Mission Continues
Yesterday was Mission Accomplished day. The day 5 years ago when President Bush triumphantly landed on an aircraft carrier and declared that major combat operations in Iraq were over, and that the US had prevailed.
In recognition of that day, I invite you to read the words of disgraced and reviled neoconservative “thinker” Richard Perle:
Relax, Celebrate Victory
Richard PerleFrom start to finish, President Bush has led the United States and its coalition partners to the most important military victory since World War II. And like the allied victory over the axis powers, the liberation of Iraq is more than the end of a brutal dictatorship: It is the foundation for a decent, humane government that will represent all the people of Iraq.
This was a war worth fighting. It ended quickly with few civilian casualties and with little damage to Iraq’s cities, towns or infrastructure. It ended without the Arab world rising up against us, as the war’s critics feared, without the quagmire they predicted, without the heavy losses in house-to-house fighting they warned us to expect. It was conducted with immense skill and selfless courage by men and women who will remain until Iraqis are safe, and who will return home as heroes.
In full retreat, the war’s opponents have now taken up new defensive positions: “Yes, it was a military victory, but you haven’t found Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction.” Or, “Yes, we destroyed Saddam’s regime, but now other dictators will try even harder to develop weapons of mass destruction to make sure they will not fall to some future American preemptive strike.”
We will find Saddam’s well-hidden chemical and biological weapons programs, but only when people who know come forward and tell us where to look. While Saddam was in power, even a hint about his concealment and deception was a death sentence, often by unimaginable torture against whole families. Saddam had four years to hide things. We have had a few weeks to find them. Patience — and some help from free Iraqis — will be rewarded.
Are you relaxing and enjoying it? This trillion-dollar exercise in futile nation-building that it’s become? This overthrow of a kleptocratic dictator with a sectarian civil war to show for it, while myriad other kleptocratic dictators remain in power, unimpeded?
In April 2008, 52 American servicepeople died in Iraq.
Yesterday, Jon Powers commemmorated the 5th anniversary of Bush’s ridiculous, premature speech by reflecting on what he was doing then. He was getting ready to go to Iraq. He writes:
There was no plan for securing. There was no plan for reconstructing.
Lieutenant Colonel Alan King recalls, in What Was Asked of Us, that as he rolled into the Baghdad Airport “they told me I had twenty-four hours to come up with a reconstruction plan for Baghdad.” You read that correctly. A Lieutenant Colonel on his way to Iraq, was given 24 hours to “come up” with a plan.
Unfortunately, the mission was far from accomplished. The mission was never defined. How can an army accomplish a mission when no one decides what the mission really is? This is failure of leadership on the largest scale imaginable.
We mark the fifth anniversary of that publicity stunt, with the following;
April marks the highest death total for US Troops in 2008. Over 4061 American fatalities Hundreds of thousand Iraq casualties Over 300,000 troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with MAJOR PTSD Estimates put the war cost at over $3 TRILLION. NY-26th, the district where I am running for Congress, continues to pay over $1.9 Billion alone.
As a direct result of the war, oil and gas prices have skyrocketed, pinching families and pushing our economy toward recession.
These numbers are where we stand now. You know they will continue to grow.
Our brave men and women in uniform have done everything we have asked of them over the last five years. They struggled to do their jobs in a war with no strategy for success. They continue to serve with inappropriate equipment, insufficient training for the situation, and a lack of leadership coming from Washington. They have even returned for 3 or 4 tours of duty, only to suffer through more of the same.
Unfortunately, Washington continues to fail our troops by insisting there is a military solution to this all too political problem. They are failing to address the real issues; pressing religious, economic, and social solutions that could help stabilize the region and return a sense of pride and productivity to the lives of every day Iraqis.
In short, the mission needs to finally be defined.
Our new mission is to bring our troops home safely, securely, and soon…[addressing]
The tragedy of hundreds of thousands of veterans coming home to a broken Veterans Administration Engage the millions of moderate middle-class Iraqi refugees who have lost their homes and are at risk to becoming recruited by radical elements Reform our approach to national security so that our military is not the only tool we use to solve political problems Bring accountability to the war profiteers and criminals who have fleeced our taxpayers and stolen from our troops Begin a diplomatic surge to engage the entire region of interested parties to help solve centuries old ethnic resentments and struggle
During Vietnam, returning soldiers were not always treated as heroes who had done their duty. During Iraq, it is the government - not the people, but its government - that is mistreating our returning servicemen and women.
Mission Accomplished? Not by a long shot.
Mike In WNY Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 11:04 am
Before Powers can be taken seriously on Iraq, he needs to acknowledge that we never should have invaded the country in the first place.
Russell Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 11:19 am
That’s a brilliant strategy, Mike. Run a Democrat in a traditionally Republican District, then have him cut his own legs out from underneath himself. Being a vet helps his cross-party appeal. Not only that, but it’s the only experience he has. (Folks don’t regularly elect substitute teachers to Congress.) Now you’re saying he should stand up and say the only experience he has and the only thing he really has to run on should have never happened. Brilliant!
Buffalopundit Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 11:37 am
Funny you should mock Powers for the fact that he’s a substitute teacher. Although the district is Republican, it’s not country club republican, and throughout the district people are opposed to the Iraq war whether it’s because of nation-building, or the incredible cost.
Ask yourself why the Republican party completely disregarded David Bellavia, who was a declared (R) candidate in NY-26. 1. He’s not a millionaire, and 2. He supports the Iraq war. The first offends the party bosses who made the selection and the second offends the electorate.
Say what you want about Powers, he earned his endorsements through his message and through hard work. Not through connections and pledged millions.
I mean, unlike Lee, Powers didn’t get a job with the family business (most of the manufacturing for which was sourced overseas)or anything before selling it off to out of towners.
Also, with his purchase of a top-banner ad on Illuzzi’s site, he’s practically guaranteed the IP line unless Orsini is somehow ousted.
As weak as you think Powers might be, the Republicans couldn’t have picked a weaker candidate if Lenihan himself had picked it for them.
Mike Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 11:51 am
Where’s hank, can’t he blame it all on the liberals?
Howard Goldman Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 12:35 pm
“…and throughout the district people are opposed to the Iraq war whether it’s because of nation-building, or the incredible cost.”
Don’t include me in that club. I’m glad we’re (USA) winning.
I was also glad to see in today’s paper (buried) that 2008 looks great for Iraq oil production. Way above expectations.
I support our troops and their mission.
Russell Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 12:44 pm
I didn’t mock Powers for being a substitute teacher. I’m just saying that that’s not usually a top credential that can get someone into Congress.
David Bellavia was not a great candidate, whether he was a vet or not. Just because Chris Lee is a millionaire does not mean that that’s the determining factor the Republicans used to pick their candidate. Success in business does help, but it’s not the #1 reason. And you don’t even know what Lee’s stance is on the war, so how can you say your #2 mattered?
Country club Republicans or not, it’s a right leaning district. A Democrat is not going to win by placing himself much to the left. It’d be much easier for a Republican to run in that district opposed to the war than it would for a Democrat. Besides, most opposition to the war today from those on the right is not that we never should have gone into Iraq. It’s that it’s been mismanaged, poorly run, and we need to change our strategy or get out. On top of that, most have acknowledged the surge has been working. I do not think saying we should not have ever gone in is going to fly too well for Powers. He hasn’t said that and I doubt he ever will say it. It’s a dumb strategy for Mike to suggest and you’re not helping your candidate if you’re defending a position for him that he never took.
Buffalopundit Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 1:38 pm
You wouldn’t have brought it up if the intent wasn’t to mock it. After all, insurance agent/realtor isn’t a “top credential” for Congress either, yet somehow Tom Reynolds managed for all these years.
Lee’s unemployed now. Is that a “top credential” for a candidate? Because in that case, maybe the Lady in White can run. As for the war, that’s the one thing Bellavia is known for - his support for the war. I doubt that this is an opinion shared by the majority of the electorate.
And yet it’s the right’s darling who got us into it and prosecuted it in just this way. It used to be the Republican Party had a reputation for being strong on international and military affairs. It took Bush just 5 years to flush that down the cosmic toilet.
Sorry, where did I say anything about Powers and not going in in the first place? Because I think that Powers’ service in Iraq, and his subsequent work with War Kids gives him everything he needs to be “taken seriously” on Iraq. So I agree that Mike’s comment was silliness.
hank Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 1:59 pm
I just wonder when all the liberals are going to realize the truth about that sign on that ship.
It was to celebrate the end of the MISSION OF THAT PARTICULAR VESSEL. Their time in the war zone was over, so the SHIP’S MISSION WAS OVER–NOT THE WAR.
Of course, in this case the truth doesn’t fit your worldview, so you interpret it so that it does.
It was the end of what was THOUGHT to be major combat operations. Mistakes were made in that assumption. As Gen. Patton said, 1 minute after H hour on D day, you HAVE NO PLAN.
4000 deaths in 5 years, and each a tragedy for the soldiers and families. 5 years in Vietnam brought us about 30,000 casualties, and a Republican was re-elected President twice in that time, so don’t you Democrats start jerking each other off just yet…though I know mike can’t wait to get started.
