, really dumb idea? No one else in the world wanted to touch his little scheme, even though some of them aren't known to be super-ethical people and would like the money just as much as Bush would. But unlike Bush, they ain't STUPID. Everyone knew we were going to fail because it was such a difficult task. The British already failed at Iraq decades ago. It takes a commitment that no one is willing or evil enough to provide. Too much death, too much money, too much the permanent end of one's career in politics... But Bush wouldn't have any of that. He's so much smarter than the rest of the world. And so he pledges to those in uniform that, due to his own stupidity, they'll have to bear the burden of America not running from its own pathetic mistakes (directly traced to Bush), as long as he's Commander-in-Chief.

"And as we train Iraqis to take more responsibility in the battle with the terrorists, we're also helping them build a democracy that is worthy of their sacrifice. And in just over two-and-a-half years, the Iraqi people have made incredible progress on the road to lasting freedom. Iraqis have gone from living under the boot of a brutal tyrant, to liberation, free elections, and a democratic constitution -- and in 15 days they will go to the polls to elect a fully constitutional government that will lead them for the next four years."
--Yeah, they've gone from living under the boot of Saddam, to living under the boot of a MORON. President Moron, that is. I'm sure that makes them feel their sacrifices were worth it.

"With each ballot cast, the Iraqi people have sent a clear message to the terrorists: Iraqis will not be intimidated. The Iraqi people will determine the destiny of their country. The future of Iraq belongs to freedom. Despite the costs, the pain, and the danger, Iraqis are showing courage and are moving forward to build a free society and a lasting democracy in the heart of the Middle East -- and the United States of America will help them succeed."
--Um, why am I having trouble believing that a man who cheated to win both terms of his office wouldn't also run fraudulent elections in Iraq? Like, put a few corporate lackeys in there?

"Some critics continue to assert that we have no plan in Iraq except to, 'stay the course.' If by 'stay the course,' they mean we will not allow the terrorists to break our will, they are right. If by 'stay the course,' they mean we will not permit al Qaeda to turn Iraq into what Afghanistan was under the Taliban -- a safe haven for terrorism and a launching pad for attacks on America -- they are right, as well. If by 'stay the course' they mean that we're not learning from our experiences, or adjusting our tactics to meet the challenges on the ground, then they're flat wrong. As our top commander in Iraq, General Casey, has said, 'Our commanders on the ground are continuously adapting and adjusting, not only to what the enemy does, but also to try to out-think the enemy and get ahead of him.' Our strategy in Iraq is clear, our tactics are flexible and dynamic; we have changed them as conditions required and they are bringing us victory against a brutal enemy."
--No George, what they mean is that whatever plan you claim to have is failing, and therefore by "staying the course" you mean sticking to failure. That's all they mean. You're a failure. A really, really dumb, moronistic failure. History books will have the word "failure" under your picture. When people google "miserable failure," your biography on the White House's web site will come up as the first google link. That's what they mean.

"Victory in Iraq will demand the continued determination and resolve of the American people. It will also demand the strength and personal courage of the men and women who wear our nation's uniform. And as the future officers of the United States Navy and Marine Corps, you're preparing to join this fight. You do so at a time when there is a vigorous debate about the war in Iraq. I know that for our men and women in uniform, this debate can be unsettling -- when you're risking your life to accomplish a mission, the last thing you want to hear is that mission being questioned in our nation's capital. I want you to know that while there may be a lot of heated rhetoric in Washington, one thing is not in dispute: The American people stand behind you."
--Are you kidding? When people are FORCED to put themselves in harm's way for a REALLY DUMB IDEA, they want nothing more than for it to be questioned. How else are they going to get out of this half-baked mission? If it's not questioned enough, they could come home in body bags, and they know it. And yes, they have the support of the American people -- most people feel sorry for them, and want them to come home to their families. Too bad our President doesn't feel the same way... yet. And too bad the Congress hasn't forced him to see it that way... yet.

