WASHINGTON, Dec. 2, 2007
No "Mission Accomplished" Just Yet
Schieffer: Until Iraqi Politicians Settle Their Differences, Our Politicians Shouldn't Declare Victory
-
Bob Schieffer says, instead of claiming a drop in Iraq violence equals victory, we must keep our eye on the prize - or in this case, the continuing lack of one. (CBS)
-
Play CBS Video Video Schieffer's Stance On Politics Politicians sometimes change their stances in the hopes of satisfying voters. But Bob Schieffer asserts that these politicians are underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
-
Video Schieffer: Congress Gridlocked As politicians soon prepare for Thanksgiving and Christmas recesses, Bob Schieffer contends that both Republicans and Democrats are responsible for the stalling of any progress in Congress.
-
Video God And The Election Pat Robertson claimed that God gave him inside information on the 2004 presidential election. Now, Robertson is endorsing Rudy Giuliani for president and Bob Schieffer wonders why.
The best advice I ever got on covering foreign policy was when someone said, "Don't ever make news of a cease fire the lead of a story about trouble in the Middle East," the lesson being events are always so fragile there that the cease fire would most likely be broken before the story made print or got on television.
That's why we shouldn't be rolling out the "Mission Accomplished" banner again in Iraq, at least not just yet.
Things have quieted down considerably. The additional troops the administration put into Iraq this year have made a difference, frankly more of a difference than I would have thought, and those troops deserve great credit.
But we must also keep our eye on the prize - or in this case, the continuing lack of one.
The whole idea of sending those troops in was to quiet things down so the factions within the Iraqi government could work out ways to share power and rule the country.
And so far, they haven't moved an inch.
Parliament took the summer off, and since its members got back, they have managed to do exactly nothing.
Until they do, until there is some progress in solving the problems that are the root cause of the violence, the turmoil may return once our troops leave.
So where do we go from there?
Immigration has dominated the recent presidential debates, and it is important to be sure, but Iraq is still the place where Americans are dying. We need to be hearing more about that.
By Bob Schieffer
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Add a Comment See all 49 Comments
- SBB2211 at 03:47 PM, "What part of ''''''''WE BEAT SADDAM HUSSEIN AND HIS MILITARY'''''''' do you not accept/understand?"
**********************
You are kidding, right? - Reply to this comment
- No way. The "Mission was Accomplished" years ago. I know so, because the little dictator tromped out in his little make-believe flight suit on the deck of that ship and told us so. I have proof. I saved the picture. Bush would never mislead us, so I know that the "Mission is Accomplished!!"
Signed, A loyal, brain-dead, sheeple for Bush. - Reply to this comment
- HURRICANE KATRINA
IRAQ
IRAN
NORTH KOREA
SYRIA
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! - Reply to this comment
- You did one heckuva job there duhhh...bya! MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
- Reply to this comment
- SBB2211 at 03:47 PM, "What part of ''''WE BEAT SADDAM HUSSEIN AND HIS MILITARY'''' do you not accept/understand?"
I accept/understand this: Bush''s attack on Iraq was comparable to President Roosevelt, after Pearl Harbor, deciding to invade Mexico instead of going to war with Japan.* (*Richard Clarke)
It took a Democrat, President Roosevelt, to stand before Americans and TAKE RESPONSIBILITY and attack the right enemy. It took a Republican, George W. Bush, to "beat Saddam Hussein and his military" ... the WRONG ENEMY ! ! ! !
Our nation, somewhere around 70% of us, has learned from the Cheney/Bush debacle: a limbaugtimized brain will do it wrong every time.
Vote out more Republicans in 2008, as was done in 2006, and America will move forward, beyond seven years of one pathetic disaster after another. - Reply to this comment
- SBB2211,
beating Saddam was NEVER the mission. Stopping the "WMD" labs was given as the reason or mission to invade.
No WMD were ever found. In fact, there was ZERO evidence that Saddam was anything more than an old toothless tiger, for God''s sake.
