Cheney: No blunders in Iraq

[TexasTiger 13,028]

Cheney: Talk of blunders in Iraq "hogwash"

By Peter Baker

The Washington Post

AP

President Bush, right, speaks to reporters while Vice President Dick Cheney looks on Wednesday.

Vice President Dick Cheney said Wednesday that the administration has achieved "enormous successes" in Iraq but complained that critics and the media "are so eager to write off this effort or declare it a failure" that they are undermining U.S. troops.

In a television interview that turned increasingly contentious as it wore on, Cheney rejected the gloomy portrayal of Iraq that has become commonly accepted even among Bush supporters. "There's problems" in Iraq, he said, but it is not a "terrible situation." And congressional opposition "won't stop us" from sending 21,500 more troops, he said, it will only "validate the terrorists' strategy."

The defiant tone contrasted sharply with Bush's State of the Union address Tuesday night, when the president told skeptics of his latest Iraq plan that he respects their arguments even as he asked them to give him one more chance to win the war. Bush acknowledged deep troubles in Iraq and made no effort to call it a success.

Cheney, on the other hand, rejected the idea that there has been any failure. He told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that the administration would disregard the resolution opposing the troop increase that was passed Wednesday by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "It won't stop us," he said.

When Blitzer asked if the administration's credibility had been hurt by "the blunders and the failures" in Iraq, Cheney interjected: "Wolf, I simply don't accept the premise of your question. I just think it's hogwash."

In fact, Cheney said, the operation in Iraq has achieved its original mission. "What we did in Iraq in taking down Saddam Hussein was exactly the right thing to do," he said.

"If he were still there today," Cheney added, "we'd have a terrible situation."

"But there is," Blitzer said.

"No, there is not," Cheney retorted. "There is not. There's problems — ongoing problems — but we have in fact accomplished our objectives of getting rid of the old regime and there is a new regime in place that's been here for less than a year, far too soon for you guys to write them off."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nati...7_cheney25.html

[AFTiger 282]

He is right. It will not be a failure until we make it one.

[Tiger Al 0]

In a television interview that turned increasingly contentious as it wore on, Cheney rejected the gloomy portrayal of Iraq that has become commonly accepted even among Bush supporters. "There's problems" in Iraq, he said, but it is not a "terrible situation." And congressional opposition "won't stop us" from sending 21,500 more troops, he said, it will only "validate the terrorists' strategy."

"It's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."---Herman Goering

[AFTiger 282]

How is Hanoi Jane doing these days?

[TexasTiger 13,028]

How is Hanoi Jane doing these days?

Don't know, but Uncle Earle as brainwashed and misinformed as you are.

[aumd03 2]

I think this is the same interview when Wolf Blitzer in a bit of journalistic genius asked Cheney if he thought Hillary would make a good president. And then I read "news" articles about Cheney's response. The man is vp to a republican president and is about as conservative a man there is in washington and his response is news??? What the hell kind of response were they expecting??? Its hard to not believe the media slants things after seeing brilliance of that degree. Its become to the point that bad publicity about Bush is news. Thats not news. But apparently better news than any successes in Iraq.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

I think this is the same interview when Wolf Blitzer in a bit of journalistic genius asked Cheney if he thought Hillary would make a good president. And then I read "news" articles about Cheney's response. The man is vp to a republican president and is about as conservative a man there is in washington and his response is news??? What the hell kind of response were they expecting??? Its hard to not believe the media slants things after seeing brilliance of that degree. Its become to the point that bad publicity about Bush is news. Thats not news. But apparently better news than any successes in Iraq.

I take it you didn't watch the interview. So do you agree that there have been no blunders?

[CCTAU 3,346]

Just because the media has finally beaten the whole country into thinking that Iraq is Viet Nerm, does not mean its as bad as they say. For a war, it's going damn good. We've killed many more of them than they have of us. For a reconstruction and country building effort, it has been a very tough lesson in how to deal with the side of the world we will eventully have to nuke.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

Just because the media has finally beaten the whole country into thinking that Iraq is Viet Nerm, does not mean its as bad as they say. For a war, it's going damn good. We've killed many more of them than they have of us. For a reconstruction and country building effort, it has been a very tough lesson in how to deal with the side of the world we will eventully have to nuke.

So were building it so we can nuke it later?

[AFTiger 282]

TT would rather fight them in New York, if he doesn't surrender first.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

TT would rather fight them in New York, if he doesn't surrender first.

There is no connection between fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here. That is one of the stupidest concepts ever uttered. Fighting in Iraq doesn't prevent terrorism here....or the UK or anywhere else. Putting the hundreds of billions we continue to spend in Iraq in things like port security here, would have helped though.

[AFTiger 282]

TT would rather fight them in New York, if he doesn't surrender first.

There is no connection between fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here. That is one of the stupidest concepts ever uttered. Fighting in Iraq doesn't prevent terrorism here....or the UK or anywhere else. Putting the hundreds of billions we continue to spend in Iraq in things like port security here, would have helped though.

Castles always fall and the Marginot Line did not hold. Although we could do a better job of securing the border. Fighting them over there is the correct strategy. Oh and we are not creating more terroists, we are only exposing more terroists. Kinda like kicking an ant bed. They were alway there and they want to kill you TT.