Bush flip-flops on Iraq - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Mephisto2 · 10-28-2004, 06:21 AM

I was honestly surprised to read this...

Quote:

Bush talks of changing tactics in Iraq
By Stewart Powell

George Bush has raised the possibility of altering US tactics in Iraq in a move that his campaign manager said showed a commander-in-chief willing to learn from setbacks.

The President tinkered with his re-election message as seven nationwide polls and the state-by-state electoral vote count showed him and his Democratic challenger, John Kerry, still locked in a virtual dead heat.

"A president must lead with consistency and strength in these troubling times," Mr Bush told supporters in Onalaska, Wisconsin. "In war, sometimes you change your tactics - but you never change your principles."

In Washington, Mr Bush's campaign manager, Ken Mehlman, told reporters several hours later that "the goal is fixed [but] the tactics are flexible" in Iraq. Neither man detailed changes in the approach to Iraq, where about 1100 soldiers have died in combat in the past 19 months.

"The American people want a leader who is resolute in what he wants to accomplish and is flexible in working on how to accomplish it," Mr Mehlman said. "Ultimately what the American people want from their president is not some guy who lies on the couch and says 'Ooh,' but somebody who learns and adapts and changes based on what we learn."

Mr Mehlman conceded that Mr Bush may not sound consistent as he adapts his approach to changing circumstances, but said: "I think the American people are much more interested in what he has done for the country than in a particular answer to a question."

Senator Kerry said Mr Bush may be hiding more bad news about the invasion and occupation. He had "not offered a single word of explanation" about why US forces failed to secure 342 tonnes of high explosives that were looted by insurgents or prospective terrorists for potential use against GIs or in the US.

Nor had Mr Bush discussed his plan to seek at least $US70 billion ($94 billion) more early next year for Iraq and Afghanistan, to bring total costs of military operations in the two countries since 2001 to nearly $US225 billion.

"Mr President, what else are you being silent about?" Senator Kerry demanded at a rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin. "What else are you keeping from the American people?"

Meanwhile, the electoral battleground has unexpectedly expanded, with Democrats suddenly playing defensive in one stronghold, Hawaii, and some party strategists eyeing two other states that Senator Kerry had all but written off, West Virginia and Arkansas.

The flurry of interest in these states in the campaign's final week underscored not only how close the race remains but also the combatants' desire to test every opportunity and protect against every contingency.

A poll in The Honolulu Advertiser - showing Senator Kerry and Mr Bush tied - caught everyone by surprise and caused the Democratic National Committee to buy TV ads as a precaution.

Two independent liberal groups, the Media Fund and MoveOn.org's political action committee, also bought air time to help shore up a state that Al Gore won by 19 percentage points.

Bill Clinton, the former president, has for weeks implored the Kerry campaign not to give up on Arkansas, a state Mr Gore narrowly lost, and plans to campaign there on Sunday. In the past two weeks, two polls have shown the race in Arkansas statistically even.

West Virginia fell off the Kerry list of top-tier targets weeks ago. But one top Democrat said polling within the past week showed the race had narrowed to low single digits, prompting a reassessment.

Hearst Newspapers, The Washington Post

REF:http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...667842419.html

Who would have thought it? Just a week before the election and Bush is changing tactics, or at least admitting he needs to change tactics, in Iraq. Whilst I applaud him for, eventually, admitting the obvious, I think this is a classic case of "flip-flopping"...

What that I hear the Republicans howl? That's not flip-flopping? Well, funny, because that's what most of the world has been telling you guys for months...

Mr Mephisto

Mojo_PeiPei · 10-28-2004, 06:52 AM

Where's the flop? Changing tactics isn't a flip, nor a flop. Voting for the war before you voted against is a flip-flop. Being the war hero "who defended this country as a young man", who said Saddam needed to be taken out of power, who said we were justified, who said it was the right thing to do, then coming back and saying wrong war wrong time wrong place, calling it a mistake on national TV, is a flop. That is providing aid and comfort to the enemy. Bitching about the support for our troops?!?! Who does this assfuck think he is, he voted against the money for the troops. Who know's maybe I should take a step back, it could be all the botox has finally started to negatively effect Kerry's brain.

