The way I see it, as a veteran who served in Iraq in 1990/91, and the way hundreds of millions (if not billions) of people see it, the "truth" is to be seen for what it is in the case of the OCCUPATION of Iraq. An OCCUPATION.

Let's be clear here.... Bush is NOT right in continuing to occupy Iraq, and no manner of wishing and hoping that one day he will turn out "right" is going to change that reality. Bush is not Truman, Bush is not Churchill, Bush is not FDR etc etc etc.


So when you state:
"So it is not about what how we feel about something; it is about what the true situation really is that counts!! " then I propose that you take your own advice at hand. The "true situation" reflects that:
1) We are NOT helping our war on terror by continuing to occupy Iraq. We are nothing more....than OCCUPIERS...period.
2) The PEOPLE of Iraq are overwhelmingly stating (Almost 80 percent) that they want us out, and feel we are OCCUPIERS.
3) The Parliament of Iraq is requesting we leave.

As for what would happen to those "poooor people if we leave", and the "we have to stay for them" excuse?
Who should determine overall that decision? I mean really, who should? Shouldn't it be THEM? Common sense dictates so, does it not? The PEOPLE want us out and the parliament wants us out, so you have to ask yourself a simple question. WHY is that question about "what about them" STILL being asked? THEY are requesting we LEAVE. Bush is NOT right. We cannot force "democracy" by the barrel of a gun....


Now, if it may "feel" good to make a "straw argument" by comparing Truman and his words from the past to Bush and the present day, but the "true situation" is, that we are seen as occupiers, we are wanted out, and only about 28 percent of "Bush Apologists" feel that somehow, someway, this man of "Gawd" will pull his numbers up by pure miracle in the next 20 years somehow.

Bush is not right...and he's not a "leader". Some who would claim his "steadfastedness" is what he is, would be blind to the fact that the term that should be applied here is simply, STUBBORN. Leadership isn't always being "steadfast". Leadership, involves changing and adapting to the situation at hand, and the reality on the ground. Stubborn leaders get people killed, stubborn leaders lose battles, stubborn leaders lose war, and stubborn leaders lose NATIONS.
He has been a STUBBORN failure all his life, and has had Jim Baker and other family members pull his A$$ out of one failure after another, time and time again.

The "true situation" is we are nothing more than OCCUPIERS, and until we get this stubborn man out of the WH (and preferably out of the country), we can expect to have more of the same.

Bush was right on Sept 12th....and then blew the support of the world....