So, the President suddenly isn't allowed to "politicize" military victories?

[Too Tall]

he didnt ask to have it taken down either. Just turned a "blind eye" but nice try.

Talk about insulting! Asking them to take it down would have been the ultimate insult. I can't believe you would even suggest such a thing. That is something that TDM would suggest, not someone like you.

Immie

The Bush admin admitted to giving it to the Navy to hang up. In fact, three different people within the Bush admin have taken responsibility for the banner. But dont let facts get in the way of what you were told.

Bartlett: "Mission Accomplished" Banner Was My Fault - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

At his news conference yesterday, President Bush said the decision to put a "Mission Accomplished" banner on the aircraft carrier where he gave a speech following the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a "mistake."

It was not his mistake, however, according to CBS News political analyst Dan Bartlett, a former senior advisor to Mr. Bush. Asked this morning by Harry Smith, co-anchor of CBS' The Early Show, who was responsible for the banner – Smith pointed out that both the Navy and former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan have taken the blame in the past – Bartlett said that it was actually his call.

But keep believing what you were told. and save your "OMG The President cant ask the Military to do stuff for a photo op" phoney outrage. They asked them to hang it directly behind his microphone or maybe it happened by "accident"

I will bet that you think Obama's visit to Afghanistan on the one year anniversary of killing OBL was a coincidence.

 

[Too Tall]

Perhaps you have the quote from Bush declaring "victory" in Iraq. I seriously did miss him saying that. I do remember him correctly saying that it was the end of major combat operations in Iraq.

And, congratulating the crew of the USS Abraham Lincoln after a very successful extended cruise was appreciated by most of us that have served in harms way.

That's a bunch of semantics bullshit if I ever heard it. He said, specifically:

"Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed."

That would be, specifically, declaring victory.

Oh, you can try to re-write history all you want. But there's lots and lots of copies of that particular video.

And then he said:

And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.

In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty, and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment -- yet, it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage, your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other, made this day possible. Because of you, our nation is more secure. Because of you, the tyrant has fallen, and Iraq is free.

Bush's speech was about giving the credit to the troops, not about him. Can you find where Obama has done the same?

As a former AF pilot, I would give my left nut to be in the right seat of a Navy jet and land on a US Carrier. I did jump seat in Marine Corps CH53D's and did several dozen takeoff's and landings on the USS Okinawa, but that is not the same.

It takes big brass ones to do what the Naval aviators do. And, Bush couldn't pass up the opportunity.

 

[rightwinger]

The problem is that Bush was so humble

 

[Peach]

The problem is that Bush was so humble

Yes, too modest: "I'M TAKING HIM OUT!"

 

[Staidhup]

What military victory are you talking about? withdraw from Iraq, planned withdraw from Afghanistan? The killing of a terrorist, mass murderer, and religious fanatic is not a military victory. When one considers he objected to how the information was acquired it seems a little ironic that when his presidency has been nothing more than a failure he flaunts the killing of such a person as a major military victory? The man is delusional at best, sort of like Solyndra.

 

[Vast LWC]

And then he said:

And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.

In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty, and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment -- yet, it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage, your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other, made this day possible. Because of you, our nation is more secure. Because of you, the tyrant has fallen, and Iraq is free.

Bush's speech was about giving the credit to the troops, not about him. Can you find where Obama has done the same?

As a former AF pilot, I would give my left nut to be in the right seat of a Navy jet and land on a US Carrier. I did jump seat in Marine Corps CH53D's and did several dozen takeoff's and landings on the USS Okinawa, but that is not the same.

It takes big brass ones to do what the Naval aviators do. And, Bush couldn't pass up the opportunity.

Can I find where Obama did the same?

Yes, I can, in fact:

Tonight, we give thanks to the countless intelligence and counterterrorism professionals who've worked tirelessly to achieve this outcome. The American people do not see their work, nor know their names. But tonight, they feel the satisfaction of their work and the result of their pursuit of justice.
We give thanks for the men who carried out this operation, for they exemplify the professionalism, patriotism, and unparalleled courage of those who serve our country. And they are part of a generation that has borne the heaviest share of the burden since that September day.

-President Obama 5-1-2011

Obama's speech wasn't about him either. He used the word "we" throughout the speech, rather than "I".

