Moving the Goalposts – Moon of Alabama

August 30, 2004

Moving the Goalposts

October 9, 2003
President Discusses Progress in Iraq

And beyond Iraq, the war on terror continues. There will be no quick victory in this war. We will persevere and victory is certain.

May 3, 2004
Remarks by the President and Mrs. Bush at “ask President Bush” Event

I’ve got a plan to win the war on terror.

July 30, 2004
Raw Data: Bush Speech in Springfield

We have a clear vision on how to win the war on terror and bring peace to the world.

August 28, 2004
Remarks by the President at Perrysburg, Ohio Rally

We’ve got more to do to wage and win this war on terror.
…
I have made a commitment to our troops and the commitment to the loved ones of our troops that they will have the resources they need to fight and win the war against the terrorists.

August 30, 2004
Exclusive interview with ‘Today’ host Matt Lauer

Lauer: “You said to me a second ago, one of the things you’ll lay out in your vision for the next four years is how to go about winning the war on terror. That phrase strikes me a little bit. Do you really think we can win this war on terror in the next four years?”

President Bush: “I have never said we can win it in four years.”

Lauer: “So I’m just saying can we win it? Do you see that?”

President Bush: “I don’t think you can win it. But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world

Posted by b on August 30, 2004 at 16:15 UTC | Permalink

Comments

“Americans are serving and sacrificing to keep this country safe and to bring freedom to others. After the attacks of September the 11th, 2001, this nation resolved to fight terrorists where they dwell. We resolved to arm the terrorist enemy.”

(The White House website quietly changed “arm” to “disarm”. Charleston, West Virginia, Jul. 4, 2004)
Hard to win when you’re arming your enemy…

Posted by: beq | Aug 30 2004 18:17 utc | 1

The war on terror never has been about “winning.” Its about control on two fronts. The first is holding on to power by the repubs and promoting their agenda. That agenda includes the backing of Israel and controling oil and destroying the middle class. The second is control of the sheeple in order to control their lives. So, you must scare the shit out the sheeple and promote the laying down of control to authority that comes with the right wing idealogy. In other words don’t speak ill of authority, ie the president, even if he’s sticking it to you. Just be quite and be a good little sheeple.
We are basically in a police state and Bushie wants more control.
Also, military bases and hardware are high on the agenda. Gotta spend that $400 billion, even though our roads and other infrastructure is falling apart.

Posted by: jdp | Aug 30 2004 20:22 utc | 2

@JDP:
Good thoughts. You took that one down-town.
But what if there are a bunch of free-range sheeple out there?
Do they put them on reservations or what?

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 30 2004 20:58 utc | 3

So it’s come to “It depends on your definition of win.” Hee hee hee.

Posted by: kat | Aug 30 2004 20:59 utc | 4

@KAT:
Now that was Funny!

Posted by: WJ Clinton | Aug 30 2004 21:22 utc | 5

OT
But another take on the Yukos “de-privatisation”
It’s longer, and much more expensive, than the Chinese route, going all the way to the Pacific near Vladivostok. Russia is very much tempted to strike a strategic, energy alliance with Japan. But the Kremlin decided, also in April 2003: the priority is the Chinese pipeline.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Aug 30 2004 21:42 utc | 6

…be a good little sheeple
Man I like that!

Posted by: koreyel | Aug 30 2004 21:45 utc | 7

Next up: Bush tells his followers that Freedom is actually an evil thing. Maybe this will now make it clear to the illiter..erm, electorate, that all of this is a monster distraction to direct thinkable thought while our pockets are being picked and our children are being forced into an even more hopeless indentured servitude to the greedy vampires. Cheney talks out the side of his mouth so you don’t see the remaining fang. Bush talks out his ass and people repeat it. Burroughs would be impressed.

Posted by: b real | Aug 30 2004 22:06 utc | 8

NEMO, WHERE ARE YOU? ARE YOU OK?

