Bush news conference #30

Posted: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 8:23 AM by Elizabeth Wilner
Filed Under: White House, Security

From NBC's Kelly O'Donnell and Elizabeth Wilner
President Bush will hold a news conference this morning just after 10:00 am ET. Topics will include an update on Bush's "consultative process on the new way forward in Iraq" and his "inclination" to increase the size of the US military. He's also certain to be asked about his comment to the Washington Post that the Iraq war is now in a stalemate (after having asserted just recently that the United States is winning the war), and also about Gen. John Abizaid's resignation.

Bush also will discuss the economy and his "commitment" to work in a bipartisan way with the new Congress.

This will be the President's 30th solo news conference and the 18th of his second term. The last was November 8, when he announced the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

All rigthty then. All together now: Give me a D Give me an R Give me an A Give me an F Give me a T What doe that spell? That spells cannon fodder! Yeah! Go to team go!

John Doe, Seattle, Wash. (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 8:49 AM)

Did napoleon wake up? No, it's just one of those pesky brain waves flying around his empty cranium...

The Edge, Macon GA (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 8:53 AM)

Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on us. Fool us I don't know how many times? When are the citizens of this country going to wake up and finally say no to this Liar-in-Chief and get him out of office. He has been caught in God knows so many lies that he's untrustworthy and totally ineffective. I don't think he could lead this country out of a paper bag yet alone the hell HE got us into.

Brian, Cedar Hill, TX (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:33 AM)

bush has finally stopped telling the lie of we are winning when is he going to stop the rest of the lies. bush recently used the phrase "this war we find ourselves in" its like he just woke up and there is a war going on and noboby told him. then he says he is not satisfied with the way things are going. bush is the decider who started the war and bush is the decider who screwed the war up costing innocent american military lives.

mikeeg,abdn,wa (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:35 AM)

I may just be a simple minded man, but i'm not real confident that the presidant is any smarter than a rock. Somebody please educate me: If we do manage to stabelize Iraq and install a democracy, What then? Is there all of a sudden less terrorist in the world? Or, on the other hand, are we going to have to invade Iran and start this whole fiasco all over again? Then Syria? This war an terror is going to take a long time when we are going about it this way.

Ken, Seattle WA (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:42 AM)

HELLO - we are not winning the war in Iraq? Did someone inject one brain cell into Dubya's head? Well one more gereral getting out while the gettings good. Soon all of the stuff that rolls down hill will be rolling onto the military and away from Dubya and his second in command elf. I feel the same way the Dixie Chicks feel about 43.

Barbara Dallas TX (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:46 AM)

Well, Bush finally admitted what most of the rest of the Americans and Iraqis with any kind of brain have known for months. I believe, however, this is a precursor to sending in more troops to "finish the job" which sounds like "peace with honor" to me. This gang of military industrial complex thugs and Constitution hijackers we have in Washington will play this war out until every dollar possible is squeezed out of the American citizen and until oil is guaranteed to flow. The past six years has been a disaster. It's not like we weren't warned. We elected an official who went from being hung-up on drugs and alcohol to being hung-up on Jesus, and another who never met a military contractor or energy executive he didn't like. It was a recipe for disaster; going to war over oil in an are which has been fighting amongst itself for over 2000 years. Michael Moore is starting to look like a genius. Hell, compared to this Administration a group of Down's Syndrome kids who work in a cafeteria could run the country better. Thanks George, for giving us a wonderful display of observing the obvious.

Robert Catalano, Salem, OR (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:49 AM)

Maybe, GWB will finally admit he's been lying 2 us all along & in Fact has had no Plan 4 IRAQ. Maybe, he'll admit the DEmocrat's(The Unpatriotic) were right 2 years ago when they said we needed more troop's in Iraq. Maybe he'll admit that Cheney was really the 1 that outed Plame. Maybe he'll admit Finally that the War on Terror is actually the War 4 OIL, & we are winning ( just ask BP,Conaco,Exxon).Maybe he'll admit the Politic's of Fear worked longer than even he could have imagined. Maybe he'll admit Barney Cam is our Newest secret weapon & is ready 2 be Deployed. Naw, just an unrealistic X-Mas wish & we all know Santa isn't real. Merry X-Mas & Happy New Year 2 everyone.

