Bush's speech last night.

[Mr. President]

Originally posted by Agathon
12 posts before someone posts a semi-pro-Bush post. Even then it's "pity the poor idiot led on by those other morons."

He's toast.

Do you really think the internet is indicative of public opinion?

If the economy doesn't pull up, Bush is toast.

Although looking at the Democrats lining up for candidacy, I'm glad I'm not registered to vote.

[MikeH]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
oh, come on. give bush a break. we were right to go into iraq and get rid of that two-bit dictator.

now, the huge mess we have there is because of those idiot chickenhawks who thought we could win peace the same way we won the war.

Isn't that the whole reason most of us were against the war anyway? No plan for what was going to happen after Saddam was toppled. At least if we'd gone in with UN backing there would be people who would help with peacekeeping. Sticking two fingers up at them and telling them we didn't need them makes it even more pathetic to go begging for their help now.

[Mr. President]

No plan for what was going to happen after Saddam was toppled.

I hear that.

We could get some Nigerian mercenaries to bust the place up. Better than reinstating the draft.

[dannubis]

but in the mean time in bagdad ...

[Drake Tungsten]

even scarier, some of those chickenhawks, emboldened by their successes in afghanistan and iraq in destroying the governments and bringing democracy to those blighted countries, think that other dictatorships will be just as easy to knock over. kim jong-il anyone?

What makes you think that? I haven't heard any serious person call for an attack on North Korea, especially not the "chickenhawks" in the Bush Administration.

[Q Classic]

What makes you think that? I haven't heard any serious person call for an attack on North Korea, especially not the "chickenhawks" in the Bush Administration.

several pundits, and some w*nkers on this board, too.

really, i agree with the common feeling that what we did was extraordinarily irresponsible: with even a shred of real diplomacy, we could've gotten the world with us, rather than against us.
the administration was just too subb-tull for that, though.

[Drake Tungsten]

several pundits, and some w*nkers on this board, too.

There's your problem. Listening to pundits and ****ers.

[BeBMan]

Europe, Japan and states in the Middle East all will benefit from the success of freedom in these two countries, and they should contribute to that success.

Benefits? So which oilfield is mine now?

[uh Clem]

What makes you think that? I haven't heard any serious person call for an attack on North Korea, especially not the "chickenhawks" in the Bush Administration.

Richard Perle did just that, several days ago. I don't know how "serious" Perle is, but he's a certified chickenhawk...totally nuts, too, for that matter.

[oedo]

Originally posted by TheStinger
The French Germans et al won't help unless the UN is in charge.

Another point is that they are broke too, they haven't got any money especially to go and Help their best freind George

I don´t think that being broke is considered as a valid reason not to send troops into military adventures. see notoriously broke Germany. after Kosovo-War they now have sent forces into various regions like Kosovo, Macedonia, Afghanistan, Georgia, Dshijbouti or Kuwait. and yet, some politicians (even from the Green Party) generally support the idea of German troops in Iraq. but of course a UN-resolution would be required before.

I wouldn´t be too surprised if France and Germany would try a delay-strategy. unlike the Bush-admin they really don´t need to hurry with agreeing on a resolution.time is running against Bush, no one else. why not waiting and delaying, letting Bush stumble over the next elections and hoping for a new, more faithful president who is more willing and able to compromise?

another point: if the Bush-admin really gets away with this, they will most likely try their strategy again on other so called “rouge-states”. finding a lie to justify another war, signing the treaties for country building after the aggression and finally trying to convince th UN so others would pay for the mess.

@topic: nice speech and a pretty good description of what´s currently going on in whitehouse and pentagon.

[Drake Tungsten]

I don't know how "serious" Perle is

Perle is a pretty serious player. Got a link? I'd be interested to see it...

[Verto]

I thought it was a good speech. Then again, I don't foam at the mouth whenever I see a picture of him, so I may be a bit biased in the matter.

And if you are going to start a thread about the speech, you should at least include it.

Good evening. I have asked for this time to keep you informed of America's actions in the war on terror.

Nearly two years ago, following deadly attacks on our country, we began a systematic campaign against terrorism. These months have been a time of new responsibilities, and sacrifice, and national resolve, and great progress.

America and a broad coalition acted first in Afghanistan, by destroying the training camps of terror, and removing the regime that harbored al Qaeda. In a series of raids and actions around the world, nearly two-thirds of al Qaeda's known leaders have been captured or killed, and we continue on al Qaeda's trail. We have exposed terrorist front groups, seized terrorist accounts, taken new measures to protect our homeland, and uncovered sleeper cells inside the United States. And we acted in Iraq, where the former regime sponsored terror, possessed and used weapons of mass destruction, and for 12 years defied the clear demands of the United Nations Security Council. Our coalition enforced these international demands in one of the swiftest and most humane military campaigns in history.

