Wednesday, June 29, 2005

Bush's speech and subsequent (and predictable) reactions

AP Headline: "Bush Criticized for Linking 9/11 and Iraq". Bush critizied? No way! Who'da thunk it? Why, that never happens in the MSM, does it? Anyway, right off the bat, you get an idea of just who is criticizing our commander-in-chief during war:
Democrats in particular criticizing Bush for again raising the Sept. 11 attacks as a justification for the protracted fight in Iraq after the president proclaimed anew that he plans to keep U.S. forces there as long as necessary to ensure peace.


Some Democrats quickly accused him of reviving a questionable link to the war in Iraq — a rationale that Bush originally used to help justify launching strikes against Baghdad in the spring of 2003.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi accused Bush of demonstrating a willingness "exploit the sacred ground of 9/11, knowing that there is no connection between 9/11 and the war in Iraq."
Nancy, you ignorant slut, of course there is a connection between 9/11 and Iraq...just not the one you're implying. No, there's no real proof that Saddam had anything to do with 9/11. The real connection is that 9/11 was an act of Islamofascist terrorism and Iraq had an Islamofascist dictator who we (and the entire world intelligence community) saw as supporting terrorism (indisputable facts: he financed suicide bombings against Israel, which not coincidentally have gone down since his cash flow stopped; and he tried to assassinate the former President Bush) and developing WMD (some of which we have found, despite press reports to the contrary...another topic for another day). Iraq is simply part and parcel of the worldwide efforts to combat global terrorism.

Establishing a democracy-style government in Iraq will eventually have a domino effect in the rest of the Middle East, which will make it considerably more difficult for terrorism to breed and thrive.

So yes...Iraq is connected to 9/11 by virtue of the overall war on terrorism. Continuing...
Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), interviewed on CBS's "The Early Show," maintained that "one of the very big mistakes early on was that he didn't have enough troops on the ground, particularly after the initial victory, and that's still the case."

Sen. John Kerry, Bush's Democratic opponent in last year's presidential election, told NBC's "Today" show that the borders of Iraq "are porous" and said "we don't have enough troops" there.

Sen. Joseph Biden (news, bio, voting record) Jr., appearing on ABC's "Good Morning America," disputed Bush's notion that sufficient troops are in place.
Somebody did tell the press that Kerry lost, right?

Whew! It's a damned good thing that we have Senators sitting in cushy D.C. offices that know more about our troops' needs than their own generals! I mean, if we had to rely on the military to manage the war instead of Senators, can you imagine the fallout?!? The president says that his generals and Secretary of Defense tell him that there are sufficient forces, but what do those nimrods know compared to McCain, Kerry, and Biden? After all, as Kerry was fond of telling us last year, he did serve in Vietnam and Bush didn't! Yeah, that line of thinking went over with the electorate like a fart in church.

"The president's numerous references to September 11 did not provide a way forward in Iraq," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said. "They only served to remind the American people that our most dangerous enemy, namely Osama bin Laden, is still on the loose and al-Qaida remains capable of doing this nation great harm nearly four years after it attacked America."
We don't have OBL, so the war is a failure, Harry? Wow...wait'll they hear THAT back in Nevada! Also, al Qaeda remains so capable of doing this nation great harm that they've attacked us again since 2001 over here! No, wait...they have not attacked us here since then! My bad...

Liberals are unwittingly aiding and abetting al Qaeda by giving them press clippings that leave the impression that America is losing its will. A local soldier was on the news here saying that one terrorist they caught over there said in broken English that "You will leave, so we hold out!" Read into that what you will. I read that as Democrat politicians' efforts to score political points against a president they despise is paying off for our enemies. My impressions, based on simply watching the implosion of today's Democratic party, is that Democrats are willing to sustain losses in this war in order to regain power, and then they'll worry about what to do in the war on terrorism. Sick, my friends...just sick.