Diz, Catlettsburg, KY (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:51 AM)

This president will not listen to reason. Instead of doing what EVERYONE wants and start bringing back our troops he plans on sending more. Unreal and Frightening. so much for a govt for the people by the people. Im sorry for everyone in the military at this moment in time. Your commander in chief is TRULY a madman..

Lynette, NYC (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:56 AM)

BUSH is Mother of all FLIP FLOPS! From the WMDs, to being against the 9/11 commission, to mission accomplished, to absolutely! we're winning the war, to the democrats shouldn't start measuring the drapes, now to no additional troops. He's such a sorry figure, I pity this unintelligent man who has lucked in to a job that is beyond his breaches.

koothoosi, madison, al (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:15 AM)

The Chiefs of Staff : "More soldiers will not help the situation" Iraq Study Group : "Start bringing our forces home" Most Dems and many Repubs : "Start bringing our forces home" Majority of American People : "Bring our troops home" Dumbya : "Stay the course...with more force" Uncle Dick : "We are winning, there's money being made" McCain : "Me too! Elect me! I'm with my fellas. Send more troops. Vote for me! " What's that spell?? DDD RRR AAA FFF TTT Why are they so out of touch with reality?

Owen Vander, Evansville, IN (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:24 AM)

I know I will get lit up for asking this. Yes, I am small minded, stupid, been locked in a closet for the past three plus years, a halfwit, a neocon, crazy right-winger, etc. But I must ask the question. How are we losing in Iraq? I know that we have lost many good lives fighting there and I understand that things have not gone as planned and mistakes have been made but really how are we losing? Iraq's economy is getting much stronger (next year it will grow about 5 times as fast as ours), elections have been held, and infastructure improvements are occuring everyday. I know that because of mistakes we made it hasn't happened as fast as everyone would've wanted and I understand that security is still a huge problem in parts of the country but I honestly want to know why everyone is so confident that not only are we losing we have already lost. In my narrow little neo-con mind I am probably missing something that I'm sure most of you will point out with class and respect:) but I'm just not seeing the fact that we have lost or are losing. I will say that things could be going better but I'm not sure if that defines losing or lost. I will be anxiously awaiting the name calling and utter contempt that will now occur.

Ryan, Michigan (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:39 AM)

I wonder... If we spent the same amount of money trying to develope a technology that would make oil obsolete as the total dollar amount that is going to be spent on this war, would oil be obsolete?

ken, Seattle WA (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:50 AM)

President George Bush WILL send troops into Sadr City and there will be a blood bath. His goal is to kill or capture Al Sadr who is already being groomed for the Osama Bin Laden proxy role. His "plan" is to go out like John Wayne, vintage John Ford. The great fear for America is that he will instead go out like Fess Parker at the Alamo. The Joint Chiefs, the Baker-Hamilton report, and his own father have tried to dissuade this Dr. Strangelove behavior. The American people have spoken loudly and he says today that he doesn't believe them. We have entered the Twilight Zone as a nation. God help us.

Mark Thieme, Daly City, CA (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:55 AM)

Ryan There is utter chaos going on Iraq as they are in the midst of a civil war now. Also the wealthy, educated Iraqui's have all moved to Jordan or are coming here. That leaves an uneducated, poor population with nothing left to lose. The war was started on the notion that Sadaam Hussain had WMD's pointed at us and that was not true. Our president cannot see that we must get out of Dodge so to speak and neither can you......

Lynette, NYC (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:58 AM)

Give me a 1, 2, 3... what're we fightin' for? Ya know I don't give a crap, 'bout fightin' in Iraq. My apologies to the original composer of this anti-Vietnam war tune. So, adding more troops will solve it all? We'll be able to win? Hmmm... this sounds all too familiar to what happened in Vietnam. How will adding more troops help? What is the definition of 'winning'??? Has Bush completely gone mad??? This man needs to be impeached, tarred & feathered and be done with his rule. Cheney should be jailed for his actions in so many instances, the least of which is the Plame affair (which he is supposed to give testimony towards). I've an idea!!! Let's have the Bush girls be the first 2 to be drafted and immediately shipped to a battle zone in Iraq. Yeah, right. The time to add more troops to this complete and utter failure of a war, was back in 2003. I was against this war then and am even more so now. It is insanity at its best (or worst) and only serves one purpose: someone is making money somewhere... follow that trail and you'll find the real reason for this war. If Bush were truely a Christian then he'd be a pacifist. Peace.

