My modifications appear in italics and between brackets (e.g. []) and the strike-through symbol is used for deletions from the original editorial.OUR OPINION: Four-year sink into quicksand has no easy fix Tucson Citizen
Tuesday marks the fourth anniversary of our nation's invasion of Iraq, a war that most everyone now agrees was based on
either flawed or misrepresented intelligence [
lies, lies and more lies].
The price has been extremely high: more than 3,200 American military men and women killed, more than 24,000 U.S. military wounded,
tens [
hundreds] of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed and [
more than ]$500 billion spent [
and still rising].
Most Americans now oppose the war, polls show. But how the United States can extricate itself from this morass is the chief question - and the most complex and controversial one. [
Give us a break here, we want to appear rational, unlike that embarrassment in the White House. But like all good Republicans we will follow ower leeeder over the cliff if we can pull the country, and specially Democrats, over with us.]
Many [
Most] Democrats in Congress, along with
many [most] Americans, oppose President Bush's push for a "surge" of troops. [
Please note that we use the President's word-spin 'surge' instead of the term 'escalation,' which would be more accurate. Good Republicans R Us.]
Nonetheless, Bush last week announced that 4,700 support troops will join the 21,500 extra soldiers he ordered to Iraq in January. [
Nonetheless, we needed a certain number of words in this article so 'nonetheless' seemed like good filler just here, at this point, appropriate like, you know.]
Even more forces probably will be needed to provide aviation support to the troop surge. An estimated 130,000 troops already are there. [
Estimates, shestimates, you probably cannot believe any numbers put out by ower leeeder or his friends or even those who once were his friends.]
While Democrats continue to decry the surge, the infusion of troops is clearly a done deal. [
Live with it Dems and stop paying attention to what the voters say. If you didn't pay any attention we Republicans would be just fine. What's wrong with you people anyway?]
Both sides need to stop blathering. The focus for Congress and Bush now must be to carefully craft a unified withdrawal strategy, making the Iraqi government increasingly responsible for the security of its own country. [
Right, we need to get out but we are good Republicans and will not suggest that Bush has no intention of getting out and we will definitely not support the Congress utilizing its considerable power of the purse to put real pressure on the administration. No, best to be good followers and just accuse both sides of 'blathering.' Then we can hint that both sides stop acting like children and sit down in their sandbox and be friends.]
As the torch is passed back to Iraqi leaders, our military forces must be protected - with sufficient funding to meet all their needs - and returned home. [
Iraq, it's all your fault now. Just forget that we destroyed your country to capture and kill one man who was no threat to us.]
Once home, those who have been wounded in any way must be afforded the best medical and psychological care possible. [
We really believe this but we will not follow up and make sure this happens because it may embarrass some of our friends.]
We seriously doubt that the United States ever will be able to honestly declare "mission accomplished" in this troubled region. [
If disorder, disarray and the transfer of funds from the tax payers to Bush cronies was the 'mission' then it's been accomplished with bells on.]
When this war was launched, President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld clearly had no understanding of the complicated and ancient divisions that torment Iraq. [
Even we wish these individuals were more intelligent and rational. Supporting a stupid man for president didn't turn out like we thought it would.]
Although the U.S. did succeed in ousting Saddam Hussein, chaos continues to shake Iraq at every turn. [
All the king's horses, and all the king's men ... ]
Now the U.S. must work with top military strategists to ensure that a smooth withdrawal endangers neither our troops nor Iraqi civilians, leaders and infrastructure. [
Yes, we know this is a meaningless paragraph. But words cover for our cluelessness.]
We must exit on our own terms, relinquishing control on our own timetable, rather than letting insurgents dictate our decisions. [
There is so much wrong with this statement that I don't know where to begin. First, 'we' in the form of Bush, have been doing exactly what anti-US types like bin Laden wish. 'We' in the form of Bush has probably helped them succeed beyond their wildest dreams. Then there's the phrase 'relinquishing control.' Control? We have control? And then there's something about a timetable. We don't even have plans, mileposts and timetables are for weenies according to this administration. And there's the term 'insurgents.' A nice all encompassing, but mostly meaningless, term into which we can lump anyone of a number of factions that do no like 'us.']
But that cannot be done until Congress and the president stop fighting and start strategizing. [
And since we know the president has no intention of stopping the war does the phrase a cold day in Hell ring a bell?]
Is this a bad sign or a good idea?
Has a nice ring to it, no?
Katie Couric, another media hack.