header_blog.jpg

Moving the Goalposts

Posted by Michael Link on March 26, 2008 at 01:07 PM

Just how do you define success in Iraq? It's one of the points that McCain's no-policy policy address today was expected to address, and it's now different than the definition he gave a couple months ago. It seems what's meant by "success" keeps changing, perhaps to allow us to stay there for another 100 years?

January 4, 2008 (AP): "He listed several elements of what he considers success, including the reduction of American causalities, the removal of U.S. troops from the front lines and having Iraqis take over more responsibility for their government. The hardest measure of success to achieve will be establishing the rule of law, he said."

Today: "Success in Iraq... is the establishment of peaceful, stable, prosperous, democratic states that pose no threat to neighbors and contribute to the defeat of terrorists."

A clear difference. But the next question is, "where did this new definition of success come from?" Thanks to Google, it's a question with an easy answer: the Bush/Cheney White House.

March 20, 2006 (Whitehouse.gov): "We seek to help the Iraqis build a stable, peaceful, prosperous country that poses no threat to its neighbor, is a close partner in the Global War on Terror, and a constructive member of the international community."

Comments - 7 »

Comments are now closed for this entry.