The President did not say the Iraq war made the world safer

[ProSense]

From the State of the Union

Last month, I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought - and several thousand gave their lives.

We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world. For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq. For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country. Most of al Qaeda’s top lieutenants have been defeated. The Taliban’s momentum has been broken, and some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home.

http://news.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/01/obama-i-intend-to-fight-obstruction-with-action.php

[dipsydoodle]

1. This generation of heroes

has made the United States safer and more respected around the world ?

I would doubt the " more respected around the world" bit.

[ProSense]

2. Right

"This generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world ?"

...question the President praising the troops, but it's not saying the Iraq war made the world safer.

Frankly, it's trivialized the illegality of Bush's actions to claim that Obama is legitimatizing the reason Bush went to war.

[dipsydoodle]

9. I didn't question

praising the troops : I questioned the outcome.

[MinervaX]

14. Huh?

That there is some doublespeak of the first order.

[BumRushDaShow]

3. The rescue of those Iranian fisherman

might have been an example, but these sorts of things aren't tabloid enough.

[ProSense]

5. Or

getting bin Laden and destroying al Qaeda (which had nothing to do with Iraq).

[TheWraith]

64. And supporting the Libyan revolution. Rescuing pirate hostages.

Plenty more where that came from.

[dipsydoodle]

7. That's a navy thing

In the same way that allied forces would've rescued German sailors in distress during WW2. In distress sides don't count to the sailors.

[ProSense]

12. I

"That's a navy thing"

...think "generation of heroes" includes all members of the military.

[dipsydoodle]

15. That was solely in response

to the example of the Iranian fishermen which is a sea as opposed to land issue.

[BumRushDaShow]

33. Huh?

Maybe England considers their Royal Navy somehow different from the rest of their military, but not here. They are ALL part of the armed services and generally operate in tandem - land, air, sea. There's no distinction. The navy will transport the army & marines.

The point being that our military DOES carry out humanitarian missions everywhere in the world (SEE both Haiti AND Japan after their earthquakes and Japan & Indonesia after their insane tsunamis).

But again, these sorts of things are apparently "irrelevent" and summarily dismissed because it doesn't make good copy on DU.

[dipsydoodle]

40. There is an unwritten rule / law of the sea

whereby mariners go to the aid of other mariners in distress - that goes back hundreds of years. That's a definite which distinguishes sailors from all others.

See response here from a USN Vet :

As a USN Vet, I have absolutely no problem with what our guys are doing in these cases. There is an unwritten code of the sea that has been in place for centuries, when a fellow ship or mariner is in distess, you do what you can to help, geopolitical concerns do not enter into a rescue attempt. These actions make me even more proud that I served with the finest sailors on the planet.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/envoy/u-navy-conducts-third-rescue-distressed-iranian-mariners-171344042.html

Its got sfa to do with our Navy - applies to merchant vessels too.

Now you go find the equivalent for land troops.

You're having a laugh quoting Haiti.

[BumRushDaShow]

46. "Now you go find the equivalent for land troops. "

Read this (a good summary):

http://coe-dmha.org/Publications/Liaison/Vol_4No_1/Dept03.htm

We don't have "unwritten rules". We have explicitly written rules that deal with our military (all forces) in such sitations, which includes disaster relief operations overseas.

I.e., the U.S. has probably spent more $$ than any other country in the world, not just for waging war (which sadly has been obscene), but in fulfilling humanitarian needs.

But you knew that, right?

[sadbear]

34. It would seem vain if the President took all credit for making the U.S. more respected

But it's true. We are more respected and it's because of President Obama, not the troops.

[Toucano]

69. That is a delusion.

Being feared is not the same as being respected.

Those who don't fear the U.S. consider it a land of gun-crazed, Jesus nuts and amoral, gluttonous, greedy pig-babies.

The U.S. is a villainous anti-hero in a cartoon drawn by a psychotic person.

[gkhouston]

63. I doubt that "safer" is true, either, although it's a comforting delusion shared by many. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. Adjust your spin control.

That's exactly what he said. Unless you think he's talking about some other wars.

[ProSense]

8. Find

"Adjust your spin control."

...a new lame spin.

