In Their Own Words "Mission Accomplished": 4 Years Later...

[Jcrowley]

Dick Cheney, 08/2006:
"Progress has been steady."
Fact:"Attacks against the coalition and its Iraqi partners reached an all time high during July 2006." — US Gov. Accounting Office, 09/2006.

George Bush, 05/2006.
"We have now reached a turning point in the struggle between freedom and terror."
Fact:"Iraqi casualties increase 42% in three months after this "turning point." —Dept. of Defense. 08/2006.

Dick Cheney, 03/2006.
"Q: Do you still believe the insurgency is in its final throes? Cheney: Yes."
Fact:"Insurgency remains strong and resilient" —GAO, 9/2006. "... remains potent and viable." —DOD, 8/2006.

Dick Cheney, 12/2005.
"The elections were the turning point. … 2005 was the turning point."
Fact:"The December 2005 elections appeared to heighten sectarian tensions,' according to the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).

George Bush, 12/2005.
"2005 will be recorded as a turning point in the history of Iraq ... and the history of freedom."
Fact:Sectarian killings turned up sharply after the 2005 election. —DOD Sources

Dick Cheney, 5/2005.
"They're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency."
Fact: Car bombing had reached a new high, US fatalities had doubled since March and Gen. Myers had warned that insurgencies last up to nine years.

Donald Rumsfeld, 2/2005.
"On January 30th in Iraq, the world witnessed ... a major turning point."
Fact: Daily Iraqi casualties increased from 50 before the election to 58 after the election, and 117 a year later. —Defense Dept. Sources

George Bush, 11/2003.
"We've reached another great turning point."
Fact:The insurgents were rapidly gaining strength, with more US fatalities this month than in any previous month.

Donald Rumsfeld, 7/2003.
"I don't do quagmires."
Fact:Troop levels fell to 115,000 in Feb. 2004, and are up to 147,000 in Sept. 2006.

George Bush, 5/2005.
"Good news to the men and women who fought ... their mission is complete."

Paul Wolfowitz, 3/2003.
Iraq: "can really finance its own reconstruction."
Fact:It has cost the US over $400 billion.

Dick Cheney, 3/2003.
"I think it'll go relatively quickly, …Weeks rather than months."
Fact:4 years later...

Jun. 29, 2005
Dick Cheney
"I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency."

Jun. 29, 2005
George W. Bush
THE PRESIDENT: I am absolutely confident that we made the right decision. And not only that, I'm absolutely confident that the actions we took in Iraq are influencing reformers and freedom lovers in the greater Middle East. And I believe that you're going to see the rise of democracy in many countries in the broader Middle East, which will lay the foundation for peace.

Jul. 02, 2003
George W. Bush
There are some who feel like -- that the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is, bring 'em on.
4 years later....

May 1, 2003
George W. Bush
"Thank you all very much. Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended." Under the banner "Mission Accomplished." Presidential Documents



Mar. 27, 2003
Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary
There’s a lot of money to pay for this that doesn’t have to be U.S. taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people…and on a rough recollection, the oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years…We’re dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.”
Fact: $400 billion later...

Mar. 25, 2003
Richard Perle, Chairman of the Defense Policy Board
I can't tell you exactly how many days or how many weeks. But by
historical standards, this will be a short war.
Fact: 4 years later...

Mar. 16, 2003
Dick Cheney
"My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. . . . I think it will go relatively quickly, . . . weeks rather than months." --on NBC's Meet the Press
Fact: 4 years later...

Rumsfeld: I Doubt Six Months
Feb. 7, 2003
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
"It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months." —to U.S. troops in Aviano, Italy
Fact: 4 years later...

Rumsfeld: Under $50 billion
Jan. 10, 2003
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
“Well, the Office of Management and Budget, has come up come up with a number that's something under $50 billion for the cost. How much of that would be the U.S. burden, and how much would be other countries, is an open question.”
Fact: $400 billion later...