For a generation leading up to September 11, 2001, terrorists and their radical allies attacked innocent people in the Middle East and beyond, without facing a sustained and serious response. The terrorists became convinced that free nations were decadent and weak. And they grew bolder, believing that history was on their side. Since America put out the fires of September 11, and mourned our dead, and went to war, history has taken a different turn. We have carried the fight to the enemy. We are rolling back the terrorist threat to civilization, not on the fringes of its influence, but at the heart of its power.

This work continues. In Iraq, we are helping the longsuffering people of that country to build a decent and democratic society at the center of the Middle East. Together we are transforming a place of torture chambers and mass graves into a nation of laws and free institutions. This undertaking is difficult and costly - yet worthy of our country, and critical to our security.

The Middle East will either become a place of progress and peace, or it will be an exporter of violence and terror that takes more lives in America and in other free nations. The triumph of democracy and tolerance in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and beyond would be a grave setback for international terrorism. The terrorists thrive on the support of tyrants and on the resentments of oppressed peoples. When tyrants fall, and resentment gives way to hope, men and women in every culture reject the ideologies of terror, and turn to the pursuits of peace. Everywhere that freedom takes hold, terror will retreat.

Our enemies understand this. They know that a free Iraq will be free of them -- free of assassins, and torturers, and secret police. They know that as democracy rises in Iraq, all of their hateful ambitions will fall like the statues of the former dictator. And that is why, five months after we liberated Iraq, a collection of killers is desperately trying to undermine Iraq's progress and throw the country into chaos.

Some of the attackers are former members of the old Saddam regime, who fled the battlefield and now fight in the shadows. Some of the attackers are foreign terrorists, who have come to Iraq to pursue their war on America and other free nations. We cannot be certain to what extent these groups work together. We do know they have a common goal -- reclaiming Iraq for tyranny.

Most, but not all, of these killers operate in one area of the country. The attacks you have heard and read about in the last few weeks have occurred predominantly in the central region of Iraq, between Baghdad and Tikrit -- Saddam Hussein's former stronghold. The North of Iraq is generally stable and is moving forward with reconstruction and self-government. The same trends are evident in the South, despite recent attacks by terrorist groups.

Though their attacks are localized, the terrorists and Saddam loyalists have done great harm. They have ambushed American and British service members -- who stand for freedom and order. They have killed civilian aid workers of the United Nations -- who represent the compassion and generosity of the world. They have bombed the Jordanian embassy -- the symbol of a peaceful Arab country. And last week they murdered a respected cleric and over a hundred Muslims at prayer -- bombing a holy shrine and a symbol of Islam's peaceful teachings.

This violence is directed, not only against our coalition, but against anyone in Iraq who stands for decency, and freedom, and progress.

There is more at work in these attacks than blind rage. The terrorists have a strategic goal. They want us to leave Iraq before our work is done. They want to shake the will of the civilized world. In the past, the terrorists have cited the examples of Beirut and Somalia, claiming that if you inflict harm on Americans, we will run from a challenge. In this, they are mistaken.

Two years ago, I told the Congress and the country that the war on terror would be a lengthy war, a different kind of war, fought on many fronts in many places. Iraq is now the central front. Enemies of freedom are making a desperate stand there -- and there they must be defeated. This will take time, and require sacrifice. Yet we will do what is necessary, we will spend what is necessary, to achieve this essential victory in the war on terror, to promote freedom, and to make our own nation more secure.

America has done this kind of work before. Following World War II, we lifted up the defeated nations of Japan and Germany, and stood with them as they built representative governments. We committed years and resources to this cause. And that effort has been repaid many times over in three generations of friendship and peace. America today accepts the challenge of helping the Iraqi people in the same spirit -- for their sake, and our own.

Our strategy in Iraq has three objectives -- destroying the terrorists -- enlisting the support of other nations for a free Iraq -- and helping Iraqis assume responsibility for their own defense and their own future.

First, we are taking direct action against the terrorists in the Iraqi theater, which is the surest way to prevent future attacks on coalition forces and the Iraqi people. We are staying on the offensive, with a series of precise strikes against enemy targets increasingly guided by intelligence given to us by Iraqi citizens. Since the end of major combat operations, we have conducted raids seizing many caches of enemy weapons and massive amounts of ammunition, and we have captured or killed hundreds of Saddam loyalists and terrorists. So far, of the 55 most wanted former Iraqi leaders, 42 are dead or in custody. We are sending a clear message: Anyone who seeks to harm our soldiers can know that our soldiers are hunting for them.

Second, we are committed to expanding international cooperation in the reconstruction and security of Iraq, just as we are in Afghanistan. Our military commanders in Iraq advise me that the current number of American troops -- nearly 130,000 -- is appropriate to their mission. They are joined by over 20,000 service members from 29 other countries. Two multinational divisions, led by the British and the Poles, are serving alongside our forces -- and in order to share the burden more broadly, our commanders have requested a third multinational division to serve in Iraq.

Some countries have requested an explicit authorization of the United Nations Security Council before committing troops to Iraq. I have directed Secretary of State Colin Powell to introduce a new Security Council resolution, which would authorize the creation of a multinational force in Iraq, led by America.

