This morning I heard President Bush's comments on MoveOn.org's "General Patreaus or General Betray Us". While there are many people that feel that the verbal assault on the General that we depend on to bring us the truth about Iraq was very harsh, the President has turned that alleged verbal assault into something even more outrageous. He turned that "catchy" title to the ad into the thought that the American people and MoveOn.org was verbally attacking all of our military personell. What a joke.
In an attempt to fully understand the relevancy and the background of where this title of MoveOn.org's latest ad came from, I went to their site to get the word straight from the horse's mouth. I found the background of this ad interesting and proof that MoveOn.org wasn't attempting to verbally attack the soldiers in Iraq, or even verbally assaut General Patreaus in the manner in which Bush is portraying to save his own skin for this mistake of a war.
One might view General Patreaus's "facts" as untruths, or that he is lying. However, if you truly want to form an opinion and deem Patreaus a liar, then you have to seek on what he bases his statements on. He has to base his information on what is considered to be true by the government, namely Bush's criteria of war progression and the decrease in deaths in Iraq. It's honestly crazy what the criteria that Patreaus has to abide by as a military general put into place by his boss, Bush.
I encourage all of you that read this to go to MoveOn.org's site and find the article revealing the truth behind the ad. I'm sure that you, just as I, will find that the reasoning behind the ad was not to defame our soldiers as a total, but rather draw more interest into what makes sense about how the war is veiwed in the eyes of Patreaus. He is doing his job as a servant of Bush at this point. What can he say? I mean really, what can he really say when the criteria of violence in Iraq is subject to Bush's guidelines of what actually counts as death in the war.
I will say that I do disagree with the opinion that Patreaus is not trustworthy to tell us the truth about the war. I feel the truth is that Patreaus is Bush's pawn. Bush can put all the pressure on Patreaus to produce the facts of war and if Patreaus says that things are getting better, than Bush can just roll with that and say he is backed by the General that is leading the war. But the truth is, Bush's ideas and criteria influence what can be determined as the truth. Furthermore, Patreaus is the pawn because now all eyes are on him instead of Bush when seeking the truth about the war. So, now Bush gets to hide in the shadow of someone else and is forcing people to ponder someone else's credibility because we all know that Bush has lost his.
Wanna see, go here - http://pol.moveon.org/petraeus_ad.html
