Live Blogging Bush

-->
Bush Administration, Iraq War

Live blog of this morning’s speech at the Naval Academy — (note — quotes may not be accurate; check against transcripts)

[Update: Executive summary — “stay the course.” See major points on White House web site.]

Wow — he worked 9/11 into the intro. All of the students joined the academy after 9/11, he says.

He’s going through the thank yous — sounds like an Academy Award speech.

This is from yesterday’s Dan Froomkin

What does it say about the president of the United States that he won’t go anywhere near ordinary citizens any more? And that he’ll only speak to captive audiences?

President Bush’s safety zone these days doesn’t appear to extend very far beyond military bases, other federal installations and Republican fundraisers.

Bush says:

Iraq is the central front on the war on terror. We must understand the enemy we face. The largest group of “terrorists” are rejectionists who are former Baathists. Many Sunnies rejecgted the democratic elections, but now those who advocate violence are being isolated by Sunnies. We believe that over time most rejectionists will support a democratic Iraq.

The second group are former Baathists.

The third group is the smallest and most lethal. These are foreigners and al Qaeda members. Our commanders believe they are responsible for most of the suicide bombings and beheadings. They are led by Zarqawi.

The third group is trying to establish an Islamic empire. They have nothing to offer the Iraqi people. All they do is kill the innocent and create chaos for the cameras. They are trying to shake our will. They will fail. America’s will is strong.

Those terrorists share the same ideology as the 9/11 bombers, the Madrid and London bombers. This is an enemy without conscience and they will not be appeased. If we weren’t fighting them in Iraq they would be killing Americans and others.

We will not accept anything less than complete victory.

We are pursuing a comprehensive strategy in Iraq.

Free societies are peaceful societies, so we are working with Iraqis to build a free society.

Security forces are on the offensive against the enemy.

Iraqi forces are being trained.

We’re repairing infrastructure.

We’ve included UN, coalition partners, other people.

Today I want to speak in depth about one aspect, the training of Iraqi security forces. Our goal is to train Iraqi security forces so that they can continue the fight.

When we defeat “terrorists” in Iraq, we’ll be safer at home.

In the past year, Iraqi forces have made real progress. Now over 120 combat and police batalions are prepared.

Now he’s arguing that Iraqi battalions are conducting operations on their own and are not just supporting U.S. troops.

He’s quoting an Iraqi soldiers who said that all he wants to do is kill terrorists.

He’s describing the territory under the control of Iraqi security forces. Lots of numbers that will be fact checked, I assume.

As Iraqi forces take control of their own territory, coalition forces can concentrate on training and going after high-value targets.

Descriptions of the training follow.

Hersh wins, looks like.

Some critics dismiss this progress, and point to the fact that only one battalion has achieved complete independence from coalition supervision. But that doesn’t mean more battalions are not ready to take the fight against the enemy. The facts are that Iraqi units are becoming more independent and capable. They will be in the fight for freedom today and tomorrow.

Lordy, he said we’ve turned a corner. He said that.

So basically he’s arguing that the Iraqi security forces are way improved and are going to be able to take on more and tougher missions, etc. He’s working up to saying “as they stand up, coalition forces can stand down.”

Bush said, “When our mission of defeating the terrorists is complete, our troops will come home to a proud nation.” Yep, Hersh called it. It’s “stay the course.”

Bush said: “We will stay as long as necessary to complete the mission.”
Says he’s willing to send more U.S. troops, if the commanders ask for them.

No artificial timetables set by politicians in Washington, he says.

He’s not leaving himself any wiggle room. He wants victory. He’s quoting Joe Lieberman. We need to do something about Lieberman. He says that withdrawal will send a message that America is weak.

Bush said, “America will not run from car bombers or assassins as long as I am your commander in chief.” Big applause line.

Some critics say I have no plan except to “stay the course,” he says. Yep, that’s it.

I will settle for nothing less than complete victory. Victory will come when the terrorists and Saddamists can no longer threaten Iraq, and when terrorists cannot plot nasty plots.

He’s preaching the Neocon gospel. Our own security is best preserved by spreading democracy. Germany and Japan are democracies now. Freedom defeated the ideology of communism and freed eastern Europe and all.

I’m telling you, Hersh nailed him.

Advancing the ideal of democracy and self-government created our nation. We will meet the challenge of our time and answer histories call. Freedom is the destiny of every man, woman, and child on this earth.

