Some key points from the President’s speech last night (that was most likely missed since no networks covered it; of course they are not biased):
The Plan
There are five steps in our plan to help Iraq achieve democracy and freedom:
1. We will hand over authority to a sovereign Iraqi government;
2. help establish security;
3. continue rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure;
4. encourage more international support;
5. and move toward a national election that will bring forward new leaders empowered by the Iraqi people.
Completing the five steps to Iraqi elected self-government will not be easy.
There's likely to be more violence before the transfer of sovereignty and after the transfer of sovereignty. The terrorists and Saddam loyalists would rather see many Iraqis die than have any live in freedom.
The Message to the Arab World
But terrorists will not determine the future of Iraq.
I sent American troops to Iraq to defend our security, not to stay as an occupying power. I sent American troops to Iraq to make its people free, not to make them American.
The Message to the U.S.
In the last 32 months, history has placed great demands on our country and events have come quickly.
Americans have seen the flames of September 11th, followed battles in the mountains of Afghanistan and learned new terms like orange alert and ricin and dirty bomb.
We've seen killers at work on trains in Madrid, in a bank in Istanbul, in a synagogue in Tunis and at a nightclub in Bali. And now the families of our soldiers and civilian workers pray for their sons and daughters in Mosul, in Karbala, in Baghdad.
We did not seek this war on terror, but this is the world as we find it. We must keep our focus.
We must do our duty.
History is moving and it will tend toward hope or tend toward tragedy.
Message to the World
America and all the world will be safer when hope has returned to the Middle East. These two visions -- one of tyranny and murder, the other of liberty and life -- clashed in Afghanistan. And thanks to brave U.S. and coalition forces and to Afghan patriots, the nightmare of the Taliban is over and that nation is coming to life again.
These two visions have now met in Iraq and are contending for the future of that country.
The failure of freedom would only mark the beginning of peril and violence. But, my fellow Americans, we will not fail. We will persevere and defeat this enemy and hold this hard won ground for the realm of liberty.
Request to God
May God bless our country
My View
A key point to me, but was not specifically said, is that in the last 32 months history has not seen another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. You may hate the President, you may not respect his intellect, you may think or say whatever you like about him (as is evidenced on the news every night, especially over the last 8 weeks). But you cannot deny that he has made this country safer than it was on September 10th. Of course there are still areas that need attention and 4 more years of his leadership will provide him the opportunity to fill in those gaps. Being simultaneously for and against every social issue, every issue of national security and just being for a UN controlled world does make for good leadership. Kerry is a candidate of nuanced nuisance, and flip-flops and waffles do not a president make.
Just as those that are blinded by their hate for Bush and everything he stands for (freedom, liberty, security, etc.), I am blinded by my respect and admiration for him. I know he is not perfect and I do not agree with him 100% of the time, but we have not faced another 9/11 or anything like it which no one can refute. 100% of the people should be 100% behind leadership like that and unfortunately anything short of that is partisan politics. And dangerous for us all.
Posted by price at May 25, 2004 10:17 AMI think the horrific tradgeies of Sept. 11 have a lot more to do with the fact that there hasn't been a terrorist attack on our soil then President Bush has done. I'm not saying he hasn't done anything but I don't think he deserves full credit. Sept.11 clearly was a wake-up call to our way of life, our taking our safety for granted and it put our internal defense systems on notice that things could very easily be comprimised.
Clearly, I am not a Bush supporter and despite that, I early on supported the war in Iraq. We all believed the messages about WMD and their danger to the entire Middle East. Now, I feel that America was duped into a war we did not really need. And still many American lives, men and women, are being lost for what, really? So, that we can enforce our way of life and government on a 5,000 year-old civilization that has its own way of doing things that we can't even begin to fathom. Sure, we need to work to defeat terrorism, but there's a difference between fighting terrorism and being what amounts to a colonial power.