Posted by: teuton | Aug 30 2004 22:13 utc | 9

Teuton, he was insulted on this Blog for his fine efforts. Go Figure.
“FINDING NEMO”
Meanwhile, was Billmon shipwrecked or did he holiday with Kerry?
I hope the latter.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Aug 30 2004 22:23 utc | 10

@CP:
Interesting. Keep us advised on this. August 30 is upon us.
Looks to me like Mr. Putin and his Kremlin cronies are playing the Great Game, and everyone else is too.. Seems from the ATimes article that Putin holds some pretty good cards. He plays them right he doesn’t have any threat from China.
If I were he, I would be building pipelines everywhere, pumping like mad, for a while.
Very Interesting!

Posted by: JD Reckafella | Aug 30 2004 22:25 utc | 11

Especially interesting JD, in that I see Putin standing up to the reptiles, as perhaps the most powerful non-reptile on earth, and it appears that they can’t come up with an effective response of their preferred black-ops type. He still has his old buddies from the KGB working with him and they know better than anyone else the true balance of power here.
And they are making some smart moves. Oil ownership is certainly on the Russians’ side, and so far they are untouchable by the greedy reptile hand. Because they know all the tricks.
Lets hope that they can keep this position and strengthen it else the reptiles gain a free hand. That would be very bad news.

Posted by: rapt | Aug 30 2004 22:40 utc | 12

The Russians won WW2 for the West, and they play chess. Could you imagine playing chess against GWB?
He couldn’t win Snakes and Ladders. That’s the BIG PROBLEM!

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Aug 30 2004 23:02 utc | 13

@CP:
Then you had go throw politics into it, and screw everything up.
Patriotism ain’t Red or Blue, black or white, North or South, Rethug or Dem: it’s a state of mind.
@Teuton:
NEMO, that little FARK, whirling dervish of news,is just resting up. He’s Okay.
@CP:
Meanwhile, was Billmon shipwrecked or did he holiday with Kerry?
No Billmon’s Narcissism knows no bounds. He probably dined with himself, and posted about his great lunch, on his own thread, under 5 or more pseudonyms. Amazing character, that one. Truly a legend in his own mind.
Doubt Kerry would have much time for that piece of work.
Actually, I hope Billmon comes back to Hamburg.
I’ve got a 20 Megaton airburst waiting for him. End of the Cretaceous. No more reptiles. No more shit.
Most amused by all of his shit.

Posted by: T REX | Aug 30 2004 23:19 utc | 14

Trolls have found this site.
FO T Rex.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Aug 30 2004 23:31 utc | 15

@CP
Yeah, I saw them top of this thread too.

Posted by: T REX | Aug 30 2004 23:39 utc | 16

You can tell a troll. All they can do is call names and there is not any logical thought patterns.
You bad, me good. Kerry bad, Bush good. Black/white. Right/wrong. Intellectual bad/religious values good. Free market good/government bad. (Unless its to give your favorite corporation tax breaks) Kerry flip-flopper/Bushie liar. Woops, that was supposed to be {commander and chief steady}. Sorry trolls.
Boy, is the world really that black and white? No greens, blues, yellows or “gray areas?” No logic?
Well, when it comes to a right wing nut cake, its always their way or the highway.

Posted by: jdp | Aug 30 2004 23:51 utc | 17

My husband’s reaction: The Commander in Chief says the war on terror can’t be won. So what was I doing out there all that time?
Imagine, Bernhard, that you’re a grunt at a fire base in some godforsaken corner of the world, sleeping in 125 degree heat and going out on missions you can’t be sure you’ll be coming back from, and the guy sitting in the White House says, “We can’t win this one.”
Swell.

Posted by: Pat | Aug 31 2004 0:28 utc | 18

odd…….” creating the conditions where those who use terrorism as a tool are less acceptable”
oh!!!!! so thats what we’ve been doing in iraq……
but what about that magnet idea?????
help i can’t keep up

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 31 2004 2:39 utc | 19

>>>>>>>>>>>> catastrophic success <<<<<<<<<<<< now i'm hyperventilating

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 31 2004 2:55 utc | 20

“”””””””””””” i wanna be the peace president “”””””””””””
+++++++++++++++

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 31 2004 3:00 utc | 21

the ghost of Andy Warhol has taken up residence inside George Bushes brain

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 31 2004 3:07 utc | 22

@Anna Missed:
You sure the hell got my vote; in 4 more years!

