Replies

"Just why does he need to say why?

"...Can you not understand what would happen if he pulled up troops and left?

...He would prove that America is only a Paper Tiger and the terrorists would be emboldened."

I understand well enough that cutting and running would hand a great victory to Islamic terror. It would not only put the rest of the world in danger, it would seriesly destabilize the entire Middle East. Pulling out is unthinkable in my view.

Also in my view, we are in Iraq as part of an effort to eradicate Islamic terror. Or at least I hope we are. Seems like a worthwhile cause, one the president might address publicly.

The Left, which includes the media, academia, Hollywood and the Democratic Party are all over the place, extremely and constantly visible, making their case and doing it convincingly, not to me, but apparently to many. Therefore, the president needs to get focused and make his case. Taking the citizens for granted doesn't cut it. Neither do platitudes about democracy.

Let us look at the progress in Iraq on each of the 5 main reasons for going to war:

1) Europeans and Indians and Persians are NOT yet driving through Iraq on the way to anywhere yet. Truck transport between China and Germany does not chose to drive through Iraq and Iran. This is because IRAN is blocking progress and supporting the insurgency in Iraq. Iran needs to be liberated next, so as to create the economic conditions for that region becoming the rich trade crossroads it used to be when it was the cradle of civilization.

If Syria wants the future superhighway to go through their territory, they will need to get their act together or it will go through Turkey.

2) The Libyan nuke program was put out of business and we reaped an intelligence bonanza on WMDs by liberating Iraq. Many of the people we caught are not being talked about because they are working with us to catch others (and being given Swiss hideaways for their efforts).

3) At least Iraq's oil is in non-terrorist hands. I cannot believe that Iranian, Venezuelan and Saudi oil is still in the hands of people whom we may not be able to trust. But having Iraqi and Canadian oil makes it easier for us to leverage our other enemies.

4) We are not being told how well the Flypaper Strategy is going. A general said last month that we killed 50,000 bad guys in the past six months. But then he was hushed up. I can see why it would have to be kept secret if we were really killing thousands of young men as they crossed the border of Iraq to fight us. The liberals would scream that we were being "unfair" or "war criminals who were killing laborers who were sneaking across the border to Iraq in order to find a job."

5) The Shiites are obviously in control of Iraq because the Sunnis now have to try to use politics (and a large voter turnout) in order to "defeat" them in an upcoming free election that hinges on three provinces. The Sunni leaders are now recruiting everyone possible to vote (when they were doing the opposite in January).

Leftists and "Granite State Conservatives" don't see the beautiful irony in today's news. The Iraqi constitution may be "defeated" when the Sunnis turn out in record numbers at the polls in three provinces of Iraq.

That is right: "record numbers of Sunnis at the polls in Iraq" means that more Sunnis will vote in this democratic election than ever before in 6000 years of history.

Iraq will have Red States and Blue States.

And the media is making that look like we are "losing."

And maybe they are right but for a different reason. Should Iraq become as schizoid as Red/Blue America?

The media is making this democratic election (referendum) look like it "will set us back" in terms of our reasons for going into Iraq in the first place. Really??

The Sunnis of Iraq will "defeat Bush at the polls" in a democratic election. Of course. That means that Bush was wrong. :-(