Attention, Left-Wing Bush Haters
By Mitch Berg
Background: I have been waiting roughly five years to say one thing.
Ahem.
At least our president won his war.
That is all.
26 Responses to “Attention, Left-Wing Bush Haters”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
December 7th, 2009 at 11:13 am
So who you claiming as “your president?” Bush I or McKinley?
Cause the only war GWB won was the one against Standard English.
December 7th, 2009 at 11:28 am
Mitch, are you referring to the war against Al Qaeda, or Al Qaeda In Iraq? Or the war against the Taliban?
December 7th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Cause the only war GWB won was the one against Standard English.
You’re right! That’s two wars for Bush, zero for Obama!
Score!
AB,
I’m referring to both Al Quaeda and the various eliminationist Shi’a and separatist Sunni militias in Iraq, yes. It’s not “over”, and many painful years of struggle remain, but unless Obama really blows it (holding breath) there’s no longer any serious contention for control of the country.
Which might not be as satisfying as a surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship or a parade down Broadway – the kind of “end of war” symbol liberals and others with short attention spans and limited knowledge of history will recognize (much less the helicopter on the embassy roof evacuating the last squad of Marines, which would have meant “victory” to an awful big chunk of the American left, at least until last January) – but it’s how the vast majority of history’s “victories” have ended; less with a bang than with a gradual realization that the issue is no longer in doubt.
December 7th, 2009 at 11:40 am
“Which might not be as satisfying as a surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship”
…or landing on the deck of an aircraft carrier.
December 7th, 2009 at 11:51 am
…or making a pretty speech using soldiers as a prop. No President EVER does that.
December 7th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
… or making the vast majority of people realize the audacity of hoping that an unqualified rube would be a better leader than a “dunce.”
December 7th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Perhaps we have different definitions of “won” and “over” and perhaps “is.” Or perhaps its just that this gradual realization starts on the right and works its way left. Assuming the latter its only a matter of time before I come to the same realization as you have, you’ll just have to bear with me in the mean time.
December 7th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
So, do the Vikings ‘win’ a game at half time? They don’t even need to finish the other half to win?
W. hasn’t won a darn thing, because it isn’t over until it’s over. “Mission accomplished” wasn’t.
Isn’t this just ‘Republican Math’ all over again……….
December 7th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
AC – clever comment about Bush’s war on our language! applause applause
December 7th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Wait, but Obama never said he wanted to win any of our wars. Geesh, in a way he has accomplished that.
December 7th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Dog, the mission that was certainly “accomplished” was defeating the Iraqi army and removing Saddam from power. Did the Bush admin underestimate the problem created by the power vacuum? Undoubtedly. Did he end the regime of a state sponsor of terrorism? Also beyond question.
I can only hope we heed the words of Charlie Wilson and don’t fuck up the end-game.
December 7th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Hey, even if Iraq is only 25% won, W still beats Dear Leader handily.
And, um, um, um, if you want to talk about a war on our language, can we show some shots of Obama sans teleprompter? “Misunderestimated” was bad; POTUS without TOTUS is excruciating.
(heck, POTUS with TOTUS is excruciating….I’ll take garbled English with an honest speaker over precise diction with a lying tongue any day)
December 7th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
We no longer want to defeat the Taliban, we want to ‘degrade’ them.
Obama is a lawyer, not a warrior. What did you expect?
December 7th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Thanks, Dog Bone!
December 7th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
“So, do the Vikings ‘win’ a game at half time?”
No, but if their 1st half plan (mission) was to be up by 2 TDs at the half… and they are ahead by 17 pts…
…. …. …. ….
““Mission accomplished” wasn’t.”
DogNagIt, you obviously don’t know the difference between a “mission” and a “war”.
The aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln did in fact complete its mission.
Yes, it certainly was a typical photo op, maybe not quite like a beer summit….
Just because we still have troops in Germany and Japan does not mean we haven’t yet won WWII.
When will the moon-bat lefties (peevee et al) start screaming about withdrawing troops from Germany… Japan…. North Korea…
December 7th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
AB,
Perhaps we have different definitions of “won” and “over” and perhaps “is.”
Actually, I’ve discussed this at some length. Not to speak for you, personally, AB, but indeed the Left does have a different idea of what victory is, based on their (utterly valid but, in this case, misapplied) historical experience of the term.
Or perhaps its just that this gradual realization starts on the right and works its way left.
