So yesterday, for the 3rd or 4th time has redefined the meaning for success in Iraq.
First it was "creating a peaceful western style democracy that will be allied with us in the WOT".........then it was to "create a country that could sustain itself, govern itself and defend itself"........and now its this:
And the definition of success as I described is sectarian violence down. Success is not, no violence. There are parts of our own country that have got a certain level of violence to it. But success is a level of violence where the people feel comfortable about living their daily lives. And thatís what weíre trying to achieve.
Absolutely amazing. Way to set such low standards. Hey if you continue to fail to meet your initial objectives, just keep changing them . Set the standards even lower, eventually you might meet them.
Funny thing is , in the 2004 debate John Kerry said gains can be made against terrorism when ďit isnít threatening peopleís lives every day, and fundamentally, itís something that you continue to fight, but itís not threatening the fabric of your life. Success against terrorism will occur when terrorist acts are reduced to a nuisance level". He was absolutely ridiculed by Bush, Cheney and the republicans for saying this. Now Bush is using the very same standard to set our goal in Iraq.