The Speech I Would Have Written

http://jewishworldreview.com/ ^ | David Frum

[manny613]

The president is going to talk about Iraq again. He's going to have to. The problem is not that his speech Tuesday night failed to quell his critics: No speech could have done that. The problem is that his speech failed to reassure his worried supporters.

Those of us who support this president and this war do not need to be told how important it is to win. We get that. But that's precisely why we are worried — because every day brings terrible news that makes us fear that the war is being lost.

[manny613]

David Frum, a former speechwriter for President Bush, is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and coauthor of "An End to Evil: How to Win the War on Terror.

[NutCrackerBoy]

Henry Kissinger has quipped that in the Clinton years, the explanations were always better than the policies. In the Bush administration, unfortunately, the reverse is becoming true. -David Frum

President Bush sets lowish expectations and lets positive events overrun them. That way of doing things can be frustrating.

[manny613]

True -True. But at least he can look up! :)

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

David should take a couple of days off, IMO.

[IrishGOP]

because every day brings terrible news that makes us fear that the war is being lost.

Dave, that is precisely what the MSM media want you to do, worry that it's all going wrong. They feed you non-stop "bad news" from Iraq and now you are worried. Come on you need to be stronger than that.

[oldfarmer]

Are you being too harsh? Frum simply makes the argument that Bush should have offered better evidence for our progress.

[IrishGOP]

I don't think I am. Frum is supposed to be an informed individual like you and me, so why would he fall for the liberal media line that we are losing? I would expect a citizen who doesn't read a lot of news and only gets their info from the nets or cnnmsnbc to think all is lost. I don't disagree that Bush should make the case of all the progress that is being made more often, but I'm not worried we are losing and Frum shouldn't be either.

[TomasUSMC]

On Sept. 20, 2001, the president said: "From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime."


Have those words been abandoned?

---

In the case of Syria they sure have. Unless, hostile regime means we just talk nasty to them.

[manny613]

well ,Syria is a different animal-it was and is a sore point for the Russians,American and Israelis.
Unless we have the guts to start up with Syria (and the Saudis for that matter) it won't make a difference.
I think a Mid-East "axis of evil" is Saudis,Iran and Syria.

[TomasUSMC]

Syria has very little. Its Air Force and Air Defenses could be destroyed just as we destroyed Iraq's in Desert Storm. If we don't have enough guts to take on Syria, now, when they are weak, we never will. We can't wait for them to get strong.

If our President doesn't want to protect our troops from the terrorist streaming into Iraq from Syria, then he should get out.... of the White House. As things stand now, we are making the same mistakes we did in Nam, when we allowed Cambodia and Laos to harbor the enemy.

But at least we bombed Cambodia and Laos. We don't even lift a finger against Syria.