mysteryman wrote:Define "win".
I don't have to. It's George W. Bush who's been defining what it means to "win."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061025.html
Bush wrote:I know the American people understand the stakes in Iraq. They want to win. They will support the war as long as they see a path to victory. Americans can have confidence that we will prevail because thousands of smart, dedicated military and civilian personnel are risking their lives and are working around the clock to ensure our success. A distinguished independent panel of Republicans and Democrats, led by former Secretary of State Jim Baker and former Congressman Lee Hamilton, is taking a fresh look at the situation in Iraq and will make recommendations to help achieve our goals. I welcome all these efforts. My administration will carefully consider any proposal that will help us achieve victory.
<snip>
Absolutely, we're winning. Al Qaeda is on the run. As a matter of fact, the mastermind, or the people who they think is the mastermind of the September the 11th attacks is in our custody. We've now got a procedure for this person to go on trial, to be held for his account. Most of al Qaeda that planned the attacks on September the 11th have been brought to justice.
<snip>
People now understand the stakes. We're winning, and we will win, unless we leave before the job is done. And the crucial battle right now is Iraq. And as I said in my statement, I understand how tough it is, really tough. It's tough for a reason; because people understand the stakes of success in Iraq. And my point to the American people is, is that we're constantly adjusting our tactics to achieve victory.
<snip>
That is substantially different, David, from people saying, we want a time certain to get out of Iraq. As a matter of fact, the benchmarks will make it more likely we win. Withdrawing on an artificial timetable means we lose.
I believe this is why Americans are losing faith in Bush and his war in Iraq. Why? Maybe because of
this:
Now, my version of win is probably much different than Bush's, most likely because I believe we won the initial battle, but have lost the war. Iraqis would rather have us out or killed; Al Qaeda is on the rise; Iran and North Korea move forward with their nuclear programs, and the U.S. is one of the most detested countries in the world, alongside Iran and Israel.
Winning to me would mean getting our troops out, and allowing the Iraqi people to handle their own messes. It would also mean removing the permanent military bases we're building over there, and empower the Iraqi people to fix their own infrastructure with the money they make from their own oil, rather than force U.S. companies like Exxon to move in and make money off of their misery. Winning would mean giving our troops the proper body armor and protected vehicles, as well as fully fund veteran's benefits and facilities when they come back with missing limbs. Winning would also mean getting to the bottom of how the Bush administration falsely led us into this conflict to begin with.
That would be winning to me. And I would assume that many Americans would consider that winning as well at this point in time.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace