Iraqis are willing to ‘tolerate’ violence?

October 11, 2006

I can appreciate that word-choice hasn’t always been the president’s strong point, but this one is even more embarrassing than most.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN: Thank you, Mr. President. Back on Iraq, a group of American and Iraqi health officials today released a report saying that 655,000 Iraqis have died since the Iraq war. That figure is 20 times the figure that you cited in December at 30,000. Do you care to amend or update your figure and do you consider this a credible report?

PRESIDENT BUSH: No, I don’t consider it a credible report, neither does General Casey and neither do Iraqi officials. I do know that a lot of innocent people have died and it troubles me and grieves me. And I applaud the Iraqis for their courage in the face of violence. I am, you know, amazed that this is a society which so wants to be free that they’re willing to — you know, that there’s a level of violence that they tolerate.

The reliability of the Johns Hopkins report notwithstanding, there’s a “level of violence” Iraqis are willing to “tolerate”? Since when?

Iraqis are now more willing to put up with the brutal violence that surrounds them than anyone else; they just aren’t in a position to stop it. Indeed, as Amanda noted, nearly a million Iraqis who couldn’t “tolerate” the violence have already fled to surrounding countries in the Middle East. For that matter, a clear majority of those who remain would feel safer if we weren’t there.

If the president sincerely believes that there are millions of Iraqi civilians willing to “tolerate” the bloodshed that surrounds them, he’s in deeper denial than I thought.

That’s like suggesting that a blind person is willing to tolerate blindness or a poor person is willing to tolerate poverty. It’s his job to see that they don’t have to tolerate violence or gas lines or bad water or intermitent electricity.

I haven’t noticed him doing those jobs to damn well either.

Boy George II also said that we have to stay in Iraq because if we left the terrorists would follow us here. Someone might point out to him that here at least we’d have a better chance to tell the enemy from our (non-existent in Iraq) friends and deal with them far easier. But I suppose that’s too pre-9/11/01 thinking.

  • Once again, what Bush and his cronies say behind closed doors sometimes accidentally pops out during a press conference. Remember when he was first in office, and they barely let him say two words to anyone? I miss those simpler times.

  • I am, you know, amazed that this is a society which so wants to be free that they’re willing to — you know, that there’s a level of violence that they tolerate.

    Our society, on the other hand, is willing to sacrifice all of its freedom on the off chance that somebody swarthy might get ahold of another box cutter…

  • … amazed that this is a society which so wants to be free that they’re willing to — you know, that there’s a level of violence that they tolerate.

    Huh. I suppose this explains why Bush feels that we shouldn’t be free over here. We won’t tolerate any violence, so obviously we so don’t want to be free. Did everyone remember to say goodbye to habeas corpus?

  • The president added, “Same with those people in Darfur. It’s amazing how much rape and murder they are willing to tolerate And those guys in Guantanamo, you wouldn’t believe how much crap they can tolerate!”

    What an ass! The word isn’t tolerate — it’s survive. Their only option is to wake up in the morning and try to live another day. It’s politicians like Bush that are doing the tolerating, mumbling BS to themselves about not having omelettes without breaking eggs, and these deaths just being the cost these poor wretches have to pay to have what George Bush wants them to have. All the great murderers of the world have tolerated death. Bin Laden tolerated all the deaths caused by 9/11 as a cost to pay for his struggle. It’s the great men and women of this world that don’t.

  • Illegal war + genocide = crimes against humanity.

    Why even ask the guy his opinion? — He’s a criminal.

  • So BushyBoy, riddle me this. If the Iraqis are willing to tolerate violence in order to achieve “freedom;” If they are, as you have so often said “resilient,” to the non-stop grind of fear and death you’ve created for them, shouldn’t we as Americans, be able to withstand the loss of at least 30,000 people through terrorist attacks in order to maintain our freedom?

    Or is he implying (as I think he is) that conditions that are good enough for the brown folks are different and (vastly inferior) to what the more delicate folks in the West can be expected to endure? (Remember what his ice-hearted mom-droid said about Katrina survivours in the AstroDome?)

    Double-dealing brain-dead bastard. The Iraqi people can take a on a monthly basis what happened to us on one fucking day because they really want freedom. We on the other hand have to scram the Constitution up our asses with our heads because we we’re such big pusses. Who’s a deafeatocrat now?

    Impeach. His ass.

  • this is a society which so wants to be free that they’re willing to — you know, that there’s a level of violence that they tolerate.

    I was always under the impression that that was generally the European view of America and our lax guns laws. Funny to see someone like Bush saying that about somewhere else without the slightest trace of irony

  • “…this is a society which so wants to be free that they’re willing to — you know, that there’s a level of violence that they tolerate.”

    What does this mean? What is the relationship between wanting to be free and tolerating a “level of violence?” What level of violence — how high will they or should they tolerate? Does being scared shitless every time you go to work qualify as tolerance? If they’re willing to tolerate it, what will stop it? If they’re so desirous of freedom, why haven’t they put a stop to the violence? I know, it’s just Bush-speak, but jeez!

    I happened to catch a little bit of his press conference, and he had no trouble running down Democrats. Of course, they weren’t there to defend themselves either.

  • It is a shame that this buffoons preposterous declamations have to be paid any heed at this late date. He has credibility only with the willfully deluded. For 2 more years this clownish, depraved administration will, at the best, waste the world’s time.

  • Illegal war + genocide = crimes against humanity.

    Why even ask the guy his opinion? — He’s a criminal.

    Not anymore. We gave this guy a free pass on war crimes with the passage of the torture bill. See as the Decider, he gets to decide what is and isn’t a war crime. Since he says it isn’t, we’re good.

    On a serious note, I vaguely understand what he’s trying to say. But it still shouldn’t have been said in public and he shouldn’t be commenting on how much the Iraqis can “tolerate.”

  • Inspired by a post by Michael O’Hare
    http://www.samefacts.com/archives/the_war_in_iraq_/2006/10/our_seven_deadly_sins.php

    Let one comma = 1000 dead human beings.

    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

  • petorado: “What an ass! The word isn’t tolerate — it’s survive.”

    True enough. The word “tolerate” is exactly wrong. Or rather, it would be precisely the word to use if, instead of praising the Iraqi love of freedom, he said something more along the lines of, “How much violence will these people tolerate? It’s time they get fed up and do something to stop it!”

  • Well, just to point out the obvious, but the violence in Iraq, sectarian at least, is because the Iraqis, both Sunni and Shite, don’t tolerate violence. It’s called revenge, and it appears as usual to be an ever spiraling effect, causing just more violence.

    The Iraqis are “tolerating” anything. They are in fact fighting back against Coalition forces (us), foreign terrorists (them), and each other. And something between 33,000 and 933,000 people have died since our invasion. How one defines that as “toleration” I don’t get.

    • Comments are closed.