Nick, Ohio (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:58 AM)

Ryan I think you answered your own question in the first paragraph of your post.

Seattle Sue (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:06 AM)

Ryan. Just curious. How do you define 'Pregnant'?

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:12 AM)

Ryan, how can you say we are winning when there is no order in Iraq? Are people able to have as much as they had under Saddam's rule? Are they able to go out and travel without fear of being kidnapped or killed? Can a man be in a hospital after dark to be with his wife or wounded child and not fear being kidnapped? Can Iraq use its oil for its own use and benefit? Is Iraq unified behind one leader? Is there a cessation in civil war activities where Sunnis kill Shias and Shias kill Sunnis? What has the Bush administration labelled as success? Do we know when we've won? How do you measure that? How can we say that their infrastructure is being rebuilt when most of the money we've sunk into that war has gone not for reconstruction, but into the pockets of Halliburton and their subsidiaries over corrupt actions? How can we expect to pay many millions of $$ for a simple bridge that some local Iraqis could have built for $500,000? Iraq is a hopeless case as long as we're the ones leading the work. We need to regroup, retreat and let the Iraqis determine their own future. They can get our money for rebuilding AFTER they end their violence upon one another. They can be the ones to be in-charge of rebuilding their country. They can be the ones to profit from the sale of their oil. They can be the ones to work out peaceful settlements with their neighbors of Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia. They need our money, but not our military. Our military can NEVER rebuild that country. Their military can learn to protect their country. Their police can stop the sectarian violence if they wish to do so. We cannot prevent that violence from occurring, no matter how many troops we send to Iraq. Get a life, get upset and call for the impeachment of Bush and his cronies.

Nick, Ohio (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:15 AM)

If the US military wasn't in Iraq, we'd have plenty of troops available for the war on terror. Heck, we might even have won in Afghanistan by now if we hadn't taken most resources into Iraq instead.

DJL (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:16 AM)

What Dubya meant to say was that we're winning the 'Stalemate'.

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:16 AM)

Really good speech! I think Bush did an excellent job of creating the impression that he isn't the worst president in American history. Good job of acting like someone playing with a full deck. At first, the assumption was that he had admitted we weren't winning in Iraq. When pressed, he added that we weren't losing either. I would like to add my own assessment to that: we're not staying even either. The most troubling thing about this war is the death of our brave troops. It breaks Bush's heart to think about families who have lost sons and\or daughters, and anyone who believes that will believe Tiger Woods drives a Buick. His biggest mistake: This one time he thought he was wrong, but he turned out to be right.

JIrby, Colorado Springs, Co (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:19 AM)

Ryan, the main issue is are we going to keep up the current plan of stay the course and leave the mess for the next president or implement a plan that will actually succeed. In the long run we can spend more money and cost more lives, only to end up with the same results. The current situation is that the insurgents are willing to wait us out, if it takes two years or ten years for us to pull out of Iraq. Unless we have a plan of attack that effectively confronts the sectarian militia and the foreign intruders, then we will never stabilize Iraq. The ultimate goal for the insurgents is domination, be it Sunni, Shia or Kurd. The Kurds would probably be content with the land they currently occupy, but the Sunnis would not and the Shiites want to pay back the Sunnis. I see this ending like Vietnam. After many years we tried to stabilize the South and finally pulled out and took as many Vietnamese people with us as we could.

TEC, Spring Tx (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:20 AM)

Mark, the only thing that can save us now is to impeach George W. Bush ASAP. He is completely insane in his meglomaniac approach to foreign affairs. He cannot admit defeat or that he's made a mistake. To do so would admit that he's fallible and he's all but said that he's the most religious of men. With that kind of religious furvor, we are in a spot where only one avenue is left to us: impeachment. He won't listen to the American people, not even to his own generals. What has this man been been popping? Where has he been living?

