Here’s the speech - and the strategy.
Thoughts?
The troop surge is already underway.
Fox News is reporting that Democratic leaders in the House and Senate have issued a joint statement saying they oppose the President’s plan. (Just found: Here’s the statement.
Oh, and here’s Senator Lieberman’s response to the President’s plan, which should make the defeatist Democrats who can’t stand him hate him even more.
Blogger reax:
Hugh Hewitt: “President Bush was at his best tonight: serious, detailed, and above all, resolute.”
Don Surber, Blog For All, Stop The ACLU, John Hawkins, Allah, Greg Tinti
Update I: Sean Hannity requested and got Fox to display a digital clock that is counting the minutes until the Democrats detail their alternative plan.
Update II: Here’s that joint Democratic ‘leaders’ statement Fox mentioned earlier.
—-
Update III: Here’s my reaction (sorry I’m a little late on it - been nursing a headache and formulating a response at the same time): I thought it was the speech he needed to give. He was cautiously optimistic while emphasizing the goals we and the Iraqi government needed to achieve there - noting that there will still be violence and death as we work to achieve those goals, while at the same tiime acknowledging that past strategies weren’t working and that he took responsibility for them.
He mentioned in his speech that he thought that the troops that were there had “too many restrictions on them” which I hope means that we’ll soon be abandoning our ’soft war’ approach.
It’s good he issued warnings to Syria and Iran about the flow of arms and foreign fighters into Iraq, which let them know that he’s not taken his eyes off of how they are working against his stated goals for success in there.
It was very important for him to emphasize to the American people, who have lost confidence that this war can be won and a majority of who think we should be out by the end of the year, what leaving too soon would mean in the overall scope of the war on terror: disaster. It’s critical that people be reminded that if we were to leave before the job is finished, that the violence and chaos that would overtake Iraq would be a danger not just to Iraqis who desire peace, but us too, and the rest of the international community.
I especially liked it when he told those who have ‘different’ views on his plan to explain why their plan would equate to success for and in Iraq, directly putting Democrats who want to cut and run on the hot seat - because you can’t equate cutting and running to ’success’ in Iraq, just ’success’ for Democrats. In the prepared Democratic response, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin didn’t explain how his party’s plan for Iraq equated to ’success’ for anybody other than the Democratic party.
Update IV: In case you missed the speech, National Review has video highlights. Watch it here.
To the Dems, if retreat then, build walls at the borders and put barbed wire on the beaches. Call up all the National Guard and wait. AQ will come to finish off the job. FDR did not stop after Pearl Harbor or D-Day or Okinawa. Why stop now?
Comment by stackja @ 1/10/2007 - 9:57 pm
- Whatever the clock is set at, Sean needs to add 6+ years of cut and run time to the Dems “plan”.
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 1/10/2007 - 10:16 pm
Sorry to hear you have a headache ST. I wish you well.
I think the Sean Hannity plan is brilliant.
Comment by Baklava @ 1/10/2007 - 11:28 pm
Why isn’t anyone DEMANDING that the Democrats put up or shut up?
Comment by PCD @ 1/11/2007 - 9:20 am