“My fellow Americans, today marks the end of America’s involvement in combat operations in Iraq. Our operational forces have withdrawn with honor from the field, leaving behind a free, if troubled democracy secure in its own borders, presenting no threat to its neighbors. Some 50,000 trainers and special operations forces remain in Iraq. They will help to sustain the victories we have labored so hard to earn in partnership with the vast majority of the Iraqi people. In nature of things, some of them may end up in combat, and some may yet die. But as a country, we have done what we can do, for better or worse. The destiny of Iraq now lies with the Iraqi people. We will continue to support them in their fight for freedom, but the fight is now theirs.
The war in Iraq has cost the United States and its closest allies nearly 5000 lives, and wounded many tens thousand soldiers whose debt we cannot ever fully repay. It has cost our treasury the better part of a trillion dollars. It has cost the Iraqi people untold tens of thousands of lives. Through our sacrifices we have liberated 25 million minds from grinding tyranny. I am not entirely sure that it was worth it.
As most of you know, I opposed my predecessor’s plan for the invasion of Iraq. I thought that decision was wrong. I thought then, and continue to believe now, that the war was fought on questionable premises. I believed that this was a war of choice, when – in my opinion – war ought to always be fought only of necessity. Despite the brilliance of our military campaign to overthrow the thuggish and dangerous regime of Saddam Hussein, I remained unconvinced that sufficient planning had gone in to what would happen after the regime had been destroyed. Today, I remain unsure whether the gains we have achieved are worth the cost we have borne, and the casualties we have inflicted. If nothing else, we have learned the limits of military power. After such costly expenditures of blood and treasure, this was hard won knowledge.
But let me be clear: A great nation undertook a great campaign against great evil. We did so through the democratic processes enshrined in our constitution. We did so out of the best intentions, if perhaps with limited foresight and imperfect intelligence. My administration will continue to endeavor to ensure that no such mistake can ever again be made, while also seeking to ensure that our sacrifices were not in vain.
Let me also make something else clear: My predecessor, nearly alone in perhaps all the world, remained convinced of the necessity to see the conflict in Iraq through to a successful resolution, just as he remained convinced that our military could, in conjunction with freedom loving people, find a way to precisely target al Qaeda, train the security forces of our Iraqi hosts and create the conditions for an honorable withdrawal of American combat power. Some labeled this stubbornness, some determination. I have come to learn that the distinction between the two is very much in the eye of the beholder.
As a presidential candidate 2007, I believed that all hope was lost in Iraq, that nothing much more could be expected of our forces than to redeploy them home. I thought it would be necessary for us to find some way to tolerate the consequences of our misadventure, consequences that I admitted might amount to genocide.
I was wrong.
Our armed forces fought valiantly under tremendously exceptionally challenging conditions, and without the united support of the people they defend, support that they deserved. They fought with unprecedented courage and humanity. Those that died in the effort gave their last full measure of devotion to the prospect that others might win the advantages that most us take for granted.
The vast majority of the Iraqi people rejected the tyranny of fear that al Qaeda and its affiliates threatened to impose and export, bravely facing death to vote for their own future, when everything in their history taught them to hunker down, to hide, to grovel. Rarely in human history have so many braved so much in the face of such implacable barbarity. It is not easy for us, who were given freedom as a birthright, to appreciate the sacrifices of those who have plucked it from the fire.
Iraq today is a far better and more hopeful place than it was in 2002. A great evil evil has been eliminated. Whether the gains we have forged will be worth the pain we have both endured and afflicted is not yet clear. It may not be clear for decades. History does not stand still.
But I am now convinced that we have done what we could reasonably hope to do. We pass the torch of freedom to the Iraqi people, even as we remain committed to supporting their successes. But although we remain engaged, we cannot commit ourselves further than they will commit themselves. We have at great cost removed from them the past boot of tyranny. We have given them their present. It is up to them to decide what kind of future they will craft for themselves and for their children. Where their aspirations align with our values, we will endeavor to assist them. But the fight for freedom is now theirs to fight, just as our fight for our freedom belongs to us. We wish them every success.
May God bless the people of Iraq, and may God bless America.”
. . . and then step down.
And get the remaining 50,000 hostages out well ahead of the remaining drawdown schedule.
It does not matter what BHO says. You cannot believe a word of it, no matter how sincere he may try to sound.
He is a stranger to the truth, so we will never hear the truth from his lips.
Frankly, I won’t listen to his lies any more, so I will find something better to do. Any activity will suffice.
That would have been an excellent speech, though.
Yes, a good speech indeed. But it was missing a certain something, something like:
1.) A strongly delivered “Let me be clear” followed by mumbled and confusing jumbo on any details, and vague platitudes 99.9% of the world understood already.
2.) A boring, un-inspired and non-sequitur lecture on something almost completely off topic that fairly clearly implicates America as the bad guy in the situation.
3.) Frequent built in pauses followed by quick and loud flourishes to sum up a sentence.
4.) Needs to be in an extra large font to be read from the teleprompter.
Kudos to the speechwriter.
The main issue is if/when the President tried to say ” I was wrong “, You would have a better chance of pushing a camel through the eye of a needle….He is incapable of admitting his faults – ANYONE who has written two autobigraphies, has serious Narcissistic tendancies –
The term narcissism refers to the personality trait of egotism, which includes the set of character traits concerned with self-image ego. The terms narcissism, ‘, and ‘ are often used as pejoratives, denoting vanity, conceit, egotism or simple selfishness
Just like his Euro-jetting Wife and his BFF DOPRAH – They are all text book case of Narcissism – Think about “O” magazine which features the picture of a self-absorbed cow on the cover each issue….what is more disturbing is that PEOPLE pay for that tripe and actually beleive the words put out by POTUS when we know it is utter Horse-shite…It is to weep.
To post in a more serious vein though, was it worth it?
5,000 deaths to liberate some 25 million people. By any historical standard, this is far less blood money than the norm. Somewhere north of 600,000 Americans died slaughtering each other in the civil war for the sake of freeing 4 million or so slaves in the end equation. In WWII we lost more than 400,000 soldiers to liberate about 150 million Europeans, or 375 people per US death (and this doesn’t consider the losses borne by the other Allies, which in the case of the USSR were staggeringly high, nor really consider the Pacific.) Each US soldier who has bleed his life out in the sands of Mesopotamia on the other hand can be, if you accept this cold calculus at all, declared to have liberated 5,000 people. A trillion dollars is around the cost of the war over seven years if you count the cost as the supplemental bills which were what was clearly above and beyond what probably would have been spent on defense anyway, although certainly the wars led to some inflation of the baseline military budget. Around a trillion dollars is also what has been obligated in a single year in the stimulus package which has gotten us, what? 3 million jobs “saved,” an impossible and meaningless number to define, let alone tabulate, and is little more than a politically calculated SWAG? An unemployment rate of more than 9% and what looks to all like a double dip recession since the stimulus did nothing to correct the structural defects that led to the recession?
We had better hope that it was worth it. The Iraq War will be the bellwether as to wether or not the war on terrorism is the war within Islamic civilization or the war of Islamic civilization. A religious culture that has never really known true political liberty this war was indeed a noble experiment. Perhaps it is head in the clouds asinine and Islamic and Arabic culture will never quite be able to achieve the values that De Tocqueville felt were a necessary pre-requisite for a democracy to thrive. Something I’m sure some people will feel is plainly and obviously the case and relish the thought of telling off supporters of the Iraq War with a rather justified “I told you so.” But where, exactly, would that leave us? With the rather daunting prospect that co-existence with about 1 billion plus people on the planet who happen to sit on top of most of the planet’s energy supply is more or less completely infeasible, and an essentially internally un-opposed minority of that population is waging unswayable millenarian holy war on the rest of us. Perhaps the 5,000 soldiers and $1 Trillion spent to see if that’s possibly not the case will look cheap in the long lens of history.
Prowler,
A question – thinking of the impact of the Boer War on British Forces – what is the value of the combat experience we’ve gained (versus the possible deterioration of warfighting capabilities via lost training opportunities). Sorry to ask such a cold blooded and perhaps even stupid question – but if the military wants civilians to understand the military that means the need to put up with efforts to gather information.
But I also have to wonder – it seems to me the grand gamble was not just to liberate 25 million Iraqis – as worthwhile as I believe that to be – but even more to begin realigning the politics of the entire region. That is a huge prize worth paying a great deal for, to this (armchair, tea-sipping, bloody-minded) neo-con.
David
I would much prefer we not go to war at all and let our military essentially wither on the vine, as that is what ineluctably happens to nearly any military that doesn’t go to war. But, from a view of pure and simple military effectiveness the experience gained in actual combat is irreplaceable and is the only way to verify and improve your warfighting ability. Victory in war also sends a ringing message to anyone who opposes you, now certain in the knowledge that your fighting forces are taut with hard won experience and morale your own forces glaringly lack. Now, of course, strategy’s logic is paradoxical and any smart enemy will therefore fight you in a manner designed to nullify any advantages you’ve just displayed in combat, but then again nothing in life’s perfect.
And, yes, exactly. From where I sit the war was not about just the 25 million Iraqis liberated. It was indeed about showing a repressed part of the world an alternative to their current state which is vomitting forth dogmatic violence on the rest of the world. The verdict on which is still out but the choice between trying it and resigning ourselves to constant warfare with terrorists and in “ungoverned” areas anyway it seems worth a try.
I’m sure the citizens of Vienna in 1683 would have rather seen THAT little party thrown in some far-away ungoverned area. I’d just as soon not see one over here either. We HAVE to remember that Islam his tried to fulfill their dream of a World Caliphate more than once in the last few centuries. We forget at our own peril.
Zipper
Concur, which is why I think it would be best if the Islamic world could emulate a hopefully successful Iraq and start policing their own, so we don’t have to have something like that over here. If that’s just not in the cards, well, we’ll find out either way. We know the historical trend of Islam, we don’t know what happens when you mix it with Democracy and some degree of political and economic liberty.
I say I would rather not go to war at all, but want to make clear when war is necessary am all for it, and I feel that the Afghan and Iraq wars and the continuing war on terror are all three vital.
The three words that comprise paragraph seven ensure that this speech will never come out of Barack Obama’s mouth.
But what a wonderful speech it is.
Agreed.
Those three words and crediting anything President Bush did.
Prowler, to bring it down to an individual level, and why should one join up to run in front of that bullet, and all, it really comes down to:
Exactly what would you rather die from than put up with?
That is a very old philosophical question.
That is one of the oldest philosophical questions, and one that anyone who’s joined the military has had to deal with on some level or another. For me, it is for my loved ones and the opportunities of liberty enshrined in our Constitution. Sadly, it is NOT for the current state of the society in LA I grew up in, selfish, atheistic, vapid, meaningless and superficial. This makes it hard to come home and realize you don’t particularly like where the trend’s going in the place in whose name you’re fighting for.
But to bring it back to the social level, how many of the people who went to work in the WTC on 9/11 asked themselves that question? As an old saying goes, you may not be interested in strategy, but strategy is interested in you. I doubt any of them thought much of terrorists or what it would be worth to stomach or die for until they were crushed, burnt alive or forced to jump 1,000 feet to their deaths quite literally out of the blue that morning.
P.s. Yeah, we’d be better off with Nixon.
I’ll read about it tomorrow; I know I should watch but I just can’t bring myself to listen to that voice and see that smug, self-righteous face, no matter what he says.
My feelings, exactly, Kris.
Agree Kris. Though I still feel the same way about either of the Clinton’s.
D’accord. I’ve no taste for listening to “More Mush From The Wimp,” redux.
Lex; your speech would be highly preferable to what we all know we’re going to get; self-congratulatory pap about how Obama rescued us all from the consequences of his predecessor’s “imperialistic adventurism,” followed by some apologies to the Iraqis and (maybe) to the troops for having put them all though this.
Now, if we only had a president who could properly operate an umbrella.
Well said.
Which is exactly why it will not come out of BO’s mouth.
Perhaps the NY Times will pick this up and publish an editorial along the same lines…….
Closer to home, it seems the elite, left, liberals are not so happy with BHO and the Democratic leaders of congress now that the highly touted economic stimulus, tax code changes, redistribution of wealth and health reforms are considered mostly failed plans with energetic hype and unfavorable results….. as a former teacher, this student and his economic team get a failing grade.
“I was wrong” is just as likely as “Thank you George W Bush for executing the surge which I voted against.”
Nice words
President Lex, 2012.
Nah, I wouldn’t wish that job on a smelly dog, let alone a good friend.
And this will be one speech where Bush doesn’t get the “credit (blame).”
Wrong, Joe. You can be sure that in at least one part of the speech will be a quick jab about how Bush got us into that war. It may be very subtle, but the comment WILL be there, have no fear.
Zipper
Watching Gibbs crawfish away FIVE (5) times this am from Foxs’ Martha McCallum’s question–”Will the President give credit to his predecessor for the success of the surge in Iraq in his speech tonight?” is worth the price of admission alone. From the top down, NO ONE in Obama’s Administration has a shred of class…not a molecules’ worth…
If we could figure out how to hack his teleprompter and then substitute Lex’s speech for Obama’s this address might be worth watching. Especially the look on Obama’s face when he figures it out.
You mean – he could figure it out? That would presume that he actually read his own speech before he gave it.
Which I don’t think he does.
Kris, he has to go through it before hand. Do you know how hard it is to read something in public cold? Very few are able to do it. And he ain’t one of them, seeing as he can barely talk without his prompter.
Now that that is off my chest – DARNED fine words, Lex, darned fine. You have a way with words.
I do have one minor kvetch though. You wrote: We did so through the democratic processes enshrined in our constitution.
Sorry to disagree with such an eloquent and distinguished gentleman as yourself, but we (supposedly) have a republican form of government, not democratic. The founders and framers, in their wisdom, gave us a Republic in order to save us from the tyranny of democracy.
VX — didn’t see the Fox interview, but to his credit, Matt Lauer asked him basically the same question — with the same results. Gibbs twisted himself into a pretzel to keep from saying the word “Bush”.
I have a new criteria for the limited number of times I get to vote for president. No more only children. BHO’s behavior, his selfcenteredness, his refusal to comprimise, are all the result of the adoration he got from birth. Yes, he had a half sister, but he was an only child for nine years before her birth, and she went back to Indonesia with their mother when he was sixteen. So, except for seven years, he was an only child. And he acts like it today. So, never again.
Wait a minute, Scott, *I’M* an only child! Does this mean you won’t vote for your ‘ole buddy when I run for the position of Maximum and/or Fearless Leader?? Let’s see–only child, ranked (once upon a time) tennis player, fighter pilot–pretty much the trifecta–no, no egotism there–nobody here but us chickens!
VX, you campaign speech could include the following paraphrase of a famous Philosopher from the 1996 election “vote for me, and only idiots will pay taxes.”
The famous Philosopher was Dogbert, running for ruler of the world, who also was going to make caning an Olympic sport. If you promised to make caning dimocrats a city league sport, I’d vote for you. Only child or not.
Make that “only children raised by their mothers after ‘Daddy wasn’t there!’ ” and we’d have avoided several less-than-acceptable perambulating pantloads in the Oval Office over the last hundred years.
“perambulating pantloads”
heh. Must.remember.that.one.. (alliteration is always in style
)
Must give proper credit to the originator: Master Sergeant Dale Raymond, MCAGCC 29 Palms, circa 1985.
“Top” Raymond was (& probably still is) a veritable fountain of colorful characterizations & wonderful witticisms. Some of his classics include “it was dark as six feet up an ape’s a$$” and “would a frog with wings f##k bats?”
I learned much from this man.
the speech he ought to give…
“Today I speak to you to announce my standing down as president of this once great country, a country that was great until the day I was appointed its president.
I am terribly sorry for what I did over the last 18 months, or going back further to the beginning of my campaign.
I have submitted records of all the criminal acts I have committed which led me to be elected president and during my term in office to the FBI and place myself at their disposal for arrest and questioning.
Until new elections can be organised to correct these errors, I have appointed general Patreous to hold this office in my stead.
May God be with you and restore this country to its rightful place in the world.”
You should make a mention that then-Sen. Obama was hardly alone in his opposition to the surge. There was plenty of division in GWB’s own administration and senior military officers as to best way to proceed.
For a rundown of those for and against at the time, and their reasons: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/specials/war-within/dissension/index.html
So, Lex, not holding your breath waiting for the speech, are you?
I would rather have you as my President than anyone else in the 200 million names in the US phonebook. Since almost 100 million of our inhabitants are either too young to serve (and thus are not in the phonebook), and another 12 million or so are ineligible to serve, that puts you in the top .5% of the people in this country in my book.
I’d follow the Man who wrote that speech as long as he admitted he was wrong and gave credit where credit was due. And so he would be capable of learning from his mistakes. A Man with some kind of understanding that the People of the United States have done more good than the rest of the Free World over the last 50 years has even attempted.
Perhaps you’d consider serving your country even far after you gave her the best years of your life to date? Because I’d appreciate the words you wrote far more than I will anything that comes out of the mouth of someone who refused, in public, to give our troops the benefit of the doubt about their capabilities; who said they couldn’t win; who gave succor and comfort to Evil men who blow up children as bait in VBIEDs, and who cut the heads off of honest Men, and rape and kill innocent women and children for the sport of seeing whom is holier than they; than people who actively undermined their mission, and made Victory a thousand times harder for them, and those who died with them, to achieve, and thus bring Peace to a place which has had little, except for the Peace of the Grave.
Subsunk
Well, back in ’08, I proposed a proper winning team for Presiden; A retired Navy Captain and a half-Luo. Well, we got a half-Luo, but not Baldilocks. The retired Navy Captain who ran was not the one I wanted, but I felt a need to vote for him anyway, gritting teeth and holding nose.
Lex, if those words came out of my President’s mouth, even THIS President’s, I could watch with tears of pride for the sacrifices and bravery of my comrades who never again saw home, and for those comrades who came home wounded in body and spirit, paying so high a price when their nation asked.
But I will not hear those words. Instead I have nonsense about “rebuilding our nation”, as if She lies in ruins. The “trillion dollars” in nine years of the War on Terror is nearly equaled by a massive spending bill enacted with the stroke of a pen.
Instead of tears of pride, there is the dull ache of disgust, and of anger, for a man who would not admit he was wrong about us, about our war, and about his own divisive and partisan viewpoints not many years ago.
I’ve served under Reagan, Clinton, and Both Bushes. I’ve bitten my tongue and served tham all, some required more tongue-biting than others. I’ve served them in conflicts ranging from Desert Storm, Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq. Some I felt were a true Commander-in-Chief, some were political hacks.
But this guy. Totally phony and corrupt to the core. Me me me, like an operatic warmup.
President Obama, you are a liar and a self serving, stereotypical Chicago politician. I follow your orders because of my respect for the office you hold. I have no respect for you.
Come on, SFC, tell it straight! What do you REALLY think?
Well, I just finished listening to the speech. Another speech where he really did not say anything, other than to let the Taliban know that we are going to pull out of Afghanistan, and letting Al Queda know that we are in the process of leaving Iraq, so just be a little patient, and you can soon do what you want.
He also claimed that he will insure that we shall have the world’s most powerful military, as he cuts CVBGs, F-22s, and lies about it.
Sorry, Lex, he didn’t use any part of your speech.