Friday, January 12, 2007

President George W Bush's Speech

Highlights from Pres. Bush's speech to the American people underlining the reasons for continuing to support this War against Radical Islam.

"Tonight in Iraq, the Armed Forces of the United States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror"
- This is truly global and and is a threat to Western Democratic values.

"Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely. They have done everything we have asked them to do. Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me."
- Refreshing for a leader to accept responsibility.

"there is no magic formula for success in Iraq."
- just a long and hard grind.

"The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits. They would be in a better position to topple moderate governments, create chaos in the region, and use oil revenues to fund their ambitions. Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons."
- Have to stop the nutters in Iran from getting nuclear weapons.

"Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents. And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have."
- Change the rules of engagement and get rid of the media and videos, cameras, etc, so that the troops are free to fight without their hands tied behind their backs.

"This time, we'll have the force levels we need to hold the areas that have been cleared. In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian violence. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter those neighborhoods"
- and get rid of Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army.

"This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks. Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering."
- not only the enemies in Iraq but also the Western liberal press!

"Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq. "
- They have been warned.

"We will use America's full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists and a strategic threat to their survival. These nations have a stake in a successful Iraq that is at peace with its neighbors, and they must step up their support for Iraq's unity government."
- It is time they stood up and were counted; Europe as well!

"It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time. On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation. On the other side are extremists who kill the innocent, and have declared their intention to destroy our way of life."
- you are so right Georgie.

"to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology of the enemy, by advancing liberty across a troubled region."

"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."
- This will make the lily-livered Democrats and MSM whinge more.

"Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship. But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world -- a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law, respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its people."

"to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear the country apart, and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale."

Contrary to the image the Western media, the Democrats and all the dim-witted, outspoken "celebrities" would like us to believe, I think George has a clear understanding of what is going on and what needs to be done. He needs to be bold now and see it through.

Victory is imperative, loss to scary to contemplate.


barry said...

I couldn't agree more!!

Watch this space for Condoleeza Rice to put her hat in the Republican ring for President next year. Her politics are on the same wavelength as George W.

This smart lady would make Hilary Clinton look like the proverbial Democratic wimp.

mawm said...

Condi is a tough lady - she'll eat clinton for breakfast.

kg said...

I don't agree, guys. Rice, like Powell, has become little more than a mouthpiece for the State Department.
And the State Department is one of the main impediments to fighting this war as it needs to be fought. State employees are still hostage to the Saudis, often leaving government employ and ending up on the Saudi payroll as a reward for pushing the interests of the Saudis.
Again and again State has ignored the interests of American citizens (esp. the cases of children being kidnapped by their Saudi fathers) to avoid upsetting Ryadh.
Rice and Powell have done nothing to reform them.

mawm said...

Rice is an academic whose political career began with membership of the Democratic Party. She changed to Republican because she felt more of an individual there rather than one of the group. Although she has served in conservative administrations and especially with neo-conservatives Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeild, she has shown that she is not as hardline as they are by wanting to repair relations with key European Allies, offering to negotiate with rogue states such as Iran and persuing multilateral diplomatic efforts in the face of N Korea's provocative missile tests.
Rice has at times taken advantage of her privileged position in the administration to champion a more cooperative foreign policy. An example would be her rebuff of John Bolton, one of the administration's hardline ideologues, when she did not give him a new portfolio within State, which ultimately led to Bolton's nomination as UN ambassador. She also gave support for José Miguel Insulza, a Chilean socialist, as secretary general of the Organization of American States and halt the U.S. push for a more right-wing candidate.
The Washington Post noted “The emerging picture is of a Secretary of State focused on solving problems and cutting deals with key allies. That necessarily means toning down U.S. preeminence and occasionally compromising on the hot-button causes of U.S conservatives.....If her first months are any indication, Condoleezza Rice will make pragmatism a stronger feature of the second term”
Seems to me there is a common theme in her behaviour - not the hardline neoconservative that she is often portrayed as, never the less she is a tough lady.

kg said...

"..never the less she is a tough lady."
No argument there. And a very bright one too.

barry said...

Of topical importance is the Editorial on P9 of this week's The Economist [Jan 13th]. Very sensibly written, I recommend you read it.