A few of points stick out as simply amazing.
1. We must recognize Iraq as the central front in our war on terror
Just one little point here. This only became a reality when we invaded the country. Prior to that is was a nation headed by a nasty little eunuch, disgusting but powerless. At the time of our invasion Iraq was in no way a central point for terrorism.
2. We will not relent until the organized international terror networks are exposed and broken and their leaders held to account for their acts of murder
Is this why you let Bin Laden escape at Tora Bora? This sure conflicts with your October 2004 statement "I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him."
3. You claim that Terrorists use war as excuse.
I will also point out that you have been using Terrorism as an excuse. It is well known that you wanted to invade Iraq long prior to the World Trade Center attack, and it is clear that you want to tie Saddam to those attacks. You use Terrorism to excuse almost each and every one of your failures or as a reason for repressive policies.
This pep talk also ignored some very hard realities.
While we love to blame foreign fighters for out trouble in Iraq. There are very good estimates that they number only 5-10% of those we are fighting in Iraq. That means that 90-95% of those we are fighting are Iraqi. (PS, about 5% of the US armed forces are non Americans, and thus foreign fighters)
Yes Iraq is a disaster area, but it is one of your making. Your desire to hold the course is just a recipe for further failure. We are already in the middle of a civil war, and our presence is a major factor helping to fuel this war.
A new path is called for, but Bush is clearly not going to be the man to find that path.
2 comments:
Your point number one is even worse when you consider that he said "Would the United States and other free nations be more safe or less safe with Zarqawi and Bin Laden in control of Iraq, its people and its resources?" As if Bin Laden is now in control over Iraq. You know, I honestly thought that he really believed what he was saying, as if they hadn't changed their justification for war countless times.
That statement would lead you to believe that we were merely responding to Al-Qaeda's invasion of Iraq. And what is the answer to that question President Bush? Will that change in 2006, when Republican incumbents are on the line? Will it suddenly seem not such a bad thing to leave Zarqawi in Iraq, and draw down our forces?
Post a Comment