"We're not leaving Iraq. We will succeed in Iraq."

President Bush, October 4, 2005 Press Conference:

"And we've got to win in Iraq. And we will win in Iraq."

"This is -- Iraq's a part of a global war on terror. We're facing people who have got a vision of the world which is opposite of ours. I know I've said that endlessly, and I will continue to say it, because I know it's true.

"And they have designs. They like the idea of being able to find safe haven in a country like Afghanistan so they can plot attacks.

"They like the idea of killing innocent people to shake our will. That's what they're trying to do.

"We're not leaving Iraq. We will succeed in Iraq."

And then there was this eye-opener...

"Right now, there are over 80 army battalions fighting alongside coalition troops. When I say army battalions, Iraqi army battalions. There are over 30 Iraqi battalions in the lead."

Funny - I seem to remember this from his Rose Garden remarks on September 28, 2005, just one week ago...

More than 20 battalions are operating in Baghdad. And some have taken the lead in operations in major sectors of the city.

In total, more than 100 battalions are operating throughout Iraq. Our commanders report that the Iraqi forces are operating with increasing effectiveness. As Iraqi forces show they're capable of keeping the terrorists out, they're earning the trust and confidence of the Iraqi people, which ensures the success of a free and democratic Iraq.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/09/20050928.html

Hmm... 1 week ago there were 20 battalions operating in Iraq with some taking the lead.  And today there are 30?  They must be fast learners!!

But wait - he's talking first about 80 battalions, out of which 30 are taking the lead.  So what happened to the 100 he quoted as existing in Iraq (although the generals report 119 Iraqi battalions exist).

And then there are these wonderful statistics that he seems to leave out of every remark, press conference, or anything else that falls out of his mouth...

"U.S. forces were responsible for 37 percent of civilian deaths, says the [Iraq Body Count]IBC study. Anti-occupation forces/insurgents killed 9 percent of civilian victims, the IBC study concluded, adding that "killings by anti-occupation forces, crime and unknown agents have shown a steady rise." Almost 20 percent of the victims have been women and children, says IBC.

"The IBC researchers based their findings on news reports in which mortuary officials and medics were the most frequently cited sources.

"The U.S. government does not compile statistics on civilian casualties in Iraq, even those inflicted by terrorists. Nor does any international agency. Without an official Western source on the subject, most U.S. news organizations have shied from reporting on the subject except in the most tentative terms. The Baghdad press is not so reticent.
http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/worldopinionroundup/

Oh, I know... details details.  Why am I so stuck on details??

•  On the Daily Show last night

  Jon S. had clips of the military people saying there was only 1 battalion after showing a clip of W. saying there were 30, 20, 40 - whatever, just pick number out of the air.

  Bush said that he had just spoken with "our Generals."  Stewart said something to the effect of, "Well, maybe he spoke with them, but just not about Iraq."

  by gabbardd on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:57:42 PM PDT

  •  I

    heard only one was really trained also. I think it was on Thom Hartman.

    by llih on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 01:39:50 PM PDT

  •  Okay - sooo

    a battalion can be anywhere from 300-1000 soldiers.  It's made up generally of 3 companies.

    Sooo.... let's take that middle point - make it 660 Iraqi soldiers in each battalion.  660X20 (since the president seems to have lost 20 battalions between this week and last) That's only, what...14,200 Iraqis gone in a matter of a week?  Desertion?  Alzheimers (on bush's part).  Poor bookeeping?

    Okay - lets include those other ghost 19 battalions that the president doesn't seem to know about - the ones the generals mentioned.  That brings it up to 26,740 Iraqis missing.  Hmmm..

    Anyone doing the math?

    OKOKOK... I'll refigure it to make the battalion small.  Like 300 soldiers... let's see, 39 missing battalions x 300...

    That's a mere 11,700 Iraqis simply vanished off the books.

    Maybe we ARE in Oz.
    

    by kishik on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 03:19:43 PM PDT

    •  lol - in Oz is right.

      You can't hit a moving target I guess.  Too bad no one's confronted G.W. POTUS (a cousin of Boss Hog?) on this.  I'd love to see the smirk jerk one of his ears off.

      by gabbardd on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 10:03:56 PM PDT

•  We have no clue

  what happened to $9 billion of our government's money that went into Iraq. So how are they possibly supposed to keep track of how many battalions are in somebody else's army?

  Besides, Dubya knows that everyone else knows that once you get above 25, all those numbers start to get pretty tricky to keep straight.

  by QuestionableSanity on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:58:34 PM PDT

•  Details

  Details is what will get them. All one needs to do is be methodical like you were in this diary I just recommended, to keep track. There is SO MUCH to keep track of with these people!I bet there's a whole list of details that unravel so many of their lies...

  now for the media to learn about details and allowing the facts tell the tale.

  by Dazy on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 01:58:33 PM PDT

  •  Do they teach note-taking

    in journalism programs anymore?  Or is note-taking now construed as just printing or reading whatever note Karl Rove gives you?

    "Did I take notes? No, of course not.  Karl didn't give me any!"

    by gabbardd on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 10:06:46 PM PDT