If you knew anything about the military (and because liberals despise it, they never spend much time learning or caring about it), almost EVERY VESSEL coming back into port has a sign like this plastered on it. Sometimes, even when going out. I saw USS Ticonderoga–the first AGEIS equipped cruiser leave port with a sign for the Russian subs that would be following it….ADMIRAL GORSHKOV–AGEIS IS ON DUTY. Written with spray paint on bedsheets sewn together in letters large enough to read from a periscope.
New York is so fucked up that it matters not who gets NY 26. Who ever wins is going to be a rookie congressman, so don’t look for too much pork–older and fatter pork products like Robert “Sheets” Byrd and John “Re-deploy to Okinawa” Murtha will nudge him away from the trough.
Russell Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 2:15 pm
So you agreed with what I said to Mike, but you had to attack me anyway? Nice.
I don’t think Bush flushed it down the toilet for the entire party. The current campaign has shown that McCain, the R, has been given more respect by the public and the media on international and military topics than either of the Dem candidates.
That’s why Bellavia wasn’t a great candidate–he was a one issue guy. It doesn’t mean the party leaders agreed or not with that one issue, they just wanted a better candidate. I think you’re reading way too much into it.
Selling your business doesn’t exactly make you unemployed and I doubt most of the public would think of Lee as unemployed, but nice try.
Perhaps realtor and insurance agent are not top credentials for Congress, but a good number of them have been elected to Congress. There are a number of publications, including Congressional Quarterly, that publish the occupation of Congressmen. I have seen a good number of realtors and insurance agents listed, but I cannot recall ever seeing substitute teacher listed. Again, I wasn’t mocking, but you’re being so defensive about it it makes me think it’s a very sensitive subject even among his best supporters.
Buffalopundit Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 2:25 pm
What are you, a fourth grader? Where in this comment did I “attack” you.
Lee may be richer than many member states of the United Nations, but he’s still unemployed. I’m sure that whole multimillionaire/Clarence/no job thing will fly well with the small towners in GLOW and the middle / upper class in Greece and Williamsville for whom taxes and prices continue to rise.
I wonder why the “substitute” teacher issue is so fascinating to you that you bring it up, sua sponte, all the time. Are there no teachers who have been elected to Congress? I think you’ll find that making an issue of one’s employment - no matter what it is - isn’t a winning proposition anywhere in that particular district.
Mike Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Good Ole hank, All the ships have those crazy signs on them when Idiots in jump suits are landing. Please hank give it up, no one except me even reads your moronic post anymore.
hank Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 3:29 pm
mike–opinions are like assholes. everyone has one–you probably have two.
More people read what I write than you would like to believe.
But when you’re a frothing liberal, you’re in a world of your own, so I hope the weather’s fine in your world—wherever it may be.
Russell Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Okay, you didn’t attack me personally, but you attacked what I said, even though you agreed with it. That’s even better.
A person’s work experience does matter in any election, especially for higher offices and even in the small towns of GLOW or the middle/upper class in Greece and Williamsville. My point was that if you take away what makes him a viable candidate, he’s left with only the experience of being a substitute teacher and that’s not usually a winning proposition to get elected to Congress. The fact that he’s a vet is what really matters. If he follows Mike’s advice and condemns the war and everything about it, he’s cutting himself off at the knees because his experience in the war is what matters most for his chances. It would be difficult to tout being a vet in a war you think is completely wrong or a complete failure as a good thing.
And let’s not kid ourselves. Being a teacher and being a substitute teacher are two different things.
Mike Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Hank any more words of wisdom? Just for your information I consider myself a communist. Also Marines are looking for a few good men with strong backs and weak minds or I’m a vet gimmie gimmie gimmie.
Jackson Smiles Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 4:13 pm
holy sh*t Russell and i agree about the war issue, at least to the fact that Powers probably wouldn’t fair well saying it was a complete mistake.
He’d get away with saying the “evidence” for war was incorrect, and the people in charge were crooks and liars and made congress believe we should go in, but based on that evidence they chose to go to war.
Asking people if they’d vote for it knowing what they knew now is a hindsight 20/20 question, but Powers can state (and i think he in one of the speaches i heard earlier this year) that it was mismanaged.
Does anyone know if he talk about it when he first joined the race? I didn’t follow him from that early on.
hank Says:May 2nd, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Interesting thoutght
and the people in charge were crooks and liars and made congress believe we should go in.
All I heard from the beginning of the Gen. Election in 00 up to and past the invasion of iraq from the left was
“Bush is an idiot, Bush is a Cowboy, Bush is a Fratboy, etc.
SO WHY DID THE SMARTEST WOMAN IN THE WORLD, AMONG MANY OTHER DEMOCRATS, BELIEVE A WORD HE WAS SAYING AND BACKED THE INVASION…
Can’t be too smart if you believe a drug addled idiot/cowboy
Your thoughts
Vote for mike for WNY’s leading Fucktard 2008.