I'm all for democracy and it should be interesting to see how things pan out after June 30. But many mistakes have been made in Iraq and very few of them have been admitted, or take responsibility for with the exception of the lives of the young people who have gotten lost in Bush War II.
Posted by: Rob at May 25, 2004 11:05 AMI appreciate your difference of opinion and pleased that you recognize the “wake-up call” that occurred on 9/11.
“but there's a difference between fighting terrorism and being what amounts to a colonial power.”
I think the President addressed your concerns about American imperialism/colonialism last night.
“I sent American troops to Iraq to make its people free, not to make them American.”
This is neither an attempt to maintain control over (colonialize) or acquire authority over (imperialize) this country, so that they are free to maintain their “5,000 year old civilization”.
“But many mistakes have been made in Iraq and very few of them have been admitted, or take responsibility for with the exception of the lives of the young people who have gotten lost in Bush War II.”
Unfortunately it is impossible to live a life mistake free and to expect perfection is unfair of anyone. However, do not confuse the actions of terrorists and the gruesome horrors that they commit for American mistakes. Furthermore, to look at this as “Bush War II”, is completely disingenuous. Do we call the Revolutionary War – George Washington’s War? No. Do we call the Civil War – Lincoln’s War? No; at least not outside the south. Do we call WWII – FDR’s War? No; of course not. These were the men that lead in a time of need, as President Bush is doing now. There are some that would call the War on Terror – WWIII. Perhaps when reading about it in history books 20 or 30 years from now, that’s exactly what it will be called. Greatness is found in not only recognizing that, “History is moving and it will tend toward hope or tend toward tragedy.”, but in preventing the latter and leading towards the former.
Posted by: Jeff Price at May 25, 2004 11:58 AMI don't think you can compare the war in Iraq to the Revolutionary or the Civil War. These were wars with specific purposes on a domestic agenda. WWII was a world-wide conflict that the US worked hard to avoid being drug into until the actions of Dec 7, 1941.
I am attempting to compare the horrific acts of terrorists with the malicious, immoral acts of a handful of American soldiers, interrogators and civilians under the auspices of the Department of Defense, the CIA and whomever else. What I'm saying is that someone at the top needs to step up to the plate and take responsibility for what happened in that prison. Now that would take a real leader.
Posted by: Rob at May 25, 2004 09:20 PMI was not comparing the battle in Iraq to the Revolutionary or Civil War, but I was referring to the War on Terror (WWIII perhaps?), that which the conflicts in Iraq are a part of. This is a world wide conflict as well, only it actually started prior to September 11th. There have been terrorist attacks affecting the entire Western civilization, including Israel for quite some time now. This is perhaps why Israel is such a strong ally to the U.S. now, because they have been confronting terror head on rather than trying to police it as a law enforcement issue for decades.
I appreciate your obvious loyalty to the Democratic party and the attempt at gallantry regarding the actions of a few soldiers at that prison. The general in command of those troops has been "suspended" (politically correct way for saying relieved of duty), and they are facing court marshals. This ball has been rolling since its discovery, by the military themselves not by the media. The media hype surrounding this is obviously not going to be satisfied until Rumsfeld resigns. True leadership is doing what is right in the face of adversity and there does not seem to be any proof that Rumsfeld has done anything that requires his resignation.
Additionally, I think it is of utmost importance to define our terms here:
"horrific acts of terrorists"
Horrific - grossly offensive to decency or morality
"immoral acts of a handful of American soldiers, [etc.]"
Immoral - violating principles of right and wrong
The Divergent Key
Atrocity - the quality of being shockingly cruel and inhumane
While I would agree that the terrorist actions were horrific and the soldier’s acts were immoral, it is not fair to compare the two as being atrocities. I would not want to argue degrees of atrocity or degrees of immorality or degrees of horrification (that’s really a word). The terrorists have committed atrocities and our soldiers have acted out immorally, but in its proper perspective those two can not be compared on the same level. An important reality to deal with, especially in light of the media attention this has received.
Posted by: Jeff Price at May 26, 2004 10:17 AM