Bush 2.0 needs new strategists
In the Washington Post today, there are two competing articles... THIS ONE is how the U.S. forces in Iraq are taking the lead from the Iraqi army in the fight against Sadr's Mahdi army while THIS ARTICLE is about how Bush 2.0 was praising the Iraqi army for taking the lead in the fight against the Mahdi army in his speech yesterday... you see where I'm going with this?
If I was advising Bush 2.0, I would have had him hold off on giving that speech... why paint yourself into a corner? Bush 2.0 has been brilliant at "kicking the can down the road" so why not wait a couple of days to see how things pan out with the current uprising in Iraq before declaring "progress"? Anyone paying attention to the news will see that the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing when they connect the dots. Or, Bush 2.0 might know something that we don't... that the situation is going down hill so quickly that he had to get in his "progress" speech when he could.
UPDATE: The NYTimes gives their perspective on the situation but omits the fact that U.S. forces have taken the lead in the fighting while the Iraqi forces man the checkpoints outside of the various cities' borders.
If I was advising Bush 2.0, I would have had him hold off on giving that speech... why paint yourself into a corner? Bush 2.0 has been brilliant at "kicking the can down the road" so why not wait a couple of days to see how things pan out with the current uprising in Iraq before declaring "progress"? Anyone paying attention to the news will see that the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing when they connect the dots. Or, Bush 2.0 might know something that we don't... that the situation is going down hill so quickly that he had to get in his "progress" speech when he could.
UPDATE: The NYTimes gives their perspective on the situation but omits the fact that U.S. forces have taken the lead in the fighting while the Iraqi forces man the checkpoints outside of the various cities' borders.
Comments