All hail the conquering hero: Bush in Baghdad

Great Debates
41

Umm… if he’d greeted the troops totally sans media coverage, how in the hell would you have ever known he’d done it? :smiley:

Pointing out the obvious bias of the “screechers” hardly constitiutes an ad hominem attack, btw. Plenty of them directed at the Commander-in-Chief sprinkled throughout the thread, however.

Look, I’m not the all-time W. cheerleader by any stretch. I just recognize his quick trip over to the Gulf for what it really was-- a genuine attempt to connect with the troops far from home on a quintessentially American holiday.

It’s just as easy to recognize the criticism levelled at him for having done so for what it really is-- unwarranted, hate-filled partisan sniping.

Some of you should just have the intellectual honesty to admit that you’d be thrown into an indignant fit no matter WHAT this President had done today. Going to Iraq was a grandstanding photo-op; an electioneering stunt. If he’d stayed at home, he’d be the great big warrior who’s happy to sit safely at his ranch in Texas while the real heroes sit on a bulls-eye Bush needlessly put them on.

I guarantee you it made a statement to the troops that he flew half-way across the world to be with them (albeit in a limited and symbolic way) when he didn’t “have to.” It’s just good leadership-- it shows the troops that if they have to be overseas on the holiday, he’s not too good to be there too. The man was an officer once upon a time, folks. He might not know how the economy works, but he knows how military leadership works.

And again… the only people on earth he was trying to “impress” were wearing desert cammies in a mess tent in Iraq today. Nothing could be more irrelevant than the cynical sneering directed at him from the elite minds featured here on the SDMB-- hate to burst your bubble, but it wasn’t done for you.

As others have noted: what’s the debate here?

42

Only to you, Dio, only to you.

Fortunately, Bush didn’t do it for you, he did it for the troops. An no amount of your asinine vitrol will change that.

43

He did it for himselfr. If he cared about the troops he wouldn’t have sent them over there to die for his approval ratings.

44

I gotta agree with that. It’s after 5pm, and Bush’s trip still hasn’t made it onto the front page at Yahoo. Everyone’s too full of turkey to care. This was a nice, if slightly quirky, gesture on Bush’s part.

45

Military leadership includes calling your daddy to get you out of the war the deserting your cushy, richboy division of the National Guard so you can get drunk and do blow? Military leadership includes lying your way into an illegal war and killing your own troops (not to mention thousands of non-Americans) for nothing?

If that’s good leadership I’d hate to see bad leadership.

46

Someone’s got a full diaper.

47

p r or not, he did make our troops happy, and thats a good thing.

48

Anyone who thinks he did this just for the troops has too much faith in polticians in general.

49

Exactly.

50

What makes you think he made them happy?

Personally, I think anyone over there who would be gratified by such a hypocritical and self-serving gesture is a gullible tool.

51

Diogenes:

Although I don’t hate the guy like you do, Diogenes, Bush/Rove’s propensity for “use the troops as political backdrop for a political production for the sake of dominating a slow news day a la the aircraft carrier stunt” leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

When I see this shit, I have this image of Karl Rove unzipping his fly and inviting the American masses - narcotized by tryptophan, family get-togethers, and football - to suck his media manipulating dick.

American politics in all its glory. :rolleyes:

Non-American Dopers, as an American, I sincerely regret some of the political images we project abroad. Even though I often disagree with your assessments of the U.S., I understand how these images can grate on you.

52

I prefer the term “statesman” over “politician.”
Believe or not some people are in it for the benefit of others and not just themselves.

A couple of times posters have mentioned the “cynical” gesture.
A gesture is not cynical, only someone’s reaction to it.

Oh, and President Bush is not killing his own troops, Iraqis are.

53

doesn’t matter if he only did it for publicity. He Still made them happy.

54

Well if I was in Iraq right now and the President stopped by for dinner for whatever reason, I’d be happy.

This, my dear Cynic, is the sort of attitude that loses elections.

55

How nice you appreciate the troops like this.:rolleyes:
Its not like they would fight to protect you, even if you think/know they are there for no good reason, they are still there.
Calling troops tools?

56

Sure, but that’s only because the troops know that those who make their displeasure shownwill get busted by Rumsfeld and the boys.
Happiness is mandatory.
Failure to be happy is treason.
Treason is punished by summary execution.
Are you happy?
–Paranoia: The Role-Playing Game

57

Like I said, this is the kind of sentiment that dooms political campaigns.

58

I think GWB did the right thing. Hillary Clinton is visiting the troops, I believe. Outrage? pin drop Duh. Maybe people are outraged this cut into her media attention?

Why the right thing? One, it’s dangerous. I give him credit for talking the Secret Service into it. How, I have no idea. Two, it shows the troops and the resistance that he’s committed. That may convince some people that, ahem, resistance is futile. Three, he’s the CiC – going is part of the job.

Will this be a wonderful political move? That remains to be seen. As already noted, repeatedly, the “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED” deal will be used against him. Let’s say that there were multiple assaults on his position while he was in Iraq, that’s some bad PR. Ask Wolfowitz.

“Mr. Bush has just taken cover under the podium… Oh, the humanity!”

59

I have just returned from the pub and wish to address a few salient issues generated by my OP:

Er… my comment was sarcasm. Was yours?

I also believe that this was a cynical move. But Hilary ain’t prez, and she didn’t start the war in Iraq either, so it’s a trifle irrelevant.

Lads, you’re going to have to come up with something better than that every time your administration gets criticized.

Yeah. Of course. See below:

I am sure you’re all right. Don’t doubt that the brave people of the US armed forces in Iraq were grateful that he spent some time with them. Now, if you want a real circle jerk, may I introduce you to this:

Thing is, the world is 98% non-American, and even more than that is non-US armed forces. The current US administration is the least popular in the world since Vietnam, and the Iraq war one of the most unpopular actions of US foreign policy ever.

You do realise that the monumental news media of the world, of which there are none bigger nor more influential than yours, tell all of us what he’s up to, all the time. And a lot of the world resents US action in Iraq. To have the most powerful man on earth visit a conquered country, on a very major American holiday, looks to me like nothing more than triumphalism.

I’m sure it plays different in the midwest, but that’s not the point, is it?

Am I meant to be jealous? I do in fact have a president in my country of residence. They don’t start illegal wars though - in fact the last one ended up as head of the UNHCR but resigned after US pressure to lay off the humanitarianism - so your comment is totally irrelevant. In other words: oh do be quiet.

60

1.) I have been in the military.
2.) The war in Iraq has nothing to do with protecting the troops or anyone else.
3.) I am not calling the “troops” tools, I am calling people who are easily manipulated bu shallow political gestures “tools.”
4.) Bush is wartime deserter. He has no right to look a real soldier in the eye.