Bush goes all Mea Culpa

[2fast4u]

k, just out of curioustiy ... who is suprised? i was. (mag) then again could this just be a campaign move?

US President George W. Bush admitted last night he didn't think the war on terror could be won.

But Mr Bush said it would make it less acceptable for groups to use terrorism as a tool.

NBC-TV's Today program was broadcasting an interview with Mr Bush that discussed his goals for a second administration.

He said he expected the war on terror to be a drawn-out battle.

NBC's Matt Lauer asked: "Can we win it?"

"I don't think you can win it," Mr Bush replied.

"But I think you can create conditions so that they, those who use terror as a tool, are less acceptable in parts of the world."

linkage to story (http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,10620915%255E663,00.html)

[UDawg]

There isn't any mea culpa. The left is making more about this than what it is. Bush was being real about the situation as he has said all along. This will take a long time and most likely longer than his two terms.

[2fast4u]

not really .. he stated that this thing cant be won at all. i agree he is (finally!) being real about the situation but this is a 180° turnaround.

[Kamel]

i was watching this int. very interesting... bush in this interview also was approached about jobs, he said that over 50% of people would say that they are better off now than they were 4 years ago. i know i can personally say that atleast in this area of the world, that's very much so not true. businesses around here have been having a horrible time keeping in business. one local b&m computer store gauging prices at over 60% just to stay in business.

i guess it was indeed an opinion based comment, but i would hate to think the president is so daft as to think that after a recession such as that that we are doing _better_. maybe recovered, but certainly not improved as expected IMO.

[UDawg]

No it isn't damn. You need to pay attention. A mea culpa is a complete apology for actions or words. Bush has not done that. Make of it what you will but the record stands as to what the president has said.

[Kamel]

eh, where in that post did i mention mea culpa? i didn't even know what it meant. the only thing i mentioned about the above post was that it was "very interesting".

[oldsk00l]

I don't understand this, when FDR said "There ain't gonna be any honey this year" in his state of the union he wasn't chastised at all. This was also a 180 that he did, he's just telling it like it is. "Finally" nor not, you can't war against a word. Same as you can't prosecute "mental disease" in court, you can't win against "terror" or wage war against "bank robberies" because they can and will always happen.

I wonder how contestable the statement that Bush has ever claimed we would stamp out ALL terror, or if he's really not turning around but being consistent.

I don't know, anyone able to produce any quotes?

[2fast4u]

No it isn't damn. You need to pay attention. A mea culpa is a complete apology for actions or words. Bush has not done that. Make of it what you will but the record stands as to what the president has said.

if you are gonna argue the thread title thats fine but its not really the point. mea culpa may be over the top but thats what jumped in my head when i read this.

[2fast4u]

I don't know, anyone able to produce any quotes?

yep.

We have been called to service. We've been called to action. And we accept that responsibility. With fine allies, we are winning the war against the terrorists. We're disrupting terrorist operations. We're cutting off their funding. We are chasing down their leaders one person at a time. We are relentless. We are strong. We refuse to yield. Some two-thirds of already Qaeda's key leaders have been captured or killed. The rest of them hear us breathing down their neck. We're after them. We will not relent. We will bring these killers to justice.

can it be any more clear that bush either believed in a full victory or claimed to have that belief?

[sbp]

Got to like that defeatist headline.

These folks can have peace right now-all they got to do is surrender and convert to bin Turd's brand of Islam.

[UDawg]

yep.



can it be any more clear that bush either believed in a full victory or claimed to have that belief?


You are taking a list of success that Bush has pointed out and then say that he says now we didn't do it? This is stupid. Talking about accomplishments is not the same as saying that this war is the type that wont be won in a few years or a few battles. This is one of the most shallow arguments I have seen in a long time. All you guys want to do is run with anything the president says that is not on the positive.

I can't be bothered with this stupidity.

[oldsk00l]

yep.



can it be any more clear that bush either believed in a full victory or claimed to have that belief?

Wellllll, I still think that quote is very contestable. You can win a war against "bank robbers" but not against "bank robbery". He specifically says "the terrorists" not "terror". Close, but I'm still lookin.

[Kamel]

IMHO the only thing bush is doing by over-reacting to terror is fanning the flames. it's giving terrorists exactly what they want, and giving them good reason to hate the US -- thus giving them a good reason to want to attack. not to belittle or undermine the issue of national security and terrorism, but terrorism is only one problem in a world crammed full of them.

i don't intend to insult anyone with my foolish comments here, terrorism just never really hits home with me. using terrorism as a tool for re-election is nothing better than a preacher using the fear of hell to get people to believe in God. IMO this is very wrong and should never be done. protection is indeed good to have, and required at that; but i would not vote someone who is blind to seemingly issues other than terrorism. not saying there is a presidential candidate that can fulfill those needs, but i am saying that we shouldn't put so much emphasis on one issue as to become blind to the others.

we've had our turn at being imperialistic IMO, and it's now time to start worrying about domestic issues. we can branch out to try and achieve these primative needs at a later time, it just seems the scales are weighted more towards domestic problems. the only terrorist attacks we've had since 9/11 have been on foreign land recently acquired, and IMO that should be considered casualties of war (we _are_ fighting terrorism aren't we?).

