Bush Thinks Americans Stupid
In his television address to the nation last night President Bush continues with his big lies to the American public. Bush must think Americans are stupid. There is ample evidence which indicates that conditions in Iraq are far worse than Bush and his administration will admit.
Bush’s claim that the withdrawal of troops are “because of gains in Iraq” is another in a long series of lies. Bush must have a low opinion of American voters and think that they are a bunch of easily manipulated morons if he expects them to believe his nonsense.
The real reason for the withdrawal of American troops is because we have effectively run out of troops which we can deploy. In order to manage the surge troop deployments were extended from 12 to 15 months. In addition, troops were rotated back into Iraq with less than 12 months duty at home. Military expects and Bush’s own generals have warned that these practices can not continue without breaking our military.
In reality Bush had no choice. The US has to reduce the troop level in Iraq. The fact that the so called “General Petraeus Plan” will reduce troop levels back to about 130,000 by next July is a bad joke of a plan. This is almost exactly the same level that existed prior to the “temporary” surge that was supposed to last for only a few months. So now Bush is calling it progress that a year after the surge began we can, depending upon conditions on the ground, bring troop levels back to where they started from. What progress!
There were other elements in Bush’s speech that makes me think that Bush considers Americans idiots. One was his claim that for each month of this year American forces have killed 1,500 insurgents , mostly al-Qaida bad guys, a month. I don’t doubt that American forces have killed at least 1,500 Iraqis a month, probably more, for a very long time. We probably manage to kill that many civilians just at check points and by misguided bombing raids.
But to claim that we kill 1,500 al-Qaida and terrorists a month is ridiculous when we have been estimating the total number of insurgents in all of Iraq at initially just a few thousand, more recently at about 20,000. To kill 1,500 a month for all of this year would mean that we have just about wiped them all out, yet the violence continues at higher levels than ever.
Another outrageous claim by Bush is that it was the success of the surge troops that lead to striking a deal with the Sunni tribal chiefs to join the US in shutting al-Qaida down in Anbar province. In fact Bush rejected a deal with the Sunnis chiefs two years ago when they were leading insurgent forces against the American military.
On their own the Sunnis were successful in dealing al-Qaida a blow in Anbar. Only after they achieved a measure of success did the US military join in and start to arm and to train the Sunnis. Now Bush is taking credit for the Sunnis “success” in Anbar. What a guy.
The new deal with the Sunnis that the US is now claiming as a model for all of Iraq (the bottom up policy) calls for arming those who are opposed to the government in Baghdad that we are trying to hold together. This “success” now so actively promoted by Bush may come back to bite us in the rear end in the near future as the Sunnis take up American supplied arms against the Nouri Kamel Mohammed Hassan al-Maliki government.
Who can believe such claims of success except idiots? And who can make such claims except for those who think that they are addressing stupid people? President Bush has no respect for the American public.
He has little if any respect for General Petraeus either. By getting General Petraeus to carry his water for him before Congress and the American public Bush has shrewdly transferred a good portion of the blame for the outcome of the surge plan to Petraeus. It’s already clear that the surge has not worked in regard to its original purpose of buying the Iraqi government time for a political unification of Iraq.
General Petraeus may not realize it yet but he has just become Bush’s fall guy. It is a huge mistake to “misunderestimate” Bush. He has build an extremely successful political career by portraying himself as a likable fellow who is not the brightest guy around.
President Bush, in my view, is actually a cunning, shrewd, scheming, and astute politician. In addition, he is completely immoral, without remorse, and incapable of admitting any mistake. He is responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, while he and his family interests as well as his elite war loving buddies get ever richer from a series of wars that appear to have no end.
If you are an American reading this I assure you that Bush thinks that you are stupid and unable to form your own opinion based upon facts. For Bush facts don’t matter. He thinks that he can make up anything that he wants to make up and sell it to the stupid American people as the truth.
Please, let the President and your Congress men and women know that you are not stupid and that you are damn tired of being fed big lies straight from the Oval Office.
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
“President Bush, in my view, is actually a cunning, shrewd, scheming, and astute politician. In addition, he is completely immoral, without remorse, and incapable of admitting any mistake. He is responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, while he and his family interests as well as his elite war loving buddies get ever richer from a series of wars that appear to have no end.”
I guess its safe to say after reading this tirade that you haven’t had an original thought in years. How can anyone read this drivel and then expect you to have the intelligence to recognize that war is difficult and those that disagree with you aren’t “completely immoral, without remorse, and incapable of admitting any mistake.” Responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis? You think Bush is the one setting up all those car bombs over there?
Pretty disappointing blog. There are many valid reasons to be against the Iraq war, but there’s nothing independent about using kook talking points - it only makes an ass out of you and waste the time of anyone who stops by here to see what you have to say…I could have gone to Daily Kos to read this crap!
Hi Evrvigint,
Thanks for taking the time to stop by and read if not think.
