Five Years On: Bush, Cheney -- A Contrast in Styles
Five years. Nearly four thousand American lives. Perhaps hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead. Half a trillion dollars spent and we're still rolling up the tab.
How do you mark the fifth anniversary of the war in Iraq? President Bush and Vice-President Cheney were a contrast in styles.
Speaking at the Pentagon, in a speech that was officially titled "President Bush Discusses the Global War on Terror, "Bush ticked off a litany of the reasons why the costs of the war -- in all its forms -- was worth the fight:
"Because we acted, Saddam Hussein no longer fills fields with the remains of innocent men, women and children. Because we acted, Saddam's torture chambers and rape rooms and children's prisons have been closed for good. Because we acted, Saddam's regime is no longer invading its neighbors or attacking them with chemical weapons and ballistic missiles. Because we acted, Saddam's regime is no longer paying the families of suicide bombers in the Holy Land. Because we acted, Saddam's regime is no longer shooting at American and British aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones and defying the will of the United Nations. Because we acted, the world is better and United States of America is safer."
Nowhere was there any mention of the WMDs or aluminum rods or yellowcake or any of the other reasons we actually went to war. No mention of a connection between Saddam and the 9/11 terrorists. There couldn't have been a mention. An exhaustive study of 600,000 documents by the Pentagon came up with not a single operational link between Al Qaeda and Saddam's government.
But never mind his popularity rating or the negative public opinion of the war are both at all time lows -- only thirty one percent of the public approving of the job Bush is doing. Two-thirds of the population is against the war. There was the president dancing for all he's worth trying to do what he can to salvage what remained of his legacy.
Antipode to that was Dick Cheney who appeared on ABCs Good Morning America. When presented with fact that two-thirds of the populace was against the war, his answer was a curt "So?"
No two-step there. No hard dancing or soft selling. Not even any spin. Certainly none of that Bush-ian effort to one-last-time swing popular opinion. Just one, single word: So?
As in; So, what do I care what people think? So, what do I care what the voters want?
When pressed by reporter Mathra Raddatz on that point, Cheney's response was that one cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in the public opinion polls.
Mind you, there have been no fluctuations in people's opinions. The polls have been going only in one direction since the insurgency in Iraq began.
What was very interesting was Raddatz's own assessment of her interview with Cheney and contrasting it with a sit-down with Bush. Speaking far more subjectively than one would normally expect from a journalist, Raddatz said of Cheney: He wasn't unfriendly. Just very different than interviewing say...the president, who pours on the charm. Mr. Cheney seemed to just want to get the interview over with.
I have a feeling the Veep feels the same way about his term in office as well.
Read more HuffPost coverage and reaction to the fifth anniversary of the war in Iraq
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"Sociopath
The fact is the Iraq War was based on lies. Iraq had no WMD, no ties to al-Quaida, and to think that its military was a threat to the US is a joke.
And after 5 years of this illegal war the Democratic Party still has not impeach the criminals Bush and Cheney. This offense against justice is just as bad as Bush and Cheney's crime.
Hooray for Mr. McCain! He is exactly right to honor our troops and defend our policies in Iraq. It brought him this far and will take him to the White House. People fail to recognize the extraordinary outcome resulting from our Mideast policies. Doesn't everyone see that the radical Sunni feeling of inevitability has been broken? Al Qaeda and Saudi Arabia as a government were promoting Wahabism and on a roll. Muslims have a simplistic faith. When things go well for the bad guys, like after 9/11, Allah is happy with them. This gives them momentum on the “Arab Street.” Allah is with them, obviously. Now, not so much. By empowering the historically more peace loving Iraqi Shiites we did more to stabilize the Muslim world than is generally given credit for. Saddam was the biggest enemy of the Shiites and a barrier for the Saudis, who flourished and could afford the luxury of supporting hate of the West without opposition or distraction. Now Saddam is gone, Obama hides in a cave, and the Sunnis and Shiites can concentrate on their longstanding historical enmity with more even odds, leaving us alone. Another massive plus is that the theologically more traditional and numerous Iraqi Shiites have risen in power to counterbalance the Shiite loonies in Iran as well. Any way you look at it, it is a beautiful strategic win for the US and the entire West!