[UDawg]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040830/D84PJ6200.html

[Kamel]

:o is it just me, or do bush and kerry both have some good lookin daughters? lol

thanks for the article, i understand what bush is saying completely. it's just like what i say with perfection "it's clear that no one can ever be perfect, but the more we work at it, the closer we get to it". i'm sure i'm not the first one to think of that, but it's my take on the whole situation. i suspect bush is trying to emphasize the same thing with terror "it's impossible to get rid of terrorism, but the more we work at it, the closer we'll get". makes perfect sense to me, heck, i could be a terrorist if i wanted; how would anyone possibly predict such an event?

anyway, it's honorable that bush wants to protect america, and security is indeed a big concern of mine... but that does not mean that it can't be trusted in the hands of others.

[oldsk00l]

we've had our turn at being imperialistic IMO, and it's now time to start worrying about domestic issues. we can branch out to try and achieve these primative needs at a later time, it just seems the scales are weighted more towards domestic problems.
I agree with all your points except that one. The only domestic "issue" I see is too much legislation being passed. More regulations, more administrative overhead, I would love to see a completely gridlocked congress that is so divided in opinion that they can't pass anything. For example, HIPAA, the DMCA, Patriot Act, etc etc etc.

FYI - The general opinion from most healthcare providers is that HIPAA added anywhere from %20 to %50 additional administrative overhead in order to come into compliance, which is exactly opposite of what HIPAA was intended for. Free market, get rid of this medicaid and medicare horsecrap. Local indigent care programs, and local assistance programs serve patients better. Also, prescription drug assistance from the pharmaceutical co's serve elderly people better and is actually more affordable to elderly people than some of the medicare deductibles.

SO, if we'd just leave it to free market we'd be better off. So, my voting strategy is to go exactly against whatever the majority appears to be congressionally. For Prez, I will ALWAYS vote for the least popular just to throw a monkey in the wrench.

[Sazar]

the business of healthcare in the united states needs an overhaul from top to bottom... from legislation to the manner in which fees are charged...

a simplified process that eliminates double/triple charging and follows in line with say the medical system in many western european nations will be worth it...

the prescription drug "benefits" are also a double-edged sword... there is no reason why we can't get cheaper drugs from across the border if it reduces the overall cost of medicine for our elderly as well as through the rest of the system so that we are not subsidising some of the costs...

lawyers and law makers and insurance jerk-offs basically are getting away with useless legislation that does nothing but add more red-tape and litigation and adds more into their pockets under the guise of helping us...

[2fast4u]

Wellllll, I still think that quote is very contestable. You can win a war against "bank robbers" but not against "bank robbery". He specifically says "the terrorists" not "terror". Close, but I'm still lookin.

*sigh* if nothing else helps eh? :retard:

[2fast4u]

You are taking a list of success that Bush has pointed out and then say that he says now we didn't do it? This is stupid. Talking about accomplishments is not the same as saying that this war is the type that wont be won in a few years or a few battles. This is one of the most shallow arguments I have seen in a long time. All you guys want to do is run with anything the president says that is not on the positive.

I can't be bothered with this stupidity.

uhh...to me that quoted part is not a list of success but a mere list of predictions.

we are winning the war against the terrorists

what part of "winning" (then) and "cant win" dont you understand? (mag)

[oldsk00l]

what part of "winning" (then) and "cant win" dont you understand? (mag)

Dude, "The terrorists" and "terror" are vastly different. For one, "the terrorists" means we are actually taking action against them, "terror" just means it's impossible to stamp out "all terrorists" but we can certainly spray some water on the flames.

You can't completely get rid of "crime" but we can go after "criminals" and "win against criminals". This also applies to "terror" and "terrorists".

@Sazar
I agree with you there, the whole "relative values" thing got all screwed up. All that the standard of relative values has done is allow insurance companies to dictate pricing. That, and the insurance companies then follow relative values but setup ridiculous "contractuals" that screw providers over, who then subsidize that lost money in self pay revenue.

That, and the fact that deductibles are still on the rise, and the folks still on deductible goto collections on average %12-20 of the time. I still blame HIPAA for most of it though.

But I'd have to say, you're assessment for fixing the solution would appear to be right on the money.

[aaahhh52]

uhh...to me that quoted part is not a list of success but a mere list of predictions.



what part of "winning" (then) and "cant win" dont you understand? (mag)

you can be winning for a very long time but never truly win....

[Kamel]

one of my favorite quotes... you may have won the battle but you lost the war.

reminds me of when i got in a fight with a bully. he beat my ass pretty bad. he won that battle, but i won the war -- never messed with me again, lol.

[oldsk00l]

I hear ya there, one time I had a portable drill at midnight, went to "the adversary's" house, drilled a hole in his muffler, duct taped around the bottom of it so it wouldn't leak, and then filled the sucker up with gasoline and taped his tailpipe.

Talk about fireballs, but I felt it was quite a bit more than pyrhic victory!! :afro3:

[PsychoSy]

is it just me, or do bush and kerry both have some good lookin daughters? lol

You're not alone. :drooling: ;)

[oldsk00l]

dude, w/Jenna, I'd DEFINITELY hit it!!