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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
01-11-2007 12:33 PM