Kerry has no spine or conviction, and he sold our boys out by saying that.

cthulu23 · 10-28-2004, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Where's the flop? Changing tactics isn't a flip, nor a flop. Voting for the war before you voted against is a flip-flop. Being the war hero "who defended this country as a young man", who said Saddam needed to be taken out of power, who said we were justified, who said it was the right thing to do, then coming back and saying wrong war wrong time wrong place, calling it a mistake on national TV, is a flop. That is providing aid and comfort to the enemy. Bitching about the support for our troops?!?! Who does this assfuck think he is, he voted against the money for the troops. Who know's maybe I should take a step back, it could be all the botox has finally started to negatively effect Kerry's brain.

Kerry has no spine or conviction, and he sold our boys out by saying that.

Thanks for summarizing about 6 months worth of talking points. I haven't had them drilled into my head enough.

hannukah harry · 10-28-2004, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Where's the flop? Changing tactics isn't a flip, nor a flop. Voting for the war before you voted against is a flip-flop. Being the war hero "who defended this country as a young man", who said Saddam needed to be taken out of power, who said we were justified, who said it was the right thing to do, then coming back and saying wrong war wrong time wrong place, calling it a mistake on national TV, is a flop. That is providing aid and comfort to the enemy. Bitching about the support for our troops?!?! Who does this assfuck think he is, he voted against the money for the troops. Who know's maybe I should take a step back, it could be all the botox has finally started to negatively effect Kerry's brain.

Kerry has no spine or conviction, and he sold our boys out by saying that.

so let me paraphrase... "it's okay for bush to change his mind on something, but not for kerry."

why couldn't you have said that in the first place? it would have saved me a valuable 7.6 seconds from reading it all.

powerclown · 10-28-2004, 08:17 AM

I don't see a problem with changing tactics on the battlefields of Iraq. Adaptation in warfare is essential to victory.

The only purpose I see this article serving is as just another anti-Bush opinion/editorial.

tecoyah · 10-28-2004, 08:31 AM

Borderline troll....but we seem to reacting well to it.

Personally I see this as a Good sign, and perhaps a light of reason in the administrations Iraq Policy....Good for Bush.

Rdr4evr · 10-28-2004, 09:03 AM

It's not that Kerry "flip flops", it's the fact that he would go about "disarming" Saddam of his imaginary weapons, and putting him out of power in a different manner than Bush did. Being realistic, Bush “flip flops” just as much as the next guy.

Mephisto2 · 10-28-2004, 01:11 PM

It was certainly NOT a troll.

My question or comment on "flip-flops" was tongue in cheek. Let me quote myself.

Quote:

What that I hear the Republicans howl? That's not flip-flopping? Well, funny, because that's what most of the world has been telling you guys for months...

Thank you for proving my point.

Mr Mephisto

dksuddeth · 10-28-2004, 01:18 PM

I'm neither republican nor democrat, but I have a hard time calling a change in tactics a flip-flop. change in objective? yes. but not tactics.

Ustwo · 10-28-2004, 01:21 PM

Ummm whats the flip flop, did a position change?

I'm sorry but there isn't a single 'flip' or 'flop'.

Dunno what lefty website you get all the stuff you cut and past is Mephisto, but you are grasping with this one.

Mephisto2 · 10-28-2004, 01:43 PM

The Washington Post and Hearst Newspapers. It's referenced at the end of the quotation. Plus there's a link. I always reference my stories.

Did you actually read the whole thing before calling into question my post?

If people see this as a troll, I respectfully state that it was not intended as much. I'm sorry you see it that way.

I actually say I applaud Bush for this change in tactics. I also used "quote marks" and a smiley to denote the tongue-in-cheek nature of my use of the word flip-flop.

It seems that not only do Republicans/Bush-lackeys not only have double standards, but they also have no sense of humour.

Mr Mephisto

Ustwo · 10-28-2004, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

The Washington Post and Hearst Newspapers. It's referenced at the end of the quotation. Plus there's a link. I always reference my stories.

Did you actually read the whole thing before calling into question my post?

If people see this as a troll, I respectfully state that it was not intended as much. I'm sorry you see it that way.

