Does Bush only have to keep US troops in Iraq until his term ends to declare "victory"?

Question

If he keeps Congress from pulling US troops from Iraq over the next 2 years, until his term ends, he can then walk away from the White House w/ his head held high knowing that he won just by defeating the "cut & run" Democrats one last time. Plus he will sabotage any incoming Democrat President by passing his Iraq disaster to him or her.

I don't know how he does it but Karl Rove is a political genius.

Answer 1

Well, Georgie hasn't had to accept responsibility for his actions his whole life. Daddy has cleaned up his messes since he was a child. This is just another mess that he will leave for someone else to fix. What do you expect from an intellectual midget who is a Mommy's boy.

Answer 2

What we saw the last month, when he proposed more war against more "foes" was the madman the last six years have created. This time, in his war against Iran, he doesn't even feel the need for minimal PR, as he did before attacking Iraq. All he is bothering with are signals -- ships moving here, admirals moving there, consulates being raided in this other place. He no longer cares about the opinions of the voters, the Congress, the generals, the press, and he especially disdains the opinions of B/S/and B [Bush Sr, Scrowcroft, Baker]. Thanks to Gerson, he identifies his own little ideas with God (a blasphemy, of course, but hey, there's lots of precedent on this), so there's no telling what he will do.

We can tell by the evidence of the last two months that whatever it is, it will be exactly the thing that the majority of the voters do not want him to do, exactly the thing that James Baker himself doesn't want him to do. The propaganda that Bush's sponsors and handlers have poured forth has ceased to persuade the voters but succeeded beyond all measure in convincing the man himself.

He will tell himself that God is talking to him, or that he is possessed of an extra measure of courage, or he that he is simply compelled to do whatever it is. The soldiers will pay the price in blood. We will pay the price in money. The Iraqis will pay the price in horror. The Iranians will pay the price, possibly, in the almost unimaginable terror of nuclear attack. Probably, the Israelis will pay the price, too.

Little George isn't the same guy he was in 2000, the guy described by Gail Sheehy in her Vanity Fair profile -- hyper-competitive and dyslexic, prone to cheat at games, always swinging between screwing up and making up, hating criticism and disagreement, careless of others but often charming. He is no longer the guy who the Republicans thought they could control (unlike, say, McCain).

The small pathologies of Bush the candidate have, thanks to the purposes of the neocons and the religious right, been enhanced and upgraded. We have a bona fide madman now, who thinks of himself in a grandiose way as single-handedly turning the tide of history. Some of his Frankensteins have bailed, some haven't dared to, and others still seem to believe. His actions and his orders, especially about Iran, seem to be telling us that he will stop at nothing to prove his dominance. The elder Bush(es), Scrowcroft, Baker, and their friends, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gerson, and the neocons have made the monster and in the process endangered the country, the Constitution, and the world, not to mention the sanity of wretches like Jose Padilla.

Maybe the bums planned this mess for their own profit, or maybe they planned to profit without mess; maybe some of them regret what they have wrought. However, they all share the blame for whatever he does next.

Answer 3

I truly believe that President Bush would prefer to get his troops home safely. (I haven't spoken to him personally on the matter, so I could be wrong.) As Commander in Chief of the Military, he does have an obligation to keep our men and women safe and supplied while on duty serving our country. The situation there is so unclear and sensationalized by the media and venues such as this that the facts become clouded easily. As a second term incumbent, there is little to gain by posturing politically, yet we can't pick up and leave immediately. Having friends over seas serving for us, I would like to see them come home soon also, but realize that by immediately retreating at this time, might not be the best plan either.

Answer 4

Rove is not so ingenious as the last elections proved. He took advantage of a vulnerable nation in fear and shock following the 9/11 attack. That is the oldest trick in the book.

Victory in Iraq morphs every few months into something new. Thus Bush and the neo-cons will try to define it to meet their numerous shortfalls.

They even twist their mouths to say that 3000+ dead soldiers means nothing because more died in other wars.

Answer 5

I want you to remember this statement that you made when President Bush's term ends and the democrats keep us in Iraq for the next four years. It is not exactly a reps. vs dems. issue. A sign of weakness to terrorists like pulling out of Iraq or pulling out of Lebanon means they've won and they'll attack another position.

Answer 6

yet somebody else who in basic terms listens to a million/2 of the story and makes up something. McCain would not prefer to maintain the Iraq conflict going for one hundred years. He by no skill stated that. He by no skill implied that. that's in basic terms made up. He did say that there must be troops in Iraq for one hundred years yet he has by no skill even endorsed that. He in basic terms suggested the prospect as quickly as. i like how human beings attempt to tie Bush and McCain to grease companies yet continuously ignore that Al Gore's fortune all got here from oil. Neither Bush nor McCain prefer the conflict to final one hundred years. they have the two called for the troops to be bumped off as quickly as a threat yet Bush did not prefer to set a schedule with out the Iraqi enter. Now that the Iraqi's are waiting to take over, the Bush administration has been discussing the timetable with them. the U. S. public voted out the "Rubberstamp Republicans" in 2006 and particularly have been given a set of Democrats that have endured to fund the conflict they have been supposedly against with out question. a super sort of excellent it did.

Answer 7

That'a about how it will play out. He'll get thousands killed and declare he won. Reality is not a friend of either Bush or Rove.
And actually, Karl Rove should find a nice large, black man to be pen pals with till he gets to prison. Keep those milky cheeks warm, baby.

Answer 8

Bush will try his hardest to keep the troops there until his term ends. I feel sorry for the next President who's going to have to fix that problem. If he or she can't do it by the end of their term they won't get reelected. Sending more troops is not going to fix the problem. You can't beat terrorist by playing the numbers game, you have to actually find out what they truly care about and strike there.

Answer 9

He knows he can't end the war in a magnificent way, so he wants to pass on the duty to the next president. This is common knowledge.

Answer 10

Cut and run? Sounds like you've been listening to conservative hate radio again. Will you ever learn? That is BS and propaganda to prop up a FAILED President. He's failed at everything else he has done, but daddy bailed him out. Let's see daddy bail him out of this one.