Which would you trust more, a report from the White House or one from Petraeus?
2007-08-16 15:06:53 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Why are we surprised? The Bush administration lied to the world about why we went to Iraq in the first place. It isn't like that administration hasn't falsified information before.
The "report" will be a glowing account of the success Bush has had in pursuit of.. of... of (fill in the blank). This "report" will be about as valid as the reports of economic progress that used to come from Stalin's Russia.
So why should we be surprised? After all, when Colin Powell told the UN about weapons of mass destruction, he was reading a speech written for him by that paragon of honesty, "Scooter" Libby.
2007-08-16 15:19:17 · answer #1 · answered by fredrick z 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋
They've written everything else about Iraq so why not the Petraeus report? Except for the 30% of Americans who still support the war do you think anyone is going to believe the White House or a White House appointed General?
2007-08-16 15:18:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Well, we know it's not because of Bush's way with words. My best guess is that Petraeus is only a general, and however competent he may be, he is not fully aware of the huge financial stake this administration has in prolonging the war. The report will represent an attempt to keep the cash flowing into the coffers of the military-industrial complex, no matter what the costs.
Edit: Whatever happened to Bush's claim that he listens to the "generals on the ground," and not to the public opinion polls? Now it appears that he only listens when the generals are saying what he wants to hear...
2007-08-16 15:34:25 · answer #3 · answered by Who Else? 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
each and every thing because of the fact the record on the suspected WMD, that have been shown to be untrue and hence delivered approximately the invasion of Iraq, is the fruit of a toxic tree. as quickly as a lie is advised no longer something yet honesty can substitute the direction. Justifying a "fantasy" can on no account be the actuality.
2016-10-10 09:42:15 · answer #4 · answered by goldthorpe 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Venom, how apt a name.
No, that ain't the truth.
Anybody who believes in the liberal press myth has never visited a network studio (doesn't matter which one) and watched the live updates they see 24/7.
Compare what comes over the wires to what is broadcast and you will know that the media is very much in the pockets of the neocons.
If they were to report things without that bias, people would be storming government buildings with pitchforks and torches.
Likewise, the whitehouse will fabricate the report in the same spirit that they let oil company representatives edit the report on global warming.
2007-08-16 15:27:37 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
This White House has so dishonored The Office and played so fast and loose with the truth that it is a wonder all the pictures of former presidents hanging there are not facing the wall. The deal with Congress was wait until September for the Generals assessment of how things are going, or, "give stay the course while surging" another chance. Congress reluctantly went along feeling not too easy about it. Now that the report is being written by BushOilCo and not the General and his staff, if Congress sits still for this sham I for one will completely lose what little respect I have for them.
This is yet another example of Bush/Cheney showing their contempt for Congress and the American people.
2007-08-16 15:17:31 · answer #6 · answered by michaelsan 6 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Petraeus might make a mistake and put too much information or truth in the report, and why wait until the release when you can make it say what you want it to now.
Karl wrote it weeks ago, for him.
2007-08-16 15:16:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Nothing surprises me any more about Bush-Cheney-Rove. These are same guys who used events of 9-11 to link to Iraq. Bush stands before congress points his finger that WMD are in Iraq. Terror alerts to alarm the voters. Did you really expect Bush to let the military write the report?
2007-08-17 01:13:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because Petraeus may tell the truth - and Bush doesn't want that.
2007-08-16 15:29:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's not his job. He reports up the chain. Besides, do we want the operational commander spending his time pushing keys when there is serious fighting and nation building going on? Besides that, President Bush has been one of the more truthful Presidents this country has seen (at least since Carter).
2007-08-16 15:42:44 · answer #10 · answered by Caninelegion 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