Nick, Ohio (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:20 AM)

Seattle Sue - That's about what I was expecting. Thanks for not disapointing. I'm sure there will be more to come. Lynette - Thanks for coming back with actual constructive dialouge. I realize that in some parts of Iraq there is chaos but is that really how you define losing or lost? Because some wealthy Iraqis have moved to Jordan or here does that mean they won't go back when things have improved? Also there is a new class of wealthy Iraqis that have been prospering because of the lifting of sanctions and a much more free economic system. I understand that many have issues about how and why the war was started in the first place. That is a good discussion to have but I believe it is not relevant to the question of are we losing or have we already lost. Nick - I wonder why you think that if you are a Christian you must be a pacifist. Please explain your theory.

Ryan, Michigan (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:23 AM)

"Beware the military industrial complex." quote from President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Republican, in the 1950's. He was also a 4 star General in command during WW!!. What part of this statement would our President be ignoring? I think all of it.

Desmond (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:32 AM)

Ryan, By what measure is Iraq's economy getting stronger? Their oil shipments are below pre-war levels, most of the country has less electrical service than pre-U.S. invasion, the intelligensia is leaving the country in droves and many parts of the country still do not have access to potable water. The new and rebuilt infrastructure is sabotaged and blown up faster than it is put on line. Their economy will grow 5 times faster than ours next year-according to whom??? The Kurdish section is doing relatively well, however, they were in good shape from the start. Many of us remember the 'spin' from the government during the Vietnam War, we have been down this road before. Our current leadership has proven to be less than honest. (a lying bunch of criminals is my real definition) There is very little, if any, confidence in our leadership, only cynicism and criticism are left. As for evidence of losing or having lost, one just needs to listen to the experts and what they are saying. Colin Powell, The Joint Chiefs of Staff, Iraq Study Group, and academians have all expressed the lost or losing opinions. Who with any credibility is expressing we are winning? Has any qualified expert objectively analyzed the situation without regard to political or philosophical ramifications and come to the conclusion we are winning?? Something my father told me years ago regarding the Vietnam War "It is impossible to win a war when you are fighting the majority of the people of a whole country. You can not impose freedom on a people. By the very act of imposing, you have taken away their freedom." We are fighting the majority in Iraq. We can not win militarily without winning the political battle. In my opinion, our chance at winning politically has past. (The election is now a non-factor, it was too long ago, enough time has past for the Iraqi people to lose confidence in their elected government. It is now irrelevant, considered an agent of the U.S.) Oh, you are correct about something in your blog : you will be flayed and fileted by others on this blog.***At least you knew what you were getting into as you typed your opinion this morning:-)

Owen Vander, Evansville, IN (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:34 AM)

The President should not be going to Crawford for Christmas. He should be staying in the White House and tell us that we are involved in a conflict in Iraq that requires us to sacrifice. He should be telling us to keep our money spending on those credit cards and partying down. If he showed us some sacrifice on his part, we would have a leader we could take a ue from, instead of a leader that is clueless.

Desmond (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:35 AM)

Nick - First, there are ebbs and flows in all major conflicts. Times when it may appear like one side is "winning" and times when it may appear like the other side is "winning". I was merely asking what makes everyone so sure that we are losing or have lost. There is order in parts of Iraq. To make a blanket statement like that is silly. Some rather large portions of Iraq (i.e. Kurdish north) are seemingly in relatively good order. At this point some people are definitley suffering more now then under Saddam, mainly those that benefited from his tyrannical regime. However there are many people (I don't have a number or percent) that I would dare to bet would say that they have more or at least the opportunity for more now then they did under Saddam. Establishing a free-market economy from a sanctioned, closed-market economy will take years. Eastern Europe is just in the past couple of years gaining their footing after shedding the weight of the Soviet Union. Iraq is definitley starting to use its oil for its own benefit, and expects to have revenues of $41 billion next year just from oil. As for your other security related question my answer is that sure, in parts of Iraq its not a good situation and security needs to improve. Iraqis need to start policing and securing their own country. However there are parts of Iraq that are much better off then before Saddam. In answer to your question of how do we know when we've won? The answer is is when we have been able to transfer the security duties to the Iraqi military and police force and helped foster the Iraqi economy to a state where it can be self-sufficient. This may take some time. As I said earlier, mistakes were made that I believe have extended the conflict but I don't think that we are necessarily losing at this point and I definitley don't think that we have lost. From the beginning of the War on Terror I told myself that this was going to be the new Cold War and expect a 40-50 year timeframe. I still consider that the case today.

