When George Bush talks about "victory in Iraq" what exactly does he mean by that?

Answer 1

He means hanging on until 2008, so that he and his criminal arsewipe cronies can blame the Democrats for the mess.

Answer 2

Since nobody else here has a clue.
I'll give you a better reply.
Victory was when we actually removed Sadaam from power. Brought him to trial, convicted him of his crimes & the courts took care of him in normal Arab fashion.
The rest of the story will have to wait. The end result will take years to define. Historians will tell future generations all about it. In a sense we have had a Victory in Iraq.

The brainy smurfs out there that think we need to bring home all our people & leave them to it. Haven't got a clue as to what the real consequencies would be. Civil war, along with the fact that you might as well tell Iran that Iraq is open go take it. Then another more costly war starts. Those that say it's all about oil are not all wrong. They just aren't completely right either.

Here's what happens next. When any of these actions happens you think gas is high at 3.80 gal. try $15.00 or more a gal. because oil supply lines would be cut. Not necessarily to us, but remember all actions have a reaction. Thus Crude oil prices would sky rocket out of control. The global economy would start to meltdown. Countries with barely stable economies go bankrupt. Loans default, banks & gov't crumble. Stock markets colapse.It would make the market crash of 1929 look like a sunday picnic.
Walking or riding bike would become the only reasonable way to travel. Economy turns to a cash only economy. Credit cards and checks not accepted. People rise up and demand action. But at that time it would be to late the damage is already done. The cost of everything will sky rocket, groceries clothing etc... Unless you have cash in hand you won't buy much. The blame game & finger pointing would run wild. Mel Gibson's movie The Road Warrior would be closer to fact than fiction. Don't thnk for one minute that the democrats aren't aware of all this. They are just glad that the republicans are taking the heat for it now.

Answer 3

Victory in Iraq is simple, as articulated by George W. Bush many times: Free Iraqi citizens and a stable government.

BTW: This took many years to achieve when the U.S. was founded, and in other more recent democracies. The worst cases are like Iraq and Lebanon, when neighboring countries fund and arm an active opposition. Ask the opponents of freedom what victory means.

Answer 4

After reading some of the answers posted it makes me wonder if anyone remember that clinton had the same Intel that GW had.

Do you remember all the democrats screaming "WE MUST REMOVE SADDAM"

Yes even hillary said that. The only difference is that bill did not have to gonads to do ANYTHING during his administration except hide the cigar.

Now to your question. When the people of Iraq are free (is that not what the democrats always want, people to be able to do what they want?) and they have a government that is working, and their people gaining wealth from the oil they can produce., that is when we have won. Unfortunately we have the democrats in this country that want to leave, if that happens you can bet your bottom dollar the animals that cut heads off will take over Iraq and WE WILL have to go back. So why leave a job half done lets do it right.

And a second note, perhaps if the democrats stop trying to control the war we would be doing better. Our troops should not have 7 rules before they can engage, they should shoot anyone with a weapon.

And lets get the liberal media out of there they only show what they want not the truth.

Answer 5

LOL..some of the a*sholes posting here crack me up!! Let's take "Robert M"...

> When the people of Iraq are free

What, you mean free to decide who's going to invade them? Were they asked about that one? Did anyone ask the Iraqis if they wanted American soldiers in their country, killing unarmed men, women and children?

> (is that not what the democrats always want

OF COURSE! How could I have been so stupid?? It's all the Democrats' fault!!

> Unfortunately we have the democrats

There it is again, folks! Blame the Democrats! Of course, the Dems haven't been in power since 1999, but hey, why should Robert M let reality get in the way of his little rant, eh?

> in this country that want to leave, if that happens
> you can bet your bottom dollar the animals that
> cut heads off will take over Iraq

Hey, dude, what about the "animals" that torture unarmed prisoners and take pictures of their victims? Remind us all who that was again, eh..?

> And a second note, perhaps if the democrats stop
> trying to control the war we would be doing better.

Three times, woweee!! It's all the Democrats' fault! The Democrats are to blame for everything.. Vietnam.. the Wall Street Crash of 1929, global warming, WWII...damn those Democrats, eh?!! I'm sure that Clinton was in on the Brinks-Mat heist and the Great Train Robbery, too!!

> Our troops should not have 7 rules before they
> can engage, they should shoot anyone with a weapon.

Well that's just the problem, man. Right now, it looks like our troops are shooting just about everyone, even if they DON'T have a weapon. Iraqi men, women and children, journalists, allied soldiers, diplomats. At least we're equal-opportunity assholes: we kill everything and everyone. Doesn't that make you proud to be American?

> And lets get the liberal media out of there they only
> show what they want not the truth.

Yeah, sure let's leave Fox News there, eh? Then when another female soldier gets rescued, Fox can tell us all how she and her colleagues were all John Wayne.

Do you get paid to look this stupid, or is it sorta "genetic"?

Look, let's cut to the chase. Our country broke the law in invading Iraq, and our President lyed through his criminal teeth. Remember, WMD? 45 minutes until launch? Anthrax? Al'Queda?

Get real. We signed and ratified the UN Charter, and that clearly states, you DON'T invade a country unless that country attacks you, or an attack is imminent. That Charter, once ratified, became the "Supreme Law" of this country (Article VI of the Constitution of the United States). This isn't about kowtowing to other countries. This isn't about some dickheads' petty obsession with France, Freedom Fries and Jacques Chirac. This is about the President of the United States invading a sovereign nation, in clear and blatant violation of the Constitution of the United States. Why the hell hasn't that murdering asshole been impeached?

Bush, Cheney and the other bent dickheads lied to us, broke international law and violated the Constutition. Now suddenly y'all try to rewrite history and tell us that we didn't invade Iraq to get WMDs, but the 'oust Saddam'. That's NOT what we were told at the time. THERE WERE NO WMD'S. NONE!!! They lied to us. How much clearer does it have to get, for chrissakes????????

Answer 6

George Bush talks about "Victory in Iraq" that actually means "victory of the oil reservoirs of Iraq". Mr. Bush is looking more interested in Iraq's Oil Reservoirs than Iraqi Peoples or Land.

Answer 7

I think your first question (what do I mean by "respect") is difficult to answer because there are different types of respect. For example, I could respect somebody by being willing to seek their expertise in a specific subject. Or, I could respect somebody by not hassling them about a point on which I think they are wrong. Or, I could respect somebody's wishes by not actively acting against those wishes, even if I think I acting against them would be morally justified. I think respect is too ambiguous a word that applies in too many cases for it to be given a simple definition. As far as being worthy of respect, I suppose I think everybody is worthy of respect in some way. I'm not entirely sure what criteria I use to determine whether or not somebody is worthy of my respect... I'll think about it some more and if I come up with an answer I'll get back to you. So, in conclusion, my answer to your question is that I can't really answer your question.

Answer 8

to defeat the terrorist it is going to take at least 10 years of hard fighting. ..the war has gone about five years already so to have "victory in Iraq" it has been estimated it will take another five years.

This is just an average of how long it usually takes to end a conflict dealing with terrorist groups. If the United States was not in Iraq then the terrorist would have a huge base in the middle east.

This war on terrorism is not going to go away for a long long time. This is something that any President will have to have..Democrat or Republican....

Answer 9

Simple, success in Iraq is "not no violence."
That and a few more of Bush's definitions of victory in Iraq:
http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=86637



"President Bush has a (changing) standard for success in Iraq. But does he have a standard for failure? .."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0511/p09s02-coop.html?s=u

Answer 10

What would victory in Iraq look like?

1. Respect for one another's cultures
2. Respect for the law
3. Unbiased noble leadership
4. Respect for minority rights