Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

President Bush Addressed the Nation Sunday Night (text of speech)
Whitehouse.gov ^ | Sept 7, 2003 | George W Bush

Posted on 09/07/2003 6:16:49 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow

President Bush Addressed the Nation Sunday Night
Address of the President to the Nation
The Cabinet Room

8:31 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. I have asked for this time to keep you informed of America's actions in the war on terror.

Nearly two years ago, following deadly attacks on our country, we began a systematic campaign against terrorism. These months have been a time of new responsibilities, and sacrifice, and national resolve and great progress.

America and a broad coalition acted first in Afghanistan, by destroying the training camps of terror, and removing the regime that harbored al Qaeda. In a series of raids and actions around the world, nearly two-thirds of al Qaeda's known leaders have been captured or killed, and we continue on al Qaeda's trail. We have exposed terrorist front groups, seized terrorist accounts, taken new measures to protect our homeland, and uncovered sleeper cells inside the United States. And we acted in Iraq, where the former regime sponsored terror, possessed and used weapons of mass destruction, and for 12 years defied the clear demands of the United Nations Security Council. Our coalition enforced these international demands in one of the swiftest and most humane military campaigns in history.

For a generation leading up to September the 11th, 2001, terrorists and their radical allies attacked innocent people in the Middle East and beyond, without facing a sustained and serious response. The terrorists became convinced that free nations were decadent and weak. And they grew bolder, believing that history was on their side. Since America put out the fires of September the 11th, and mourned our dead, and went to war, history has taken a different turn. We have carried the fight to the enemy. We are rolling back the terrorist threat to civilization, not on the fringes of its influence, but at the heart of its power.

This work continues. In Iraq, we are helping the long suffering people of that country to build a decent and democratic society at the center of the Middle East. Together we are transforming a place of torture chambers and mass graves into a nation of laws and free institutions. This undertaking is difficult and costly -- yet worthy of our country, and critical to our security.

The Middle East will either become a place of progress and peace, or it will be an exporter of violence and terror that takes more lives in America and in other free nations. The triumph of democracy and tolerance in Iraq, in Afghanistan and beyond would be a grave setback for international terrorism. The terrorists thrive on the support of tyrants and the resentments of oppressed peoples. When tyrants fall, and resentment gives way to hope, men and women in every culture reject the ideologies of terror, and turn to the pursuits of peace. Everywhere that freedom takes hold, terror will retreat.

Our enemies understand this. They know that a free Iraq will be free of them -- free of assassins, and torturers, and secret police. They know that as democracy rises in Iraq, all of their hateful ambitions will fall like the statues of the former dictator. And that is why, five months after we liberated Iraq, a collection of killers is desperately trying to undermine Iraq's progress and throw the country into chaos.

Some of the attackers are members of the old Saddam regime, who fled the battlefield and now fight in the shadows. Some of the attackers are foreign terrorists, who have come to Iraq to pursue their war on America and other free nations. We cannot be certain to what extent these groups work together. We do know they have a common goal -- reclaiming Iraq for tyranny.

Most, but not all, of these killers operate in one area of the country. The attacks you have heard and read about in the last few weeks have occurred predominantly in the central region of Iraq, between Baghdad and Tikrit -- Saddam Hussein's former stronghold. The north of Iraq is generally stable and is moving forward with reconstruction and self-government. The same trends are evident in the south, despite recent attacks by terrorist groups.

Though their attacks are localized, the terrorists and Saddam loyalists have done great harm. They have ambushed American and British service members -- who stand for freedom and order. They have killed civilian aid workers of the United Nations -- who represent the compassion and generosity of the world. They have bombed the Jordanian embassy -- the symbol of a peaceful Arab country. And last week they murdered a respected cleric and over a hundred Muslims at prayer -- bombing a holy shrine and a symbol of Islam's peaceful teachings.

This violence is directed not only against our coalition, but against anyone in Iraq who stands for decency, and freedom and progress.

There is more at work in these attacks than blind rage. The terrorists have a strategic goal. They want us to leave Iraq before our work is done. They want to shake the will of the civilized world. In the past, the terrorists have cited the examples of Beirut and Somalia, claiming that if you inflict harm on Americans, we will run from a challenge. In this, they are mistaken.

