Rice's Generational Iraq Timetable

Never mind what Bush and his administration said about how Iraq would be a slam dunk and we'd be out of there in "weeks rather than months." Now that we are there we are there for a generation. Condi Rice on Fox News Sunday says so:
The administration, I think, has said to the American people that it is a generational commitment to Iraq.

This isn't the first time she's said this either. On August 7th 2003 at 28th Annual Convention of the National Association of Black Journalists she basically said the same thing:
Now that Saddam's regime is gone, the people of Iraq are more free, and people everywhere need no longer fear his weapons, his aggression, and his cruelty. The war on terror will be greatly served by the removal of this source of instability in the world's most volatile region. And Saddam's removal provides a new opportunity for a different kind of Middle East.

But if that different future for the Middle East is to be realized, we and our allies must make a generational commitment to helping the people of the Middle East transform their region.

This has been the President's clear and consistent message.


Well this is generational commitment is news to most people - including some of the Bush Administration's top people.
From Think Progress:
Vice President Dick Cheney, 3/16/03:
[M]y belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. . . . I think it will go relatively quickly. . . (in) weeks rather than months

Donald Rumsfeld, 2/7/03:
It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.

Former Budget Director Mitch Daniels, 3/28/03:
The United States is committed to helping Iraq recover from the conflict, but Iraq will not require sustained aid…

So who's lying here? My guess: All of them.

Tags: (all tags)

Comments

1 Comment

Generational
Isn't that a minimum of thirty years?
by Gary Boatwright 2005-06-20 05:30AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads