Why does Bush insist on 'staying the course' when even his own appointees say we're losing the war in Iraq

Question

Robert Gates, the White House choice to be the next defense secretary, conceded Tuesday that the United States is not winning the war in Iraq and warned that if that country is not stabilized in the next year or two it could lead to a "regional conflagration."

Read for yourselves:

http://kevxml.windstream.net/_1_J63TO1038W1HOO__wind.main/apnws/story.htm?kcfg=apart&sin=news_top&qcat=news&ran=24383&feed=ap&to

Answer 1

Bush, like all politicians, has to play to his audience. Like most imbeciles, his grasp of reality and his ability to reason is just not his strong suit. Like most people in government, they crave POWER, but are terrified of RESPONSIBILITY.

If he acknowledged the reality of the outcomes of his wretched wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, he would have to face the reality and responsibility that his Presidential decisions were reckless, brutal, and horribly destructive, yet utterly ineffective. He is a utterly worthless failure as President!!

Awareness of this fact would be crushing to him, and to avoid this, he pretends that everything is wonderful, and that the only thing preventing "victory" are these F#$%$@G critics of his administration and its war policy.

He certainly wasn't the first leader to do this, he isn't alone in doing this, and is not even the worst.

It is most distressing, however, to those Americans who would like to put this truly dismal misadventure which he is responsible for behind us as soon as possible.

Answer 2

Maybe he just wants to get nominated and change his mind later.
He isn't really up to date on the plans of Iraq and therefore would be a poor choice to replace Rummy.

Here are the goals set forth:
Create a Democratically elected government: Accomplished
Create 3,200 infrastructure projects: 82% were completed as of Aug. 2006
Create a police force and military that can take care of Iraq: The president of Iraq say that will be accomplished in June 2007
Find WMD: According to Congressional record, 500 WMD were found and Iraq was so far ahead at making a nuclear weapon that when the Bush administration published the confiscated blueprints on line that critics said to take it off because the complete blue prints could allow another country to build a nuclear bomb.

So where is the losing part? Two goals have been accomplished, one goal has a deadline and the other goal is moving forward and not backwards.

Answer 3

In all due respect George Bush is a very stubborn person. He feels as if it is unnatural to make a mistake, and later admitting to making that mistake. It is obvious why certain people within his cabinet (formerly) such as the Donald Rumsfield and Colin Powell left office. Also, recently Condoleeza Rice admitted that many mistakes have been made in the Iraqi war (which is both obvious and understandable in my eyesight) but she is unable to disclose those faults until the current presidential term has expired. I applaud Bush for his initial motive of trying to help Iraq (if that was indeed what he was trying to do) but I do not like for someone to make idiotic comments such as "staying the course" when 3,000 people have died as a result of this "course".

Answer 4

For the very same reasons he initiated the Iraq War, which HE has yet to publicly disclose, but are published on the Internet at PNAC's site. Exactly one year before 9-11, PNAC posted a "white paper" entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century." According to that document, they want the United States, by way of economic and military force, to bring the rest of the world under the umbrella of a new socio-economic Pax Americana. The New World Order, an American global hegemony.

That paper states America must:
* Reposition PERMANANTLY based forces to Southern Europe, Southeast Asia and the MIDDLE EAST;
* Modernize U.S. forces, including enhancing our fighter aircraft, submarine and surface fleet capabilities;
* Develop and deploy a global missile defense system, and develop a strategic dominance of space;
* Control the "International Commons" of cyberspace;
* Increase defense spending to a minimum of 3.8 percent of gross domestic product, up from the 3 percent currently spent (which Bush has already done).

It also states American forces need to be deployed in 3 simultaneous military conflicts, and must win decisively, to show the world American power. Once Iraq is under control, we are to build a permanent military base there.

Additionally, it contains the statement: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor,” and remember, this paper was published exactly one year prior to 9-11.

Vice President Dick Cheney is a founding member of PNAC, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz is the ideological father of the group. Bruce Jackson, a PNAC director, served as a Pentagon official for Ronald Reagan before leaving government service to take a leading position with the weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin. William Kristol, famed conservative writer for the Weekly Standard, is also a co-founder of the group. The Weekly Standard is owned by Ruppert Murdoch, who also owns international media giant Fox News.

When Bush assumed the Presidency, the men who created and nurtured the world domination schemes of PNAC became the men who run the Pentagon, the Defense Department and the White House. On September 11th, when the Towers came down, these men saw their chance to turn their White Papers into substantive policy. On September 20th 2001, Bush released the "National Security Strategy of the United States of America." It is an ideological match to PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses" report issued a year earlier.

PNAC, http://www.newamericancentury.org the Project for the New American Century is a Washington-based think tank created in 1997.

