Tony Snow: 'I'm Not Sure Anything Went Wrong' In Iraq

[danarhea]

I have a question to ask, followed by a statement.

Question: Huh????

Statement: What kind of hallucinogenic drugs are members of the Bush administration taking these days? I know this can't be :spin:because the White House knows that the American people are not THAT stupid, so they must really believe what they are shoveling. Talk about complete denial.

On the other hand, maybe Snow is right. We took Baghdad and got rid of all the nuclear weapons Saddam had, just before he launched them all at Washington DC, we killed bin Laden, who was standing at Saddam's side when we captured him, the Iraqis greeted us with flowers, they love us, and adore us, and want to be just like us. The Iraqis elected a descendant of George Washington as president, and are even begging Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell to move there and run their sunday schools. The Baghdad stock market is bullish nowadays, the unemployment rate is less than one percent, and the housing market is great. Crime is down, entertainment is up, and Garth Brooks is playing to a packed house there. The Baghdad Jihadis have been picked as the favorite to win the Super Bowl next year, and don't forget about the baseball team, the Revolutionary Guards, who should easily make the playoffs, and even have an outside chance at the World Series. They are in the American League, of course.

Man, those are some drugs the White House has.

Article is here.

 

[Hatuey]

Q But this estimate was monumentally wrong. So would the President, knowing what he knows today, still have decided to go into Iraq?

MR. SNOW: Yes. The President believes that we did the right thing in going into Iraq. The question is, should you saddle any military planner with an expectation that they're going to have perfect insight into what happens five years later? Aand the answer is, of course not. And I think if you talk to military planners, they do their very best under a situation. As you know, many reporters who were in the field then probably had different views about how things might be today.

Weed dime. 10$. Coke dime. 25$. Saying the president would still make the worst choice in his entire career if he had the chance. Priceless.

 

[jfuh]

I wonder where I can get some of the **** that these morons are on.

Pass the buck, their plan is to hold out as long as they can and pass the blame onto whomever comes in in 2008.

THis idiot of a president thinks he's Truman, it would be much funnier if it weren't actually true.

Listen Bush, fracking moron, Truman tried as best as he could to minimize the spread of war, to contain it the best he could. You and your war mongerals are doing the exact opposite after being proven time and time again that your judgment is dead wrong.
For once in your stupid pathetic so called life of running away from reality listen to your father.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

So much jealousy. So little time.

 

[FierceEnigma12z]

.....oh, another I hate Bush lets bash him and call him a war monger topic.Damn, and I thought something good was gonna start here.

 

[Binary_Digit]

.....oh, another I hate Bush lets bash him and call him a war monger topic.Damn, and I thought something good was gonna start here.

Yeah, I get sick of hearing about Bush and co. doing and saying stupid things too. It'd be nice if they were smarter, huh?

 

[FierceEnigma12z]

Yeah, I get sick of hearing about Bush and co. doing and saying stupid things too. It'd be nice if they were smarter, huh?

It'd actually be nicer to stop hearing Liberals on this forum call Bush a war-monger.

 

[FierceEnigma12z]

Wow...god forbid you posted the rest of what Snow said.He elaborated

"At the beginning of the Civil War, people thought it would all be over at Manassas. It is very difficult -- no, Jessica, the fact is, a war is a big, complex thing. And what you're talking about is a 2002 assessment. We're now in the year 2007, and it is well-known by anybody who has studied any war that war plans immediately become moot upon the first contact with the enemy.

"For instance, a lot of people did not think that we would have the success we had moving swiftly into Baghdad. All I'm saying is that -- what happens is, you're looking at a pre-war assessment, and there have been constant assessments ever since. A war is not a situation where you can sit down and neatly predict what exactly is going to happen. You make your best estimates, but you also understand that there are going to continue to be challenges, there are going to be things that you don't anticipate, there are going to be things that the enemy doesn't anticipate. And the most important task, frankly, is to continue to try to assess near-term and mid-term to figure out how best to address the situation."

 

[jfuh]

It'd actually be nicer to stop hearing Liberals on this forum call Bush a war-monger.

His record speaks for himself. AFter all that we have been through, after all that has happened and what we know now. Tony Snow, speaker of the white house has the nerve to come out and say that nothing went wrong?
The new pentagon report that came out states that the administration did indeed push for going to war in Iraq regardless of. Yes he's a war monger, I don't see any other way of characterizing it. And had it been a liberal president that made the same stupid mistakes and arrogantly still proclaim that all is well, I'd call him a war mongering idiot as well.

WHat I don't get is regardless of how you stand politically in ideology, how in the world, can you manage not to get angry with such a proclamation by the white house? What is it that you see that the rest of america does not see?

 

[FierceEnigma12z]

I see nothing special..but you must have missed my post where he expanded on what he said.He obviously knows things have gone wrong in Iraq or there wouldn't be so many people against it.But you guys have to take one line Snow said and blast him for it without even reading/considering the rest of the statement.

Actually trying to stop terrorists is war-mongering right?

 

[jfuh]

I see nothing special..but you must have missed my post where he expanded on what he said.He obviously knows things have gone wrong in Iraq or there wouldn't be so many people against it.But you guys have to take one line Snow said and blast him for it without even reading/considering the rest of the statement.

Actually trying to stop terrorists is war-mongering right?