You don''t do much reading, do you? - Reply to this comment
- SBB2211,
what you been reading, darlin''?? the democrats didn''t have control of congress untill 2006. The changing missions started way back in 2004.
You know "WMD", then "stay the course", then "stand down as they stand up" then "surge to provide an oppertunity for political reconciliation".
And I don''t know how many more! The rep Congress gave shrub money over and over again dispite the fact that nothing about Iraq was ever solid, including the actual "mission"! - Reply to this comment
- clestes
"How can anyone claim victory in Iraq, when the goals of the mission have changed several different times??
"
And it is the DEMOCRATS in Congress that keep changing what the victory conditions should be. They should let the military do the job and fund them to the level they need to reduce the amount of BLOOD that our sons and daughters shed. I lay EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN death in Iraq at Pelosi''s and Reid''s feet, because through their driving need for political supremacy they will spend as many soldiers lives as it takes! - Reply to this comment
- newz4i
"I suggest you read the polls again. Democrats in Congress have a higher approval rating than Republicans."
Yeah, Liberals cannot take any responsibility, they have to blame someone else for their failure.
Oohh! It isn''t our fault (event though we said we had a MANDATE, a majority and a 100 day plan). Those sneaky Republicans won''t let us play with our new toy!
"Also...if Republicans lose more, we "other" Americans
hopefully will hear less name calling? (it seems name calling is the best conservative Republicans can do)"
And then you immediately followed it with "Limbautimized minds"? Who is the one name-calling? It seems that you can''t resist using it yourself.
Do not criticize people if you are as guilty of what you do not like. By contradicting yourself, your aurguments lose any value.
Back to my original question:
What part of ''WE BEAT SADDAM HUSSEIN AND HIS MILITARY'' do you not accept/understand? - Reply to this comment
- John Kennedy (one of a few with any backbone) had it right during the missile crisis. He told the Russians eye ball to eye ball---Any attack on the Western Hemisphere would be considered an attack on us, resulting in a full retaliatory strike, not only on Cuba but them as well.
This same message must go out again only this time to the Terrorist and the nations that harbor them like Iran. We mean business, and we "will not" keep it conventional.
The only thing fanatics understand, ether religious or political, is total destruction. The Japanese came to their senses when they realized they were about to cease to exist as a people on this earth in 1945.
BTW, they were putting the young lifeblood of their nation on a one way plane ride into our navel Ships. Talk about blowing yourself up. They were beaten, they were finished, they could not possibly win and still they kept fighting us and did this to their young boys. Talk about fanatics.
- Reply to this comment
- thgdriver,
Jimmy Carter had nothing to do with WHY the Iranian revolution occurred. You seem to think that if we had invaded Iran in 1979 everything would be fine!
You could not be more wrong!! Invading Iran will be a massive bloodshed. Carter knew it and so does Adm Fallon, who is head of all middle east operations.
Adm Fallon has stated plainly that invading or bombing Iran WILL NOT HAPPEN will he is in command.
We should never have messed with the Iranian politics in 1953. By doing so we created a demon which then turned on us 25 years later and is STILL in existance today.
Try reading "All the Shah''s Men". It tells of the covert CIA/MI-5 removal of the prime minister and installing the Shah.
It was stupid then and it is stupid now to interfere where we do not belong. If Canada decided to overthrow our president and install someone who rapes our natural resources for CANADA''s benefit, would you like it??
I''m betting you would say NO WAY. That is EXACTLY what we did to Iran and are doing in Iraq. It is a policy destined to fail everytime. - Reply to this comment
- The whole mess in the middle East can be laid right at the feet of Jimmy Carter. Instead of backing the Shah He left him hung out to dry. Then he let the most powerful nation in the world be humiliated by standing by and watching our embassy be held captive. Yeah, right, we need more Demonrats like him in office. By Carters inaction, others thought they could do whatever they wanted to us and we would do as he did--NOTHING! No wonder they figured they could kill our brothers and sisters in the towers, pentagon and a field in Western Pennsylvania and get away with it.