Michele Johnson Says:May 3rd, 2008 at 9:20 pm
All I can think of to add is..Thank you to the troops and their families..you are true heroes. And that the Bush twins should be in Iraq.
Jim Ostrowski Says:May 4th, 2008 at 10:13 am
The Democrats were elected to end the war; they lied. They could have ended the war anytime by majority vote (actually a tie vote)–cut the funding.
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec7
No, we need two-thirds, a big fat lie any schoolboy would refute. No, they kept the slaughter going so they could win the White House and ram socialized medicine down our throats. Oddly enough, their Machiavellian strategy will probably work. And I don’t believe either Democrat will end the war either. FUBAR. Government grows; it’s a law of nature.
Jackson Smiles Says:May 4th, 2008 at 10:51 am
Jim it’s a double edge sword… where would they cut the funding from? Body armor, ammunition, armored humvees, training, social reconstruction for Iraq? Oh wait… they never had a good enough budget to begin with. Budget reduction would only hurt the soldiers who are over there doing there duty. The soldiers have done there part and have already gotten sh*t on for it by offering contractors companies billions to hire ex-soldiers to do the same job (and they pay them 6 times as much) so some of Cheney’s friends can make a few extra million. I’m not blaming the ex-soldiers, they’re heros too. The gov’t should cut the budget by reducing contractors millions and putting into higher pay for soldiers. Then they should pump money into the VA so when a soldier does take a bullet for our fat asses sitting here blogging, they actually get the help they need.
You last comment sounds a little like: “boo-hoo the democrats won’t clean up the republican mess… lets put the republicans back in”
That’s like telling Konrad Adenauer “you didn’t do a fast enough job of putting Germany back together in ‘49… maybe we should see if Hitler’s people have any ideas.”
It shouldn’t be about Dems vs Republicans any more. We’re all Americans. There’s some pretty stupid Republicans out there and there are some pretty stupid Democrats too, but there are some smart ones on both sides. Any of them could vote to stop the war, so don’t blame just one party for it.
The idea our government was founded on was to get the best of both parties together to collaborate effectively for our country, not to bitch and whine and point fingers at the other party.
Jim Ostrowski Says:May 4th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Jackson, you cut the funding for the war, leaving enough for a safe withdrawal.
If the commander in chief deliberately jeopardizes the safe withdrawal even though it is fully funded, you impeach his ass or cut his own funding. Turn his f’in lights off!
All within the Dems control even though the liars claimed they needed the Republicans.
And on getting the Republicans back in power, you apparently don’t know that I can’t stand either party and refuse to enter the two-cell ideological prison of conventional politics. It’s crowded enough in there.
Eric P. Says:May 5th, 2008 at 8:46 am
Hank sums up the Republican mindset - Hank says, “Can’t be too smart if you believe a drug addled idiot/cowboy”.
I agree.
hank Says:May 5th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Eric–
Democrats are on video tape all over saying everything that the Bush Administration said and MORE supporting the invasion of Iraq.
I really appreciate the comments of a battle tested veteran such as yourself. Your battlefield experience just puts everything in perspective for me. I take my 10 years service, including 2 as a Combat Corpsman with the Marines and bow to you in supplication.
Eric P. Says:May 5th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Supplicate this, Hank.
lulu Says:May 6th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Russell said: “The fact that he’s a vet is what really matters. If he follows Mike’s advice and condemns the war and everything about it, he’s cutting himself off at the knees because his experience in the war is what matters most for his chances. It would be difficult to tout being a vet in a war you think is completely wrong or a complete failure as a good thing.”
I agree whole heartedly with your first sentence, but where you see a forest, I see a bunch of trees. The fact that Powers served in the war (and steadily climbed in the ranks while doing so) is what makes him a (decorated) vet and that status as a vet is what matters to the electorate, not his opinion of the war itself or the people who choose to start it and mismanage it.
And if he condemns “everything about it” as you say (which he doesn’t) then perhaps we civilians should consider his opinions a bit more informed than ours as he was there in combat providing him first hand knowledge of this war while US civilians, like ourselves, have been made to form opinions based on spoon fed media spin and politically motivated speeches.
I would even go so far to say that Powers may not even be running for Congress if he had not been so disappointed in the way Washington handled this war, the decision to go and the clusterfuck than ensued once there.
Participating in Iraq war combat has directly affected Jon’s life - and his response to this experience (both WORK and LIFE experience, mind you) thankfully does not include PTSD appointments at the VA, but rather has manifest itself in a new challenge - a run for Congress - where he is attempting to once again serve his country, albeit in a non-military way, that allows him to use the experience he gained in Iraq while participating in a government body that makes leadership decisions on our behalf - decisions that include whether or not we start any new wars.