Nov. 15, 2002
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
"The idea that it's going to be a long, long, long battle of some kind I think is belied by the fact of what happened in 1990," he said on an Infinity Radio call-in program. "Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that."
Fact: 4 years later...

Feb. 13, 2002
Ken Adelman
"I believe demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk.” - Washington Post
Fact 4 years later...

Oct. 29, 2001
Michael Leeden, American Enterprise Institute, research fellow
"If we just let our own vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to be clever and piece together clever diplomatic solutions to this thing, but just wage a total war against these tyrants, I think we will do very well and our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

The children are not singing Mr. Ledeen they are crying. They are dying.

[Jcrowley]

1. STATE OF THE UNION January 28th 2003

George Bush


STATE OF THE UNION January 28th 2003 :

With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East and create deadly havoc in that region. And this Congress and the America people must recognize another threat. Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.

Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes. (Applause.)

(Comment: Bush makes Saudi hijackers into possible Iraqi agents of Saddam—no Saddam Al Qaeda connection then, none now, no actual weapons of mass destruction then or now, no chemical or biological weapons then or now, and some of this information was known to be completely wrong even as he read it to the entire nation as part of this State of the Union address)

http://www.epinions.com/content_4056391812

[lectrobyte]

2. Thanks for assembling this... Just stunning to read the years of spin.

[Jcrowley]

3. Remember Scotty?

When White House spokesman Scott McClellan opened up his daily press briefing yesterday, he said, "This will be the only question of the briefing." He was joking. But it turned out that the first question--a response to the news the Iraq Survey Group had ended its hunt for weapons of mass destruction after finding absolutely nothing--was practically the only question of the day. Here's that first query:

The fact that the Iraq Survey Group has now folded up its field operations, can you explain to us if there is any sense of embarrassment or lack of comfort about the fact that after two years of looking, these people found nothing that the President and others assured us they would find?

McClellan did the usual. He did not answer the query.

McClellan: I think the President already talked about this last October in response to the comprehensive report that was released by Charles Duelfer at that point. Charles Duelfer came to the White House in December; the President took that opportunity to thank him for all the work that he had done. The two discussed how Saddam Hussein's regime retained the intent and capability to produce weapons of mass destruction, and they also discussed how he was systematically gaming the system to undermine the sanctions that were in place, so that once those sanctions were eliminated -- which was something he was trying to do through the U.N. oil-for-food program -- then he could begin his weapons programs once again. And I think the President talked about the other issues back in October. Nothing has changed from that time period.

And nothing has changed in terms of the White House's response to the absence of WMDs. Bush refuses to address the consequences of having misled the nation and the world.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=2123

[Jcrowley]

4. And this needs it's own thread

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
October 7, 2002

President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat
Remarks by the President on Iraq
Cincinnati Museum Center - Cincinnati Union Terminal
Cincinnati, Ohio

8:02 P.M. EDT

Many Americans have raised legitimate questions: about the nature of the threat; about the urgency of action -- why be concerned now; about the link between Iraq developing weapons of terror, and the wider war on terror. These are all issues we've discussed broadly and fully within my administration. And tonight, I want to share those discussions with you.

First, some ask why Iraq is different from other countries or regimes that also have terrible weapons. While there are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone -- because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq's weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant who has already used chemical weapons to kill thousands of people. This same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a small neighbor, has struck other nations without warning, and holds an unrelenting hostility toward the United States.

By its past and present actions, by its technological capabilities, by the merciless nature of its regime, Iraq is unique. As a former chief weapons inspector of the U.N. has said, "The fundamental problem with Iraq remains the nature of the regime, itself. Saddam Hussein is a homicidal dictator who is addicted to weapons of mass destruction."

Some ask how urgent this danger is to America and the world. The danger is already significant, and it only grows worse with time. If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today -- and we do -- does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html

Oh the irony of the header.