Rusted Sky

Text of President Bush's address - Conflict in Iraq - MSNBC.com

Good evening. 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 — and our safety here at home. The new strategy I outline tonight will change America's course in Iraq, and help us succeed in the fight against terror.

I'll be honest with you - I don't think we can pull this off. Not because the military isn't capable, not because the Iraqi people don't want it - but because we've got a large portion of our political population dedicated to the idea that opposing Bush is the only thing that matters. When Bush was saying we didn't need more troops, they were for more troops in Iraq. Now that Bush is saying we need to surge troops - they'll be completely against that idea, as Sen. Kennedy's already demonstrated. In his mind, apparently, it's already a lost cause and there's nothing to be gained by continuing the fight.

I fully expect the Democrats to push through their symbolic vote plan, which Bush should ignore, then rail against Bush because he's not paying them any attention.

Frankly, this is looking a lot like the build-up to 1975 again. Will the Dems cut all funding to Iraq next year or the year after, as they did with Viet-Nam in '75? Or have they learned ANYTHING in the last 30 years?

I don't think they have. I believe they think that once Bush is out of office, they'll be able to roll the world situation back to '96 or '97 - occasional terrorist attacks, but nothing that's particularly serious. So we lose an occasional skyscraper - what's the problem? Better that than fighting a war against a malignant ideology, right?

Bush is promising to ease up on the rules of engagement. I predict howls from the left, about how insensitive and cruel we are. He's also promising to end support from Syria and Iran... good luck there. Any attempts to interdict materials are going to be met with a lot of opposition at home and abroad - figure that it'll be characterized as 'relief convoys' and 'busses of pilgrims going to holy shrines'. And the US will be blamed, of course.

Bush said "From Afghanistan to Lebanon to the Palestinian Territories, millions of ordinary people are sick of the violence, and want a future of peace and opportunity for their children. And they are looking at Iraq. They want to know: Will America withdraw and yield the future of that country to the extremists – or will we stand with the Iraqis who have made the choice for freedom? "

If it were up to Bush - we'd stand. If it's up to Pelosi and Co... we fold. That we'd have to do it all again in a few years means little to them. They hate Bush NOW - and that's the important part.

Which is why I think we're going to lose. We can't fight a three-sided war and win - especially when one side is one of our political parties. Pelosi & Co might think that getting rid of Bush is the most important thing now - but the future exists far beyond the 2008 elections, and the crap they're pulling now is severely affecting what's to come far down the road.

Update: Well. Maybe there's a chance.

Iraq PM tells Shiite militias to give up - Yahoo! News

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq's prime minister has told Shiite militiamen to surrender their arms or face an all-out assault by U.S.-backed Iraqi forces, senior Iraqi officials said Wednesday, as President Bush said he will commit an additional 21,500 American combat troops to the war.

Under pressure from the U.S., Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has agreed to crack down on fighters controlled by his most powerful political ally, Muqtada al-Sadr, a radical Shiite cleric, according to officials. Previously, al-Maliki had resisted the move.

The militas have been one of the real stumbling blocks. Dismantle those, and there's a chance.

J.