Ryan, Michigan (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:43 AM)

"Bush also will discuss the economy and his "commitment" to work in a bipartisan way with the new Congress." See, Ryan - even this boob of Biblical proportions can sometimes comprend the glimmer of truth. Even Uncurious George comprehends that he can no longer run rough shod ove rthe Constitution. But you stilll don't "understand." You're not so much a right-winger as an uninformed cheerleader who refuses to "understand."

Lee in CA (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:46 AM)

Ryan I do not think we lost or are are losing. I cannot see the big picture of what it is we are trying to win? I have never gotten that. I live in NYC and was gung ho to go out and get Bin LAden. I for one did not expect our president to use that event as a catalyst for starting an upheaval in the entire middle east, (as if they needed our help over there)and go after personal vendettas. The Initial picture has been lost and its time to concede what ever it is we went there to do. Its more embarrassing to stay at this point......

Lynette, NYC (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:00 PM)

We are at war folks and fearless leader has given us our marching orders for the home front...Go Shopping! He actually said it again! Please, somebody give this clueless disgrace a hummer so we can impeach him!

Gary Schear (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:01 PM)

Ryan, please tell me where you get your information about all the wonderful good things happening in Iraq.I watch CNN, CNN Headlins News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC,NBC and FOX News.I just don't see all these good things that you do. Even our dimwitted president or his lovely wife can't show me anything good going on in Iraq. I'm sure if there was some good, Fox would be showing it 24/7.

Seattle Sue (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:09 PM)

TEC - I do agree with you that we need a new plan going forward. I also would say that we needed that new plan probably a year ago or more. It seems like there is some news today of a new Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd alliance forming that is opposed to al Sadr, and supported by the U.S. Hopefully this is true and the start of an improving political situation. I am cautiously optomistic that militarily and politicaly speaking we can avoid another Vietnam. Owen - Assuming that no one on this blog will accept any news from "right-wing" news sources I will cite the new Newsweek article here http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16241340/site/newsweek/ as at least some proof that Iraq's economy is improving. Again this is just the beginning and it might not be much but it is baby steps. Now, of course like everyone, I wish we could've started these steps 12-18 months ago but for this discussion that's mute. I would argue that we are not fighting a majority in Iraq. Most estimates suggest that there might be 100,000 insurgents in Iraq or about 0.4% of the population. Many of those insurgents, usually cited between 40-60%, aren't even Iraqi and are from Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Syria. Sure, the Iraqis want us gone, I want us to move out of there too, but according to some recent polls 55-70% of them want us to stay to help stabalize the situation, which is what I am for as well. Owen, thanks for not lighting me on fire:) and keeping the jabs to a minimum. Also thanks for having good discussion points.

Ryan, Michigan (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:10 PM)

Ryan, Reality is not so scary, you should try a bit of it sometime....if you like it maybe you can tell our prez about it? he could use some too...

The Edge, Macon GA (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:13 PM)

Ryan, I have no military cred whatsoever, but I do believe one knows one is "winning" a war when one can hold on to one's territory. It sounds like, when our guys leave an area they have "won," the insurgents move back in, torture and kill the Iraqis who cooperated with the US, and then impose their own order. I do believe that is what the generals mean by "not winning, not losing." When our troops are present they can subdue the insurgents, but then, when we leave, the insurgents rebound.

Amy B Maine (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:25 PM)

Lee - I'm not sure what you are referencing? What does "Even Uncurious George comprehends that he can no longer run rough shod ove rthe Constitution." have to do with Bush saying "discuss the economy and his "commitment" to work in a bipartisan way with the new Congress."? Lynette - This is the point where the true differences of opinion lie. It sounds like, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that you believe that if we would've anihalated (major sp?) the Taliban in Afghanistan and killed all the top leader of al Queda including OBL then that would've solved our terrorism problem. While I do think that that would have an effect and already has had an effect on our terrorism problem, I believe that is only part of the solution. I believe that we can't just handle this like a "police action" where we "round up" the known perpatratures and then we're done. I believe that this is a war of ideology, similar to the cold war, and that we need to be fighting it in many different ways in many different areas of the world. Some places we are "fighting" with our military, other places we are still using diplomatic effots, others still we are trying to curb the financial support of these organizations. Now as to argue whether Iraq was the best place to go into militarily after Afghanistan that may be discussed now that we know that some of the intelligence was bad but I still believe that the world WILL be a better place without Saddam in charge of Iraq and also believe that without Saddam in charge we as a nation are safer then with him in charge.

