Has Bush changed?

[Guynemer]

Polls show that a huge majority of Iraqis want us out.

However, it is so ****ed up now that if we leave, it will undoubtedly get worse, becoming a bigger danger to the world at large.

What we're doing now isn't working. But pulling out would be worse. We have to find another way; I'm not smart enough to figure out what that way is, and I have less than zero confidence in the Bush Admin's ability to do the same.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
Americans wanted a "tough", "decisive" flip flopper, the one who could do what is right even if he had to kill kittens (or 30k innocent people as it might have happened). he is just doing what you elected him to do, which is speak tougher to make you all safer.

That is what the man does best.

well you elected him again so enjoy the fruits of his labour now

100% correct

[Ted Striker]

Supposedly the State Department is now overseeing the reconstruction of Iraq instead of Rumsfeld. The Admin is also interested in nation building but at this point who knows if it's too late, let's hope not.

On top of that, I'll believe it when I actually see it.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DanS
Bush also mentioned the 30k dead Iraqis.

Interesting. I don't know if it's a correct move, because as demonstrated here, it doesn't change any opinions on the matter, and we could do the reaper's math anyway.

Doing the same old deny everything and just pretend everything is fine routine sure as hell wasn't working for him. Each week brings a new low in his approval rating and it has been that way for most of the year. I imagine they'd try anything to turn those crappy numbers around.

In the end it is to little to late and he's lied for so long no one other then the die hard talk radio nuts thinks he's honest.

[CrONoS]

Google -> Good Bush -> Ifeel lucky:

http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/presidents/george-w-bush/

Bush Changes? Oh No! It's one of the best party animal we want to our party.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Supposedly the State Department is now overseeing the reconstruction of Iraq instead of Rumsfeld. The Admin is also interested in nation building but at this point who knows if it's too late, let's hope not.

On top of that, I'll believe it when I actually see it.

Funny you should mention that...

State Dept. Considers Mandatory Iraq Tours
Los Angeles Times
12/18/2005
Paul Richter

WASHINGTON - Facing growing difficulties staffing its Iraq operations, the State Department is debating whether to begin ordering reluctant diplomats to serve in the foreign service's most dangerous posting.

A change to the traditional voluntary assignment system could hurt morale and undercut the Iraq mission by suggesting to the world that U.S. diplomats are not fully committed to the effort. Yet in the nearly three years since the invasion, U.S. officials have found it increasingly difficult to find qualified personnel to fill jobs in Iraq.

Some senior officials acknowledged privately that they favor adopting such "directed assignments," which have not been put to wide-scale use since the Vietnam War. The department is not likely to make the change for the 2006 rotation, but could turn to it for 2007, some diplomats said.

"The department has never wanted to coerce people, and they've always found a way to avoid this," said one senior U.S. official, who asked to remain unidentified because of the sensitivity of the subject. "But the question is out there."

He added: "A lot of us feel they should."

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who would have to approve such a move, was asked about the issue in October by Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Rice said in a written reply that department officials were confident they would be able to round up the volunteers they need for Iraq.

But she added: "Nevertheless, the secretary has the authority and tools in place to direct assignments should critical vacancies not be filled through the normal assignment processes. The department is prepared to do so should it become necessary."

Adding to the pressure, the State Department also must find personnel for a new network of civilian-military reconstruction teams.

...

Rest of the article here.

It is interesting that, when I joined the Foreign Service in early 2004, people were champing at the bit to get into Iraq -- it was seen as a way to be a part of history, as well as being a career-making assignment. Now, less that two years later, jobs there are going begging. (Of course, staffing problems aern't helped by the fact that we've decided to stand up our largest embassy worldwide in a war zone.)

The article talks about jobs going unfilled, but doesn't talk about a second aspect -- who is filling those jobs. To be sure, careerists, patriots, and adrenaline junkies are all filling some of those positions. But the way State works at the mid-level is that you lobby your superiors for your assignments; as a result, a certain percentage of State Iraq jobs aer probably being filled by those mid-level officers who can't get any other assignment at State. That's right: Baghdad may be being staffed up, at least in part, by State's least competent, least desireable officers.

Say it loud, say it proud: Mission Accomplished!

[DanS]

Each week brings a new low in his approval rating and it has been that way for most of the year.

WaPo is reporting a sizeable bump up in his approval ratings this week.

[Gatekeeper]

Well, Dan, you'd hope he'd get some sort of return on his investment.

Anyway, it'll last until the next roadside bomb wipes out five or 10 U.S. soldiers and a few dozen Iraqis on the side.

Gatekeeper

[DanS]

Well, Dan, you'd hope he'd get some sort of return on his investment.

Long term, I don't know that he will see a return on this investment. Long ago, Bush learned that you never talk yourself down (there are plenty of others who do it for free) and you never negotiate with yourself.

One possibility was that he was losing some of his core support, who were seeing him as slightly out of touch, and he figured that anything that reversed that loss was worthwhile.

[Gatekeeper]

Only time will tell on the ROI. That said, there's better news, too: Afghanistan's Parliament reconvened today (Monday) for the first time since 1973. So there's some real progress to report from the "other" front.

Heh. Hopefully the lawmakers (a hodgepodge of warlords, former refugees, women and minorities) will be able to get something done over there.

Gatekeeper

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Oerdin


I give him credit for this. It is good though he seems to have only done so after nearly three years of lying resulted in his poll numbers sinking into the toilet. "Hey, lying has worked so maybe we should being slightly honest?"

They still blocked the investigation into seeing what really happened with the pre-war intelligence. Of course if I fixed intelligence so that it said the opposite of what every intelligence service in the western world said then made the intelligence service a scapegoat for my own personal crusade then I'd try to stop people learning about the truth too.

and well one would think this was obvious all along, but somehow a good part of American public manages to dismiss this idea.

-- just to clarify, the idea that he is constantly lying in order to to stop people learning about the truth (whatever that truth might be)

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Odin


Actually, we didn't elect him, Diebold stole it for him. That is why the election results were way off compared to the exit polls.

OK I give you that ... US is the only country in the world where the exit polls differ wildly from the real results, so eh well, at least enough people voted for him to make this feasible option.

If a 10% exit poll turned into a 51% win now, that surely wouldn't fly it was only a 5-6 % swing... IIRC

[Patroklos]

Funny about the Iraqi "we want you out polls," find one that say when they want us out. OBVIOUSLY Iraqis want us out as soon as possible, though you would be suprised by when most of them think that is.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Odin

Actually, we didn't elect him, Diebold stole it for him. That is why the election results were way off compared to the exit polls.

I can predict the future! Every election in the future will feature Odin and a conspiracy theory explaining just how it was stolen by an unlikely series of actions by all-knowing all-powerful enemies who are (surprisingly) wrong about everything else and otherwise completely incompetent.

If you don't want me to read your mind, you best get that tinfoil hat back on.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Sikander


I can predict the future! Every election in the future will feature Odin and a conspiracy theory explaining just how it was stolen by an unlikely series of actions by all-knowing all-powerful enemies who are (surprisingly) wrong about everything else and otherwise completely incompetent.

If you don't want me to read your mind, you best get that tinfoil hat back on.

ehhh, what does that have to do with pretty obvious fact that at exit polls Kerry won by 3% but in the elections Bush got 2.5% more votes.

In the rest of the (democratic) world it would be a scandal, in US it is "tin foil hat" material.

Sure close your eyes, forget about checks and balances and enjoy the ride

But let's not beat this one again, and let's focus how Bush as changed the tone of his voice as this is the theme of the thread. And indeed IMO this is what the voters want - a more steady, and decisive Bush, in tough times. He might not know where he leads you but he is determined to get you there.

on another topic mentioned here in the thread - i do support him staying in Iraq, because once this mess already started it would be realllly lame to let people kill eachother on proper civil-war scale and just bugger off. I am sure AlQ would have loved that scenario. It would be a HUGE win for them and give true purpose to 9-11 feat.

I mean Bush already vindicated taking twin towers down, a pull out from Iraq would have been equal to a major defeat in this "perpetual war without a state" . Other than that it would be another HUGE let down to the people of Iraq who are on the receiving end of western ignorance bombs and bulltes for a looong time. Hopefully the next administration will be able to swallow a humble pie and invite the whole world including the UN as an organization to help out with rebuilding of Iraq and give it a true push to straighten the wrongs that have been done so far.