Posted by: T REX | Aug 31 2004 3:11 utc | 23

Not winning is the only way to keep the world bound by their “perpetual war”. It’s not hard to see the rusty cogs whirling noisily and furiously. This also means more nations that give aid to faceless terrorists, which means more bounty to plunder. It’s a fine variation of the Cold War … a containment of the uncontainable … fear lurking around every corner, and nearly perfect in its machiavellian composition.

Posted by: Kate_Storm | Aug 31 2004 3:14 utc | 24

@T REX
and you can marry your jesus statue

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 31 2004 3:25 utc | 25

@ Anna Missed and Kate Storm:
You say Warhol;I say RIEFENSTAHL; we agree on
Lorenzo Il Magnifico.
No Problemas! Venceremos!

Posted by: T REX | Aug 31 2004 3:34 utc | 26

William B. Bader, From Vietnam to Iraq: Pretext and Precedent, at the IHT:
(W)hen taking on an administration as to the evidence presented in paving the road to war, the timing of any inquiry is critical to its success. Fulbright became skeptical of the 1964 presentation, but he could not find a way to penetrate what he came to believe was a web of deception. In 1966 he attempted unsuccessfully to repeal the Tonkin Resolution. In August 1967, as the Vietnam War fell ever deeper into a quagmire, he decided to try again. He chose me, a junior staffer with a naval intelligence background and an historian’s training, to undertake a confidential inquiry into the events. Six months later that research blossomed into an executive session of the Foreign Relations Committee that contributed to Johnson’s demise. It took four years to retrace accurately the road to war in Vietnam. A credible audit by the Foreign Relations Committee of the Iraq war resolution will require the same preconditions that produced the Tonkin postmortem – the passage of time and a continuing festering of the efforts to restore peace and security to the region…

Posted by: Pat | Aug 31 2004 3:47 utc | 27

Karen Kwiatowski puts in a good word for Larry Franklin at lewrockwell.com.

Posted by: Pat | Aug 31 2004 4:07 utc | 28

@Pat:
I respect Col. K’s judgement completely. She
has been speaking, without fear, about all this,
since spring 2003. What’s up Pat?
Why is Franklin the sacrificial “sheeple”?

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 31 2004 4:30 utc | 29

Why is Franklin the sacrificial “sheeple”?
Posted by: | August 31, 2004 12:30 AM
Beats me. I entertained the idea that it came from inside the White House – a slap for some entity or other, not specifically Mr. Franklin. (No love lost between GWB and Sharon, believe it or not.) Then again, someone on the other side of the political fence could have been calling in a favor. My political instincts and experience are severely limited.
In any case, I don’t expect that the investigation is in high gear or soon to produce.

Posted by: Pat | Aug 31 2004 5:04 utc | 30

I’m a little unclear on why the failed exchange of MEK terrorists for (major) al-Qaeda operatives (apparently engineered by Franklin) is not seen as a major blunder in the war against terrorism. The MEK is an acknowleged terrorist organization, and therefore, under the presidents own proclomation, should be brought to justice— not to mention that Iran has offered, on silver platter, 5 of the highest al-Qaeda members—bin-Ladens son, and al-Zarqawi included — and this coming from the country we accuse of harboring the terrorists— that they are willing to give us??

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 31 2004 7:50 utc | 31

As expected, over the past 24 hours now the Dems have been vociferously calling GWB on this one and, in the process, reaffirming their own committment to winning the phony war on terror. So was this a set-up, or simply a gaff? And why is Edwards so militant? Tell me, where is sanity?

Posted by: b real | Aug 31 2004 17:59 utc | 32

Back to Main