And what war did you fight in brave Bush warrior?
As a Vietnam vet, a man who lost his father in WW II, and an American who worked and lived as a consultant in The Islamic Republic of Pakistan for 30 months, I have experiences with wars to write from that I expect you are a little short of.
You must think that the Iraqi car bombers started the Iraq war. There were no bombers in Iraq until we invaded.
Let me ask you, what do you think Americans would do if occupied by a foreign military for over five years. Give them flowers and candy?
Of course, you are entitled to an opinion, even if it’s not an informed one. That’s just one of many things that makes America great.
But thanks to Bush not being able to admit a mistake and move on America is being pulled down. Just look at the new all time lows for the US Dollar as one example of the consequences of spending 12 billion a week or so to fight a reckless war.
Whoops! Sorry. That should be “spending 12 billion a month”, not a week. Either why it’s a lot of money.
I usually don’t take the time to answer such nonsense, but…
“And what war did you fight in brave Bush warrior?†The chickenhawk charge is the first retort of a simple mind – our history is replete with leaders and thinkers who never served but who’s opinions were valid nonetheless. Poor form for a military man to abuse the honor we show him.
“As a Vietnam vet, a man who lost his father in WW II…†– It’s not your credibility I question, it’s your intelligence. What you’ve done in your life is diminished when you make ridiculous claims or thoughtless points – desultory charges like these:
“I don’t doubt that American forces have killed at least 1,500 Iraqis a month, probably more, for a very long time. We probably manage to kill that many civilians just at check points and by misguided bombing raids†– That’s a grave charge, made in ignorance, inspired by antipathy for a president you hate and a war you despise. Reports abound about the lengths our soldiers and marines go to avoid civilian casualties, (remember, a large debate before the surge was about changing the rules of engagement, which were seen as endangering the soldiers) and Michael J. Totten’s latest piece on Ramadi is a good example of the tact the Americans are taking to secure Iraq ( I dare you to read it).
“But to claim that we kill 1,500 al-Qaeda and terrorists a month is ridiculous when we have been estimating the total number of insurgents in all of Iraq at initially just a few thousand, more recently at about 20,000. To kill 1,500 a month for all of this year would mean that we have just about wiped them all out, yet the violence continues at higher levels than ever.†– This passage is astounding for its childishness, or you think the people reading this baloney are just plain stupid. Whether or not we kill 1500 Al Qaeda a month is debatable, the military won’t release the numbers, but we do know that the terrorists are streaming in from outside of Iraq – which means Al Qaeda is being reinforced from abroad (is this that complicated?). Iran, Syria, Egypt, Jordon, Pakistan – they’re all represented in AQI. Then you say the violence continues at a higher levels than ever? Again (predictably), wrong on the facts – though the decreasing violence has cost Americans more lives because we’re going after the terrorists instead of sweeping an area and leaving it (I do not expect that you’ve read anything beyond Cindy Sheehans latest missive, but the changing tactics on the ground in Iraq is fascinating to learn about).
“The new deal with the Sunnis that the US is now claiming as a model for all of Iraq (the bottom up policy) calls for arming those who are opposed to the government in Baghdad that we are trying to hold together. This “success†now so actively promoted by Bush may come back to bite us in the rear end in the near future as the Sunnis take up American supplied arms against the Nouri Kamel Mohammed Hassan al-Maliki government.†– This may be the only useful thing in your post, which should give anyone passing through here hope. But Bush isn’t taking credit for quelling the violence in Anbar – time and again he’s given Patraeus the nod and the Iraqi’s there the credit – he has to – the security of Iraq depends upon Iraqis, not Americans. That’s a common understanding by nearly all involved. On the other hand, Unfortunately our government does arm terrorists like Fatah and Hamas in Palestine, in the hopes they will secure themselves en route to peace, and invariably those weapons get turned on Israelis and Americans alike. It’s a policy choice I disagree with, but I’m not willing to descend into kookville and think Bush delights in the deaths of Americans by American weapons…
I’ve spent too much time here already – but I’ll end with this. I’m not happy about being in Iraq either. I don’t like the idea of spending treasure and sacrificing the lives of our bravest soldiers (those you intimate are murderers – 1500 civilians a month?). Even if America were to calm Iraq, the history within Iraq and outside of it means war and tyranny are implacable foes that can only be overcome by Iraqis and Middle Easterners themselves. In ten years, for all the good we’ve done, are chances good that Iraq will be an ally of ours? Sadly- no.
But to pull out now means victory for Al Qaeda (and the subsequent increase in prestige that brings them, followed by a swell of jihadis eager to join this tortured version of Islam) and the ownership of resources that will fund terror around the world for generations to come. As many Iraqis have found, Al Qaeda does not have their best interests at heart. If it’s a bloodbath you’re concerned with, you’re creating one if you succeed in getting America to surrender in Iraq.
