|
THE SPEECH, THE SURGE, ...
Watching FOX's live feed, reading along on Drudge (H/T: Allahpundit). Seems to be sticking with the script pretty well, not doing a bad job on delivery.
Says the rules have changed; I hope that's really true. ... In these dangerous times, the United States is blessed to have extraordinary and selfless men and women willing to step forward and defend us. These young Americans understand that our cause in Iraq is noble and necessary – and that the advance of freedom is the calling of our time. They serve far from their families, who make the quiet sacrifices of lonely holidays and empty chairs at the dinner table. They have watched their comrades give their lives to ensure our liberty. We mourn the loss of every fallen American – and we owe it to them to build a future worthy of their sacrifice.
Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve. It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom. Yet times of testing reveal the character of a Nation. And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed. Now America is engaged in a new struggle that will set the course for a new century. We can and we will prevail.
We go forward with trust that the Author of Liberty will guide us through these trying hours. Thank you and good night.
Over at 8:22 by my watch. Not bad, overall. Not enough detail to draw any firm conclusions from. I'm waiting to hear more about more realistic Rules of Engagement and about putting the hurt on Iran and Syria.
***
Mary Katharine Ham: Surge: The Fors and Againsts (H/T: MKH)
*** A New Wave of Troops Heading to Iraq
Kim Priestap
The report comes from the AP: The first of up to 20,000 additional U.S. troops will move into Iraq by month's end under President Bush's new war plan, a senior defense official said Tuesday. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pledged to hold a vote on the increase, which many Democrats oppose.
Details of a gradual military buildup emerged a day before Bush's planned speech to the nation, in which he also will propose a bit over $1 billion to shore up the country's battered economy and create jobs, said a second U.S. official.
Bush is expected to urge friendly Mideast countries to increase their aid to Iraq but will ignore the recommendation of the bipartisan Iraq Study group that he include Syria and Iran in an effort to stanch Iraqi bloodshed nearly four years after the U.S. invasion, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the plan has not yet been announced.
Bush is expected to link the troop increase to promised steps by the Iraqi government to build up its own military, ease the country's murderous sectarian tensions, increase reconstruction and enact a plan to distribute oil revenues among the country's religious sects.
I'm for a troop increase but they and the troops who are already must be allowed to do what they've been trained to do: to aggressively seek out and destroy al Qaeda and other terrorist insurgents in Iraq. At this moment, our troops are in a terrible situation because they can not do their jobs for fear of the media, which is enthusiastically ready to pounce on any event that they think is ugly. Well, here's a newsflash: war is ugly. It's hell as General Sherman said. Nonetheless, our troops are there now, and they must complete the mission, and the only way they can do that is to conduct the war without being second guessed by politicians, the media, pundits, and bloggers.
***
Ed Morrissey live-blogged the speech here. POST SPEECH ANALYSIS: Bush and his team spent quite a bit of time on the address. They included several elements to bridge political differences. His assumption of responsibility for the failure to quell the violence in Baghdad is the one element that had been missing until now, and it may help take the edge off of some of the criticism. ...
*** Mistakes, failures & victory?
"Uncle Jimbo" Hanson
I think W just gave the best speech since his second inaugural. He admitted failure, which he has rarely done, but he also articulated a clear vision of what we can now do.
None of the Dems want to say what their calls for withdrawal actually mean, defeat. They speak in terms of minimizing future losses and removing our troops because they are the cause of the violence. It's garbahj and always has been. Our troops are not the cause of the violence, a dispute about the succession of Mohammed's son caused the Shia-Sunni split centuries ago. The question is can our troops stop the extremists from killing each other long enough for the great majority who would rather live in peace to prevail.
***
Two I'd have linked earlier if I'd been more alert:
*** America Always Defies The Pessimists
A J Strata
Bush nailed his speech and the Dems walked off the cliff into oblivion. Bush was clear we had a tough job, but a doable one if things come together. And he was clear that failure in Iraq, especially derived from dumb-headed retreat, would cause the extension of our dying in Iraq and the ME as we would give Al Qaeda the grand prize of the ME: Iraq. Bush is open to all ideas which hasten and secure success. He is not interested in ideas on how to hasten our defeat. And America’s ‘can do’ attitude was tapped with good, solid changes in strategy. He said we always defy the pessimists (and we do). He explained the ramifications of defeat and how that path only leads to more death and destruction and innocent lives lost. How will we defy the pessimists (i.e., the Democrats)?
Both Iraq and the US are flooding Baghdad and Anbar with forces to stomp out the violence. Maliki has given the final ultimatum to the Shiia militias - disband or be destroyed. And we will now hunt down and take out the Syrian and Iranian meddlers and their insurgency support networks. The hands are untied, the gloves are off, and the Americans are now unleashed to tamp out all threats to the democratically elected Iraqi government.
And Dick Durbin (who claimed our brave military were like Nazi’s and other brutal tyrants of the 20th century) walked right into Bush’s straight flush. Bush reminded people plans for failure are not an option. And while our hopes had not been achieved yet, our options for success are still wide open. Dower Durbin, the leader of the pessimist party, made the insane decision to go ahead and be the example of what Bush said was not feasible or safe. And in doing so Bush set expectations for success. ...
***
Allahpundit has a hightlights video here. Durbin’s rebuttal was more of the same pitiful tough-love garbage about Iraqis needing to “step up,” as if the problems in the country were due to laziness or too much happy-go-luckiness. They sound like a woman telling her unemployed college-dropout son to get a job.
***
Gateway Pundit: Best line from Bush's speech tonight, although a bit confusing: "Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering."
Help me out here... Was he talking about CNN?
*** The Speech
Lorie Byrd
I watched the President's speech, but only watched a few minutes of the post speech commentary. I saw Tim Russert say that Bush bet his presidency on Iraq and that tonight he made that bet double or nothing.
I was impressed by the speech. I thought the President struck the correct tone, explained the plan sufficiently for viewers to follow along, and provided enough details for them to decide for themselves whether or not they believe the plan deserves a shot. He also did a really good job explaining why it is so incredibly important that we do everything possible to succeed in Iraq. He cited in some detail some of the mistakes that have contributed to the current situation. He made clear that he took full responsibility. He said that the troops have done everything that has been asked of them and that they bear no blame for the things that have not worked. ...
***
Stop The ACLU: Bush Surge Speech Open Thread And Liveblogging
***
Dan Riehl: Bush Speech: Warning To Iran Bush Warning to Iran: 'I recently ordered deployment of additional carrier strike group'...
'We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria'...
***
Don Surber: Bush to Iraq: We had an election here. You guys lost
*** The Presidents Speech - Jan 10, 2007
Posted by Curt
A wonderful speech tonight by President Bush that layed out exactly what will happen if we cut and run: ...
The most important part of this speech may be this paragraph: Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity – and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.
That sure sounds like we are not going to take the meddling of Iran and Syria sitting down anymore.
Did we just declare war on Iran and Syria?
Man, I hope so.
*** Leadership
That's what it looks like. It's not exercised by committee. It doesn't waffle on polls. It does not take dictation.
A leader does take the counsel of grey hairs and the people's representatives, among many others. But then a leader, all by himself, with no one but himself to turn to in the end, makes a decision. A sometimes very difficult decision. Ther eis a reason why our founding fathers set it up this way. They had spent enough time arguing with each other in committee to know that ultimately, one man all alone has to make the hardest decisions. As one of their heirs said a century and a half later, "The buck stops here."
There is not a lot to say really about what George Bush said last night, except that it was the right thing. At long last, the key pieces are moving into play.
It isn't really about the number of troops. It is good that 21,500 tested, but rested combat troops are going in.
It's about what they will do with them. Aggressive leaders with a mandate will pair them with 10,000 to 12,000 Iraqi troops and throw them at the militias and the insurgents.
There are potential pitfalls to this approach. One of them is not that some of these soon-to-be-deployed soldiers will die ... and don't worry, you can rely on the AP will start a tally of the deaths of the newly deployed.
In war, death is a given. If and when it happens, it will mean that our soldiers have found and engaged the enemy, which I predict will die in greater numbers.
The most immediate pitfall I see looming is that enemy has a heads up, and may attempt to melt away, using its advantage as an irregular native force to cache its weapons and stand on the street corner, whistling and acting normal.
This is why there must be provocations to draw them out. For starters, the beseiging and seizure of Moqtada al-Sadr and other criminal leaders, responsible for the murder of thousands. Relentless raids on their stronghold neighborhoods.
It won't be pretty. ...
Read the whole thing.
|
