By definition a surge is a short burst of energy.. Therefore can we expect the OCCUPATION to be over by June.
2007-02-07 06:55:51 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Condi didn't say it was a surge or an escalation...she clearly stated it was an "augmentation" which immediately made me think of plastic surgery.....
2007-02-07 07:09:38 · answer #1 · answered by Sun Spot 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There are two problems with the question you are asking. You are abiding by a textbook definition of what a term like “surge” means. You should know by now that Bush, and many of his cohorts, don’t adhere to terms and their true meanings, but instead like to twist them into their own bizarre definitions. Remember in Bush’s twilight zone world concepts like fighting a “War on Terrorism” means time to exploit a country for oil and construction profits. WMDs can be a group of innocuous chemicals found in a warehouse and a handful of firecrackers. In Bush’s realm the phrase “mission accomplished” actually means performing a minor feat of defeating a third rate military, while failing at a major task, like winning the peace in a country. In Bush’s deluded mind, establishing free democracy means selecting puppet rulers for the a people to choose from, and then having those people coerced by death squads after the elections; death squads that were created and allowed to fester as a result of this administration’s mismanagement of the occupation. The term “surge” signifies to Bush, an indefinite commitment to more troops to an already failed endeavor. Clearly this list of distorted vocabulary and phrases can go on and on with respect to the Bush administration.
The second problem with your question concerning the “surge” is that implicit in it is a demand to define a timetable. Remember, Bush and his administration consider timetables unnecessary. Bush has a God complex after all, and God being eternal has no respect for time, and Bush seems to be likeminded with respect to Iraq.
2007-02-08 07:33:55 · answer #2 · answered by Lawrence Louis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That would be true - IF you used the dictionary definition. Sadly, a surge is an increase... and hopefully to be temporary. The closest thing I've read and heard about when the surge would end is when Bagdhad is 'calm' and under control by the Iraqi national forces.
I will hope for June.
2007-02-07 07:00:07 · answer #3 · answered by words_smith_4u 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well find out next year.
The Joint Chiefs testified before the Senate that the surge would not start before September.
Sure they all agreed a few went over for the photo-opp. But they have no equipment or support.
Go big Red Go
2007-02-07 07:03:14 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not long, this is actually the thrid surge of the last 12 months.
2007-02-07 06:58:53 · answer #5 · answered by Timothy M 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
For ever endless war with many surges to come and many ppl be killed too.
2007-02-07 07:05:01 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nope.
You can expect the occupation I mean whatever they are calling it to be over when the puppet government is in place and controllable.
2007-02-07 06:59:02 · answer #7 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No one ever said that after the surge the war would end, so I don't know where you got that idea.
2007-02-07 07:01:21 · answer #8 · answered by Pfo 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, June of 2025.
2007-02-07 06:58:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Until the administration comes up with a new name for it.
2007-02-07 07:00:18 · answer #10 · answered by Wayne Z 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