I recognize that not all of our friends agreed with our decision to enforce the Security Council resolutions and remove Saddam Hussein from power. Yet we cannot let past differences interfere with present duties. Terrorists in Iraq have attacked representatives of the civilized world, and opposing them must be the cause of the civilized world. Members of the United Nations now have an opportunity, and the responsibility, to assume a broader role in assuring that Iraq becomes a free and democratic nation.

Third, we are encouraging the orderly transfer of sovereignty and authority to the Iraqi people. Our coalition came to Iraq as liberators and we will depart as liberators. Right now Iraq has its own Governing Council, comprised of 25 leaders representing Iraq's diverse people. The Governing Council recently appointed cabinet ministers to run government departments. Already more than 90 percent of towns and cities have functioning local governments, which are restoring basic services. We are helping to train civil defense forces to keep order -- and an Iraqi police service to enforce the law -- and a facilities protection service -- and Iraqi border guards to help secure the borders -- and a new Iraqi army. In all these roles, there are now some 60,000 Iraqi citizens under arms, defending the security of their own country -- and we are accelerating the training of more.

Iraq is ready to take the next steps toward self-government. The Security Council resolution we introduce will encourage Iraq's Governing Council to submit a plan and a timetable for the drafting of a constitution, and for free elections. From the outset, I have expressed confidence in the ability of the Iraqi people to govern themselves. Now they must rise to the responsibilities of a free people and secure the blessings of their own liberty.

Our strategy in Iraq will require new resources. We have conducted a thorough assessment of our military and reconstruction needs in Iraq, and also in Afghanistan. I will soon submit to Congress a request for $87 billion. The request will cover ongoing military and intelligence operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, which we expect will cost 66 billion dollars over the next year. This budget request will support our commitment to helping the Iraqi and Afghan people rebuild their own nations, after decades of oppression and mismanagement. We will provide funds to help them improve security. And we will help them to restore basic services, such as electricity and water, and to build new schools, roads, and medical clinics. This effort is essential to the stability of those nations, and therefore to our own security. Now and in the future, we will support our troops and we will keep our word to the more than 50 million people of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Later this month, Secretary Powell will meet with representatives of many nations to discuss their financial contributions to the reconstruction of Afghanistan. Next month, he will hold a similar funding conference for the reconstruction of Iraq. Europe, Japan, and states in the Middle East all will benefit from the success of freedom in these two countries, and they should contribute to that success.

The people of Iraq are emerging from a long trial. For them, there will be no going back to the days of the dictator -- to the miseries and humiliation he inflicted on that good country. For the Middle East and the world, there will be no going back to the days of fear -- when a brutal and aggressive tyrant possessed terrible weapons. And for America, there will be no going back to the era before September 11th, 2001 -- to false comfort in a dangerous world. We have learned that terrorist attacks are not caused by the use of strength -- they are invited by the perception of weakness. And the surest way to avoid attacks on our own people is to engage the enemy where he lives and plans. We are fighting that enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan today, so that we do not meet him again on our own streets, in our own cities.

The heaviest burdens in our war on terror fall, as always, on the men and women of our armed forces and our intelligence services. They have removed gathering threats to America and our friends, and this nation takes great pride in their incredible achievements. We are grateful for their skill and courage, and for their acts of decency, which have shown America's character to the world. We honor the sacrifice of their families. And we mourn every American who has died so bravely, and so far from home.

The Americans who assume great risks overseas understand the great cause they are in. Not long ago I received a letter from a captain in the 3rd Infantry Division in Baghdad. He wrote about his pride in serving a just cause, and about the deep desire of Iraqis for liberty. "I see it," he said, "in the eyes of a hungry people every day here. They are starved for freedom and opportunity." And he concluded, "I just thought you'd like a note from the 'front lines of freedom.'" That Army captain, and all of our men and women serving in the war on terror, are on the front lines of freedom. And I want each of them to know: Your country thanks you, and your country supports you.

Fellow citizens: We have been tested these past 24 months, and the dangers have not passed. Yet Americans are responding with courage and confidence. We accept the duties of our generation. We are active and resolute in our own defense. We are serving in freedom's cause -- and that is the cause of all mankind.

Thank you, and good night. And may God continue to bless America.

[Jac de Molay]

And for America, there will be no going back to the era before September 11th, 2001 -- to false comfort in a dangerous world. We have learned that terrorist attacks are not caused by the use of strength -- they are invited by the perception of weakness. And the surest way to avoid attacks on our own people is to engage the enemy where he lives and plans. We are fighting that enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan today, so that we do not meet him again on our own streets, in our own cities.

In other words, it's better to spread violence, death, and destruction in your neck of the woods so we can be safe and comfie in ours.

That's a great way to galvanize Arab support in the region.

[Immortal Wombat]

Two completely different, utterly irreconciable worldviews. If only we had the terrorists' viewpoint to give us the other side of this whole business.

[Elden]

Originally posted by Verto
And if you are going to start a thread about the speech, you should at least include it.

I prefered Agathon's summary