Uncle Dick says he was right about the insurgency being in it's "death throes", but the media just made him look like he was wrong. Rummy compares this war to World War II and The Cold War (but interestingly, not Vietnam). And Dubya runs back in the (White) house when questioned. Special guest star: George Casey as Shemp!
Iraq, 3 years later: Dispute on definition
By David E. Sanger and Thom Shanker The New York Times
MONDAY, MARCH 20, 2006
WASHINGTON On the third anniversary of a war that the Bush administration had expected would be long over by now, senior officials took to the airwaves to argue that despite the escalating violence their strategy is working, and to dispute the assessment of Iraq's former prime minister, Ayad Allawi, that a civil war has started.
Displaying a carefully calibrated mix of optimism about the prospects of eventual victory and caution about how long American troops would be required to remain in the country, the officials who marked the day - including President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld - sounded Sunday much as they did two years ago, on the first anniversary of the invasion.
At that time, the rebuilding effort had just begun, the fierceness of the insurgency was far lower, and the U.S. occupation had suppressed, temporarily, the sectarian violence that scars Iraq today.
Cheney, in an interview on CBS's Face the Nation, was challenged on his statement three years ago that "we will be greeted as liberators" and his assertion 10 months ago that the insurgency was in its "last throes." He insisted that in both cases his facts were right, but that the news media had created a different perception with vivid imagery of killing.
"I think it has less to do with the statements we've made, which I think were basically accurate and reflect reality, than it does with the fact that there's a constant sort of perception, if you will, that's created because what's newsworthy is the car bomb in Baghdad," he said.
As for an Iraqi civil war, Cheney said that terrorists had made "a serious effort" to foment a civil war, but added that "I don't think they've been successful."
Rumsfeld dismissed the calls for withdrawal from Iraq - which some conservatives have now joined - by comparing the current battle to the two great struggles of his generation: World War II and the Cold War. "Turning our backs on postwar Iraq today would be the modern equivalent of handing postwar Germany back to the Nazis," he wrote in an op-ed published in The Washington Post. "It would be as great a disgrace as if we had asked the liberated nations of Eastern Europe to return to Soviet domination."
Bush gave a short statement when he returned to the White House from Camp David, urging Iraq to form a unity government, but when reporters began asking him about the administration's assessments of progress he swiftly turned to enter the White House residence with his wife, Laura.
Bush's unwillingess to engage in questions about the gap between his expectations three years ago and the realities of Iraq today seemed to underscore the enormous challenge that the White House faces in explaining the war at a time when only about 34 percent of Americans say they approve of the job he is doing. He is hoping to put a floor under eroding support for his Iraq strategy with two more speeches on the subject this week - on Monday in Cleveland and Wednesday in West Virginia - but his aides acknowledge that the images of Shiites fighting Sunnis has done more to undercut the core of support for the war than any other event.
Bush's message of progress was challenged Sunday by the country's former interim prime minister, Allawi, one of the Iraqi leaders whom Bush once described as exactly the kind of unifying leader the country needed.
"It is unfortunate that we are in civil war," Allawi said on the BBC. "We are losing each day as an average 50 to 60 people through the country, if not more."
"If this is not civil war," he concluded, "then God knows what civil war is."
Allawi's assessment was directly contradicted by General George Casey Jr., the senior U.S. commander in Iraq, who said, "We're a long way from civil war." Casey acknowledged that U.S. armed forces would have to maintain substantial numbers in Iraq for "a couple more years," but insisted that "over 2006, we will continue to see a gradual reduction in coalition forces."
That is a quite different assessment than the one the White House and the Pentagon were making the night the war began three years ago with a bombing raid on Baghdad that included a site where American intelligence agencies believed, falsely, where Saddam Hussein was ensconced.
At that time, the Pentagon expected a short conflict. Its classified plans called for the withdrawal of the majority of American troops by the fall of 2003. Today there are about 133,000 still there, and officials say it will be difficult, though possible, to bring that figure to around 100,000 by the end of the year.
Rumsfeld, whose refusal to send larger numbers of troops into Iraq after the initial invasion has now made him a lightening rod for critics who say he allowed the insurgency to flower, insisted Sunday that the rebels - not the American-led coalition - were failing in Iraq.
"The terrorists seem to recognize that they are losing in Iraq," Rumsfeld wrote, words that were repeated by Cheney. "I believe that history will show that to be the case." And like Cheney, he insisted the problem was the imagery created by a 24-hour news cycle, rather than the realities of round- the-clock killing. "Fortunately, history is not made up of daily headlines, blogs on Web sites or the latest sensational attack," Rumsfeld wrote. "History is a bigger picture, and it takes some time and perspective to measure accurately."
The military was represented on the Sunday TV talk shows this year by Casey, who predicted that the U.S. armed forces would have to maintain substantial numbers in Iraq for "a couple more years."
"It depends how you define major American presence," Casey said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I see a couple more years of this, with a gradually reducing coalition presence here in Iraq as, as I said, as the Iraqi security forces step forward." And in an interview on "Fox News Sunday," Casey said "that over 2006, we will continue to see a gradual reduction in coalition forces."
"Is there terrorist violence in Iraq? Yes, there is," Casey said on CNN's "Late Edition."
