The Syrian raid was so perfectly carried out, with such precision, that the only way the Fake News Media could demean was by my use of the term “Mission Accomplished.” I knew they would seize on this but felt it is such a great Military term, it should be brought back. Use often!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 15, 2018
I said it yesterday:
Trump is completely aware of how Bush was punched around for using that phrase in a celebration of a specific mission that in fact was accomplished, and he would like the naysayers to come after him the way they came after Bush, and when they do, he'll show us all how to handle that kind of anti-military negativity.
Posts
55 comments:
Yep.
Those ignorant of history are doomed to repeal it.
It’s a nice contrast with the progressive mission, which by definition can never be accomplished.
Ann needs a "chain yanking" tag.
That’s fine but what is the long term mission and what has been put in place to accomplish that?
Kevin said: "It’s a nice contrast with the progressive mission, which by definition can never be accomplished."
Truer words have not been written. Lefties never succeed in their variety of hair-brained schemes. Mo' money is always required. "It would have worked if we only had more funding."
Looks like they'll go for Trump's bait every time.
Kevin, the point is to level everyone they don't like. They've managed a lot of that.
"Those ignorant of history are doomed to repeal it."
LOL.
I thought something like this would happen.
Like, no one wants to be thought of as a cock holster.
Blogger roesch/voltaire said...
"That’s fine but what is the long term mission and what has been put in place to accomplish that?"
Do you mean a mission like "leading from behind"?
i've become fixated on polling numbers
according to the MSM polling; Trump has the lowest approval numbers ever recorded, by Anything, Anywhere
but according to Rasmussen, Trump is not only at 50%, that is Significantly higher than O'Bama was at this point in his Presidency.
One of these two is Obviously lying; but How to determine Which?
Since the MSM polling showed Hilary winning decisively, with a HUGE landslide in the electoral college; and since That IS Exactly what DID happen... We can easily make a choice.
“Kevin, the point is to level everyone they don't like.“
And then what? It ends there, or they go to the next level of “don’t like”?
This is not a strategy, it’s a pathology.
Gotta keep hammering for the cause.
Tommy Duncan
Chain yanking or jerking around. Trump plays the media for the fools and hacks that they are.
"That’s fine but what is the long term mission and what has been put in place to accomplish that?"
In relation to what? This was a clearly defined mission to retaliate for Assad's use of chemical weapons by putting ordinance on specific targets and bringing all pilots involved home safely. In the event, they shot 105 missiles and at least 95% of missiles successfully hit their target, plus all pilots returned safely. To put it succinctly, the mission was fully accomplished. There is no further action required unless Assad pulls this shit again, in which case a new, clearly defined mission will be required and appropriately executed.
Bush did not use that term. That was the ship's celebration on returning from its mission.
But AA knew that.
"Hair-brained schemes" - Vidal Sassoon could not be reached for comment.
"Bush did not use that term. That was the ship's celebration on returning from its mission."
Yup.
Sort of like Sara Palin saying "I can see Russia from my house" when it was actually Tina Fey on SNL.
The DNC/media complex creates their own realities to fit the narrative that leftists want to believe.
Like all good trolls, this one is multi-level
First of all, Trump is a PROMOTER - of events, shows, buildings, brands...
He knows how to create a spectacle, and a great way is through controversy. Like "Maybe the Russians can find Hillary's (govt) email"... since she stored it on the open Net in her toilet where any spy could get it
Second is "I am doing it right". Bush stayed in after mission accomplished, I am getting out. He invites contrast that favors him.
you can't analyze this troll in depth via logic
its about the feelings created
God damn it; I remember distinctly having argued that when George Bush stood under the "Mission Accomplished" banner on the USS Lincoln, it was true and correct. The Lincoln was returning after an extended cruise, its mission had been accomplished admirably, and Bush was right.
Where was a fat ass like Trump back then? Which porn star was he shtupping? Trump definitely was not paying attention, such that when the 2016 debates rolled around, Trump was spouting shit like "there were no weapons of mass destruction and they knew it, they knew it."
Hagar (thankfully said it first): Bush did not use that term. That was the ship's celebration on returning from its mission.
And as already stated, like Palin, he will forever have false words put into his mouth.
Once the lie is out there and repeated over and over by the media AND by misinformed lofo people it is very difficult to change.
This is why Trump must Tweet. I don't always like the style of what he is saying, but I rarely disagree with the substance. It gets his message out before it can be suffocated by the press or twisted.
Trump did not say "I can shoot someone on 5th Ave.....". He said that some of his supporters said that. Maybe a fine distinction. Close but not accurate.... close enough only works in hand grenades and horseshoes. Accuracy counts. (how many more cliches can I put into this paragraph?)
"...extended cruise..."
Carnival barker Chuck.
Awww, Cuck is triggered by The President's trolling of lefty cunts. Funny that a lifelong republican always seems to end up being affected by things that the left hates.
I love it when he calls BS on all this crap.
Now we have Field Marshall R/V.
Trying to make sense of the shadows:
https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/sword-and-shield/
Mid March, Russian TV claimed U.S. is training Syrian Rebels to fake a gas attack in order to justify bombing.
Either true, or Russia knew in advance a gas attack was coming.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmYCgK2zHCI&feature=youtu.be
Donald Trump is a modern-day minstrel show aimed at voters who didn't do so well over the last 10 years.
If we didn't have Comrade LLR, we'd have to invent him.
The original tweet was dumb-was because it was bragging about something that was operationally no big deal. If three first world militaries could not hit three third world targets with missiles it would be a story. That they can is no story. The effect of the hits remains to be seen and POTUS is dumb-was to be treating one like the other.
The curious incident in the night was that no Russian nor Iranian anti-missile defenses were actuated.
If Assad chooses to use gas attacks as a weapon of war, he must now factor in the US response as part of the calculus. That doesn't mean he will stop, but it does mean that the US response is part of the cost. I don't see peace and love breaking out in the Middle East anytime soon, but maybe this bombing run will serve to inhibit the use of chemical weapons, so Mission Accomplished. In the Middle East, it's important to keep your missions modest and hedged with qualifiers.
Trump is inviting the contrast with W. Good. We are not nation building in Syria like that drunk W did in Iraq. Colossal waste of money and US lives. As bad as Obama was, he wasn’t as bad as W. Libya, like the rest of the Middle East except Egypt, has been a shithole for a long time. Obama’s stupidity was pretending that the US was somehow at fault for the Middle East shithole. It wasn’t. It’s Islam. They need their holy war with each other before it gets better. Seal off the Middle East and Iran and they will sort it out eventually, just as Europe did. We’re happy to sell some weapons and provide some training but we aren’t taking in refugees from the losing side.
How dare a wrestler come off the mat and hold his hand high
after pinning his opponent off the takedown in 28 seconds of the 1st round..,what about the rest
Of the tournament?..,,one at a time says Trump.
Trump has to order some targeted strikes because Obama was stupid and weak and W as even more stupid. He has to to show Putin, Xi, and North Korea and Iran that W and Obama (and Clinton and HW) are worthless ex-presidents and their playbook is burning in the trash.
The Iran deal is getting ripped up next and Iran’s support of Animsl Assad is going to be one of the reasons. Anyone who does business with Iran is supporting genovide by chemical weapons, or something to that effect.
That Trump tweets makes this all more effective. The Red Scum in China, Putin the Great, Rocket Man and The Mullahs don’t know what to think anymore. They are used to the HW-Clinton-W-Obama easy to read stupidity and were expecting the same if Clinton. Trump keeps these jagoffs up at night. Good.
"The original tweet was dumb-was because it was bragging about something that was operationally no big deal."
So, the smart, "presidential" thing would have been to ignore it? Pretend the strike never took place?
Trump and Mattis seem to make a much better team than Dubya Bush and Rumsfeld, and an infinitely better team than Obama and anyone dumb enough to be his SecDef. They did a nice job of killing people who needed to be killed and sending a message while limiting collateral damage against people who had nothing to do with Assad's chemical warfare program.
As to George W. Bush and "Mission Accomplished," at the time he stood under that banner the mission -- of removing Saddam Hussein from power -- certainly had been accomplished. Hussein was on the run and in hiding (he wouldn't be captured for another 7 months). At that point it was not clear that al Qaeda would fight the victorious American troops, much less that they could do so effectively. Paul Bremer's incredibly foolish decision to dissolve the entire Iraqi army was still two weeks in the future, meaning that the Iraqi soldiers -- still armed with their AK-47s! -- instead of fighting the foreign al Qaeda fighters would actually join them. So at the time Bush stood under that banner the temporary success of al Qaeda was still in the future, as was the the leadership of General Petraeus, the Surge, the Anbar Awakening, and the eventual victory that should have come in 2003 instead of 2008.
Also of note should be that George W. Bush essentially handed his successor a war that had been won -- and his successor quite nearly lost it.
Big Mike -- do you recall that Rumsfeld was given an advanced copy of the USS Lincoln speech, and Rumsfeld removed the phrase "Mission Accomplished"? Rumsfeld was at the time in the Middle East; at Centcom headquarters, or in Afghanistan, or in Baghdad... I have forgotten exactly where. Rumsfeld was on the scene, and he knew that the war had not been won and he knew how hard it would be to "win" it.
Rumsfeld did not know about the banner hanging in front of the bridge of the Lincoln.
Still, the Lincoln's "mission" had been "accomplished" admirably.
If Obama had done this the MSM would be praising his “Gutsy Call “.
Bush did not use that term. That was the ship's celebration on returning from its mission.
This cannot be repeated often enough.
It was the USS Lincoln's mission. It was accomplished.
Leftists deliberately taking it out of context can go to hell.
"'Bush did not use that term. That was the ship's celebration on returning from its mission.'
"This cannot be repeated often enough.
It was the USS Lincoln's mission. It was accomplished."
Bullshit. The Bush team choreographed the whole thing to valorize Bush, not to celebrate the USS Lincoln. The whole thing was a Bush media event. Even if it is true that the crew asked to hang a banner, the Bush people ran with it and made the event about Bush and the war in Iraq. That's expert propaganda...you send a message without making explicit statements. With his comment that "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed," with the banner hanging prominently behind him, the Bush team meant to send the message "we won." Any other interpretation, the crew's own involvement notwithstanding, is revisionist bullshit.
"Also of note should be that George W. Bush essentially handed his successor a war that had been won -- and his successor quite nearly lost it."
Destroying a country we claim we attacked in order to "liberate" the people (the excuse we relied on after WMD proved nonexistent) is not winning a war.
Also of note should be that George W. Bush essentially handed his successor a war that had been won -- and his successor quite nearly lost it.
Actually George W. left Obama a war that had been nearly won - and Obama lost it by totally reversing US policy from containing Iran to building up Iran to the point we wound up with a small US force assisting General Suleyman's Revolutionary Guards liquidate the remains of our former allies, Iraq's Sunni Bedouins, and announcing to all the world who the new "strong horse" in the Middle East was to be.
Why did Obama do this? Perhaps just instinctively reversing anything Republican (and Bush), perhaps from some notion of establishing a new "balance of power" in the Middle East that would balance out to peace without an American presence in the region - who knows - but the result is what it is - the current situation - and Obama owns it.
Trump's problem is: Now what the hell do we do?
@Chuck, can you provide a link? When it comes to Trump and Bush I always assume you are lying.
"Actually George W. left Obama a war that had been nearly won - and Obama lost it by totally reversing US policy...."
How did Obama reverse US policy? He continued and expanded our illegal military actions and drone bombings in the region. "Trump's problem," as you call it, was created the minute we invaded Iraq.
Bullshit yourself, Cookie.
That's what happened and no about of crap shoveled by The Atlantic is going to change it.
The event was for the USS Lincoln. Bush landed on the carrier.
He also used the event to announce the end of major combat operations in Iraq. Which it was.
The event was not about Bush. It was about the USS Lincoln.
I remember it well. I don't need some leftist revising what fucking happened.
This shit's been going for about 70 years now. Isn't time we acknowledged the Constitution is null and void?
"The event was not about Bush. It was about the USS Lincoln.
I remember it well. I don't need some leftist revising what fucking happened."
I remember it well, myself, particularly how ridiculous it was that they had Bush dressed up in a flight suit, emphasizing his presidential junk. No one watching the speech on tv thought for even one second about the crew of the USS Lincoln, (except for the families of the crew). The Lincoln was delayed out at sea in order for Bush's PR stunt to be carried out.
As I recall, Bush flew to the aircraft carrier on a Navy airplane, and the flight suit was required. Not to mention that he'd worn such suits before when he flew his own TANG jet: if some draft-dodger or never-served like Clinton or Obama or Trump had worn a flight suit, that would have been 'dressing up', but both Bushes earned the flight-suit the hard way.
Got any more warmed-over bullshit talking points from way back when?
"As I recall, Bush flew to the aircraft carrier on a Navy airplane, and the flight suit was required. Not to mention that he'd worn such suits before when he flew his own TANG jet: if some draft-dodger or never-served like Clinton or Obama or Trump had worn a flight suit, that would have been 'dressing up', but both Bushes earned the flight-suit the hard way."
Hahaha!
Bush was a draft-dodger, in that he had his dad get him into the Texas Air National Guard to avoid going to Vietnam. As for "earning the flightsuit the hard way," his dad did, but Bush was never near a battlefield, so let's say he "earned" his flight suit "the medium way." But that's cool, the Vietnam war was an unjustified atrocity and anyone who had the means to avoid going was well advised to do so. As for "the flight suit was required" excuse...why? Because he arrived in a Navy jet? Well, why was that necessary? The USS Lincoln was only about 30 miles offshore...he could have been flown out in a helicopter. Or, if for some unlikely reason the jet was the only way he could have been flown to the Lincoln, he could have changed into his suit and tie before appearing before the cameras and the troops. Or, he could have simply boarded the Lincoln when it pulled into port. No need to fly him out there at all.
The point is, the whole thing was calculated propaganda to create an effect for the public. It was fakery at its most grandiose.
Robert Cook: My respect for Dukakis went up 95 brownie points when he released video of himself actually enjoying the ride in the Abrams tank. He was ridiculed for the mushroom helmet, but the smile on his face as the tank barreled around the field was real. Had he the sense of any nonpolitician, he would have said so and completely derailed the criticism.
GWB rode the jet to the carrier because he could. It was fun. It was propaganda, but it was positive propaganda meant to showcase America's greatness, not denigrate the military. I'd love to fly on a fighter jet to a carrier landing. Wouldn't you? And as I recall, Bush said pretty much that he envied the crew their youth and ability, in finer words on the carrier deck, to the men & women just back from a successful battle deployment.
I never said the propaganda stunt was done to denigrate the military.
I'm sure it was fun for Bush to ride in the jet. (I don't think I'd like to...I don't even like roller coasters.) However, it was unnecessary for him to appear before the cameras and crew dressed in a flight suit. It was to intended for him to ride in the jet and appear in the flight suit in order to sell Bush as a great warrior and to sell his message that we had triumphed in Iraq, (when all we had really done was smash the country into bits, and its still broken all these years later).
Robert Cook, I'm sorry you cannot be nuanced enough in your understanding of public relations and US governance to see that positive reinforcement by one's boss - congratulations on a job well done - is acceptable, even commendable, as it shows the public that their military accomplished a difficult thing and did so quite well.
Even in the speech on the carrier's deck Bush admitted the work in Iraq was far from over, many problems remained, and so on. Most non-haters could see,a nd even more importantly, admit that there is a difference between congratulating the military on accomplishing their mission and claiming the war was won completely and only rainbows would fly over Iraq anon. Bush did the former, justifiably. Haters saw only the latter, in their own twisted minds.
If only the event on the carrier had used a visual display of some kind, expressing the subject of the speech Bush gave congratulating the carrier's men and women on accomplishing their mission, perhaps you might have a better understanding of his actions that day. Maybe a banner that said "Mission Accomplished" instead of "War Over, Peace at Hand." If only.
Post a Comment