BLOG VIEW  |  HEADLINE VIEW
SUBMIT NEWS  |  RSS FEED  |  SEARCH

Bush Gets A Big “F” on Surge Report

WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER 5 2007 9:00 AM

Submitted by FearTheReaper. Edited By erin_broadley.

TAGS: Iraq, GAO, Patraeus,



On September 15th, Bush will release his carefully picked over and re-written version of General Petraeus’ report. That is the report Congress has been waiting for, in order to determine if they will continue to support this disaster of a war. It was previously thought that the General would write the report, but last month it was revealed that the White House would do the writing and Patraeus would read it to Congress. That way the White House can easily confuse Americans into thinking that Patraeus actually wrote the report. And you can bet the report will make it seem like things are looking up! But according to the Government Accountability Office, Bush’s surge has been completely worthless. Yesterday, the GAO released their own report on the surge.

Thirteen of the eighteen benchmarks set to measure whether or not the surge has been successful have not been met. The GAO report claims that only three out of the eighteen have been met. That is 16.6%. Unless we are grading on a curve, the surge gets a big fat F.

Of course, like any grade school kid who gets an “F,” the administration believes the GAO report is mean and too hard.


It's pretty clear that if that's your measurement standard a majority of the benchmarks would be determined not to have been met. A lot of them are multipart and so, even if 90 percent of it is done, it's still a failure. The standard the GAO has set is far more stringent. Some might argue it's impossible to meet.


Aw. Boo hoo. Were the benchmarks too hard? Maybe we can make up an extra-credit surge? Keep spinning, it is obvious the surge is a failure. More Iraqi civilians and American soldiers were killed this summer than last summer. And on top of that horrible statistic, almost nothing was accomplished to show progress on other fronts.

Here is a list of the benchmarks that were met and the many that were not met.


Benchmarks met:

* Establishing supporting political, media, economic, and services committees in support of the Baghdad security plan.
* Establishing all of the planned joint security stations in neighborhoods across Baghdad.
* Ensuring that the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi legislature are protected.

Benchmarks partially met:

* Enacting and implementing legislation on procedures to form semi-autonomous regions.
* Providing three trained and ready Iraqi brigades to support Baghdad operations.
* Ensuring that, according to President Bush, Prime Minister Maliki said ‘‘the Baghdad security plan will not provide a safe haven for any outlaws, regardless of [their] sectarian or political affiliation.’’
* Allocating and spending $10 billion in Iraqi revenues for reconstruction projects, including delivery of essential services, on an equitable basis.

Benchmarks not met:

* Forming a Constitutional Review Committee and then completing the constitutional review.
* Enacting and implementing legislation on de-Ba'athification.
* Enacting and implementing legislation to ensure the equitable distribution of hydrocarbon resources of the people of Iraq without regard to the sect or ethnicity of recipients, and enacting and implementing legislation to ensure that the energy resources of Iraq benefit Sunni Arabs, Shia Arabs, Kurds, and other Iraqi citizens in an equitable manner.
* Enacting and implementing legislation establishing an Independent High Electoral Commission, provincial elections law, provincial council authorities, and a date for provincial elections.
* Enacting and implementing legislation addressing amnesty.
* Enacting and implementing legislation establishing a strong militia disarmament program to ensure that such security forces are accountable only to the central government and loyal to the Constitution of Iraq.
* Providing Iraqi commanders with all authorities to execute this plan and to make tactical and operational decisions, in consultation with U.S. commanders, without political intervention, to include the authority to pursue all extremists, including Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias.
* Ensuring that the Iraqi security forces are providing even-handed enforcement of the law.
* Reducing the level of sectarian violence in Iraq and eliminating militia control of local security.
* Increasing the number of Iraqi security forces’ units capable of operating independently.
* Ensuring that Iraq’s political authorities are not undermining or making false accusations against members of the Iraqi security forces.


Writing that some benchmarks were “partially met” kinda fucks up the White House talking point that, “even if 90 percent of it is done, it's still a failure.” But the White House pressured the GAO to change the report to include a “partial” category.


The study was slightly more upbeat than initially planned. After receiving substantial resistance from the White House, the GAO determined that four benchmarks — instead of two — had been partially met.


Very soon you will begin to hear the term "sub-benchmarks" or "mini-marks." That is how we reframe failure in America.

And I can guarantee that the "Patraeus’ report" (White House report) will paint a much prettier picture and Republicans will scream that we cannot pull out now, because of all the “progress” and then the Democrats will cave like bitches. And the war will go on and on and on, even though it is obviously never going to be successful.

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 15

Next

MrCrisp

MrCrisp

Charleston, SC
August 2004

SEP 05, 2007 09:06 AM

"F" is for fabulous!

KingHELL

KingHELL

Portland, OR
July 2003

SEP 05, 2007 09:22 AM

Wait, we're not doing well in Iraq? Since when?!

Zarth

Zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

SEP 05, 2007 09:28 AM

KingHELL said:
Wait, we're not doing well in Iraq? Since when?!


It's okay. The media is only reporting the bad stuff, and none of the good stuff. We're just about to turn the corner. And it's a good thing we're fighting the terrorists there, too, otherwise we'd be fighting them here.

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

SEP 05, 2007 09:34 AM

"The White House 'Patraeus Report'"

magpieboy

magpieboy

Seattle, WA
June 2004

SEP 05, 2007 09:35 AM

Zarth said:

KingHELL said:
Wait, we're not doing well in Iraq? Since when?!


It's okay. The media is only reporting the bad stuff, and none of the good stuff. We're just about to turn the corner. And it's a good thing we're fighting the terrorists there, too, otherwise we'd be fighting them here.


I heard we built a hospital.

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

SEP 05, 2007 09:36 AM

Zarth said:

KingHELL said:
Wait, we're not doing well in Iraq? Since when?!


It's okay. The media is only reporting the bad stuff, and none of the good stuff. We're just about to turn the corner. And it's a good thing we're fighting the terrorists there, too, otherwise we'd be fighting them here.



Or in Afghanistan. But everything must be fine there because we don't care about them any more. Right?

Zarth

Zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

SEP 05, 2007 09:36 AM

meatpieboy said:

Zarth said:

KingHELL said:
Wait, we're not doing well in Iraq? Since when?!


It's okay. The media is only reporting the bad stuff, and none of the good stuff. We're just about to turn the corner. And it's a good thing we're fighting the terrorists there, too, otherwise we'd be fighting them here.


I heard we built a hospital.


And painted a school! Some areas of Baghdad even have electricity sometimes!

You never hear about that, though, do you?

SirPsychoSexy said:
Or in Afghanistan. But everything must be fine there because we don't care about them any more, Right?


Their agricultural sector is booming! And they're increasingly taking on their own security responsibilities!

graphicsman77

graphicsman77

Pasadena, MD
June 2007

SEP 05, 2007 09:37 AM

It was previously thought that the General would write the report, but last month it was revealed that the White House would do the writing and Patraeus would read it to Congress.



Umm, where did you read ANYWHERE in that article that Patraeus is going to read a report re-written by the administration? I read the article and didn't see that at all.

Here's the latest I've read about the coming report.

Time to Head to Congress

aaronthere

aaronthere

San Francisco, CA
September 2003

SEP 05, 2007 09:40 AM

Maybe we should have sent a politician surge instead of a troop surge. jesus! enacting legislation? If that would help I know of a few good choices to send over there that won't be missed here.

aaronthere

aaronthere

San Francisco, CA
September 2003

SEP 05, 2007 09:41 AM

Zarth said:

KingHELL said:
Wait, we're not doing well in Iraq? Since when?!


It's okay. The media is only reporting the bad stuff, and none of the good stuff. We're just about to turn the corner. And it's a good thing we're fighting the terrorists there, too, otherwise we'd be fighting them here.



we ARE fighting terrorists at home, they are called Democrats.