Two years ago, I told the Congress and the country that the war on terror would be a lengthy war, a different kind of war, fought on many fronts in many places. Iraq is now the central front. Enemies of freedom are making a desperate stand there -- and there they must be defeated. This will take time and require sacrifice. Yet we will do what is necessary, we will spend what is necessary, to achieve this essential victory in the war on terror, to promote freedom and to make our own nation more secure.

America has done this kind of work before. Following World War II, we lifted up the defeated nations of Japan and Germany, and stood with them as they built representative governments. We committed years and resources to this cause. And that effort has been repaid many times over in three generations of friendship and peace. America today accepts the challenge of helping Iraq in the same spirit -- for their sake, and our own.

Our strategy in Iraq has three objectives: destroying the terrorists, enlisting the support of other nations for a free Iraq and helping Iraqis assume responsibility for their own defense and their own future.

First, we are taking direct action against the terrorists in the Iraqi theater, which is the surest way to prevent future attacks on coalition forces and the Iraqi people. We are staying on the offensive, with a series of precise strikes against enemy targets increasingly guided by intelligence given to us by Iraqi citizens.

Since the end of major combat operations, we have conducted raids seizing many caches of enemy weapons and massive amounts of ammunition, and we have captured or killed hundreds of Saddam loyalists and terrorists. So far, of the 55 most wanted former Iraqi leaders, 42 are dead or in custody. We are sending a clear message: anyone who seeks to harm our soldiers can know that our soldiers are hunting for them.

Second, we are committed to expanding international cooperation in the reconstruction and security of Iraq, just as we are in Afghanistan. Our military commanders in Iraq advise me that the current number of American troops -- nearly 130,000 -- is appropriate to their mission. They are joined by over 20,000 service members from 29 other countries. Two multinational divisions, led by the British and the Poles, are serving alongside our forces -- and in order to share the burden more broadly, our commanders have requested a third multinational division to serve in Iraq.

Some countries have requested an explicit authorization of the United Nations Security Council before committing troops to Iraq. I have directed Secretary of State Colin Powell to introduce a new Security Council resolution, which would authorize the creation of a multinational force in Iraq, to be led by America.

I recognize that not all of our friends agreed with our decision to enforce the Security Council resolutions and remove Saddam Hussein from power. Yet we cannot let past differences interfere with present duties. Terrorists in Iraq have attacked representatives of the civilized world, and opposing them must be the cause of the civilized world. Members of the United Nations now have an opportunity -- and the responsibility -- to assume a broader role in assuring that Iraq becomes a free and democratic nation.

Third, we are encouraging the orderly transfer of sovereignty and authority to the Iraqi people. Our coalition came to Iraq as liberators and we will depart as liberators. Right now Iraq has its own Governing Council, comprised of 25 leaders representing Iraq's diverse people. The Governing Council recently appointed cabinet ministers to run government departments. Already more than 90 percent of towns and cities have functioning local governments, which are restoring basic services. We're helping to train civil defense forces to keep order, and an Iraqi police service to enforce the law, a facilities protection service, Iraqi border guards to help secure the borders, and a new Iraqi army. In all these roles, there are now some 60,000 Iraqi citizens under arms, defending the security of their own country, and we are accelerating the training of more.

Iraq is ready to take the next steps toward self-government. The Security Council resolution we introduce will encourage Iraq's Governing Council to submit a plan and a timetable for the drafting of a constitution and for free elections. From the outset, I have expressed confidence in the ability of the Iraqi people to govern themselves. Now they must rise to the responsibilities of a free people and secure the blessings of their own liberty.

Our strategy in Iraq will require new resources. We have conducted a thorough assessment of our military and reconstruction needs in Iraq, and also in Afghanistan. I will soon submit to Congress a request for $87 billion. The request will cover ongoing military and intelligence operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, which we expect will cost $66 billion over the next year. This budget request will also support our commitment to helping the Iraqi and Afghan people rebuild their own nations, after decades of oppression and mismanagement. We will provide funds to help them improve security. And we will help them to restore basic services, such as electricity and water, and to build new schools, roads, and medical clinics. This effort is essential to the stability of those nations, and therefore, to our own security. Now and in the future, we will support our troops and we will keep our word to the more than 50 million people of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Later this month, Secretary Powell will meet with representatives of many nations to discuss their financial contributions to the reconstruction of Afghanistan. Next month, he will hold a similar funding conference for the reconstruction of Iraq. Europe, Japan and states in the Middle East all will benefit from the success of freedom in these two countries, and they should contribute to that success.