Actually the rest of his statement showed otherwise. Would the president still go to war knowing what he knows now? Answer yes.
That doesn't tell me anything contrary to the original "one liner".
I have no issue of stopping terrorists. AS my record speaks for itself, I support the war in Afghanistan as well as the reasons for going. However the facts remain. Iraq did not have the terrorists, nor did it support terrorists such as AQ; neither did it have WMD's or threaten to use them against US; What Saddam said was true, the denial was against Iran, which is why he maintained his position; Today we see why he maintained his statement toward Iran, a sponsor of terrorism, Hezbollah.
However choosing to still follow the same premise after knowing it was wrong today I can't describe it as anything else other than war mongering.
Again, I don't understand how you could see anything other than.

 

[Binary_Digit]

Actually trying to stop terrorists is war-mongering right?

No, trying to stop terrorists is what we should be doing in the War on Terror. Going to war by cherry picking shady intelligence to support a pre-concieved decision is war mongering. We were right to invade Afghanistan, but then we took a wrong turn at the Euphrates river.

 

[RightinNYC]

Q Slides from a pre-war briefing show that by this point, the U.S. expected that the Iraqi army would be able to stabilize the country and there would be as few as 5,000 U.S. troops there. What went wrong?

MR. SNOW: I'm not sure anything went wrong. At the beginning of the Civil War, people thought it would all be over at Manassas. It is very difficult -- no, Jessica, the fact is, a war is a big, complex thing. And what you're talking about is a 2002 assessment. We're now in the year 2007, and it is well-known by anybody who has studied any war that war plans immediately become moot upon the first contact with the enemy.

For instance, a lot of people did not think that we would have the success we had moving swiftly into Baghdad. All I'm saying is that -- what happens is, you're looking at a pre-war assessment, and there have been constant assessments ever since. A war is not a situation where you can sit down and neatly predict what exactly is going to happen. You make your best estimates, but you also understand that there are going to continue to be challenges, there are going to be things that you don't anticipate, there are going to be things that the enemy doesn't anticipate. And the most important task, frankly, is to continue to try to assess near-term and mid-term to figure out how best to address the situation.

Q But this estimate was monumentally wrong. So would the President, knowing what he knows today, still have decided to go into Iraq?

MR. SNOW: Yes. The President believes that we did the right thing in going into Iraq. The question is, should you saddle any military planner with an expectation that they're going to have perfect insight into what happens five years later? Aand the answer is, of course not. And I think if you talk to military planners, they do their very best under a situation. As you know, many reporters who were in the field then probably had different views about how things might be today.

The fact is, the war is -- I know it's becoming a cliche , but it's true -- it's a highly complex enterprise. What you end up doing is you make your best guesses going in. It turns out, for instance, their assessment that they would be able to move swiftly into Baghdad was absolutely right. But you have -- it is pretty clear that some of the other assessments were wrong, and you deal with it.

He's not denying that anything went wrong, in that the war went perfectly, he's saying that he doesn't think it makes sense to broadly characterize a difference between the projection 5 years ago and the result now as something that "went wrong."

Once again, why bother to actually look critically at a nuanced claim when you can just create a sound byte and use it to make impassioned claims about how stupid Bush is?

 

[aps]

It'd actually be nicer to stop hearing Liberals on this forum call Bush a war-monger.

I recommend you do the following when you would like to experience "Liberals on this forum" to stop "call[ing] Bush a war-monger"--there is a box in the upper right-hand corner with an X in the middle. Click on it. Your problem is solved.

 

[Billo_Really]

It'd actually be nicer to stop hearing Liberals on this forum call Bush a war-monger.

He goes way beyond war monger. He's a war criminal! He should be impeached, arrested and charged with Crimes against Humanity. Then spend the rest of his life in prison without the possibility of parole.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

He goes way beyond war monger. He's a war criminal! He should be impeached, arrested and charged with Crimes against Humanity. Then spend the rest of his life in prison without the possibility of parole.

People need dreams, billo. Even you.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by CurrentAffairs:
People need dreams, billo. Even you.

They also need something you can find
at your local sporting goods store...

...a set of balls!

 

[RightinNYC]

Moderator's Warning:

no more of this crap

 

[FierceEnigma12z]

I recommend you do the following when you would like to experience "Liberals on this forum" to stop "call[ing] Bush a war-monger"--there is a box in the upper right-hand corner with an X in the middle. Click on it. Your problem is solved.

Hmm.Very funny aps, but I'll pass.Also, that wouldn't really stop you people from saying it, it would just stop me from having to read it every 10 seconds, but thanks for the advice anyways.

 

[FierceEnigma12z]

No, trying to stop terrorists is what we should be doing in the War on Terror. Going to war by cherry picking shady intelligence to support a pre-concieved decision is war mongering. We were right to invade Afghanistan, but then we took a wrong turn at the Euphrates river.

Ohh, right Bush did that just to get oil and actually start a war because he was bored.Opps

 

[jfuh]

Ohh, right Bush did that just to get oil and actually start a war because he was bored.Opps

Ok, rule out oil, rule out bordom, so then seriously, why was Bush so eager to get us into Iraq?
1. There was no credible evidence
2. there was no diplomacy
3. UN inspectors found 0 evidence of any WMD's even though we pointed to them exactly where we "knew" the stock piles were
4. There was 0 terrorist connection between saddam and those that attacked us on 9/11

Was Iraq just a target of convenience?

Finally, the administration considerably repeats itself that this is the most important war our country has ever had to face; yet he is also the first president over a war that has not asked the American ppl to make sacrifices by raising taxes and so on. Thus - how's this war to be paid?

I do not wish you get the wrong impression that I'm asking these questions out of sarcasm or to put you on the spot. But I'm seriously trying to get an honest straight forward no spin answer to these questions.