Are you that enamoured with your ow n thought process that you can;t see the the chickens because of the eggs. Have you had a lobotomy or what? There are no winners in war, only changes. The war was not necessary to create the biggest changes. The U.S. has not won anything b ut to make Al Qaeda stronger. It seems you've forgotten Afghanistan and your brain.
Translation: With Saddam Hussein out of the way, *we* can exploit the oil, oppress the citizenry and threaten regional security.
He probably has no idea why no-on else considers that an improvement.
I once saw Tucker Carlson and his rentboy Jonah Goldberg squeeling over Dick Cheney like a couple of little girls with a great big crush on the captain of the football team.Jonah did the usual "He's the kind of guy you'd like to have a beer with." while Ensign Tucker went one step further by recalling a speech Dead-Eye Dick gave,in which "...the contempt he felt for the audience was palpable!"
John, you might want to choose your words carefully about a man who's just one "hunting accident" away...
After all this time, the best summary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq that I've heard is still a succinct statement by an Iraqi woman who was interviewed by the BBC during the first year of the war: "Before the Americans came, we had Saddam. Now, we have hundreds of Saddams."
John Ridgely you are one of the most thoughtful and intelligent commentators and writers of our day. As far as Bush and Chaney are concerned its takes great men to acknowledge their mistakes and to change course for the good of their fellow men. History will not be kind to this administration and their legacy will haunt them and theirs for the rest of time. Thoughtful people without blind loyalty to a political party can see the right from the wrong. Seventy percent of the american people and most of the rest of the world can see the hypocracy of our leaders.
http://www
No doubt about it, Cheney will go down in American History as one of the worst if not worst Dictator VicePresidents we have ever had. He has no regard for either American or Iraqi life.
I hope someone writes a book exploring the psychological portrait of this maniac. It makes you wonder how someone like him came to be so corrupt>
Once he leaves office, no doubt he will spend the rest of his days hiding out from the American Public.
you're right.at least Spiro Agnew wasn't calling the shots(Henry The K was)during the Nixon years.
And the hits just keep on comin'.
Well, I think, based on Bush's speech, that we finally have our reason for the Iraq war. It's an oldie and a goodie, well-worn and time-tested. Let the citizens know, and may the history books declare, for decades to come:
Rape rooms. It was those G---damn rape rooms.
That, or Cheney finished off the Energy Industry Task Force wish list they all came up with at the start of this nightmare. High oil, high gas, endless war and Iran all nicely tee'd up for McCain to drive down the fairway.
Pelosi's an asshole, by the way.
different styles but the same message.
screw you, usa...
d
At least Bush bothers to pretend like he cares. Cheney doesn't even do that.
Bush is a good old boy, that due to just the right circumstances, unfortunately, became President. In another time or place, he would have been your average Joe Sixpack. I'm often reminded of a quote by Mark Twain that reminds me of Bush: "All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence, and then success is sure." Bush wants to be liked, and that is why is surrounded by sycophants that tell him that he is great, and that his presidency will be compared to Lincoln's.
Cheney on the other hand got to his position by being totally ruthless. He is the Machiavelli to Prince Bush. He doesn't give a whit what other people think, unless it could interfere or impact his plans. He truly has ice water flowing in his veins. When his term is over, Cheney will go back to Halliburton probably as chairman of the board, and he will be on the boad of other Military-Service company's where he can use his influence to garner favors and contracts with the government.
How do you mark the fifth anniversary of the war in Iraq? I was thinking a pair of gibbits on scaffolds labeled Bush and CHeney on the front lawn of the White House....
Cheney's response is actually a lot more honest then the statements of most DC politicians. Does anyone seriously wonder if inside the Beltway politician give a care what voters think? If they did actually care, would Congress ignore the popular will? I'm not talking about simple polls as Cheney suggests but the 2006 election, which was hardly a mandate for Bush/Cheney policies on the war.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