The people of Iraq are emerging from a long trial. For them, there will be no going back to the days of the dictator, to the miseries and humiliation he inflicted on that good country. For the Middle East and the world, there will be no going back to the days of fear, when a brutal and aggressive tyrant possessed terrible weapons. And for America, there will be no going back to the era before September the 11th, 2001 -- to false comfort in a dangerous world. We have learned that terrorist attacks are not caused by the use of strength; they are invited by the perception of weakness. And the surest way to avoid attacks on our own people is to engage the enemy where he lives and plans. We are fighting that enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan today so that we do not meet him again on our own streets, in our own cities.

The heaviest burdens in our war on terror fall, as always, on the men and women of our Armed Forces and our intelligence services. They have removed gathering threats to America and our friends, and this nation takes great pride in their incredible achievements. We are grateful for their skill and courage, and for their acts of decency, which have shown America's character to the world. We honor the sacrifice of their families. And we mourn every American who has died so bravely, so far from home.

The Americans who assume great risk overseas understand the great cause they are in. Not long ago I received a letter from a captain in the 3rd Infantry Division in Baghdad. He wrote about his pride in serving a just cause, and about the deep desire of Iraqis for liberty. "I see it," he said, "in the eyes of a hungry people every day here. They are starved for freedom and opportunity." And he concluded, "I just thought you'd like a note from the 'front lines of freedom.'" That Army captain, and all of our men and women serving in the war on terror, are on the front lines of freedom. And I want each of them to know, your country thanks you, and your country supports you.

Fellow citizens: We've been tested these past 24 months, and the dangers have not passed. Yet Americans are responding with courage and confidence. We accept the duties of our generation. We are active and resolute in our own defense. We are serving in freedom's cause -- and that is the cause of all mankind.

Thank you, and may God continue to bless America.

END 8:49 P.M. EDT


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: 2ndanniversary; commanderinchief; speech; transcript
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-98 next last
To: Starrgaizr
Well said, Starrgaizr.

So, Aunt Enna, would you have gone into Iraq? Given even the advantage of hind sight, what would you have decided?

Are you agreeing that it is good we went, and just quibbling over the purported justifications? If so, enough already. Some damn good stuff has happened, and don't expect my patience for those quibbling at the edges.

Or are you saying we should not have gone? If so, then you are very wrong.

Actually, I sense you are saying something quite different. That it's not so much whether the right thing was done, saving millions from rape, torture, prison, death and tyranny, but whether it was done the right way, with the appearance of perfect consistency at all times in spoken justifications.

How liberal of you ... There is a Right and a Wrong. There is Good and Evil. Sometimes hellish means are required to fight Evil and support Good ... means far more hellish than the refocusing of motivations that your quibbling mind discerns.

41 posted on 09/07/2003 7:46:25 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (Mooo !!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: 11B3
True. Yeah - I'm supposed to be doing my bills now. It is easier to be distracted by this.
42 posted on 09/07/2003 7:48:04 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (Mooo !!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: celtic gal
Isn't there a slogan somewhere that says " As California Goes, So Goes the Nation"?

That used to be true but not anymore. Once the democrat/liberal state house would pass a wacky law and it would be emulated by other states that had democrat state legislatures so they could feel they were as "progressive" as California. However, Republicans have all but domianted in the state governments and grass root levels for about a decade and growing. Now states have concealed carry and welfare to work programs (like Wisconsin). Furthermore, have you noticed that the liberal media stops saying "As California goes, so goes the nation" when conservative ideas like halting illegal immigration welfare or English only initiatives were passed?

43 posted on 09/07/2003 7:54:43 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator (This space for rent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Starrgaizr; Aunt Enna; All
Well said indeed Starrgaizr. Enna and I have already had the dubious pleasure on other threads. After two occurrances, it was easy to see it's far simpler to just skip over his/her posts.

Prairie
44 posted on 09/07/2003 8:23:17 PM PDT by prairiebreeze (de Villipin wants UN approval for any military actions...ever. I fart in his general direction!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
You know what Bush really needs in an address to the nation? To list the WMD evidence and the deceit that the UN weapons inspectors went through years and years after the Gulf War, right up to this war. Saddam Hussein made numerous threats and remarks about destroying America and showed hostilities, not to mention his record of aggression. And the WMD has to be addressed sometime. I thought they were finding SOMETHING, but they are not hinting at anything anymore and seem to be ignoring that part of it. The question is-if Iraq doesn't have them now, where'd they go because we know he had a program going. Of course, we gave him over a yr. to prepare for this so what happened in that time?
45 posted on 09/07/2003 8:23:44 PM PDT by bushfamfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
Thanks for your good post. The claim by America's enemies, foreign and domestic, that WMD was the causus belli, and hence the 'failure' to find them proves that the president 'lied' is a classic attempt to rewrite history and to re-frame the argument. To those I've engaged who have that argument, I've insisted that that they re-read Powell's speech last year which stated the litany of reasons, before I'll listen to another word from them. That speech is here, and I hope you'll find it useful. AuntEmma: take a leap.

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2003/17300.htm
46 posted on 09/07/2003 8:25:23 PM PDT by GopherIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Brian_Baldwin
Amen to your post! Many of us are writing to and calling Homeland Security about the horrific law passed here for exactly the reason you said, and they are not happy about it either! The excuse used by the democrats here is that it is a felony for illegals to register to vote and check the square that says they are a citizen! As if they care!!!! It is not legal for them to be here in the first place! This is insanity!

BTW: I happen to know a certain foreigner here right now who possesses 2 drivers licenses and 2 social security cards! They are easily purchased afterall, of course now, they can just go right into the DMV and pick them up for 10 bucks!


47 posted on 09/07/2003 8:29:58 PM PDT by ladyinred (The left have blood on their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Enna
The war was sold to the American people based on the fact that Saddam had wmd's

Nice try, we didn't sell a war. Saddam violated 17 UN resolutions for 12 years. He bought himself a war. Violate a peace treaty, and you'll be removed, provided the President is Republican. WMD sales pitch nonsense is the Democrat carnival sideshow spin.

48 posted on 09/07/2003 8:33:43 PM PDT by T. Jefferson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
The other thing about the shrill dems is that if the WMDs aren't found and that means the war was wrong, do they suggest of we find Saddam that we dust him off and set him up back in his palace with an official apology? If there is no justification for reinstating Saddam (and why not?) then there was no legitimacy for him to govern in the first place. The idea of "sovereignty" without the consent of the governed was a distasteful necessity during the cold war, but why should we respect hereditary despots like Assad and Uday and the rest? If you wouldn't restore Saddam if he is found, then you should clam up.
49 posted on 09/07/2003 8:34:39 PM PDT by Starrgaizr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
The Starr report was about your slimey president dear, who could have FIRED Starr anytime he wanted. Thing is, he didn't want to, as he controlled the information being put out there.
Go get educated before you open your mouth.
50 posted on 09/07/2003 8:37:02 PM PDT by ladyinred (The left have blood on their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Starrgaizr
It seems to me that this is the hypocrisy of the libs at this point. They crab and whine about a supposed (in their minds) lack of post-war plan, and worry about costs etc. but when pressed on it they agree that we can't back off now. (At least the Dims I saw in the post-speech analysis admitted that much.)

It's just a damned shame that they are more concerned with their own power than with what's good for the nation. And that the media licks their feet.

Prairie
51 posted on 09/07/2003 8:49:26 PM PDT by prairiebreeze (de Villipin wants UN approval for any military actions...ever. I fart in his general direction!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
Bush gave a pretty good speech tonight. He laid out his case well and restated Iraq's role in the War on Terror. He also stated that the US will not leave until victory has been accomplished.