But still, the right-wing claimed that Obama was "taking credit that belonged to the Seal Team", "boasting", and "not thanking anyone else".

Bush claimed victory by flying onto an aircraft carrier covered with banners. When in reality there was no victory, only more war.

Obama claimed victory because the enemy he referred to was dead. And he did it with little fanfare, in an address from the White House.

See the difference?

And Bush and company used the war on terror countless times to promote themselves politically. Hell Rudy Giuliani said 9/11 so many times that it became a joke.

Now, Obama runs a perfectly accurate ad, pointing out his success and pointing out that the man who has been berating his national security credentials would not have done the same.

A point which Mitt Romney himself made clear in 2007, when he said Mr Obama's stance on making raids into Pakistan was "ill-timed" and "ill-conceived", and that he would not do the same without the express consent of Pakistan.

How exactly is that "Spiking the football"? Especially compared to the endless use of the War on Terror as a political football for the 7-8 years following 9/11?

 

[Vast LWC]

What military victory are you talking about? withdraw from Iraq, planned withdraw from Afghanistan? The killing of a terrorist, mass murderer, and religious fanatic is not a military victory. When one considers he objected to how the information was acquired it seems a little ironic that when his presidency has been nothing more than a failure he flaunts the killing of such a person as a major military victory? The man is delusional at best, sort of like Solyndra.

I would agree that it's not a major military victory.

Or that it SHOULDN'T have been a major military victory...

If Republicans hadn't turned the world-wide mission to capture or kill terrorists into:

THE WAR ON TERROR

The right defined it as a "military success" by their own terminology.

 

[del]

What military victory are you talking about? withdraw from Iraq, planned withdraw from Afghanistan? The killing of a terrorist, mass murderer, and religious fanatic is not a military victory. When one considers he objected to how the information was acquired it seems a little ironic that when his presidency has been nothing more than a failure he flaunts the killing of such a person as a major military victory? The man is delusional at best, sort of like Solyndra.

I would agree that it's not a major military victory.

Or that it SHOULDN'T have been a major military victory...

If Republicans hadn't turned the world-wide mission to capture or kill terrorists into:

THE WAR ON TERROR

The right defined it as a "military success" by their own terminology.

yeah, it's always the republicans' fault.

go figure

 

[Immanuel]

he didnt ask to have it taken down either. Just turned a "blind eye" but nice try.

Talk about insulting! Asking them to take it down would have been the ultimate insult. I can't believe you would even suggest such a thing. That is something that TDM would suggest, not someone like you.

Immie

The Bush admin admitted to giving it to the Navy to hang up. In fact, three different people within the Bush admin have taken responsibility for the banner. But dont let facts get in the way of what you were told.

Bartlett: "Mission Accomplished" Banner Was My Fault - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

At his news conference yesterday, President Bush said the decision to put a "Mission Accomplished" banner on the aircraft carrier where he gave a speech following the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a "mistake."

It was not his mistake, however, according to CBS News political analyst Dan Bartlett, a former senior advisor to Mr. Bush. Asked this morning by Harry Smith, co-anchor of CBS' The Early Show, who was responsible for the banner – Smith pointed out that both the Navy and former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan have taken the blame in the past – Bartlett said that it was actually his call.

But keep believing what you were told. and save your "OMG The President cant ask the Military to do stuff for a photo op" phoney outrage. They asked them to hang it directly behind his microphone or maybe it happened by "accident"

Thank you for the information.

Immie

 

[rightwinger]

Talk about insulting! Asking them to take it down would have been the ultimate insult. I can't believe you would even suggest such a thing. That is something that TDM would suggest, not someone like you.

Immie

The Bush admin admitted to giving it to the Navy to hang up. In fact, three different people within the Bush admin have taken responsibility for the banner. But dont let facts get in the way of what you were told.

Bartlett: "Mission Accomplished" Banner Was My Fault - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

At his news conference yesterday, President Bush said the decision to put a "Mission Accomplished" banner on the aircraft carrier where he gave a speech following the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a "mistake."

It was not his mistake, however, according to CBS News political analyst Dan Bartlett, a former senior advisor to Mr. Bush. Asked this morning by Harry Smith, co-anchor of CBS' The Early Show, who was responsible for the banner – Smith pointed out that both the Navy and former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan have taken the blame in the past – Bartlett said that it was actually his call.

But keep believing what you were told. and save your "OMG The President cant ask the Military to do stuff for a photo op" phoney outrage. They asked them to hang it directly behind his microphone or maybe it happened by "accident"

Thank you for the information.

Immie

It is interesting that nobody in the Bush administration tried to clarify the Mission Accomplished banner until a year later when it was obvious the mission wasn't accomplished

 

[rightwinger]

. When he received an advance copy of the speech, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld took care to remove any use of the phrase "Mission Accomplished" in the speech itself. Later, when journalist Bob Woodward asked him about his changes to the speech, Rumsfeld responded: "I was in Baghdad, and I was given a draft of that thing to look at. And I just died, and I said my God, it's too conclusive. And I fixed it and sent it back… they fixed the speech, but not the sign."[11]
Bush did offer a "Mission Accomplished" message to the troops in Afghanistan at Camp As Sayliyah on June 5, 2003 – about a month after the aircraft carrier speech: "America sent you on a mission to remove a grave threat and to liberate an oppressed people, and that mission has been accomplished."[12]
For critics of the war, the photo-op became a symbol of the Bush administration's unrealistic goals and perceptions of the conflict. Anti-war activists questioned the integrity and realism of Bush's "major combat" statement. The banner came to symbolize the irony of Bush giving a victory speech only a few weeks after the beginning of a relatively long war. Many in the administration came to regret the slogan. Karl Rove later stated, "I wish the banner was not up there."[13]
In a less publicized incident, Rumsfeld also declared an end to major combat operations in Afghanistan on May 1, a few hours before Bush's announcement.[14]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Mission_Accomplished_speech#cite_note-13

 

[Too Tall]

What military victory are you talking about? withdraw from Iraq, planned withdraw from Afghanistan? The killing of a terrorist, mass murderer, and religious fanatic is not a military victory. When one considers he objected to how the information was acquired it seems a little ironic that when his presidency has been nothing more than a failure he flaunts the killing of such a person as a major military victory? The man is delusional at best, sort of like Solyndra.

I would agree that it's not a major military victory.

Or that it SHOULDN'T have been a major military victory...

If Republicans hadn't turned the world-wide mission to capture or kill terrorists into:

THE WAR ON TERROR

The right defined it as a "military success" by their own terminology.

What part of the 'end of major combat operations' don't you understand?

 

[Too Tall]

What military victory are you talking about? withdraw from Iraq, planned withdraw from Afghanistan? The killing of a terrorist, mass murderer, and religious fanatic is not a military victory. When one considers he objected to how the information was acquired it seems a little ironic that when his presidency has been nothing more than a failure he flaunts the killing of such a person as a major military victory? The man is delusional at best, sort of like Solyndra.

I would agree that it's not a major military victory.

Or that it SHOULDN'T have been a major military victory...

If Republicans hadn't turned the world-wide mission to capture or kill terrorists into:

THE WAR ON TERROR

The right defined it as a "military success" by their own terminology.

At least we have won the WAR ON POVERTY that was started by LBJ, don't you agree?

 

[Katzndogz]

It was the end of major combat operations UNTIL obama was elected, then the efforts to keep Iraq on track were derailed. Sort of like how obama took an unavoidable victory in Afghanistan and intends to lose and turn it over to the taliban.

Now, the democrats take the failures that they created and honestly claim that Bush's lauditory compliments to the successful mission of the Abraham Lincoln crew were a premature celebration.

 

[Katzndogz]

What military victory are you talking about? withdraw from Iraq, planned withdraw from Afghanistan? The killing of a terrorist, mass murderer, and religious fanatic is not a military victory. When one considers he objected to how the information was acquired it seems a little ironic that when his presidency has been nothing more than a failure he flaunts the killing of such a person as a major military victory? The man is delusional at best, sort of like Solyndra.

I would agree that it's not a major military victory.

Or that it SHOULDN'T have been a major military victory...

If Republicans hadn't turned the world-wide mission to capture or kill terrorists into:

THE WAR ON TERROR

The right defined it as a "military success" by their own terminology.

At least we have won the WAR ON POVERTY that was started by LBJ, don't you agree?

What I did not understand about the war on poverty was that the democrats intended poverty to win. Thankfully I have since been disabused of that notion.