"Is there terrorist violence in Iraq designed to foment sectarian strife? Yes, there is. But we're a long way from civil war."
Iraq, 3 years later: Dispute on definition
By David E. Sanger and Thom Shanker The New York Times
MONDAY, MARCH 20, 2006
WASHINGTON On the third anniversary of a war that the Bush administration had expected would be long over by now, senior officials took to the airwaves to argue that despite the escalating violence their strategy is working, and to dispute the assessment of Iraq's former prime minister, Ayad Allawi, that a civil war has started.
Displaying a carefully calibrated mix of optimism about the prospects of eventual victory and caution about how long American troops would be required to remain in the country, the officials who marked the day - including President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld - sounded Sunday much as they did two years ago, on the first anniversary of the invasion.
At that time, the rebuilding effort had just begun, the fierceness of the insurgency was far lower, and the U.S. occupation had suppressed, temporarily, the sectarian violence that scars Iraq today.
Cheney, in an interview on CBS's Face the Nation, was challenged on his statement three years ago that "we will be greeted as liberators" and his assertion 10 months ago that the insurgency was in its "last throes." He insisted that in both cases his facts were right, but that the news media had created a different perception with vivid imagery of killing.
"I think it has less to do with the statements we've made, which I think were basically accurate and reflect reality, than it does with the fact that there's a constant sort of perception, if you will, that's created because what's newsworthy is the car bomb in Baghdad," he said.
As for an Iraqi civil war, Cheney said that terrorists had made "a serious effort" to foment a civil war, but added that "I don't think they've been successful."
Rumsfeld dismissed the calls for withdrawal from Iraq - which some conservatives have now joined - by comparing the current battle to the two great struggles of his generation: World War II and the Cold War. "Turning our backs on postwar Iraq today would be the modern equivalent of handing postwar Germany back to the Nazis," he wrote in an op-ed published in The Washington Post. "It would be as great a disgrace as if we had asked the liberated nations of Eastern Europe to return to Soviet domination."
Bush gave a short statement when he returned to the White House from Camp David, urging Iraq to form a unity government, but when reporters began asking him about the administration's assessments of progress he swiftly turned to enter the White House residence with his wife, Laura.
Bush's unwillingess to engage in questions about the gap between his expectations three years ago and the realities of Iraq today seemed to underscore the enormous challenge that the White House faces in explaining the war at a time when only about 34 percent of Americans say they approve of the job he is doing. He is hoping to put a floor under eroding support for his Iraq strategy with two more speeches on the subject this week - on Monday in Cleveland and Wednesday in West Virginia - but his aides acknowledge that the images of Shiites fighting Sunnis has done more to undercut the core of support for the war than any other event.
Bush's message of progress was challenged Sunday by the country's former interim prime minister, Allawi, one of the Iraqi leaders whom Bush once described as exactly the kind of unifying leader the country needed.
"It is unfortunate that we are in civil war," Allawi said on the BBC. "We are losing each day as an average 50 to 60 people through the country, if not more."
"If this is not civil war," he concluded, "then God knows what civil war is."
Allawi's assessment was directly contradicted by General George Casey Jr., the senior U.S. commander in Iraq, who said, "We're a long way from civil war." Casey acknowledged that U.S. armed forces would have to maintain substantial numbers in Iraq for "a couple more years," but insisted that "over 2006, we will continue to see a gradual reduction in coalition forces."
That is a quite different assessment than the one the White House and the Pentagon were making the night the war began three years ago with a bombing raid on Baghdad that included a site where American intelligence agencies believed, falsely, where Saddam Hussein was ensconced.
At that time, the Pentagon expected a short conflict. Its classified plans called for the withdrawal of the majority of American troops by the fall of 2003. Today there are about 133,000 still there, and officials say it will be difficult, though possible, to bring that figure to around 100,000 by the end of the year.
Rumsfeld, whose refusal to send larger numbers of troops into Iraq after the initial invasion has now made him a lightening rod for critics who say he allowed the insurgency to flower, insisted Sunday that the rebels - not the American-led coalition - were failing in Iraq.
"The terrorists seem to recognize that they are losing in Iraq," Rumsfeld wrote, words that were repeated by Cheney. "I believe that history will show that to be the case." And like Cheney, he insisted the problem was the imagery created by a 24-hour news cycle, rather than the realities of round- the-clock killing. "Fortunately, history is not made up of daily headlines, blogs on Web sites or the latest sensational attack," Rumsfeld wrote. "History is a bigger picture, and it takes some time and perspective to measure accurately."
The military was represented on the Sunday TV talk shows this year by Casey, who predicted that the U.S. armed forces would have to maintain substantial numbers in Iraq for "a couple more years."
"It depends how you define major American presence," Casey said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I see a couple more years of this, with a gradually reducing coalition presence here in Iraq as, as I said, as the Iraqi security forces step forward." And in an interview on "Fox News Sunday," Casey said "that over 2006, we will continue to see a gradual reduction in coalition forces."
"Is there terrorist violence in Iraq? Yes, there is," Casey said on CNN's "Late Edition."
"Is there terrorist violence in Iraq designed to foment sectarian strife? Yes, there is. But we're a long way from civil war."
Comment