How many more body bags?

LINK

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush declared Tuesday that rebuilding Iraq, following a U.S.-led invasion there, will be a "massive and long-term undertaking," one that he suggested would require further sacrifice....

Boy, the anti-Bush bias at Google is pretty blatant....hard to find quotes using them.

 

Excellent points!

 

The most elaborate — and criticized — White House event so far was Mr. Bush's speech aboard the Abraham Lincoln announcing the end of major combat in Iraq. White House officials say that a variety of people, including the president, came up with the idea, and that Mr. Sforza embedded himself on the carrier to make preparations days before Mr. Bush's landing in a flight suit and his early evening speech.

Media strategists noted afterward that Mr. Sforza and his aides had choreographed every aspect of the event, even down to the members of the Lincoln crew arrayed in coordinated shirt colors over Mr. Bush's right shoulder and the "Mission Accomplished" banner placed to perfectly capture the president and the celebratory two words in a single shot. The speech was specifically timed for what image makers call "magic hour light," which cast a golden glow on Mr. Bush.


Bush used the American people and made a
impression that things were just swell with this
premature media event.


leaving false impression


Cheney said we would be greeted as Liberators
(false impression)
Cheney said the insurgency is in its last throes.
(more bizarreness)


I think middle America is asking the question

"Either do it right or get out"

listen to this couple from the Midwest

Hardball transcript:

very telling interview on Hardball 4Aug2005
from a family from the Heartland.

MATTHEWS: Tonight, we begin with the parents of Lance Corporal Edward Schroeder, who was among the 14 Marines who lost their lives in yesterday's attack in Iraq. His parents, Rosemary Palmer and Paul Schroeder, join me now from their home outside Cleveland.

Well, it's a terrible thing to do, but I want to talk to you both about the war in Iraq and the loss of your son.

Ms. Palmer, did you sense that this war was very dangerous for your son, even before yesterday?

ROSEMARY PALMER, MOTHER OF KILLED U.S. MARINE: Well, war is always dangerous. And there were so many deaths that it was starting to mount to the point where I was actually thinking yesterday that if Auggie (ph) were not among the 14 killed, I was almost to the point of calling the Department of Defense and just saying, for mental health reasons, he had to come home, that I couldn't handle it anymore. It was just too much.

MATTHEWS: What made you feel that the danger was growing?

PALMER: Well, it's the old game of the fewer. And the 325 unit that he's in has been having more and more casualties. And if you have fewer guys and the same number of people, well, then, the other—the chances are growing that your person is going to be the one that's hit.

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you, Mr. Schroeder, why do you think we're in this war? What do you think is the real reason for this war in Iraq?

PAUL SCHROEDER, FATHER OF KILLED U.S. MARINE: Well, I really don't know why. I could guess, which might be unfair. But I would guess it has to do with oil. It has to do with deposing a dictator that we used to love and came to hate.

MATTHEWS: Yes.

SCHROEDER: That goes on repeatedly.

MATTHEWS: What did your son say was his motivation for fighting? Was it just patriotism to our country or a belief in the mission?

SCHROEDER: He did not have a motivation to fight. He had a motivation to do his duty to the Marine Corps and to be part of the Marines. His entire life was devoted to doing what he promised he would do.

MATTHEWS: What did he tell you...

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: What did he say about how the war was going?

SCHROEDER: Well, early on, when his unit arrived there in March, he was talking about the friendly Iraqi people. After May and June, he stopped talking about the friendly people, not that they weren't friendly. But he stopped talking about it.
Two weeks ago, in the last conversation I had with him, he simply said, the closer we get to coming home, the less worth it this is.

MATTHEWS: How did you interpret that?

SCHROEDER: I took that to mean that his participation in Operation Matador, Operation New Market, Operation Sword, Operation Spear, and a couple others that I don't know the names of were failing. And that's, basically, the operations were intended to go into these towns, kick out the insurgents, take their weapons, arrest whoever they could, and then they would withdraw.

They only had to go back and find more insurgents in the same places. The fact that these 14 fellows were blown up indicates to me, logic would say, that this policy, this strategy, this tactic has failed.

MATTHEWS: Let me go to Rosemary...

SCHROEDER: If it was successful, if it was successful, then he would still be alive, as would all those other kids.

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: Rosemary, let me ask you about the—what is your feeling about this war and the goal of trying to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people? And do you think that was a smart thing for us to try to do?

PALMER: It was a very naive thing for us to do.