I actually say I applaud Bush for this change in tactics. I also used "quote marks" and a smiley to denote the tongue-in-cheek nature of my use of the word flip-flop.

It seems that not only do Republicans/Bush-lackeys not only have double standards, but they also have no sense of humour.

Mr Mephisto

Yes I read, and while the washington post IS left wing, I mean the site that links all these for you for easy pasting. I rather doubt you search the internet every day to cut and paste.

This is NOT a classic case of flip-flopping. Flip flopping would be saying 'We never should have gone into Iraq' or 'I voted for it before I vote against it'.

If you ment it to be sarcastic, you might want to work on it, calling it 'classic' doesn't lend itself to sarcasm.

docbungle · 10-28-2004, 01:55 PM

Well, I say it's about time Bush begins to 'adapt' and 'change' strategies. I see this as a very potentially good thing, albeit extremely late.

Mephisto2 · 10-28-2004, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Yes I read, and while the washington post IS left wing, I mean the site that links all these for you for easy pasting. I rather doubt you search the internet every day to cut and paste.

Actually, I do read several news items every day. And I posted the actual link to the story. It's the Sydney Morning Herald.

Quote:

This is NOT a classic case of flip-flopping. Flip flopping would be saying 'We never should have gone into Iraq' or 'I voted for it before I vote against it'.

If you ment it to be sarcastic, you might want to work on it, calling it 'classic' doesn't lend itself to sarcasm.

It wasn't sarcasm. It was meant to be humourous, whilst pointing out an apparent dichotomy (which several posters on this thread agree).

You may need to work on your sense of perspective. Pomposity does not lend itself to humour.

Mr Mephisto

Boo · 10-28-2004, 04:54 PM

October 28, 2004 - Could this be our "October Surprise"?

I believe it to be a tactic to turn undecided voters in his favor. Maybe it will work, maybe not.

D Rice · 10-29-2004, 04:07 PM

I don't know what the hell john kerry stands for
Kerry Says Saddam 'Might Be Gone' Had He Been President
Fri Oct 29 2004 10:02:35 ET

NBCNEWS Brokaw interviewed John Kerry Thursday evening.

Brokaw: "If you had been President, Saddam Hussein would be in power."

Kerry: "Not necessarily."

Brokaw: "You said you wouldn't go to war against him."

Kerry: "That's not true. Because under the inspection process, Saddam Hussein was required to destroy those kinds of materials and weapons."

Brokaw: "But he wasn't destroying them."

Kerry: "That's what you have inspectors for. That's why I voted for the threat of force, because he only does things when you have a legitimate threat of force. It's irresponsible to suggest that if I were President, he wouldn't be gone. He might be gone, because if he hadn't complied, we might have had to go to war, but if we did, we would have gone with allies, so the American people weren't carrying the entire burden. And the entire world would understand why we did it."

hannukah harry · 10-29-2004, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by D Rice

I don't know what the hell john kerry stands for
Kerry Says Saddam 'Might Be Gone' Had He Been President
Fri Oct 29 2004 10:02:35 ET

NBCNEWS Brokaw interviewed John Kerry Thursday evening.

Brokaw: "If you had been President, Saddam Hussein would be in power."

Kerry: "Not necessarily."

Brokaw: "You said you wouldn't go to war against him."

Kerry: "That's not true. Because under the inspection process, Saddam Hussein was required to destroy those kinds of materials and weapons."

Brokaw: "But he wasn't destroying them."

Kerry: "That's what you have inspectors for. That's why I voted for the threat of force, because he only does things when you have a legitimate threat of force. It's irresponsible to suggest that if I were President, he wouldn't be gone. He might be gone, because if he hadn't complied, we might have had to go to war, but if we did, we would have gone with allies, so the American people weren't carrying the entire burden. And the entire world would understand why we did it."

it's funny that you don't understand what he stands for... it's pretty clear in the what you posted. to paraphrase "we needed to continue inspections to make sure saddam had destroyed his weapons, which the threat of force would push him towards, and if we found that he had not and would dismantle them, then we would have had to go to war, but we would have had more allies."