"And we should not fear the debate in Washington. It's one of the great strengths of our democracy that we can discuss our differences openly and honestly -- even at times of war. Your service makes that freedom possible. And today, because of the men and women in our military, people are expressing their opinions freely in the streets of Baghdad, as well."
--Yeah, that's why George has done everything he can to crush dissent in this country. Because he does fear the debate in Washington. It's the one thing that'll get people thinking about abandoning his cash cow/oil war. And thinking about what a bunch of war criminals he & his administration have been.... and about how they should be tried for war crimes... and how war criminals should be treated once convicted.

"Most Americans want two things in Iraq: They want to see our troops win, and they want to see our troops come home as soon as possible. And those are my goals as well. I will settle for nothing less than complete victory. In World War II, victory came when the Empire of Japan surrendered on the deck of the USS Missouri. In Iraq, there will not be a signing ceremony on the deck of a battleship. Victory will come when the terrorists and Saddamists can no longer threaten Iraq's democracy, when the Iraqi security forces can provide for the safety of their own citizens, and when Iraq is not a safe haven for terrorists to plot new attacks on our nation."
--Everyone wants our troops home, but Bush's idea of "complete victory" is nothing but a fairy tale. Iraq was never a safe haven for terrorists attacking the US, and so in true Bush form, that part of a "victory" is nothing but a lie. As far as "terrorists" (who largely don't exist in Iraq) and "Saddamists" (actually just the Iraqi resistance -- patriots who don't like to see their country occupied), they can't threaten a democracy that really isn't there. What Bush really means here is the population being crushed to the point of completely accepting whatever puppet regime that Bush wants to give them via rigged elections or any other sorry old method. And Iraqi forces taking over security? Well, maybe, but the real issue here is what side they'll be on if we're talking true democracy. Again, a puppet regime is NOT a true democracy. It's no better than Bush cheating his way into office, then leading America into illegal wars, ruining the economy, etc. And notice yet again the World War II reference -- the Emperor of Japan. Notice Bush is NOT mentioning any of the illegal wars his father backed while President. No Samozas or Sandinistas, Ollie North or Ronald Reagan, crack cocaine or gun dealing in this story. No, he has to go back to World War II to find a story that doesn't implicate his family in criminal activities... other than Prescott Bush, of course. And so you have the fairy tale -- "complete victory" wanted by a man who's failing miserably.

"As we make progress toward victory, Iraqis will take more responsibility for their security, and fewer U.S. forces will be needed to complete the mission. America will not abandon Iraq. We will not turn that country over to the terrorists and put the American people at risk. Iraq will be a free nation and a strong ally in the Middle East -- and this will add to the security of the American people."
--This is the "happily ever after" vision of how the Iraq War will end, versus "sad endings" like the fall of Saigon. Now sit back and watch what really happens.

"In the short run, we're going to bring justice to our enemies. In the long run, the best way to ensure the security of our own citizens is to spread the hope of freedom across the broader Middle East. We've seen freedom conquer evil and secure the peace before. In World War II, free nations came together to fight the ideology of fascism, and freedom prevailed -- and today Germany and Japan are democracies and they are allies in securing the peace. In the Cold War, freedom defeated the ideology of communism and led to a democratic movement that freed the nations of Eastern and Central Europe from Soviet domination -- and today these nations are allies in the war on terror."
--Notice how everyone uses World War II as an example because the wars we've fought since were almost all criminal actions. Also notice how the "Cold War" has been replaced by the "War on Terror". Always need a war to fight when you're in the war industry. Cold war ends and hey, ya gotta come up with something, or Halliburton's out of business!

"Today in the Middle East freedom is once again contending with an ideology that seeks to sow anger and hatred and despair. And like fascism and communism before, the hateful ideologies that use terror will be defeated by the unstoppable power of freedom, and as democracy spreads in the Middle East, these countries will become allies in the cause of peace."
--Freedom, Democracy, and Peace: three things George Dubya Bush has worked his hardest to defeat, especially in THIS country.

