War in Iraq: When all else fails President continues to redefine "success"

Redefining success in Iraq seems to be a sport that many of us can play. Our President has had a head start on us with 4 plus years experience in this area and is considered a Black Belt in this sport. For example, at the early stages of the Iraq invasion here's a list of what success was defined as:

* Removing Saddam Hussein from power (accomplished)
* WMD's and their growing threat to America (unsuccessful)
* Saddam Hussein's suspected connection to Al Qaeda (incorrect then, correct now)
* Human Rights abuses by Saddam Hussein (well documented then, now we write a new chapter of our own abuses i.e. Abu Ghraib)
* Rooting out any terrorists who may have found safe haven there under Saddam's rule. (We found a way to attract a lot more recently: Just stay there with no plan to leave!)


Then after the invasion and we were there for a while we changed the definition of success to:
* Mission accomplished
* Help Iraqis build a democratic government
* Elected government
* Ensure that one brutal dictator is not replaced by another (Where's a good dictator when you need one? :)

Lately Bush has defined success as follows:
* Demanding more from Iraq's Elected Government.
* Sectarian violence down
* An acceptable level of violence
* Either we'll succeed, or we won't


Now I would like to add my own definitions of success in Iraq:
* If we stay in Iraq they won't throw us out until their Army or Militias are strong enough! Then we will know the training has been successful.
* As long as I (Bush) am President, we haven't lost. I still have until Fall of 2008, unless they impeach me.
* As long as gas prices are high, Americans won't even be thinking about Iraq.
* As long as I can keep a volunteer Army in place, Americans will be satisfied and won't really mess with my (Bush) Administration. Hope they keep enlisting!

Feel free to leave one yourself.