"That's exactly what he said. Unless you think he's talking about some other wars. "

Yes, the so-called war on terror. Remember when we all knew that it had nothing to do with Iraq?

Still doesn't.

[emulatorloo]

16. Seems to me that George Bush destabilized Iraq and made it a great recruiting tool

for al Qaeda and spinoffs.

Now, not so much.

[zipplewrath]

6. You're right

You really have to disect his rhetoric to make sure you heard what you think you heard. I suspect he wants some people to hear that Iraq made the world safer, and yet have the "deniability" that he ever said it.

[JackRiddler]

28. Pandering to militarist hooey with an escape hatch.

Could you see Bush delivering every word of the above? No problem. The OP is playing one of those "depends on the meaning of is" games of no consequence to the clear overall gist of the words as an apology for the Iraq war and the "war on terror."

[Toucano]

70. Precisely. n/t

[karynnj]

37. I agree - and admire the wordsmith that did it so well

but .... there will also be people who hear the side they disagree with. (ie here people saying he claimed it - and on the right people saying he did not make it clear that Iraq was beneficial AND that he did not give all the credit to Bush who set everything (Iraq and getting OBL) into motion.

The good thing is that it is innocuous enough that people in the middle will hear it as intended.

[zipplewrath]

39. I don't

As you suggest, it is intended to appeal to those who will hear what isn't there, and give him plausible deniability to those that were listening. Say what you mean, mean what you say. This kind of vague wording is so that he doesn't actually have to take a stand.

[mmonk]

10. That's a toughy. A paragraph about welcoming home our last troops in Iraq

followed by "We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world."

True, he did say US and not world.

[Scuba]

11. I interpreted it as America is now safer and better respected for having left Iraq.

[malaise]

13. 100% correct

Rec

[Bonobo]

17. Ahem, bullshit. He said precisely that.

He was talking PRECISELY about the Iraq War when he said it.

I am sorry if it makes your head explode, but there it is.

[ProSense]

18. Ahem

Ahem, bullshit. He said precisely that.

He was talking PRECISELY about the Iraq War when he said it.

I am sorry if it makes your head explode, but there it is.

...the text is in the OP, and it's very clear. I suspect that's why you made up your own.

Sorry to burst the anti-Obama bubble.

[Bonobo]

19. Web at least agree that it's very clear from the precise text.

I did not "make up my own". I paraphrased because it was so very clear what he said.

You are spinning busily but it is -in this case in particular - beyond incredible and entering into the realm of pathetic.

[ProSense]

22. What?

"You are spinning busily but it is -in this case in particular - beyond incredible and entering into the realm of pathetic."

The OP is the text. There is no spin attached. People can read it for themselves.

There is nothing in the OP that states: "The Iraq War made the USA more secure as a nation."

[Bonobo]

27. So then how was the US made safer according to the statement?

OK, the heroes did it, I get that. But how? And in what context?

Obama was talking about having welcomed back the heroes from the Iraq War which is no over, right? Yes?

So he says the heroes made the US safer and more respected (the heroes that fought the Iraq War). right? Yes?

So then fighting the Iraq War (which is what they did and what they are being called heroes for) is what made us safer. How the fuck can you claim that Obama said the Iraq War heroes made the US safer and more respected WITOUT admitting that it is being implied that it was done by FIGHTING the Iraq War?

You are being ridiculous.

[ProSense]

30. Here,

So then how was the US made safer according to the statement?

OK, the heroes did it, I get that. But how? And in what context?

Obama was talking about having welcomed back the heroes from the Iraq War which is no over, right? Yes?

So he says the heroes made the US safer and more respected (the heroes that fought the Iraq War). right? Yes?

...let me break it down for you, from the OP

We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world. For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq. For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country. Most of al Qaeda’s top lieutenants have been defeated. The Taliban’s momentum has been broken, and some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home.

Out of Iraq, safer.

Osama bin Laden dead, safer.

Al Qaeda top leaders defeated, safter.

Nothing about the Iraq war making the world safer.

Remember, bin Laden and al Qaeda had nothing to do with Iraq.

So then fighting the Iraq War (which is what they did and what they are being called heroes for) is what made us safer. How the fuck can you claim that Obama said the Iraq War heroes made the US safer and more respected WITOUT admitting that it is being implied that it was done by FIGHTING the Iraq War?

Easy, comprehension.

[Bonobo]

31. Tortured logic. Ugh. nt

[ProSense]

38. You

can continue disputing what he actually said and believing your "paraphrase" to be fact. Doesn't make it so.

[Number23]

67. You deserve a freaking medal. Your patience for dealing with certain people here, is simply legend.

[ecstatic]

42. They've done a lot more than just fight in Iraq

you know. Most people say that our military keeps us safe, regardless of whether we're in a war or not. You are clearly in the wrong here and you should apologize for your misleading OP last night.

[dionysus]

47. well, we all know you'd want him to say how evil america is and how much we suck...

[uponit7771]

51. I'm choosing not to believe people who make up stuff out of the blue

[donheld]

71. Yes he did, but war = peace around here.

[FarLeftFist]

20. If that above statement is his exact quote then,

He drew clear distinction between the two. He also mentions Afghanistan. Nothing wrong with praising the troops.

[JackRiddler]

21. Some day you might figure out there are cases when your spin is pointless.

Last edited Wed Jan 25, 2012, 10:58 AM - Edit history (1)

The USG committed a planned war of aggression in Iraq that resulted in US military war crimes, hundreds of thousands killed, millions displaced and impoverished, ethnic cleansing, destruction of infrastructure and poisoning of the environment. The apologetics are disgusting.

[ProSense]

23. Yes

The USG committed a planned war of aggression in Iraq that resulted in US military war crimes, hundreds of thousands killed, millions displaced and impoverished, ethnic cleansing, destruction of infrastructure and poisoning of the environment. The apologetics are disgusting.

I know, and trying to claim that the President said that the Iraq war made the world safer is beyond ridiculous. Trying to push it in the face of his actual statement is curious.

[NNN0LHI]

24. Very curious

[JackRiddler]

25. Safer, schmafer. Hairsplitting can't hide the perverse apologetics.

[ProSense]

26. Even

"Safer, schmafer."

...more curious.

[dionysus]

52. oooh, perverse... how biting...

[dionysus]

48. are you daft enough to suggest he spend the state of the union explaining everything that's wrong

with america? my guess is yes...

[Nye Bevan]

29. So how, exactly, has "this generation of heroes made the United States safer"?

I like Obama and respect how he has done his best to clean up the horrible legacy left to him by Bush, but are we really "safer" than if we had never got into this mess in the first place?

[ProSense]

32. Oh

'So how, exactly, has 'this generation of heroes made the United States safer'?"

...brother. Here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=218748

[Nye Bevan]

36. So the way that "this generation of heroes made the United States safer" was to come home from Iraq.

OK, so I guess that kind of works. You have impressive parsing skills.

[karynnj]

35. Nice wording on someone's part to get around that

He needed to say something - and this worked very very well - without suggesting that the Iraq war was necessary or beneficial. There will still be some who claim that NOTHING done was beneficial or that the sum of what we did made things worse, but there is no way a President could or would say that. It would be a slap in the face for our military. In addition, there was no likelihood that we would not have responded to 911.

What Obama is claiming credit for is being out of Iraq and killing OBL.

[kentuck]

41. Right.

He was only talking about Afghanistan when he was talking about "this generation of heroes" and the "several thousand that gave their lives"...

[ProSense]

43. No

"He was only talking about Afghanistan when he was talking about "this generation of heroes" and the "several thousand that gave their lives"..."

...he wasn't: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=218748

He did mention "some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home."

Seriously, conflating the fighting the Iraq war with the statements about the end of it, getting bin Laden and destroying al Qaeda serves no purpose except to advance the notion that President Obama is justifying the illegal invasion.

He didn't say that, but if that's the purpose of distorting his words, have at it.

[kentuck]

55. Are we to assume he wasn't talking about Iraq?

When he said these heroes had made the world safer and more respected? Who's conflating?

[Scurrilous]

44. Thanks ProSense.

[Broderick]

45. I didn't take it the way some did

I took it more as a whole picture of how American influence hasn't waned, and how our respect in the world has grown with him as president. As a whole, that is what I gathered from the speech concerning this issue.

[dionysus]

50. some people honestly think he should have spent what is basically a national pep rally, to declare

how much we suck...