Read Michael J. Tottens articles – part 1 and two. http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001514.html - http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001517.html
Hello Again Evrviglnt,
Thank you for your reference to Michael J. Tottens. I did read the articles. And looked at the chilling pictures. They kind of reminded me of the old Vietnam story that to save the village we had to destroy it.
I saw a couple of examples of that in Vietnam while deployed with the Marines. I was a Navy Seabee based in Danang. During the Tet offensive I was at a forward fire station with a Marine 155 mobile gun company about twenty kilometers South of the Danang airfield. The Marines hit back hard.
A few nearby villages were villages no more after a few rounds were fired into them. At the time I felt nothing for the villagers. I was a short timer who just wanted myself and my buddies to make it back home on our own two legs.
I expect that the troops in Iraq have the same sentiments. Serving in Iraq must be worse than Vietnam ever was. For one thing a hot day in Vietnam was only 100F or so, not the 120-130F of Iraq. At best war is an unbelievingly dehumanizing experience. Suffering day after day under extreme heat has to be totally tough even when your not being shot at.
For most troops after a few months in a combat zone all the high and mighty reasons for being in the conflict disappear. Survival for yourself and your buddies takes center stage. And in a land where all of the folks look the same and wear funny looking outfits that can easily conceal weapons, I expect that all natives become suspicious and look hostile. Better them than us is an easy altitude to adopt. Collateral damage is certain.
I enjoyed looking at your blog even though you seem to be pretty far on the right. No problem.
To me intelligence is to be able to consider other points of view. Sometimes I even have to admit that others are right and my original views were flawed.)
I wrote the “President Bush Thinks Americans Stupid” article after watching his last speech on national TV. I admit I was upset with what I thought to be a poor speech filled with inaccuracies. I also admit I wrote the article to be a controversial one as I wanted to see what kind of response it would bring. A couple of them were pretty vile (not yours), too vile to approve for a GP rated blog.
You seem to be a strong supporter of the right wing and I think that is actually a good thing. At least you have the intelligence and resolve to speak out firmly about what you believe in.
Too many Americans seem to be only deeply concerned about the Fall TV season and what that may bring to their lives. A war without sacrifice except to our outstanding military and to their families is not in my opinion a good thing for America. We should all have to make sacrifices of some sort, as in WW II, or the threat, in my opinion, is not sufficient enough to justify a war.
Growing up I was an Air Force brat. I was in Japan during the Korean war and in France as the cold war accelerated. I know first hand that military families make sacrifices during hot and cold wars.
My heart goes out to the troops and their families who are now being deployed multiple times to Iraq. One deployment in Vietnam was enough for me as it changed my life forever. I learned, unfortunately, that you can not trust your own government.
This has at times colored my outlook on life in ways that I don’t particularly like. But it did teach me not to accept as true all statements made by the President right on down the chain of command. I also know that at times Presidents have little choice but to lie. The public is just not ready for the truth and probably never will be.
At least we agree on one important thing. Iraq is a tough nut. Looking forward we have , in my opinion, no good options. The so called “Korean Model” now being discussed is probably where we are headed but unfortunately as long as we have troops in Iraq they will come under attack.
As Americans, it’s hard to fully understand just how powerful a force religion and tribal alliances are in Iraq and generally within Islamic cultures. The Islamic nations will look at Americans as “crusaders” for as long as we are in their lands. And as for tribal alliances they are always shifting about.
In Pakistan, I learned that a written contract was really just a starting point for further negotiation. One party was always seeking an advantage over the other. The original agreement mean little. This is pretty much true in Iraq. Our Iraqi allies today can easily become our enemies of the near future.
I wish I had a good solution to the Iraq war. But I admit that I do not. I doubt if one exists. The absence of a clear cut victory will come as a bitter blow to Americans who even after Vietnam still believe in a victory culture. There are Americans today who say we would have won the war in Vietnam if only we had stayed in the fight.
If we do eventually pull out of Iraq I’m sure we will hear the same thing. And if we stay the military and their families will continue to suffer.
I expect that we also can agree that being the American Commander in Chief is one hell of a tough job. What “normal” human being could possibility want it?
My own take on George W. Bush and Iraq is that he is taking a long view of history. He has been willing to risk damage to his immediate creditabilty to secure for America what he knows that we need. If that turns out to be the correct view Bush may well be right as to his final legacy. He will be regarded by historians as the President who extended American’s rule of Empire by many years.
I may be opposed to the Iraq war as a means of achieving our ends but in a contest between “them” and “us” I’ll take us every time.
Anyhow, we are both taking up far too much time with these exchanges. All the best with your blog and for an American “victory” in Iraq, whatever form it may take.
The resource wars have begun and we have little choice but to find a way to prevail.
[...] George Bush still thinks that Americans are stupid. Perhaps stupid is not the right word. It’s far worse than that. Bush thinks that Americans [...]