It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush passes buck to next US President on Iraq

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 06:32 PM
link   

AP News Wire link via SF Gate
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush said Tuesday the decision about when to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq will fall to future presidents and Iraqi leaders, suggesting that U.S. involvement will continue at least through 2008.



The mouthpieces that will be busy the next few days explaining this:

""That, of course, is an objective. And that will be decided by future presidents and future governments of Iraq,"
he said.


Spin, baby spin!! Republicans & Democrats are all set to distract us for the midterm election based soley on that admission, meanwhile eroding the country even further.
All those who voted for Bush in 2004 & those who suypported theft 2000 have a special place in all of this, but civility doesn't give me the words at the moment.

Mod Edit: to add source provided by member.



[edit on 22-3-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 12:01 AM
link   
Bout Time you forgot to include a link to the article.
As for Iraq assuming the US dosnt cut and run Coalition troops will have a presence in a Iraq for around 30 years. I think most people would have figured this out. I dont think we will see a huge improvement untill Iraq untill Bush leaves office.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 01:25 AM
link   
Truly, in the press conference today he stuttered so much on this issue. You could tell he didn't know how to spin it so he just said it...long after he is gone our money will continue to be burned in Iraq (well, that's not exactly what he said it's just what I heard because when he talks about Iraq being a problem for future administrations I see dollar signs). There was no exit strategy for the Iraq war because they had no intention on exiting.

But, that's not even the worse thing he said today. He said (with a straight face) the terrorist reject freedom--well so do you, Mr. Bush...so do you.

[edit on 22-3-2006 by Saphronia]



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 02:20 AM
link   
And what is worse is that he still didn't make a good case for why we need to be in Iraq. I watched the news conference still feeling the same way I did in Nov. 2000 and 2004: being had. Equally as frustrating is that he created this mess and passes the responsibility on to the next POTUS!!!! It's as if a little kid is tired of playing with his new toy and throws it out the window while pitching a tandrum.

Don't even get me started on the money part of the deal. To think all that money wasted could have helped with a continued prosperity in our nation in terms of jobs, health care, and education. Not to mention helping the veterans.

This is yet another example of sweeping the sludge under the rug and pretending the entire room was clean.

[edit on 22-3-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   
That pic looks like Elmed Fudd, Porky pig, and Foghorn Leghorn


He's passing the buck? Well then thats good news. As long as HE is not planning to finish what he started, i'm good.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 10:48 AM
link   
Passes the buck? Collin Powell was saying before the war happened that it'd 'probably' last 10 years, it was known from the start that bush wouldn't be president for the end of this war.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Great! A democrat wins the election, and in one year ends the war in Iraq. Then, since we aren't dumping money into Halliburtons bank vault the democrat takes the money and fixes Social Security, funds Medicaid, and turns the economy around since we aren't dumping trillions into Halliburtons bank account.

Could the Republicans screw this up any more?



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by DevinS
Great! A democrat wins the election, and in one year ends the war in Iraq. Then, since we aren't dumping money into Halliburtons bank vault the democrat takes the money and fixes Social Security, funds Medicaid, and turns the economy around since we aren't dumping trillions into Halliburtons bank account.

Could the Republicans screw this up any more?


Do you actually believe that Democrats can fix all of this? I'm sorry, but they are just a different side of the same, evil coin. No Democrat or Republican will/can fix this - nor do they want to. They are only concerned about what special interest group is going to net them the most. Both parties are bought and paid for.

When will "We, The People" realize that the two-party system is:

1. Not working.
2. Never the intent of the founding fathers.

Unfortunately, we will have either a Dem or Rep POTUS again this next election, but the Third Parties will gain ground. It is inevitable.



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Passes the buck? Collin Powell was saying before the war happened that it'd 'probably' last 10 years, it was known from the start that bush wouldn't be president for the end of this war.


G-Dub wasn't saying that. Mission Accomplished, right? It was the view of the "thinkers" behind this war that it would be an in and out job for the ground troops. The "thinkers" wouldn't even entertain the idea of the troop levels Powell wanted let alone his time table. Greeted as liberators, right? Well, it doesn't matter really, does it? We have to win this war, as they say. As long as it takes, as they say.


Great! A democrat wins the election, and in one year ends the war in Iraq.


I wish I could say the dems are just dim-witted bystanders, but nope. They knew and know what this thing is costing the American people most of them voted for the war, and most of them are commited to it. They want us to believe they can do a better job, right? They won't end it. If a dem wins 08 they'll claim to be fixing the mess...we'll still have the patriot act...we'll still have the WOT and DHS with its militarized police...we'll be head first into the kind of socialism Marx could only dream of. Gunless and bankrupt, and well...there I go ranting again. Shhhhh....peace.



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 10:00 PM
link   
No, think about it, will last 8-10 years, that means when a dem wins in 08 they will be president when it ends, whether they do anything or not.

ANd since they aren't dumping Trillions in Halliburton's bank account they take the money and dump it is Social Security right before the 2012 election securing the old people's vote!

Come on republicans it is so obvious!



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 11:43 AM
link   
I am really sorry that the WOT can't be scheduled to fit our soundbite society. Reality is, the war against terror could possibly extend beyond our lifetimes. So you might as well get used to it. The next president, or four, is going to be dealing with this malignancy for the foreseeable future. That is a very distasteful thought, but truth often is.

This war started long before President Bush was elected, and will be going on long after he's gone.

This conflict has all the earmarks of being generational, in some spots in the world it already is (Palestine/Israel), certain parts of Europe, and Africa. The sooner we come to that realization, the sooner it can be won, but maybe its easier for some to blame Bush as the font of all evil and ignore the broader picture. It's there for eyes that see to see.



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 04:47 PM
link   
There is no WOT, never was.
There's been a retalitory strike in the Afgan campaign that's ongoing, and an unwarranted invasion in Iraq. Call a big muscular police action and an illegal invasion a War if it makes you sleep better, but it doesn't fit the definition outside of propaganda circles that keep us & the world distracted.
All other spark points are being watched, with pre-emption deployed where sound.
The WOT is the mask corporate imperialism wears, it's no call to arms of classic struggle, it's no fight of ideology other that predatory capitalism vs. resource rich developing nations.
The sound bytes all come from the government churning out hollow reverence to military action by comparison to prior actions that were honorable.



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 06:34 PM
link   
I wonder how the words of the commander in chief of our troops in Iraq feels after listening what he has to said about their fate now in the hands, not of the American president that started this war but the future presidents to come.

And more so in when the president itself has put their fate in the hands of the Iraqi government.

Is very irresponsible for a president to even suggest that our troops are at the mercy of a foreign government.

I wonder what in the heck the president was thinking when he made the comment.

He most be very desperate as to tried now to wash his hands of the mess he created and also wash his hands of our troops fate.

[edit on 24-3-2006 by marg6043]



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 08:38 PM
link   
I have no idea what your talking but I would like to say they all have that look on their face like they're making sure whoever they're looking at is saying the things they want him/her ot say. Like you better say it or we're going to needle you in your sleep so you die.

I find it interesting that so many republicans say they don't like bush now, they voted for him but with all the weird/socialist ideas he's been projecting , it makes them queesy. Me personally, I believ ehe is part of the shadow government we never get to see, just like the democrats that get elected, they both erode this country and will not stop until their plan is complete. All we can hope for is for smart people to stop voting for these blokes and try something new or spend spend spend until they get these guys behind bars, which we know will never happen.
These folks are criminals, they should be tried for treason, but again, that will never happen. Preference exists after all if you wear a tie and make over 200k/yr for god knows what.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join