[renie408]

54. Pretty much. Not only was this a National Pep Rally, it was the kickoff for his campaign.

And we all know what a vote getter "The Army sucks" would be.

[Broderick]

57. LOL

Really not the time to do that! I remember one of the candidates running for the Republican nomination years back talking about how much the country sucked and we need to face reality, blah blah blah blah. He fizzed like a dizzling dud.

[renie408]

53. That is an extremely athletic tip toe around the subjects he didn't want to take credit for.

He mentioned the things he wants a little backpatting over, praised the troops and left the rest a little vague.

[Logical]

56. Wow, you stretch anything to meet your goal. It is actually entertaining. Lawyer?

[Spazito]

58. Thanks, ProSense, I thought he was talking about the troops and NOT...

saying Iraq/Afghanistan wars made "the United States safer". I was going to check the transcript to be sure before posting in the misleading thread about that but, thanks to your thread with his exact words, I know I did hear him correctly when I watched the SOTU address.

Recommended.

[JackRiddler]

59. Being able to win a point in court is not the same as telling the truth.

Congratulations on the sophistry that allows him to appear to endorse the aggressive warfare in Iraq and pander to warrior worship while phrasing it such that a strictly correct interpretation of the words allows his intellectual defenders to plausibly claim he didn't really mean it that way. When we're not called out to parse a leader's statements to his advantage in the context of academic debate, however, in every-day political business we're told that politics is all about speaking to emotions and keeping it simple. And this is not an academic debate, but the most widely viewed annual speech to the nation. Syntactical athletics and disclaimers in the small print lend no honor to nationalist pandering, even if we were not talking about the century's most horrific and destabilizing crimes against humanity and international law. But since we are, and since the primary perpetrators live free and prosper under this new leader's jurisdiction and with his blessing, and since the victim nation's sufferings shall endure for generations yet to come, the words, which any Republican could have brought off as easily, are shameful.

[Bonobo]

66. Wow. Well said! +1,000! nt

[Number23]

68. Good God...

Just quit while you're behind, okay? All of the SAT words and pedantic posturing in the world won't detract from the fact that you and a few others are ONCE AGAIN choosing to mischaracterize what the president said in order to demonize him.

Prosense has the quotes verbatim and yet here you are, still SOMEHOW finding a reason to argue. There has got to be a better use of your time.

[Uncle Joe]

60. It was a subliminal attribution something along the lines of using 9/11 and Saddam Hussein in the

same paragraph as was done prior to the run up to the war with Iraq.

Obama mentions in the previous paragraph that he was "welcoming home the last of our troops to serve in Iraq."

The first sentence of the next paragraph then proposes to honor this generation of heroes which has made the United States safer and more respected and he mentions there are no more Americans fighting In Iraq along with the other accomplishments.

There is no substantive distinction made between the troops and their service in the Iraq War so the listener or reader could easily interpret this either way.

Thanks for the thread, ProSense.

[loyalsister]

61. Maybe he should have been clearer

"I'm sure you're pissed off and maybe even suicidal. But that's because the previous administration sucked."

The purpose of any public event with the president and military is to praise them. Does anyone seriously advocate suggesting that their dangerous life activities over the past 10 years were a waste on the national stage? Or, do we maintain civility and go by the standing conventions and thank the troops?
His part in the Iraq war was to end it. Why would he talk about the beginning and all of the controversy about it when he wasn't even there to vote for or against it? He took over the mess they made and has done a good job.

The boots on the ground have done what they needed to do to bring it to a close. I thought that is what he was praising.

[WI_DEM]

62. of course he didn't but the Obama 'dislikers' will insist he did.

[bvar22]

65. Depends on what the definition of the word "is" is, right?

And he never "campaigned" on a Public Option either, right?

The fact that you come to DU today with a hair splitting rationalization of what you believe he really said
is more revealing than the actual phrase delivered from the podium last night.

If we are to believe your analysis,
then we must accept that President Obama and his speech writers purposely constructed this paragraph with the intent to deceive
the majority of Americans by including a clever got ya ambiguity
that someone would have to explain to us all later.

What would we do without you?




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their clever rhetorical ambiguities.
[font size=5 color=green][center]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]