You don't go to another culture and try to impose yours and expect it to work. We're not Iraqis. We don't have the same culture. And while I understand that we're a multicultural nation, we don't act like it sometimes. We act like the whole world thinks exactly the way we do.

MATTHEWS: Do you think that the war is going to get any better now that your son—I mean, you have paid the ultimate price? And, by the way, thank you. I don't know what it means to say thank you for your service, except I mean it. The courage of these young guys and some women over there is unbelievable. And I guess everybody wonders about the conduct of the war, whether they're being—these lives are being wasted or these lives are being put to good purpose.
What is your feeling about that now?

PALMER: Well, I personally believe that, since it is not working, then we have to make a change, that it is not worth the sacrifice if it is just more bodies on to the heap.

Like President Bush said, he wanted to stay the course and honor the memory of the ones who died by continuing to fight. If it didn't work before, why does fighting more—you know, you do the same thing over and over, that's—expecting a different result is, I think, the explanation of insanity.

MATTHEWS: Yes.

Well, the way you describe it, it is like pouring water into a sand hole on the beach and having it drain right through and start over again. It seems like a repetitive process that doesn't seem to be getting anywhere.

PALMER: Exactly.

SCHROEDER:ll, the repetitive process has been going on for 27 months, since the active invasion phase ended, 27 months of doing the same thing over and over and over again, with no evidence that it is getting better.

If there were evidence it was getting better—and I have yet to see it—and I—frankly, if it was getting better, these fellows would still be alive after all of this strenuous effort. Then it is time to make a change. Either put the number of troops on the ground that you need to really do the job or get the heck out.

MATTHEWS: Do you have a sense...

SCHROEDER: have a saying—we have a saying in the Midwest, piss or get off the pot.

MATTHEWS: Do you have a sense, because of your son's tremendous, permanent, total sacrifice of his life and his experience in these months fighting this war, that the middle-level officers, the majors, the captains, do they have a sense of a clear vision of what they're getting done over there?

SCHROEDER: I can't speak to those fellows. I have great respect for the Marine officers at that level and the sergeants who made these troops, great respect.
I would tell you that they probably are frustrated, just like a lot of the ground troops, the lance corporals and the privates are. I would say that one thing that we have to make crystal clear, which is why we agreed to talk today,is that there is a—you cannot equate. There is a clear difference between supporting the troops on the ground and supporting the policies that put them there.

The president likes to make those—to equate those two things. If you don't support the war, you don't support the troops. And too many American people are buying into that. I don't buy into that. Rosemary doesn't buy into that. It is time that we say, look, we can support the troops all until the cows come home.

(CROSSTALK)

SCHROEDER: We don't support the policies that put them there.

MATTHEWS: You two have more right to answer this question than anybody else in the country today. After reading those headline—and to most of us, they're just headlines. They're American G.I.s, Marines in this case, giving their lives for their country, 20-some this week, in that one part of the country in Iraq.

What should be the reaction of the American people who pick up their newspapers, watch television, and learn of these horrors? What should they do as a result of seeing that news, Mr. Schroeder?

SCHROEDER:ey should stand up and tell President Bush, enough is enough. You've had your chance. Now let somebody else come up with a different plan. If you can't come up with a different plan that is going to work, in my view, that is more troops, then get out.

MATTHEWS: Rosemary, is that your view? Is that how we, all of us, not in the news business, regular Americans from your part of the country, across the country, getting this horrible news, how should they react to it?

PALMER: Well, I think most people are just saying, you know, the latter, just get out, because it is clearly—well, it is obvious that the politicians are not going to institute a draft. And with the number of deaths and the dangers being what they are, they are not going to get the recruits.

therefore, if you can't—you can't get enough guys to do the fighting, well, then you have to get out. Do it or get out of the game.

MATTHEWS: I got you. I heard your views and they sound similar.
Thank you very much for this hour of—this time of anguish, to be giving this information. I think the public needs to hear from folks like you.
Thank you very much, Rosemary Palmer and Paul Schroeder, who lost their son, Lance Corporal Edward Schroeder, just today, last 24 hours.
We'll be right back with HARDBALL.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTHEWS: Coming up, a deadly period for U.S. forces in Iraq, more than 30 service members killed since Sunday. Is it time for the troops to come home or do we need more troops over there?

When HARDBALL returns.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

 

I believe that's because there aren't any.

Another...exaggeration by APAL.

 

Don't forget that they do cannot say what they feel, especially if it is contrary to the mission at hand.

Regards,
BiR

 

I see that this thread is just more rehashing of the same old, tired arguments.



Make it go away, Puff.

 

Don't forget that they do cannot say what they feel, especially if it is contrary to the mission at hand.

Regards,
BiR </font>[/QUOTE]Tell that to Rumsfeld.

Joseph Botwinick

 

As usual, that's pure hog wash, ASLANSPAL!

Most of us happily celebrated a solid victory over Saddam's former military forces with a limited number of casualties. That's something America needs to do more often and stop letting some of our own people beat ourselves up all the time. If we listened to the negative line all the time we'd walk around in constant shame for always doing the wrong things, at the wrong times, and in the wrong ways. It's good people with that attitude are not in charge of building troop morale - ours, that is!

The President didn't consider that initial victory to be the end of the struggle. No one ever knows for certain how things will turn out in a war but I don't think very many people felt this initial victory signaled the end of this one nor that there wouldn't be problems going forward. Most everyone with common sense, including our leadership, understands this is a long hard fight that may span generations. Most of us are expecting gains and losses along the way verses instant success.

At the same time you're slamming the President for celebrating this victory as a premature event you're also claiming we should leave because we've won. So, which is it, ASLANSPAL, have we won the whole war yet or just one phase of it in this theater? If it's the former, then when did that happen and to which anti-war activist idiot will you assign credit? If it's the latter, then why are you screaming that we should "cut and run" while we have "victory" and to whom will you cast blame?

 

Don't forget that they do cannot say what they feel, especially if it is contrary to the mission at hand.

Regards,
BiR </font>[/QUOTE]Most troops I know say exactly what they're thinking - they always have - and, thankfully for the security of our nation, they're overwhelmingly positive about what they're doing, their ability to do it, have confidence in their leadership, believe in the probability of success, and willingly accept the risk associated with carrying out the duty we've given them. Hopefully, all the negative talk they hear from the anti-war crowd will continue to be taken for the baloney that it really is.

 

Fortunately we have a ten page maximum now! ASLANSPAL will likely use up eight of them reposting the same information over and over.

 

Makes me wonder if we heard the same speech. I surely didn't get the impression that everything was "just swell". He was proud of the performance of our troops and wanted them to know it.

He also let them know ...


"We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We're bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous. We're pursuing and finding leaders of the old regime who will be held to account for their crimes...

We are helping to rebuild Iraq where the dictator built palaces for himself instead of hospitals and schools.

And we will stand with the new leaders of Iraq as they establish a government of, by and for the Iraqi people.

The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done and then we will leave and we will leave behind a free Iraq."

Although he never uttered the words "mission accomplished", that is how the speech is universally referred to.

 

Carpro, that's the same speech I heard!

What's really "salient" about it, is that the things he spoke about are, in fact, coming to pass.

 

Well I guess it took about 230 years for our constitutional republic to be turned into a democracy. Or is it a plutocracy? Or is it a kleptocracy?

 

Our nation has certainly drifted away from being a constitutional republic! We need to get her moving back in the right direction.

However, for Iraq a democracy, in its true meaning of the word, will be far better than what they had before.

 

Even yet, it is not to late in Iraq
to snatch defeat from the very jaws
of Victory

 

And he has also said that we would leave when the Iraqi people want us to leave. So which is it?

 

Don't forget that they do cannot say what they feel, especially if it is contrary to the mission at hand.

Regards,
BiR </font>[/QUOTE]Tell that to Rumsfeld.</font>[/QUOTE]What was the name of that officer that spoke out against then-President Clinton?

 

Since I was ignored a couple of pages back..let me ask this again, How many of you great brothers in Christ with all of your sublime political ideaology have served or have a son serving in this "war on terrorism"?

I do not say this to be antagonistic as much as I am trying to get some of you pro-occupation type people to see the folly of being an expert on the outside... on "flowery beds of ease".

 

Don't forget that they do cannot say what they feel, especially if it is contrary to the mission at hand.

Regards,
BiR </font>[/QUOTE]Tell that to Rumsfeld.</font>[/QUOTE]What was the name of that officer that spoke out against then-President Clinton? </font>[/QUOTE]Apparently,

This administration is bigger than the Clinton Administration and can handle some criticism, even from a green soldier who had not even made it into combat yet. What was that guy's name again that you used to bring up when it was politically expedient for you?

Joseph Botwinick

 

PrimePower7 said:

My brother served in Vietnam.

My brother-in-law served in Vietnam.

One of my grandnephews is currently serving in Iraq.

My other grandnephew is in the Army as well, currently Stateside.

As for our children, they all have four legs.