Ryan, Michigan (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:45 PM)

Gary funny in times of emergency/crisis we are often told to go shopping. Rudy Giuliani told New Yorkers the same exact thing two Saturday's after 9/11. As if we were told ok people you have been given a sufficient amount of time to grieve and adjust to your new lives.. now prove we have beat those terrorists and SHOP.. Nuts then Nuts now...

Lynette, NYC (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:46 PM)

Ryan, why does a christian have to embrace war and death. I thought Christ was all about love and tolerance. Most people , including me ,think that Christ was all about loving thy neighbor and turning the other cheek. Obviously you think of Christ as a warmongerer and love to see people die. Christians beleive in the sanctity of life. Why do you preach death and destruction of human life. Ryan I am only calling out christians like Bush that think war, destruction, and loss of life as the only way to solve problems. I think Jesus would attempt to talk to all parties involved before invading. It boggles my mind when I see christians so fervently back the war in Iraq where thousands of people have been killed on both sides. What is christian about war. War to me is the anti-christ way of solving problems. You have to ask yourself one question, Would Jesus have invaded Iraq with the information we know. Answer this question as a christian and not a neocon politician. A neocon can not be a christian. Christians are suppose to preach tolerance, love, and do unto others. Neocons preach they have a right to force democracy and religion on other people whether it is right or not. Neocons think they are right and everyone else is wrong. They beleive if you are not with them then you are against them. Does any of this sound christian. So Ryan to answer your question yes christians should be pacifists until provoked into a war against our better judgement. Christians do not go out and start a war to push their religious and political beliefs on other people. This was a war of choice. This was never a war of need. Iraq was never a threat to us since the 1991 Gulf War.

bobf (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 1:01 PM)

Ryan, we lost the War in Iraq the minute we invaded it. It may be a stalemate militarily, and there may be a chance to reach a political compromise between the factions in Iraq, however, as far as the world, goes, we have lost. When George Bush took office, the Middle East was fairly stable. Israel and the Palestinians were talking, Lebanon was enjoying a relatively peacefule existance and even if Saddam Hussein was rattling his sabre, he was powerless to attack anybody. Iran was relatively contained and the Taliban had nearly wiped out the opium poppy crop in Afghanistan. Six years later, not only are the Israelis fighting the Palestinians, they are fighting the Lebanese. The Palestinians are fighting amongst each other. There is civil war in Iraq. Iran and North Korea are developing Nuclear weapons. Heroin, from Afghani poppies, is being imported into the US at a higher volume than ever. Outside of the Middle East, we have lost respect from nearly ever other country in the world. Italian and German prosecuters are after members of the CIA for their arrogant and illegal actions on foreign soil. I have a friend who just came back from South America where he was working for Agricultural interests and he told me most of the people he spoke to are afraid George Bush is trying to usher in another era of Yanqui Imperalism. He further states most of them are afraid this is what is fueling the dramatic shift to the left in Latin America. The only people who have gained from this failed war are Halliburton and other military contractors, Iran and North Korea, militant Islamic Fundamentalism and anti-American leaders throughout the world. We, as Americans, have lost thousands of our young men and women, hundreds of billions of our hard earned dollars, and the respect and friendship of most of the world. De Gaulle once said when he was asked if he needed confirmation of nuclear missles in Cuba said, "If the President of the United States says missles are there, than they must be there." Those days are gone. George Bush has shot our credibility and will make it much more difficult for world leaders to totally trust us again. Yes, Ryan, we are losing. The trouble is Iraq is not the only theatre where ground has been lost.

Robert Catalano, Salem, OR (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 1:06 PM)

"I wonder why you think that if you are a Christian you must be a pacifist. Please explain your theory." Er, "Thou shalt not kill" ? "Blessed are the peacemakers" ? "Turn the other cheek?"

