Bush's final humiliating failure before the US leave - Iraq

Bush's final humiliating failure before the US leave

Iraq Forum

Pages:  1Original Forum    Popular Forums    Search

Posted by: h@ts

Bush is sending 20,000 more troops to Iraq. Anyone agree/disagree that this is going to be Bush's final humiliating failure (and he's had a lot) before even he finally has no choice but to understand that the US lost in Iraq a long time ago?

The troops will go home (or moved to a neighbouring state) and Bush can then be certain of being crowned the worst President in US living history, and Iraq is marked down as America's second Vietnam. Unfortunately for Bush there were a few Presidents to share the blame for Vietnam. Not so Iraq. It was his war, and his choice alone to start the war.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: EUCLID

I noticed toward the end of Bush's speech last night, he said something to the effect that he also had "plan B." Then he said he did not want to talk about it now.

I have two questions:

1) What is plan B?

2) Why on earth has no news organization asked that same question? How can Bush slip something so provacative into a speech and nobody pick up on it?

Apparently the answer to #2 is that the news organizations all knew what he was going to announce about more troops and prepared their response without actually listening to the speech.

Is Plan B the partitioning of Iraq?

Reply To this Message

Posted by: h@ts

quote:
EUCLID said this in post #2 :
1) What is plan B?

2) Why on earth has no news organization asked that same question? How can Bush slip something so provacative into a speech and nobody pick up on it?

Is Plan B the partitioning of Iraq?


It's probably just BS and the media can smell it a mile off. I doubt very much he has any other plans because this latest plan is the same old tired plan he's tried before in Baghdad, Fallujah, Ramadi, Samara, etc etc. When the US troops are sent into Baghdad the insurgents can just leave and sit out any attack somewhere else, and unless US troops stay forever, just move back in when they've gone.

How can Bush partition Iraq? The Sunnis don't have any oil in the areas they are the majority and the Turks do NOT want an independent Kurdish state.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: EUCLID

quote:
h@ts said this in post #3 :


It's probably just BS and the media can smell it a mile off. I doubt very much he has any other plans because this latest plan...



I am not questioning whether "plan B" is good or bad. I am just amazed that a supposedly inquisitive press utterly failed to pick up on his comment about having a "plan B." If the press thought his claim to having a plan B was just BS, surely they would have seized the opportunity to rub his face in it. I think you will have to agree.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: HECK!

Mayor Quimby unveiled "Plan B" on The Simpsons. It involved moving Springfield 5 miles down the road. Wonder if they will do the same with Iraq?

-HECK!

Reply To this Message

Posted by: lodgebo

Yep push it inot Iran and the circle of disaster is complete.
Let's be honest even if they asked Bush is not going to tell them plan B (It's really plan C lets be honest) you don't announce your back up plans to the enemy. Howevere Plan B will involve either blaming the left, blaming the French ( or all of Europe) or possibly calling an election and blaming whoever it is that beats Bush in a landslide.

Anyway is this not the most ignorant, uninformed idea that Bush has yet come up with? It seems that the Bush adminstartions answer to any problem is to point a gun at it. More soldiers won't solve thew problem for a few reason mainly that the British are leaving soon and Basra is not under control so the Iraqis will need help there, the other coaliton forces are leaving, the Iraqi army still can't work alone, the idea is unpopular in the US and the insurgents have not used ther plan B yet.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: EUCLID

quote:
lodgebo said this in post #6 :


Anyway is this not the most ignorant, uninformed idea that Bush has yet come up with?


What idea are you talking about? Plan A or Plan B?
Reply To this Message

Posted by: lodgebo

The plan to send 20000+ troops to Iraq.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: EUCLID

I think the main thing that might be effective in Bush's added-troop plan is the announcement of a change in the rules of engagement. He said we will no longer be hampered by political influence from the new Iraq goverment. Well what took so long? It's about time we got rid of that imprediment.

It sounds like the new resolve is to fight to the death with the Sadr Madi Army and any other obvious militia. Again I ask what took so long?

He also said that the new Iraq government has pledged to divide up oil revenues equally. What is that all about? Does everybody get a check each month for oil sales?

Reply To this Message

Posted by: EUCLID

Oh by the way, I suspect plan B is Iran.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: asantana

quote:
EUCLID said this in post #10 :
Oh by the way, I suspect plan B is Iran.


Plan B is "iraqis are not cooperating thats why I will leave them alone, boys lets go home... "
Reply To this Message

Posted by: h@ts

quote:
EUCLID said this in post #9 :
I think the main thing that might be effective in Bush's added-troop plan is the announcement of a change in the rules of engagement. He said we will no longer be hampered by political influence from the new Iraq goverment. Well what took so long? It's about time we got rid of that imprediment.