10-28-2004, 06:52 AM	#2 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	Where's the flop? Changing tactics isn't a flip, nor a flop. Voting for the war before you voted against is a flip-flop. Being the war hero "who defended this country as a young man", who said Saddam needed to be taken out of power, who said we were justified, who said it was the right thing to do, then coming back and saying wrong war wrong time wrong place, calling it a mistake on national TV, is a flop. That is providing aid and comfort to the enemy. Bitching about the support for our troops?!?! Who does this assfuck think he is, he voted against the money for the troops. Who know's maybe I should take a step back, it could be all the botox has finally started to negatively effect Kerry's brain. Kerry has no spine or conviction, and he sold our boys out by saying that. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

10-28-2004, 08:31 AM	#6 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	Borderline troll....but we seem to reacting well to it. Personally I see this as a Good sign, and perhaps a light of reason in the administrations Iraq Policy....Good for Bush. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

10-28-2004, 01:21 PM	#10 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Ummm whats the flip flop, did a position change? I'm sorry but there isn't a single 'flip' or 'flop'. Dunno what lefty website you get all the stuff you cut and past is Mephisto, but you are grasping with this one. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

10-28-2004, 01:55 PM	#13 (permalink)
docbungle It's all downhill from here Location: Denver	Well, I say it's about time Bush begins to 'adapt' and 'change' strategies. I see this as a very potentially good thing, albeit extremely late. __________________ Bad Luck City

10-28-2004, 04:54 PM	#15 (permalink)
Boo Leave me alone! Location: Alaska, USA	October 28, 2004 - Could this be our "October Surprise"? I believe it to be a tactic to turn undecided voters in his favor. Maybe it will work, maybe not. __________________ Back button again, I must be getting old.

10-28-2004, 08:17 AM	#5 (permalink)
powerclown Junkie Location: Detroit, MI	I don't see a problem with changing tactics on the battlefields of Iraq. Adaptation in warfare is essential to victory. The only purpose I see this article serving is as just another anti-Bush opinion/editorial.

10-28-2004, 09:03 AM	#7 (permalink)
Rdr4evr Banned	It's not that Kerry "flip flops", it's the fact that he would go about "disarming" Saddam of his imaginary weapons, and putting him out of power in a different manner than Bush did. Being realistic, Bush “flip flops” just as much as the next guy.

10-28-2004, 01:18 PM	#9 (permalink)
dksuddeth Junkie Location: bedford, tx	I'm neither republican nor democrat, but I have a hard time calling a change in tactics a flip-flop. change in objective? yes. but not tactics.

10-28-2004, 01:43 PM	#11 (permalink)
Mephisto2 Junkie	The Washington Post and Hearst Newspapers. It's referenced at the end of the quotation. Plus there's a link. I always reference my stories. Did you actually read the whole thing before calling into question my post? If people see this as a troll, I respectfully state that it was not intended as much. I'm sorry you see it that way. I actually say I applaud Bush for this change in tactics. I also used "quote marks" and a smiley to denote the tongue-in-cheek nature of my use of the word flip-flop. It seems that not only do Republicans/Bush-lackeys not only have double standards, but they also have no sense of humour. Mr Mephisto

10-29-2004, 04:07 PM	#16 (permalink)
D Rice Tilted	I don't know what the hell john kerry stands for Kerry Says Saddam 'Might Be Gone' Had He Been President Fri Oct 29 2004 10:02:35 ET NBCNEWS Brokaw interviewed John Kerry Thursday evening. Brokaw: "If you had been President, Saddam Hussein would be in power." Kerry: "Not necessarily." Brokaw: "You said you wouldn't go to war against him." Kerry: "That's not true. Because under the inspection process, Saddam Hussein was required to destroy those kinds of materials and weapons." Brokaw: "But he wasn't destroying them." Kerry: "That's what you have inspectors for. That's why I voted for the threat of force, because he only does things when you have a legitimate threat of force. It's irresponsible to suggest that if I were President, he wouldn't be gone. He might be gone, because if he hadn't complied, we might have had to go to war, but if we did, we would have gone with allies, so the American people weren't carrying the entire burden. And the entire world would understand why we did it."