Amy B ME. (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 1:07 PM)

NOW it's the "Ideology of Liberty" vs the "Ideology of Hate". Why don't they just entitle it the "TBA" (to be announced) War so that some historians in the distant future can finally determine what this horrific melee is that the Liar-in-Chief created.

Brian, Cedar Hill, TX (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 1:28 PM)

The Liar-in_Chief vows that America will not walk out on the Iraqis. He's damned close to America walking out on him.

Brian, Cedar Hill, TX (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 1:30 PM)

ryan how many american military died yesterday so that you can spew your propaganda?

mikeeg,abdn,wa (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 1:31 PM)

Ryan, From the information I've read, the majority of the violence is sectarian violence, and the minority of violence is being done by insurgents. How can the Iraqi's start to take care of their own security if they can't or won't keep people loyal to militias or other entities out of the police and army? I agree, if I saw a real chance of change in Iraq I would embrace it. After four years though, only 3 of 18 provinces have been "turned over" to the Iraqi's, while still being helped by US forces and logistics. The latest information I have is that no Iraqi battalions can stand totally on their own. Is that still true? We've been there four years and the security situation has deteriorated. Four years and electricity, sewage, etc. is no better. Four years and the public is now being told that some of the companies paid millions or billions for reconstruction have done such a shoddy job, that buildings are falling down around people, including new police training buildings. Remember that Iraqi oil revenues were supposed to pay for the bulk of reconstruction? What happened? I'm sorry but after four years I don't see much in the way of progress. In my book, not making things worse is not an accomplishment. How many more thousands of US military personnel (including my own loved one)may die in Bush's war of choice? How much time do we give them, five years, ten? With no signs of serious progress (that don't reverse in a few months time)?

Sacramento, CA (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 1:37 PM)

Ryan our terrorism problem will never go away. I was gung ho on getting rid of Osama Bin Laden because I was born and bred in New York and I was furious. We have many enemies and we cant go around trouncing on every country because in the end we are THE USA and thats enough said, don't u think. To get back to the original point of the conversation, George Bush is clueless and lost and is not listening to the people of this country. The majority, not by much but the majority of people in this country do not agree with the Iraq situation and that was evidenced in the recent election. At this point something has to be done and he should go with what the people want not by what he wants to do.....

Lynette, NYC (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 2:10 PM)

Ryan, I saw a story about a month ago on the multimillion dollar hospital, which we funded, and Laura bush touted as being the epitome of what we are going to do in Iraq. that hospital is not done and does not have functioning toilets. We gave the Iraqis our money to build it. A lot of our money has turned up missing there. Bremer handed out cash like it was candy and held no one respossible. From a purely economic stand point, the American people have lost a lot of money there. Would be ironic if in the end, all that oil they have ends up under a Shiite Islamic government like Iran. Our price of oil will go up. Squeeze the beast. I would guess if you asked the Iraqis if 4,000 dead a month constituted winning or losing, they would say we failed to provide them with basic security, so the people and the U.S> has lost. Otherwise we would not be advocating more troops. the mission would be accomplished.

Desmond (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 2:26 PM)

I hope everyone who voted for this sociopathic madman is enjoying the beer they wanted to have with him.

JJ in NJ (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 2:27 PM)

Because, Ryan, he wasn't too damned concerned about being "bipartisan" when the GOP held all the cards, and please stop being obtuse on purpose. What part of "run rough shod over the Constitution" were you "unaware" of? "Protection from unreasonable and warrantless searches." "Habeas corpus"? How did that little monkey get control of that? "Due process"? Jose Padilla. It's been reported that he's yelled at people for constantly bringing up "that damned piece of paper" when he wants to subvert your rights - lost on you, I guess. Ryan, you seem to have a LOT of time to patiently, consistently and repeatable articulate every point that Karl Rove would. In short, I think you work for them.

Lee in CA (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 2:29 PM)

So, I see where "The Decider" decided we aren't winning in Iraq and announced it at his press conference earlier today. NEWSFLASH: Anybody who lisens to radio or watches TV, or anyone who reads the newspapers could have told you that 6 months ago. Geeze! Is this guy for real or what?

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Wednesday, December 20, 2006 2:49 PM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=21677