He thinks he is Democracy Jesus, in other words.

There’s only one way to honor the lives lost, which is to complete the mission.

He’s done. They’re playing “Stars and Stripes Forever.”

Bottom line, he may have established some markers to enable some drawdown of troops, on the basis of improved Iraqi security forces, but he’s clearly planning on staying until the “terrorists” are defeated and Iraq is an established and stable democracy. He’s trying to remarket the war as it is without actually changing policy.

David Gregory on MSNBC is saying the document released this morning contains nothing of substance that’s new; it’s just a sales job. The one new thing is calling the Sunni die-hards “rejectionists.”

Once we’ve got a transcript we can fact-check the specific claims he made about the security forces.

Hardball note: Jack Murtha will be on Hardball tonight. Could be interesting.

Dana Priest of the Washington Post on MSNBC is saying that there was nothing new militarily in the speech.

Will this and future speeches have any impact on public opinion? Some of the major polling organizations will probably manage to find a bit of a bump, but I can’t see how this speech will make a big difference.

Share Button
12 Comments

11 Comments

  1. emel  •  Nov 30, 2005 @10:28 am

    All we hear this week is the word victory over and over, But no definition of what complete victory is. does he think zarqawi will sign a surrender? He assumes iraqis will take security over. how will they be a strong ally when they have told their own people resistance is ok? More analogies to WWII as if that had anything to do with this. Funny he never talks about WWI that really does have relevance to why iraq exists and why they resist occupation.He thinks iraq will change damascus and tehran. yea by magic. we see saddam this week because they need to focus on something else. we see bush do the immigration thing because they need to focus our attention to something else. but staying in iraq for 3 more years will not make it all go away magically

  2. merciless  •  Nov 30, 2005 @10:33 am

    I wasn’t expecting anything else, so no surprises for me. How did he look, Maha? I’m a little worried about him, being so alone and all, with nobody except his mamas to talk to.

    Seriously, how did he look? How was his speech pattern? Inquiring minds want to know!

  3. maha  •  Nov 30, 2005 @10:35 am

    He was more pulled together than he’s been in other recent speeches. As has been noted in the past, when he actually believes what he’s saying he is less spastic. Seemed emotional.

  4. Steve M.  •  Nov 30, 2005 @10:41 am

    He’s quoting Joe Lieberman.

    He’s not. He and Lieberman are both quoting Frank Luntz, or someone else who’s been given the task of finding pretty words to make “Stay the course” sound hopeful.

  5. Steve M.  •  Nov 30, 2005 @10:43 am

    Or, if not hopeful, at least upbeat.

  6. merlallen  •  Nov 30, 2005 @10:49 am

    Do you think Murtha might kick the host’s ass? I’d pay to see that.

  7. maha  •  Nov 30, 2005 @10:51 am

    I’d pay to see that.

    Me, too.

  8. Swami  •  Nov 30, 2005 @11:18 am

    Sousa instead of Clint Blackwood? Bush is out of touch with the kick ass, take names later spirit of America. I know Sousa was good at getting us pumped up, but his music doesn’t invoke god. How are we to understand the righteousness of our cause in Iraq without the endorsement of god through song.

    Bush’s speech is just a rehash of the same old bullshit…except he does make the newly formed death squads sound rather lofty. Bush is peddling fantasy.

    I remember years ago having an attitude about buying boots for the Contras when I couldn’t afford to put shoes on my own children. Now Bush is asking for an additional 3.? billion dollars to buy uniforms for the Iraqi death squads. It pisses me off big time..What happened to all that oil money that Wolfkowitz said was supposed to finance this debacle.

  9. merciless  •  Nov 30, 2005 @12:43 pm

    Thanks for the clarification, Maha. Yes, Bush does sometimes get emotional in his speeches (somebody said he actually got teary!).

    But I attribute that to his being a Cancer. Lord knows they’re an emotional bunch, even on their good days.

  10. New Age Jesus  •  Nov 30, 2005 @1:10 pm

    Dem. Jesus hunh? Isn’t he about overdue for crucifiction?

  11. justme  •  Nov 30, 2005 @2:20 pm

    I hate to say I told ya so….but I told ya so!

1 Trackback



    About this blog

    About Maha
    Comment Policy

    Vintage Mahablog
    Email Me
















    eXTReMe Tracker













      Technorati Profile