How does that work? It sounds to me like a step backward. If the US can't control Iraq (and Bush has proved quite clearly he can't) and we're now going to completely ignore the Iraqi government, then why would Prime Minister Al-Maliki even pretend to cooperate with us after we've blown up a lot of buildings and killed a lot of people?

quote:
It sounds like the new resolve is to fight to the death with the Sadr Madi Army and any other obvious militia. Again I ask what took so long?


Do you seriously think opening a new battle front is a good idea? The US is already unpopular and struggling with the Sunni insurgency? Surely starting another full on battle would fail and just lead to escalating violence which we couldn't control and even more chaos?

quote:
He also said that the new Iraq government has pledged to divide up oil revenues equally. What is that all about? Does everybody get a check each month for oil sales?


Nouri Al-Maliki has said he does not want the Prime Minister's job and wants to leave as soon as possible. He will undoubtedly be under tremendous pressure from all sides to do different things, including bending under pressure from Iran who are hardly friendly with the Sunnis.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: h@ts

quote:
EUCLID said this in post #10 :
Oh by the way, I suspect plan B is Iran.


No, that is plan STUPID, so maybe you're right and Bush is seriously considering it. No doubt even he is starting to realise that he's going to go down as one of the worst US President ever, so maybe he thinks why not take the whole country down with him. That would certainly fit his arrogant, self-destructive, alcoholic, spoilt, impulsive nature.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: EUCLID

Actually, I found out that Plan B is to pull back and let the Sunnis and Shiites kill each other; kind of like letting the fire burn out rather than fight it.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: h@ts

quote:
EUCLID said this in post #14 :
Actually, I found out that Plan B is to pull back and let the Sunnis and Shiites kill each other; kind of like letting the fire burn out rather than fight it.


If Bush can't do diplomacy and talk to those who have influence and power in the region - as the Baker report suggested - then it doesn't leave him with a lot of options but to go to this plan B.

What do you think of Bush's plan A - 20,000 more troops - which to me is just bandaging over the gash until Bush can leave office? These new troops are for no-one's benefit but Bush's inability to admit defeat.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: lodgebo

quote:
EUCLID said this in post #14 :
Actually, I found out that Plan B is to pull back and let the Sunnis and Shiites kill each other; kind of like letting the fire burn out rather than fight it.


So really plan B is admitting that you can't control Iraq and you are leaving.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: Lawless

quote:
lodgebo said this in post #16 :


So really plan B is admitting that you can't control Iraq and you are leaving.



When Bush admitted that he was wrong... that should have been what he said next. Sure, we're sending more, and more troops. Maybe we're making a pinch of a difference there... even if we are sending home our people in body bags for someone else's war. But, in the end... these terrorists, or religious zealots, and groups, will do as someone mentioned earlier in this thread. They will vacate the area, and just sit and wait this out. Once the US departs, they will go right back to killing each other.

We need to not send more troops... but pull out and let these people figure it out.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: HECK!

Didn't even watch his speech. Rather watch Elmer Fudd chasing that wabbit on the Cartoon Network. It's just about as enlightening.

-HECK!

Reply To this Message

Posted by: EUCLID

quote:
h@ts said this in post #15 :


If Bush can't do diplomacy and talk to those who have influence and power in the region - as the Baker report suggested - then it doesn't leave him with a lot of options but to go to this plan B.

What do you think of Bush's plan A - 20,000 more troops - which to me is just bandaging over the gash until Bush can leave office? These new troops are for no-one's benefit but Bush's inability to admit defeat.


I think he needs to send 20,000 troops to congress because that is where the biggest battle will be fought.

Seriously, I don't know what to expect from sending 20,000 more troops to Iraq. I think it makes more difference what you do with the troops rather than how many there are. I really have no idea how this war is being fought. Watching the network news in the U.S., I can only conclude that the entire country of Iraq is composed of people wandering around among smashed and smoking vehicles. That is as deep as the news goes here.

I am not convinced that Bush is sending the extra troops only for his own benefit. If the extra troops solve all the problems, then Bush's overall position will be vindicated. If it does not work, he will be much worsely repudiated than he would have been if he just kept going with the status quo. So it seems like he is taking a big gamble. If he was worried about covering his butt for his legacy, the far safer course would have been to just take the advice of the Iraq study group, so if it results in a worse problem, he can just blame it on the ISG.

I can tell you this: If I were the Iraqi insurgents, I would be dusting off my own plan B to show the world that 20,000 more opposing troops will not solve the problem. Get ready for some really big expolsions.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: Lawless

quote:
EUCLID said this in post #19 :
I can tell you this: If I were the Iraqi insurgents, I would be dusting off my own plan B to show the world that 20,000 more opposing troops will not solve the problem. Get ready for some really big expolsions.



You know what... I completely agree with you, 100% here. If I were an insurgent in Iraqi, I would be doing exactly that as well.
Reply To this Message

Pages:  1 Free Forums    Chat Forum

Iraq Forum: Bush's final humiliating failure before the US leave

Forum Forum Forum