Bush torn on al Qaeda in Iraq

There were a few interesting exchanges at this morning’s White House press conference, which the president apparently called to chastise Congress for not following his orders, but I was struck by a question about Iraq, which Bush didn’t quite know how to answer.

A reporter noted that al Qaeda in Iraq is apparently losing strength, and she wondered how close we are to “declaring victory against” AQI. The president responded:

“Al Qaeda is still dangerous. They’re dangerous in Iraq, they’re dangerous elsewhere. Al Qaeda is not going to go away anytime soon. That’s why it’s important for us to be finding out what their intentions are, and what are their plans, so we can respond to them. This is a — this war against al Qaeda requires actionable intelligence. That’s why this FISA bill is important. And they still want to do us harm, Elaine, and they’re still active. Yeah, we’ve hurt ’em bad in Iraq. We’ve hurt ’em bad elsewhere. If you’re the number three person in al Qaeda, you’ve had some rough goes — you’ve either been captured or killed. And we’re keeping the pressure on them, all the time.

“And so, yes, we’re making progress. But, no, I fully understand those who say you can’t win this thing militarily. That’s exactly what the United States military says, that you can’t win this military [sic].”

There are a few angles to this, some more troubling than others. First, note that Bush makes no distinction between al Qaeda and AQI. That’s obviously misleading, but it’s also key to trying to maintain some semblance of public support for staying the course.

Second, the president immediately transitioned into pushing for more surveillance power. If there’s a question about terrorists, naturally Bush has to push for more power. At this point, it’s pure reflex.

But the real significance is that Bush just didn’t know what to do with the question — he wants to boast that AQI is losing, but he can’t emphasize it too much, because if people believe AQI has been defeated, then there’s no reason to stay in the middle of a civil war.

This was reported on the front page of the WaPo the other day:

The U.S. military believes it has dealt devastating and perhaps irreversible blows to al-Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq. […]

But as the White House and its military commanders plan the next phase of the war, other officials have cautioned against taking what they see as a premature step that could create strategic and political difficulties for the United States. Such a declaration could fuel criticism that the Iraq conflict has become a civil war in which U.S. combat forces should not be involved.

And we saw this exact dynamic play out in one rambling answer. AQI is dangerous, but not too dangerous. We’re beating AQI, but not too much. We’ve had some decisive victories, but not too many.

This is all quite foolish. The reality, as Drew Tilghman, an Iraq correspondent for Stars and Stripes, recently explained, is that al Qaeda in Iraq, as of a few months ago, included about 850 full-time fighters, comprising 2% to 5% of the Sunni insurgency. Tilghman quoted a 20-year intelligence veteran and Arabic speaker who has worked with military and intelligence units tracking al-Qaeda inside Iraq saying, “Al-Qaeda in Iraq is a microscopic terrorist organization.”

Over the last several months, we’ve apparently made it even more microscopic. It’s too bad for the president that he can’t bring himself to admit it.

If you’re the number three person in al Qaeda, you’ve had some rough goes…

How about the number one guy? How’s he doing? How’s the weather on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border?

  • I was struck by the comment about the #3 person in al Qaeda.

    President Bush said “If you’re the number three person in al Qaeda, you’ve had some rough goes — you’ve either been captured or killed.”

    It seems to me that we have killed or captured the #3 person in al Qaeda at least three times and probably a lot more.

    It seems that since we can’t find #1 we make up for it by continuing to capture #3.

    The fact that al Qaeda has no trouble recruting people to be #3 seems to be a problem to me. I wonder if anyone in the Bush administration has ever calculated how many times we killed or captured #3???

  • heh. JKap, that was the same passage that caught my eye, but for a different reason: Bush said it almost like it is a single person – we capture the “#3 guy in AQ,” haul him off, beat him up a bit, then send him back out with a tracking device so we can capture him again in 6 months to new headlines: “US Captures AQ #3!” – like the AQ “#3 guy” is having a really really bad version of Groundhog Day.

    which, given BushCo, could be the only true thing he said in the entire presser.

  • WMD’s – didn’t exist.
    Saddam Hussein – executed.
    His sons – killed.
    Democratic Elections – check.
    AQI – we’ve captured or killed their #3 so many times that #1 and #2 don’t count.

    So why are we still in Iraq? Oh, wait, we don’t have their oil yet. Silly me.

  • JKap wrote:

    How about the number one guy? How’s he doing? How’s the weather on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border?

    Whoa, do you guys mean of Al Qaeda, the group that attacked us on September 11, 2001, or do you mean Al Qaeda in Iraq, the group we’re fighting in Iraq that has nothing to do with the Sept. 11 Al Qaeda, but has a similar-sounding name?

  • Does big “Dick” Cheney expect (lil’ Georgie doesn’t really think) that the passage of FISA is going to in any way alter things for the Repugs in the next election? Will expanding the dictatorial powers of Bush really matter? Have the neocons so saturated the governments with cronies that they expect to covertly spy on un-American activities after the next election? —Or is this just another ego exercise for the Repugs?

  • Re 3: Zeitgeist, you forgot the bit where sometimes he is also killed, and then brought back to life.

    Or maybe Bush just get death? That would explain a lot, wouldn’t it?

  • A lyric from a Soundgarden song fits nicely in regard to what our not-so-beloved president is attempting to do: Tightrope walking/in lead filled shoes. For some time now this administration’s policies have been untenable! -Kevo

  • These situations are why George has two sides of his mouth to speak out of. A gift from god.

  • “If you’re the number three person in al Qaeda, you’ve had some rough goes ”

    So in other words, we keep getting just the henchmen.

    al Qaeda has comehow turned into a combination of SPECTRE and Cobra.
    With a pinch of the Legion of Doom sprinkled in.

  • It’s like Bush suddenly realized with this question that he has to make AQI bigger and more meaningful. Maybe stage some big attacks showing the need for us to continue to stay the course.
    It’s laughable. Are we to believe that 850 AQI members are capable of taking over Iraq?
    It’s becoming increasingly difficult to deny that we are in the middle of refereeing a civil war and have been for some time.
    Iraq will only be a democracy when King George declares it a democracy. My god, what has to happen before this president will agree to start bringing our forces out of Iraq? How many more of our civil liberties must be lost before it is enough to satisfy the dictator before he will stop forcing our troops to fight and die policing a civil war?

    Let’s face it…what Bush really wants is to extend the Protect America Act (PAA) to the Protect America Completely Mandate or “PAC-Man” so he can more easily move around the nation gobbling up our remaining freedoms. while avoiding terrorists and the eyes of the ACLU.

  • From what Bush said today about the “telephone companies” and “expanding FISA” the argument could be made that:

    1. What he’s already sanctioned and wiretapping actions committed are outside wiretapping laws.

    2. He is aware of this and wants FISA laws “expanded” so that phone companies can’t be made liable for bending to government pressure to do what was illegal.

    3. He also wants to “expand” FISA to backdate his previous illegal actions legal.

    He is the lyingest of the lying liars and he makes me sick.

  • Bush torn on al Qaeda in Iraq

    He’s also torn on anal intercourse, but that’s a different issue.

  • Gee, you could make this into a great kafka-esque TV show:
    The scene opens on a bizarre coastal compound in Cuba; an interrogation cell door clangs shut in front of a Middle Eastern face; an echoing voice emanates from nowhere and everywhere:
    “Who are you?”
    “The new Number Three.”
    “Who is Number Two? Where is Number One?”
    “I am not a number — I was a free man!”
    (Raucous laughter from the walls: “The US is Number One, Number One, Number One.”)

  • Comments are closed.