Oh, BTW, remember what Bill Clinton did about the attack on our ship the COLE and the 17 sailer''s killed??
NOTHING!!! Yeah, right, we need more Demonrats. - Reply to this comment
- For more commentary on the "mission accomplished" please read
http://www.counterpunch.org/richman11292007.html
It sums it all up pretty well. - Reply to this comment
- How can anyone claim victory in Iraq, when the goals of the mission have changed several different times??
First is was WMD, then it was establishing a democracy, then it was training Iraqi troops. The "mission" has never been defined for longer than a couple of months and it keeps changing.
Now the mission is for the Iraqi parliment to do 3 things.
1. pass a budget
2. allow former Baa''thists to work again
3. sign an agreement to let the US remain there another year.
Since these things are already happening, political progress will be crowed next Jan and the sad fact is, most of America will not take the time to even understand that the shrub admin is setting it up so that progress is guarenteed. - Reply to this comment
- Sorry, my newz4i at 02:01 PM post was directed at SBB2211 at 01:45 PM
- Reply to this comment
- Read the polls before you start claiming stuff that is not true.
Yes Congress has a low approval rating, but do you know who the American people blame??
By 2:1 the reps. - Reply to this comment
- random_radar,
No f*cking way. Do not compare Iraq to the Phillipines. The whole of the middle east are desert tribes. The hold to a level of savagry unseen anywhere else in the world.
Don''t you realize that this a religious war?? For the sake of their religion, people will do ANYTHING including blowing themselves up. I never read of that happening in the Phillipines. Their resistance was NOT based in religion.
Whole different view. Look, the US overthrew the democratically elected PM of Iran in 1953. We installed the Shah against the will of the people and propped him up for 25 years.
The result?? The 1979 takeover of the US embassy. These people are little more than scaresly civilized desert warriors. They DO NOT think in the same way as we do or the Phillipines for that matter. - Reply to this comment
- dancingfornow43, nope, I don''t mean "her majesty Pelosi and grand duke Reid."
I suggest you read the polls again. Democrats in Congress have a higher approval rating than Republicans.
As I say, if voters can remove more Republicans out of office in 2008, Congress will have a higher poll rating once it drops more Republicans.
Also...if Republicans lose more, we "other" Americans
hopefully will hear less name calling? (it seems name calling is the best conservative Republicans can do)
Limbautimized minds, in their attempt to humiliate people with such things as Parkinson''s disease, a child who suffered brain damage from a car accident, Senators who lost three limbs in Vietnam, can sit in their little corners complaining to themselves. - Reply to this comment
- newz4i
"Success came to Iraq AFTER American voters demanded change in 2006."
I assumed that you mean that the ''new'' Congress led by her majesty Pelosi and grand duke Reid granted us a success in Iraq. Please, tell us what they did, other than NOTHING AT ALL!
The current Congress has the LOWEST favorable ratings in their history! THEIR ENTIRE HISTORY! I repeat "THEIR ENTIRE HISTORY"!
They have lower ratings than the PRESIDENT! More people approve of the way President Bush is doing his job then what Congress is doing (or not doing)!
Man, you really have to give up that kool-aid! You can no longer tell a victory from a hole in your sock. WE BEAT SADDAM HUSSEIN AND HIS MILITARY! MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
Did you not want to hear that? Then, I''ll repeat it for you:
"WE BEAT SADDAM HUSSEIN AND HIS MILITARY! MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"
What part of BEAT SADDAM AND HIS MILITARY is so difficult for you to understand/accept? - Reply to this comment
- Success came to Iraq AFTER American voters demanded change in 2006.
I agree with the above post, "Victory can only come with political progress." The Cheney/Bush administration failure in diplomacy will never achieve political progress in Iraq. However Iraq can move toward political progress if American voters again remove more Republicans out of office in 2008.
Republicans failed after "Mission Accomplished." Vote more Republicans out in 2008 and we can move successfully beyond the surge. - Reply to this comment
Mike Huckabee on GOP "rock stars," 2012, health care reform and more.