However, I see Bush getting only a few points bounce in the polls. This speech was not intended to gain new support, but only to reassure supporters about the righteousness of our involvement in Iraq.
52 posted on 09/07/2003 8:55:44 PM PDT by Sparta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starrgaizr
Well, I'm sure they'd agree with the apology bit.

Of course it would be wrong of us to set Saddam back up in power; who are we to say who should be governing Iraq?

You see it's not about what we should do, nor is it about what's right and wrong.

With the leftists, its about being weak, because being strong is dangerous. They trust those who speak at length and carry a short bent stick.

They'd replace the engines in our ships with oars, to lessen the risk of (or at least speed of) going astray. Engines are dangerous.

... guess if you lack a moral compass, power is dangerous ...

53 posted on 09/07/2003 9:02:47 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (Mooo !!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze
Right. Why not "bring the troops home" and let Saddam return in triumph if the war was a mistake? They are the hypocrites.
54 posted on 09/07/2003 9:05:33 PM PDT by Starrgaizr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Sparta
Probably so. Which will provide the liberal media with a grant chance to brand the speech a failure and a disappointment to Republican chief schemer Karl Rove, because "it didn't provide the hoped for recovery in Bush's rapidly falling support ..."


55 posted on 09/07/2003 9:10:00 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (Mooo !!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: houndofzeus
>>> The only issue that might be a problem is that he called for a multinational division to be put under AMERICAN control.<<<

That would only be "a problem" if he really wanted to have multiple nations involved, wouldn't it? And for my part, neither do I!

56 posted on 09/07/2003 9:11:02 PM PDT by HardStarboard (Dump Wesley Clark.....he worries me as much as Hillary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow

Which will provide the liberal media with a grant chance to brand the speech a failure and a disappointment to Republican chief schemer Karl Rove, because "it didn't provide the hoped for recovery in Bush's rapidly falling support ..."

If Bush's poll numbers just hold steady, this speech did it's job, regardless of what the left and the isolationists say.

57 posted on 09/07/2003 9:26:50 PM PDT by Sparta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
Being strong isn't just dangerous to them, it's wrong. They feel guilty that we have a strong and wealthy country. It fitss right in with multiculturalism and moral equivalence. Every culture and people and nation-state is equally valid and worthy. Therefore, we should never make anyone else change or even influence them to be more like us.

Today's liberals are closet dictators. They just don't realize it. But they like the French have a soft spot for dictators -- just think of Fidel. The world would be perfect in their minds if only they could be or pick the right benevolent dictator.

Liberals are fonder of Fidel Castro than they are of George Bush -- and they view the former as a more legitimate head of state. That is a frightening thing. I loathed Clinton, but I cherish the process that allowed my misguided fellow citizens to elect him twice. When did liberal democrats go so wrong that they stopped championing human rights EXCEPT when there is no national interest in doing so? They are ashamed of being Americans and of America's power. Viet Nam made this generation of liberal leaders lunatics. They deserve political oblivion.
58 posted on 09/07/2003 9:26:56 PM PDT by Starrgaizr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Starrgaizr
Yup. Sad.

Sometimes I long a bit for the innocence of my youth, in which none of what you wrote would have made a damn bit of sense to me.

Now it's all too real.

Though their roots go back for generations, yes, the Anti-War Movement was a formative time for this generation of leftists.

Last night I was reading, and listening on the radio, to some of the conspiracy theories surrounding LBJ's purported involvement in JKF's assasination. The baby boomers were the first generation raised in such wide spread leisure, free from day-to-day concerns of basic needs, and free of much of the education in our nations history and form of government that had been the foundation of our citizenship until then. Not surprisingly, many of them turned on their elders, loathing, despising, and distrusting them.

They might have actually been half right about LBJ. He may well have been worthy of their distrust. It wouldn't surprise me if the allegations that he had JFK killed were true. He may well have been a deeply dishonest person.

If you read enough of that conspiracy stuff, you can come away glad that Bush has chosen "a new tone", and avoided trying to call to justice his predecessors (Clinton, in particular). If the depth of treachery, murder and power lust is as bad some claim, and if Bush had attacked it head on, he'd be gone by now.

59 posted on 09/07/2003 9:49:24 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (Mooo !!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

Comment #60 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-98 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson