Bush: Heads I win, tails I win on terror war duration

[gulliver]

Watching Bush's press conference today, I couldn't help but notice. He said, "When we were attacked on 9/11, I said that this war on terror is a different kind of war. It's going take a while to win the war on terror.... However long it takes to win the war on terror, this administration is committed to doing that ... slowly but surely....

Now it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see three things:
1. Bush uses 9/11 for every tough question, just like in yesterday's Doonesbury.
2. Bush is very happy to say "war on terror" three times in four consecutive sentences.
3. Most important. No matter how long the war on terror lasts, Bush considers himself successful. In his formulation, he can't lose.

If the terror war lasts a long time, then that just shows how committed Bush is to the long haul. On the other hand, if terrorism were to end tomorrow, you can bet Bush would take credit.

So, the big question is ... Why are we still talking about al Qaeda getting ready to do serious damage to the United States almost two years after 9/11? To me, hearing these latest warnings about al Qaeda reminded me of the days shortly after 9/11. But it's almost two years. When does Bush get a report card on the war on terror?

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jenmito]

2. Bush's comments today

I watched him thinking the same exact things! And he connected it to 9/11 about 10 times when a reporter asked how he felt about our soldiers continuing to die in Iraq. It makes me sick how he says they're over there "protecting Americans" and then connects it to 9/11. He can't lose, just like you said. Even if another "9/11" happens, the country will "rally behind our president" or be labeled "unamerican."

[newyawker99]

4. Hi jenmito!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Davis_X_Machina]

3. It's always going to be 9/11...

...and all the clocks are always going to be striking thirteen, and Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia, has it not?

[TahitiNut]

5. Isn't it wonderful?

According to Junior, the criteria of veracity is whether he believes it, the criteria of success is whether he regards it as such, and the criteria of what's good for the nation is whether he wants it. For him, there's no other standard. They recognize no obligation to show candor, proof, or value. In virtually every utterance, this madministration recognizes only its own viewpoint as valid. In every specious apologetic they are self-referential. This is the very essence of a "rogue regime." Forget 'democracy' -- they aren't even being republican.