 

[rightwinger]

What military victory are you talking about? withdraw from Iraq, planned withdraw from Afghanistan? The killing of a terrorist, mass murderer, and religious fanatic is not a military victory. When one considers he objected to how the information was acquired it seems a little ironic that when his presidency has been nothing more than a failure he flaunts the killing of such a person as a major military victory? The man is delusional at best, sort of like Solyndra.

I would agree that it's not a major military victory.

Or that it SHOULDN'T have been a major military victory...

If Republicans hadn't turned the world-wide mission to capture or kill terrorists into:

THE WAR ON TERROR

The right defined it as a "military success" by their own terminology.

At least we have won the WAR ON POVERTY that was started by LBJ, don't you agree?

LBJs war on poverty was a success. Millions of people were helped through jobs programs, training and government assistance. Ask anyone who is a generation out of poverty and see if they took advantage of those programs

Poverty in the early 60s meant no running water, no central heating, no electricity.......kids literally barefoot

We have progressed greatly since the Great Society

 

[Dr.Drock]

I would agree that it's not a major military victory.

Or that it SHOULDN'T have been a major military victory...

If Republicans hadn't turned the world-wide mission to capture or kill terrorists into:

THE WAR ON TERROR

The right defined it as a "military success" by their own terminology.

At least we have won the WAR ON POVERTY that was started by LBJ, don't you agree?

LBJs war on poverty was a success. Millions of people were helped through jobs programs, training and government assistance. Ask anyone who is a generation out of poverty and see if they took advantage of those programs

Poverty in the early 60s meant no running water, no central heating, no electricity.......kids literally barefoot

We have progressed greatly since the Great Society

You mean back in the day when people could afford an education, a house, a car, gas for the car and different insurances?

 

[rightwinger]

At least we have won the WAR ON POVERTY that was started by LBJ, don't you agree?

LBJs war on poverty was a success. Millions of people were helped through jobs programs, training and government assistance. Ask anyone who is a generation out of poverty and see if they took advantage of those programs

Poverty in the early 60s meant no running water, no central heating, no electricity.......kids literally barefoot

We have progressed greatly since the Great Society

You mean back in the day when people could afford an education, a house, a car, gas for the car and different insurances?

No question...

Since LBJ the poor have done better, the middle class has done worse

 

[Jarhead]

LBJs war on poverty was a success. Millions of people were helped through jobs programs, training and government assistance. Ask anyone who is a generation out of poverty and see if they took advantage of those programs

Poverty in the early 60s meant no running water, no central heating, no electricity.......kids literally barefoot

We have progressed greatly since the Great Society

You mean back in the day when people could afford an education, a house, a car, gas for the car and different insurances?

No question...

Since LBJ the poor have done better, the middle class has done worse

I credit the civil rights movement more than anything else for those without shoes being better off a generation later.

 

[Too Tall]

I would agree that it's not a major military victory.

Or that it SHOULDN'T have been a major military victory...

If Republicans hadn't turned the world-wide mission to capture or kill terrorists into:

THE WAR ON TERROR

The right defined it as a "military success" by their own terminology.

At least we have won the WAR ON POVERTY that was started by LBJ, don't you agree?

LBJs war on poverty was a success. Millions of people were helped through jobs programs, training and government assistance. Ask anyone who is a generation out of poverty and see if they took advantage of those programs

Poverty in the early 60s meant no running water, no central heating, no electricity.......kids literally barefoot

We have progressed greatly since the Great Society

I would believe the government statistics on some things, and this is one of those things.

Princeton, New Jersey (CNN) -- America's poverty rate is now the worst since 1993, according to a shocking report last week from the U.S. Census Bureau.

Over 46 million people are living in poverty, 2.6 million more than in 2009 and the poverty rate has reached 15.1 percent.

The outlook is grim. The recession has compounded decades of growing economic inequality, structural poverty, and urban decay. With the projections that unemployment will remain high for several years, these numbers are not likely to improve.

Making matters worse, as Ron Haskings at the Brookings Institution noted, "Safety net programs run by the federal and state governments are helping millions of families avoid poverty, but thee programs could be subject to cuts at the federal and state level because of continuing deficit and debt problems.

"

War on poverty in 2011? - CNN.com