Thursday, May 1, 2008


White House admits Mission Unaccomplished in IraqFive years after Bush’s 'Mission Accomplished' statement, White House 'paid price' for wrong impression.

WASHINGTON - The White House said Wednesday that it had "paid a price" for the "Mission Accomplished" backdrop to US President George W. Bush's May 1, 2003 Iraq speech, saying it left the wrong impression.

"President Bush is well aware that the banner should have been much more specific, and said, 'Mission Accomplished For These Sailors Who Are On This Ship On Their Mission,'" said spokeswoman Dana Perino.

"We have certainly paid a price for not being more specific on that banner. And I recognize that the media is going to play this up again tomorrow, as they do every single year," she said.

The "Mission Accomplished" banner hanging behind Bush on the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier has become a powerful symbol to his critics of how badly he underestimated the difficulties ahead in Iraq, where more than 4,000 US soldiers have paid the ultimate price.


Spike said...

What "price" have these lice at the head of our government paid?
The price was paid by our kids as the inept and avaricious politicians showed themselves to be traitors to all of us People.

So now what? Do we just put a big ole Texas 'whoopsie' poster up and the lice go back to their country club lives?

There must be a reckoning for all the harm they have done to our nation and its people.

Bill Corcoran said...

Spike: Thanks for taking time to comment and such an excellent comment it is.

Along the same lines, here is what a very good friend of mine just sent me by e-mail:

Dear Bill:

Although I reject the basic premise associated with state violence -- in answer to your narrower question in the sixth paragraph, "what is a victory in Iraq going to look like?" clearly, a "victory" in Iraq means the defeat of the invader - occupier, the withdrawal of 100 percent of its forces (the permanent bases and embassy included), sufficient reparations paid for the material and human damages triggered by the invasion - occupation, and, last, a trial before a duly constituted international tribunal of those political leaders who bear the greatest responsibility for the crime of launching this war of aggression in the first place.
(Feel free to circulate my response to whomever you like.)

David Peterson

Bill Corcoran said...

Spike: I forgot to mention Dave was referring to my editorial/post re Frank Rich of the NY Times that was posted earlier this morning. That is why he mentions paragraph six, but the basic premiese is the same and I agree with both of you.

Bill Corcoran, editor of CORKSPHERE