Zarth

Zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

SEP 05, 2007 09:44 AM

graphicsman77 said:
Umm, where did you read ANYWHERE in that article that Patraeus is going to read a report re-written by the administration? I read the article and didn't see that at all.


Second page, tenth paragraph:

Despite Bush's repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government.



aaronthere said:
we ARE fighting terrorists at home, they are called Democrats.


Oh, snap!

Rafi

Rafi

Santa Monica, CA
January 2003

SEP 05, 2007 09:50 AM

aaronthere said:

Zarth said:

KingHELL said:
Wait, we're not doing well in Iraq? Since when?!


It's okay. The media is only reporting the bad stuff, and none of the good stuff. We're just about to turn the corner. And it's a good thing we're fighting the terrorists there, too, otherwise we'd be fighting them here.



we ARE fighting terrorists at home, they are called Democrats.



Why didn't you just cut to the chase and write, "I'm too lazy and/or inept to actually address any part of the article content at hand of how massively the Bush administration's plans in Iraq have failed?"

Heathen_Dave

Heathen_Dave

Birmingham, AL
July 2005

SEP 05, 2007 09:51 AM

Rafi said:

aaronthere said:

Zarth said:

KingHELL said:
Wait, we're not doing well in Iraq? Since when?!


It's okay. The media is only reporting the bad stuff, and none of the good stuff. We're just about to turn the corner. And it's a good thing we're fighting the terrorists there, too, otherwise we'd be fighting them here.



we ARE fighting terrorists at home, they are called Democrats.



Why didn't you just cut to the chase and write, "I'm too lazy and/or inept to actually address any part of the article content at hand of how massively the Bush administration's plans in Iraq have failed?"



I think he should have cut to the chase and written, "I'm going to make a joke on a topic." Cry about it.

Zarth

Zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

SEP 05, 2007 09:52 AM

Rafi said:
Why didn't you just cut to the chase and write, "I'm too lazy and/or inept to actually address any part of the article content at hand of how massively the Bush administration's plans in Iraq have failed?"


You don't think he was being sarcastic?

d20

d20

San Francisco, CA
September 2003

SEP 05, 2007 09:52 AM

SirPsychoSexy said:

Zarth said:

KingHELL said:
Wait, we're not doing well in Iraq? Since when?!


It's okay. The media is only reporting the bad stuff, and none of the good stuff. We're just about to turn the corner. And it's a good thing we're fighting the terrorists there, too, otherwise we'd be fighting them here.



Or in Afghanistan. But everything must be fine there because we don't care about them any more. Right?



it's the same with New Orleans. i mean, we wouldn't go around fucking with other countries unless we had our own people taken care of, right?

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 15

Next

SuicideGirls: Dirty Laundry

Last Comment 14 MIN by CheezyTot

SuicideGirls: Dirty Laundry

Last Comment 14 MIN

Cardigans were the one thing on my wishlist this Xmas. More ...

The Stooges Guitarist Ron Asheton Dies at 60

Last Comment 1 HR

and to add insult to injury: Ron Asheton's family hires private security to protect house after... More ...

Obama Opens A Can of Stupid

Last Comment 2 HR

Or if you have a family that you need to insure. Or if you are the primary caretaker of your children... More ...

TV On The Radio's Dear Science: Album of the Year?

Last Comment 2 HR

it looks like they're playing the muppet show or something! that rules! More ...

Israel vs Hamas: Game On!

Last Comment 2 HR by gfvella

Israel vs Hamas: Game On!

Last Comment 2 HR

Well it's on again, the late twentieth century's favorite cage fight: Israel vs. the Arabs! More ...

Comic Con 4

Last Comment 12 HR by RufusD

Comic Con 4

Last Comment 12 HR

I'm just pleased for Dave that this has been finally been made..it's been in preproduction hell... More ...

SuicideGirls Interview: On the Vineyard with Maynard James Keenan
SuicideGirls Interview: Eagles of Death Metal Part 1: Joshua Homme
SuicideGirls Interview: CSI Franchise creator: Anthony E. Zuiker