November 26, 2005

Freedom, Democracy & the War on Terror

With all of the Iraqi war naysayers playing loose with both facts and reality, I thought it might be helpful for all of us to reread some major speeches by President George W. Bush about the War on Terror and the great themes of freedom and democracy. While earlier postings (here, here) have highlighted speeches #1-8, I would encourage you to pay particular attention to the more recent speeches #9-12:

1. September 20, 2001 initial speech about War on Terror

2. October 7, 2001 Afghanistan speech

3. January 29, 2002 State of the Union speech

4. June 1, 2002 West Point graduation speech

5. January 20, 2005 Inaugural speech

6. March 8, 2005 National Defense University speech

7. May 7, 2005 speech in Latvia on freedom and democracy

8. May 10, 2005 speech in Georgia on freedom and democracy

9. October 6, 2005 National Endowment for Democracy speech about War on Terror

10. October 25, 2005 speech to Joint Armed Forces Officers' Wives' Luncheon

11. November 11, 2005 Veterans' Day speech about War on Terror

12. November 16, 2005 speech in Kyoto, Japan on freedom and democracy

James Q. Wilson wishes Bush would give this speech.

Norman Pohoretz asks Who is Lying About Iraq?

Rich Lowry comments that If Bush lied, it stands to reason that Democrats who followed are all naifs, foolishly drawn to the seductions of a charlatan.

Michelle Malkin writes about Bush's Veterans' Day speech in Bush Battles Back and provides links to other reactions in the blogging community.

Other commentaries about the claim that Bush misled the nation about going to war by Instapundit, J.D. Johannes, Mark Goldblatt, Power Line, Christopher Hitchens, Power Line, Power Line, Joel Engel, Stephen Hayes, Instapundit, Instapundit, Power Line, and Captain's Quarters.

Read the links in this posting to remind yourself how Cindy Sheehan is wacky beyond words.

The Wall Street Journal comments on Bush's speeches in Latvia and Georgia.

Duncan Curries comments on Bush's speech in Japan.


President Bush gives additional major speeches:

13. November 30, 2005 Naval Academy speech on the strategy for victory in Iraq

Marc highlights commentary on the speech by Mac Owens and Rich Lowry and links to the National Strategy for Victory in Iraq report.

14. December 7, 2005 Council on Foreign Relations speech on War on Terror and Rebuilding Iraq

15. December 12, 2005 Philadelphia World Affairs Council speech on War on Terror and Upcoming Iraqi Elections

16. December 14, 2005 Woodrow Wilson Center speech on Iraqi Elections, Victory in the War on Terror

Peggy Noonan has these thoughts.


Angela Codevilla offers a counter-argument:

In 2005, the U.S. government's "war on terror," as well as its operations in Iraq, were entwined in the same tortuous logic by which they had been conceived. After redefining the mission in Iraq from finding Weapons of Mass Destruction, to building democracy, to eliminating terrorists, to enabling the Iraqis to fight for themselves—and not being serious about any of these—the Bush Administration was arguing that to withdraw would be to admit defeat. But what would victory look like?

In December, pressed from all parts of America to address that question, President George W. Bush spoke, surrounded by banners that read, "The Strategy for Victory." Yet the speech, as well as the seven-point, 35-page White House document that accompanied it, simply reiterated hopes for a united, democratic Iraq and the beneficial influence this might have. It described efforts to bolster Iraqi armed forces, foster national reconciliation, and build up the country's infrastructure. None of this amounted to a strategy any more than it ever had, because wishes are a poor substitute for explaining why anyone should expect these actions to produce those outcomes. In short, the Bush Administration never attempted logically to balance ends and means, the things it desired with the things it was doing...

Comments, although monitored, are not necessarily representative of the views Anchor Rising's contributors or approved by them. We reserve the right to delete or modify comments for any reason.

Lets see here...the premise of the war was that Iraq had WMDs and we couldn't bee too sure so we needed to have regime turns out that there were no WMDs...the war was fought on a false premise. Whether or not the administration misled people, this war is a lost cause. Bush overpromised the american people that we would have a shiny new democracy in the middle easr...thats just impossible. We now see that.

We don;t have enough troops to win, and the Iraqis don't want us to become too involved in the domestic politics...there are legitimate political fights that need to take place there. We can't settle them.

Whats wrong with acknowledging an error and finding a way to get our precious men+women home that minimizes the domestic political fallout in Iraq and the middle east?

I think that is a very rational position. Don't you? How can it not be? That is what democrats want...I don't care how you try to distort it...that is what the wish is.



Posted by: Jerm at November 27, 2005 8:04 PM