ABC interview with *

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

ABC interview with *

Postby nomo » Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:28 pm

Bush: U.S. Won't Get Into Iraq Civil War<br><br>President Bush Grants Elizabeth Vargas Exclusive, Wide-Ranging Interview<br><br>WASHINGTON, Feb. 28, 2006 — - In an exclusive interview with ABC News' Elizabeth Vargas, President Bush offered his views on a range of topics, including the response to Hurricane Katrina, the war in Iraq, U.S. port security and the future of his presidency. What follows is an excerpt from the full interview. For more of the interview, watch World News Tonight at 6:30 P.M. ET and the daily webcast, World News Now, at 3 P.M. ET.<br><br>ELIZABETH VARGAS: A congressional report assessed the U.S. reaction as "woefully unprepared" not only for a natural disaster now but for a terrorist attack, the state of readiness right now of the United States. Setting aside future improvements that you plan, today do you agree with that assessment, that the United States is "woefully unprepared" for another natural disaster or attack?<br><br>PRESIDENT BUSH: I agree that we didn't do as good a job as we could have done on Katrina. However, I would remind people that there was a hurricane right after Katrina that hit Louisiana and Texas, and the response was much better coordinated, and the situational awareness on the ground was much improved. And so while I can't predict 100 percent success on a catastrophic -- major catastrophic event, I can say that lessons learned from Katrina were being implemented quickly.<br><br>Listen, here's the problem that happened in Katrina. There was no situational awareness, and that means that we weren't getting good, solid information from people who were on the ground, and we need to do a better job. One reason we weren't is because communications systems got wiped out, and in many cases we were relying upon the media, who happened to have better situational awareness than the government. And when you have the media have better situational awareness than the government, the American people are saying, "Wait a minute. What is happening?"<br><br>VARGAS: So you don't agree with that report that calls the U.S. "woefully unprepared"?<br><br>BUSH: I think the U.S. is better prepared than woefully unprepared. There's no question we've got more work to do, and our report on Katrina outlined the work that needs to be done.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>VARGAS: When you look back on those days immediately following when Katrina struck, what moment do you think was the moment that you realized that the government was failing, especially the people of New Orleans?<br><br>BUSH: When I saw TV reporters interviewing people who were screaming for help. It looked -- the scenes looked chaotic and desperate. And I realized that our government was -- could have done a better job of comforting people. A lot went right, by the way. But the chaotic scenes were very troubling. It just -- it was very unsettling for me to realize our fellow citizens were in near-panic wondering where the help was.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>VARGAS: Let's move to Iraq. This has been a rough few days in Iraq since the bombing of the mosque in Samarra. There's been a lot of sectarian violence. What is the policy if, in fact, a civil war should break out or the sectarian violence continues? Are you willing to sacrifice American lives to get the Sunnis and the Shiites to stop killing each other?<br><br>BUSH: I don't buy your premise that there's going to be a civil war. There's no question that the bomber of the mosque is trying to create sectarian violence, and there's no question there was reaction to it. On the other hand, I had the duty, which I did, to call these leaders, Shi'a and Sunni leaders, as well as Kurdish leaders.<br><br>And the response was that we understand this is a moment that we've got to make a choice if we're going to have sectarian strife or whether or not we're going to unify. And I heard loud and clear that they understand that they're going to choose unification, and we're going to help them do so.<br><br>VARGAS: But what is the plan if the sectarian violence continues? I mean, do the U.S. troops take a larger role? Do they step in more actively to stop the violence?<br><br>BUSH: No. The troops are chasing down terrorists. They're protecting themselves and protecting the people, and -- but a major function is to train the Iraqis so they can do the work. I mean the ultimate success in Iraq -- and I believe we're going to be successful -- is for the Iraqi citizens to continue to demand unity.<br><br>VARGAS: So let me make sure I understand you. No matter what happens with the level of sectarian violence, the U.S. troops will stay there?<br><br>BUSH: The U.S. troops will stay there so long as -- until the Iraqis can defend themselves. I mean, my policy has not changed.<br> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
nomo
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 1:48 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: ABC interview with *

Postby Col Quisp » Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:38 pm

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Listen, here's the problem that happened in Katrina. There was no situational awareness, and that means that we weren't getting good, solid information from people who were on the ground, and we need to do a better job. One reason we weren't is because communications systems got wiped out, and in many cases we were relying upon the media, who happened to have better situational awareness than the government. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Love it. The communications systems were deliberately blocked, as I recall someone saying at the time.<br><br>What happened during Katrina was perhaps the worst travesty in the history of this country, maybe worse than 9/11, because people were deliberately left to starve, or be killed by hospital workers who just wanted to get out, or be packed into that hellhole, swept off to unknown territory, stripped of all possessions and dignity. Reduced to forage for food like animals, then called "looters." Left to starve while food, water and aid were available but BLOCKED by FEMA. Left to suffer without medications. Children disappeared, still not found. Toxic waste everywhere. People can't return to their homes, while the city is being rebuilt so they can't afford to come back.<br><br>Lessons learned. Indeed.<br><br>"My Pet Goat."<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Col Quisp
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 2:52 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: ABC interview with *

Postby StarmanSkye » Wed Mar 01, 2006 1:56 am

--Quote--<br>Listen, here's the problem that happened in Katrina. There was no situational awareness, and that means that we weren't getting good, solid information from people who were on the ground, and we need to do a better job. One reason we weren't is because communications systems got wiped out, and in many cases we were relying upon the media, who happened to have better situational awareness than the government. <br>--unquote--<br><br>Another aspect to this 'communication failure' -- <br>How can FEMA (or anyone) possibly claim this couldn't have been reasonably anticipated and planned for? HOW could there by so much incompetance by so-called experts whose jobs it were to game-plan contingencies and disaster-response -- and for NO ONE to be actually held criminally accountable? WHY weren't FEMA officials and top military commanders provided with adequate radios/telephones and portable power/radio equipment? Ineffective planning or planned-failure?<br><br>Also -- There was obviously NO attention given AT ALL to keeping the displaced public reasonably informed and organized -- this would have gone a HUGE way towards providing needs by simple communication -- Capable volunteers could have been organized among those displaced to network with officials (as indeed, people WERE helping each other with their very limited resources); I don't doubt that 10 out of 100 people could have done a FAR better job than Brown or many of the FEMA officials, in anticipating what needed to be done, what supplies and emergency care needed to happen, how to distribute aid and delegate people to get things done. The utter humiliation and lack of dignity the Katrina refugees were made to feel at the hand of FEMA's abusive fumbling speak volumes.<br><br>But in that NO ONE in a situation of authority even recognized how vital it was to morale and to foster cooperation and to establish trust in simply giving people information -- TALKING to them. This government (Bush et al, including sell-out & incompetant Demos) are so self-absorbed and disconnected and insular, they don't think they SHOULD make an effort to communicate or get people working together collectively. The Katrina aftermath showed what happens when a government no longer really cares about its people -- even when what it does was a 'success' it came with incredible waste, fraud, mismanagement, stupidities (10,000 trailers sitting in the mud, unoccupied, while rent-space is being paid and people are homeless?)<br><br>Remember when Bush said, on tv, that it was NEVER acceptable for people to scavenge food and water, even in dire need?<br><br>America should be collectively ashamed such a criminally-vapid dolt was ever allowed to steal the president's office.<br><br>Indeed, 'Lessons Learned.' -- What an outrageous farce.<br><br>Starman<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
StarmanSkye
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:32 pm
Location: State of Jefferson
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: ABC interview with *

Postby chiggerbit » Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:14 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Listen, here's the problem that happened in Katrina. There was no situational awareness, and that means that we weren't getting good, solid information from people who were on the ground, and we need to do a better job. One reason we weren't is because communications systems got wiped out, and in many cases we were relying upon the media, who happened to have better situational awareness than the government<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :rollin --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/roll.gif ALT=":rollin"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

I Don't Like Chiggers, but, I'm With chiggerbit...

Postby Floyd Smoots » Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:29 am

But, for goodness' sake, let's never, never talk about the much-blogged (elsewhere) twenty-odd Ear Witnesses who heard explosions anywhere near the levies. Naw, not only Didn't happen, but COULDN'T HAPPEN!!! No one in, or out of government would EVER do THAT!!! (pardon my chem-trail-induced coughing spell here)....----.....----.....----<br>Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, Oklahoma City, Waco, Ruby Ridge, Twin Towers, Baghdad Mosque, cough, Cough, COUGH........Damn it, I think I've got a touch of Byrd (sic) Flu. What's a poor boy to do???<br><br>Fellow Freedom-bloggers, slimmie, anti, Pugz......I KNOW I'm leaving out a few other "events" here. Please feel free to weigh in, and fill the ones I've missed.<br><br>Verinoid Floyd<br> <p></p><i></i>
Floyd Smoots
 
Posts: 548
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Agent for Peace

Postby Gouda » Wed Mar 01, 2006 7:13 am

I also posted this in the 'something must be right w/ Bush' thread...<br><br>In the Vargas interview, Bush said "...he hopes that his presidency, in retrospect, will be viewed as an <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>agent for peace</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->."<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/28/bush.interview/index.html">edition.cnn.com/2006/POLI...index.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Gouda
 
Posts: 3009
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 1:53 am
Location: a circular mould
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to Bush Family

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest