# What?? The mission accomplished sign on the carrier didn't mean Iraq?? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 27, 2003, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084 "2003-09-27T00:49:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/41 "2003-09-27T17:49:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jack Batty \* > \*\*If I were Bush’s guy, I would have just said … “Hey, it was just a show. Calm down people.” \*\* IMHO they absolutely _cannot_ do this - to admit to a superficiality would be a very big mistake. They must continue to appear to have real substance, to admit showmanship would again bring up the whole now- you- see- it- now- you- don’t rationales for the war. Re: the OP. this one doesn’t do much for me. Even when it was happening, I (and others, I"m sure) saw the "RE-Elect George W. Bush across the bottom of the picture. I neither know nor care why the banner was up. I would be hard pressed, however, to believe that no one in the Administration thought of the PR potential (regardless of the ‘real’ meaning of the banner) at the time. ---
**Author:** ![Ben\_Hicks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bbce88/32.png) [@Ben\_Hicks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben_Hicks)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/42 "2003-09-27T18:21:50Z")
> [@](#): > > Nonetheless, the Bush Administration chose a sign which was factually inaccurate to try to create an impression that was not true despite knowing that the continued violence would be reported in excrutiating detail upon every single occurence, thus making Bush look like an idiot. YES! That’s _exactly_ what they did. That the Iraqi backlash has been as extreme as it turned out to be was something Bush’s handlers didn’t expect. They believed (correctly) that the banner would make for a good photo op but they were too short sighted to see that it could conceivably backfire as spectacularly as it has. They fucked up. It’s called propaganda you fucking dolt, but if swallowing Bush’s bullshit is an adequate panacea for your cognitive dissonance then by all means continue. Just don’t expect anyone to take you seriously. **Casdave** had it exactly right. The visual connotations spoke as loud as, if not louder than, Bush did and _everybody knew it_. > [@](#): > > On the other hand, here’s what is required to believe the Bush Administration’s version of the story: > > _::snip::_ No, _here’s_ what’s required to believe the Administrations version. 1. That Bush’s media managers genuinely didn’t consider the possibility that having Bush fly a combat helicopter onto a battleship and give a morale boosting speech under a banner with MISSION ACCOMPLISHED written on it in 20 foot high letters \*would \*send the impression that the Administration believed the conflict to be a done deal. All that’s required to believe my version is that: 1. Someone, somewhere fucked up big time. 2. There isn’t a 2. That’s fucking it! I’ll leave it to the rest of the participants in this thread to decide which one is more likely. ---
**Author:** ![Ben\_Hicks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bbce88/32.png) [@Ben\_Hicks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben_Hicks)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/43 "2003-09-27T18:24:11Z")
That post was addressed to **manhatten** by the way. ---
**Author:** ![Wyatt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b19c9b/32.png) [@Wyatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wyatt)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/44 "2003-09-27T19:11:17Z")
The Banner “mis-spoke” that’s all. The Banner 'mis-spoke" ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/45 "2003-09-27T20:39:33Z")
Seems stunningly obvious that putting Bush underneath that banner was a calculated photo-op. Just like pretty much every other public appearance made by any sitting president since the invention of the camera. Arguing that it wasn’t a deliberate piece of spin on behalf of the Bush administration is only marginally less stupid than getting upset that a president used the media to manipulate public opinion in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![Michael\_Ellis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/977dab/32.png) [@Michael\_Ellis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Michael_Ellis)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/46 "2003-09-27T20:42:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Miller \* > \*\*Seems stunningly obvious that putting Bush underneath that banner was a calculated photo-op. Just like pretty much every other public appearance made by any sitting president since the invention of the camera. Arguing that it wasn’t a deliberate piece of spin on behalf of the Bush administration is only marginally less stupid than getting upset that a president used the media to manipulate public opinion in the first place. \*\* How true. ---
**Author:** ![SpectBrain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a87d85/32.png) [@SpectBrain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SpectBrain)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/47 "2003-09-27T21:23:52Z")
I recall hearing about the efforts that went into the staging of a presidential appearance and after a bit of googling I found …[this](http://www.notinourname.net/resources_links/bush_image_may03.htm) > [@](#): > > “We pay particular attention to not only what the president says but what the American people see,” Mr. Bartlett said. “Americans are leading busy lives, and sometimes they don’t have the opportunity to read a story or listen to an entire broadcast. But if they can have an instant understanding of what the president is talking about by seeing 60 seconds of television, you accomplish your goals as communicators. So we take it seriously.” So I agree with the OP that the message we are supposed to take away is what we saw, not what we heard. And BTW, the President could have made a very dignified and much safer entrance by riding in a helicopter. Although he did look cooler than Dukakis riding in a tank;) ---
**Author:** ![Ben\_Hicks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bbce88/32.png) [@Ben\_Hicks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben_Hicks)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/48 "2003-09-27T21:30:53Z")
**Miller** I don’t think anyone in this thread is actually angry that Bush took advantage of the Mission Accomplished banner to get a handy photo op. Much of the anger (mine certainly) is aimed at those whose skills in doublethink would make George Orwell curl up in a fetal ball and cry like a sissy. These people remind me of Oliver Twist begging for more, except in their case they’re begging for more party line BS. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/49 "2003-09-27T21:38:16Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Ben Hicks_\* > Much of the anger (mine certainly) is aimed at those whose skills in doublethink would make George Orwell curl up in a fetal ball and cry like a sissy. Are you refering to the administration, or the posters defending it in this thread? ---
**Author:** ![Ben\_Hicks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bbce88/32.png) [@Ben\_Hicks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben_Hicks)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/50 "2003-09-27T21:40:29Z")
**Miller** The latter, but it’d work well enough for the former too. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/51 "2003-09-27T22:31:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by manhattan \* > \*\*We did win. \*\* We did? It’s over? There’s a democracy in Iraq, terrorism has been defeated forever, the troops all came home? Did I miss something? No, pal, you knew damn well what this was about, and what the objections were. Picking one item from a long list of objectives and claiming success on that basis is just silly. Now, tell us, as honestly as you can: What did you think when you saw the sign and heard the speech? Was it “Golly gee, the Lincoln’s tour of duty is over!”? Was that really all that came to mind? Now, while you’re still trying this honesty stuff, have you ever heard of or thought of this or any alternate explanation until now, or have you advanced any? You needn’t answer if it’s too embarrassing; we know anyway. Reality can be a bitch. Bush is up against her right now, and he’s losing. But that doesn’t matter - the good people getting killed every day because of his delusions, the delusions shared by so many even today, are what matter. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/d26b3c/32.png) [@UncleBill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBill)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/52 "2003-09-28T00:16:14Z")
People, this still is the Straight Dope. It was not a fighter jet, **Jack Batty** , it was not a helicopter, **Ben Hicks** , it was a four seater S-3B Viking, designed for anti-submarine warfare, then as an airborn refueler, and now it can carry air-to-ground missiles. It has no guns, no air-to-air capabilities, and is recently been retrofitted to be able to attack ground targets. The Bush people had a media guy on board before the arrival of the President, and things were set up just so. Just like dozens of Presidents before him at various appearances, only slicker and more professionally staged. He has a big budget for this type of thing. In my opinion, if he had to stand on his perceived intelligence and actual speaking abilities on the fly, his approval ratings would be lower than they are today. For **ElvisL1ves** , the mission to overthrow the regime, ousting the Baath Party and the Saddam Hussien power structure was accomplished. Those were the stated goals, as I understood them. ---
**Author:** ![3trew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/3/13edae/32.png) [@3trew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/3trew)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/53 "2003-09-28T01:51:17Z")
If I make the effort and convince myself that nobody in the administration considered that the banner might send an unintended message, is that somehow supposed to make me feel better? ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/54 "2003-09-28T02:19:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by UncleBill \* > \*\*… it was a four seater S-3B Viking, designed for anti-submarine warfare, then as an airborn refueler, and now it can carry air-to-ground missiles. It has no guns, no air-to-air capabilities, and is recently been retrofitted to be able to attack ground targets. \*\* And I was afraid he was being a little over the top. Ok. Conceded. Replace my “fighter jet” with “military aricraft” and I’ll let the rest of my comments stand. ---
**Author:** ![Ben\_Hicks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bbce88/32.png) [@Ben\_Hicks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben_Hicks)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/55 "2003-09-28T02:26:19Z")
Same here. Thanks for the Straight Dope **UncleBill** 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Ben\_Hicks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bbce88/32.png) [@Ben\_Hicks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben_Hicks)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/56 "2003-09-28T02:31:36Z")
Same here. Thanks for the Straight Dope **UncleBill** 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Ben\_Hicks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bbce88/32.png) [@Ben\_Hicks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben_Hicks)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/57 "2003-09-28T02:32:48Z")
'Scuse me. I’m gonna go shoot some hamsters… ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/58 "2003-09-28T02:42:02Z")
And while you’re at it, replace my “aricraft” with “aircraft”. No point in dragging Mr. Fleischer into this. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 8:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/59 "2003-09-28T08:21:58Z")
> [@](#): > > For **ElvisL1ves** , the mission to overthrow the regime, ousting the Baath Party and the Saddam Hussien power structure was accomplished. Those were the stated goals, as I understood them. And here I thought the mission had something to do with protecting America by forcibly disarming Saddam Hussein and finding eliminating his terrible Weapons of Mass Destruction - anthrax, botulinum, maybe even nukes - and stopping him from giving them to terrorists. Silly me. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084/60 "2003-09-28T11:40:16Z")
Yes, **UncleBill** , this is still the Straight Dope. Adding “as I understood them” in no way makes the preceding clause any less bullshit. You oughta know how poorly weaseling works here. Looks like **Marley23** got the main points other than the ones I helpfully listed for you, but left out still another: Getting the people who were responsible for 9/11. Check out Bush’s letter to Congress reluctantly requesting their approval, for one. Another would be this UN resolution, enforcement of which, in his own preferred interpretation, he was willing to defy the UN to achieve. You swallowed the spin whole, without chewing. There’s no shame in that, really, considering the stress we all were under and how little we knew at the time about Bush’s propensity for lying. But holding to it now _is_ shameful, and even a little silly. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-mission-accomplished-sign-on-the-carrier-didnt-mean-iraq/204084.md?page=4)