In the quietest coup ever, this organization has taken control of the top seats in our government, changed our Constitution to further empower the presidency, as well as severly reduced our rights and protections from unfair treatment by our own government, while claiming it's all to battle terrorism.

Since when have the American people become the terrorists?

Answer 5

I read it early this morning. And "regional conflagration" does not necessarily equate to the word "Lose" or "Loss". It means the methodology being used needs to change in pursuing the goal of this war. It means that we must shift our strategies and change with changing conditions. Think for a minute what the result would be if the order was given to pack everyone up and bring them all home in 3 weeks. Iran is already pressuring the regional nations to kick the US out of every base we currently have them stationed in. Why do you suppose that is? Because they are concerned that our people are dying there? No, I don't think so.

Stop allowing your hatred of the man blot out your common sense here.At this point, it makes ZERO difference if we were wrong going in or not. Live with what is. Not what was or what should have been. What is...is this. We are hip deep in it. We have dedicated lives to this. We have dedicated billions of dollars to this. Our future is on the line. Every time we back down because (whining voice) "It's too hard!", the recruitment of radical Islam rises and believe me when I tell you, they don't care about you or your family and your live and let live attitude. They care about the destruction of a nation, the destruction of ALL infidels and anything connected with the infidel. You better wake the h*** up and take a look at the bigger picture.

I do not mean to sound so harsh, but the same comments and questions appear here by the hour, and you best believe this. The radicals DO have the balls to bring the fight to us, right here on American, British, Canadian, Spanish or African soil. They are not afraid to sit for days in a burned out wreck of a house for a chance to make a successful attack on any western interest. They have the guts to walk boldfaced into a crowded shopping mall with a suitcase nuke strapped to their belly and set it off 2 days before Christmas when the mall is full of families. Better think about it. And if you haven't looked at these links, I hope you do now, because their Islamic bretheren who don't agree with them are truly risking their lives to help us see this threat.

Answer 6

because he believe that his choices rules over everyone Elise's and he does not care about the general public point of view. It doesn't matter how many people dies out there, he won't bend. He needs to be a real leader and step up to the plate and bring our women and men home. It's way over due. I believe the American vote last month proved it

Answer 7

Valerie s you sure know how to show your ignorance and prejudice, you must be a northern ***** as women in the rest of the country seem to have some intellect, and I am sure you could be another Rambo and win this war single handed I am also sure you wouldn't say the same about your black friends as that wouldn't be P,C,now would it? ,F.Y,I.if we pull out of Iraq now without destroying the Taliban and the insurgency in Iraq a lot of people will die unnecessarily, as they did in Viet Nam ,then the Moslem's will be in our front yards killing our people or don't you remember the W,T,C getting blown up by these fanatics?they will be here raping killing our people whole sale, I know you are not worried about being raped but some others are, so ask your self is this what America wants ??

Answer 8

The course will be whichever way he steers it. If the USA withdraw from Iraq he will say that it was part of the course and that stability is now there.

Answer 9

I HAVE BEEN TO WAR. LOSING? WINNING? THIS ISNT A SPORTING AFFAIR. IF LOSING IS NOT WINNING IT OUTRIGHT THEN I GUESS WE ARE LOSING. IF WINNING MEANS GETTING A LITTLE BACKBONE AND NOT FOLDING LIKE A DECK OF CARDS THEN I THINK WE ARE WINNING. WHAT IS A GOOD FIGURE THAT WE CAN SET ON INNOCENT LIVES BEING LOST BECAUSE WE DIDNT WANT TO BE INVOLVED. THE LAST TIME I CHECKED IT WAS WW11 WHEN THE ONLY REASON WE GOT INTO THE FIGHT AT ALL WAS WE WERE ATTACKED AT PEARL HARBOR. AND THAT ONLY COST THE LIVES OF @20,000,000 INNOCENTS OR MORE AND WAS GOING ON EVEN AS WE SAT ON OUR HANDS PRIOR TO DEC 7, 1941 WITH A SEMI ISOLATIONIST POLICY EVEN AS ENGLAND WAS GETTING THE CRAP BOMBED OUT OF IT AND ENTIRE ETHNIC POPULATIONS WERE BEING SYSTEMATICALLY EXTERMINATED IN GERMANY. WAKE UP FOLKS!! WHILE WE FIDDLE, ROME IS BURNING.

Answer 10

He does not want to look like a dumb@$$ for sending us there. He just wanted to show them that we can hurt ppl too. After 9/11 he felt we needed to go to teach them a lesson. And so did most of the hillbilly's in this country. Well, as most of us can see, he and his hillbilly friends were wrong. Now we have to pay the price. No matter when we leave, someone will retaliate.