"Advancing the cause of freedom and democracy in the Middle East begins with ensuring the success of a free Iraq. Freedom's victory in that country will inspire democratic reformers from Damascus to Tehran, and spread hope across a troubled region, and lift a terrible threat from the lives of our citizens. By strengthening Iraqi democracy, we will gain a partner in the cause of peace and moderation in the Muslim world, and an ally in the worldwide struggle against -- against the terrorists. Advancing the ideal of democracy and self-government is the mission that created our nation -- and now it is the calling of a new generation of Americans. We will meet the challenge of our time. We will answer history's call with confidence -- because we know that freedom is the destiny of every man, woman and child on this earth."
--Yeah, uh, maybe after "Democracy" spreads across the Middle East, they can send some over here. If Bush cares about "Democracy" so much, then why did he steal the last two elections?

And now he feels he's answering "history's call?" Sure, uh, history's call: "Calling mass murderers... Calling all mass murderers of history... Please report to prison pending your war crimes tribunals..."

If Bush had actually bothered to READ history, he would have found a nice little quote about history by President John F. Kennedy: "History will judge us harshly." Smart man, obviously read history... because THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HISTORY DOES. History doesn't CALL people to go BOMB over 100,000 people to their deaths. It just tells everyone that you bombed 100,000 people to their deaths after you've already done it. And then it labels you as, that's right, a MASS MURDERER OF HISTORY. Thank you, George Duh-bya Bush, for admitting you've never, EVER, read any history.

"Before our mission in Iraq is accomplished, there will be tough days ahead. A time of war is a time of sacrifice, and we've lost some very fine men and women in this war on terror. Many of you know comrades and classmates who left our shores to defend freedom and who did not live to make the journey home. We pray for the military families who mourn the loss of loves ones. We hold them in our hearts -- and we honour the memory of every fallen soldier, sailor, airman, Coast Guardsman, and Marine."
--Can't be any tougher than dying for oil revenue. Nothing like a few crocodile tears to make people think you care, as you send the next batch of fodder out to die for your own personal monetary gain.

"One of those fallen heroes is a Marine Corporal named Jeff Starr, who was killed fighting the terrorists in Ramadi earlier this year. After he died, a letter was found on his laptop computer. Here's what he wrote, he said, '[I]f you're reading this, then I've died in Iraq. I don't regret going. Everybody dies, but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it's not to me. I'm here helping these people, so they can live the way we live. Not [to] have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark.'"
--Poor kid, confusing political lies made in the cause of corporate profiteering with the real reasons for war. Maybe if the kid's ghost is still around, it can work on this little discrepancy. And don't spare any dishonest politicians, kid!

"There is only one way to honor the sacrifice of Corporal Starr and his fallen comrades -- and that is to take up their mantle, carry on their fight, and complete their mission."
--Don't let this guy die alone! Don't you want in on the action? You too can die today, and maybe be mentioned in a Presidential speech later.

"We will take the fight to the terrorists. We will help the Iraqi people lay the foundations of a strong democracy that can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself. And by laying the foundations of freedom in Iraq, we will lay the foundation of peace for generations to come."
--Yeah yeah, we all know that as soon as America pulls out, it's all over. Bush just has to paint a picture of sunshine to convince the gullible to get behind his giant death machine.

"You all are the ones who will help accomplish all this. Our freedom and our way of life are in your hands -- and they're in the best of hands. I want to thank you for your service in the cause of freedom. I want to thank you for wearing the uniform. May God bless you all, and may God continue to bless the United States of America."
--Nothing like trying to whip up a little pride to make people feel important before they're sent to their deaths. Thank you, thank you and good night.




Back to Pam's rants

Back to the top

Back to Pam's vegan vegetarian FUN page

Pam's vegan vegetarian cookbook, with vegan vegetarian recipes

© 2005 by Pam Rotella