That’s true of most things. The fall of the Soviet Union was an epic win on the right, a non-event on the left – until the left realized fifteen years after the fact that it was a win that they needed to find a way to co-opt and claim belated credit for (“Charley Wilson’s War“). Hey, y’all learned!
Assuming the latter its only a matter of time before I come to the same realization as you have, you’ll just have to bear with me in the mean time.
We always do. 🙂
December 7th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
DG,
clever comment about Bush’s war on our language! applause applause
Garbling words is a “war?”
Then Obama without TOTUS is a “holocaust”. Seriously. People in all 57 states are realizing what a Ken doll we have in office.
December 7th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
And in “conclusion” – what Kerm said. Bush was absolutely correct on the deck of the USS Lincoln; the mission for which they, and the rest of the troops, had been sent overseas – the removal of Hussein and the destruction of a military that had not only started two wars but had acted as an instrument of Hussein’s power in two near-genocides – was accomplished. Flawlessly. In record time. As in, one of the greatest, most successful, conventional campaigns in history.
Did the Administration misunderestimate the fallout afterwards – including the willingness of Iran to support an insurgency to draw off our power and mitigate our threat to them? Absolutely, and it took 3-4 years to fix it, which was pretty much Bush’s only real foreign-policy blunder. Granted, it was a doozy.
Saying “other than the insurgency, Bush was right” is a little like saying “other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?”, it’s true. But the left’s jumping on that particular incident would have been a little like Republicans in May of 1945 saying “Victory in Europe? FDR, you hypocrite, we still have troops fighting on Okinawa and Iwo Jima!” (or would have been, had Republicans in 1945 been the same breed of context-deprived America-lasters that too many Democrats “were” in 2004 – which they were not).
Anyway.
December 7th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
That’s racist!!!
December 7th, 2009 at 7:57 pm
Mitch wrote:
“At least our president won his war.”
We haven’t had a declared war to be won since WW II.
And………wasn’t AFGHANISTAN “W’s” war?????????? (arguably the more important one, with the Iraq conflict unnecessary, unjustified, and ill advised.)
I would disagree about Bush winning, since it seems from what I recall that Bush in part changed his failing approach to Iraq in response to pressure from the Dems………but hey, why let that stop him from claiming credit.
December 7th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
We haven’t had a declared war to be won since WW II.
All the more reason reason for you to read this bit here.
And………wasn’t AFGHANISTAN “W’s” war??????????
Most Democrats, including Obama, said it was “the real war” or “the war of necessity”.
(arguably the more important one, with the Iraq conflict unnecessary, unjustified, and ill advised.)
Untrue, but outside the scope of this post.
I would disagree about Bush winning, since it seems from what I recall that Bush in part changed his failing approach to Iraq in response to pressure from the Dems
The pressure from the Dems was to withdraw; depending on the Dem you asked, either “soon” or “immediately”. I don’t know if a single Dem other than Lieberman supported the surge.
………but hey, why let that stop him from claiming credit.
Becuase it would deny him none, that’s why.
December 7th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
You ralize, don’t you, DG, that Obama opposed the surge? He wanted immediate withdrawal,
I think you would not only have a hard time finding a dem who was in favor of the surge, you would have a hard time finding a dem today who would admit that it was successful.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001586.html
The fact that we still have troops in Iraq, and that they will be there until Aug of next year, means that on the only substantive war legislation he faced as Senator, he was dead wrong.
It would be nice if the news networks or the big city papers would mention this, since it is necessary background in evaluating the wisdom of his Afghanistan decision. I’m not holding my breath.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Terry takes DogNagIt to task once again.
December 11th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
I didn’t know Bush had WON Afghanistan, you know, the war he started in 2001?
Is that over?
And Iraq… hmmm, 167 people died in bombings on Sunday, so I guess that’s over.. good thing too.
Your post is what we in the reality based community refer to as a ‘howler.’ Funny stuff, though, truly.
December 11th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
I didn’t know Bush had WON Afghanistan, you know,
That’s not what I said.
the war he started in 2001?
Actually, it was started by 19 hijackers, on behalf of Al Quaeda.
And Iraq… hmmm, 167 people died in bombings on Sunday, so I guess that’s over.. good thing too.
Of course it’s not over. Doy. But the end is no longer in any serious dispute, and hasn’t been for some time.
Your post is what we in the reality based community refer to as a ‘howler.’ Funny stuff, though, truly.
Let me get this straight – you call yourself “reality-based?”
Let me try to digest that.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:35 am
“reality-based”
Now that is a ‘howler’!!!!
😆 😆 😆