Re-writing history

While listening to the radio today (that's all I do with my job), I heard several radio show hosts comment on the speech given last night by President Bush. Of the coming year in Iraq he stated: "Let me be clear: The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent. Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue -- and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties" (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070110-7.html). Several hosts commented on this portion of the speech and said the media would over-emphasize this point - just more of the liberal media distorting facts again. According to Madison talk show host Vicki McKenna, the Bush administration stated from the beginning that we should expect a bloody, difficult and protracted struggle. Let's look back at some of their comments:

In the lead up to the war, March 16 2003
MR. RUSSERT: do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly and bloody battle with significant American casualties? [emphasis my own]

VICE PRES. DICK CHENEY: I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators...The read we get on the people of Iraq is there’s no question but what they want to get rid of Saddam Hussein and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080244/)
----He does not seem to think the upcoming war will be difficult or bloody

20 June 2005
VICE PRES. DICK CHENEY: The level of activity that we see today from a military standpoint, I think, will clearly decline. I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency. (http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/30/cheney.iraq/)
----The oposition seems to be ending, again, very rosey on the prospects of a short conflict

19 June 2006
VICE PRES. DICK CHENEY: I guess if I look back on it now, I don't think anybody anticipated the level of violence that we've encountered. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/06/20060619-10.html)
----If they stated all along that this would be a proctracted struggle, then he would have anticipated the level of violence

14 November 2002
SSEC'Y DONALD RUMSFELD: I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today would last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that. And, it won't be a World War III. (http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2002/t11152002_t1114rum.html)
----Again, not a long war

07 February 2003
SSEC'Y DONALD RUMSFELD: And it is not knowable if force will be used, but if it is to be used, it is not knowable how long that conflict would last. It could last, you know, six days, six weeks. I doubt six months. [emphasis my own] (http://www.defenselink.mil/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=1900)
----I do not think I need to editorialize this comments any further

20 February 2003
JIM LEHRER: Do you expect the invasion, if it comes, to be welcomed by the majority of the civilian population of Iraq?
SSEC'Y DONALD RUMSFELD: There's no question but that they would be welcomed. (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june03/rumsfeld_2-20.html)

This does not include the incredible lies regarding the cost of the war ('The oil revenues would pay for the war itself' HA!). Looking at the comments above, Iraq should have resolved itself by now. Alas, it has not.