Drudge has the full text here.
A lot of it you’ve heard before, some of it you saw coming. I perked up my ears at this bit:
Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity – and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.
We are also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence sharing – and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region.
Allahpundit, of course, has video highlights and commentary and commentary on the commentary. Worth checking out.
Victor Davis Hanson on the Democrat response.
Democratic elasticity [Victor Davis Hanson]
After listening tonight to Wesley Clark, Dick Durbin, Tom Vilsack, Nancy Pelosi, etc. I still can’t for the life of me learn what they want to do. Not one will support Ted Kennedy’s cut-off of funds. Apparently the party line is that we can’t win, but we’re afraid to pull out in case we do, and so we will equivocate as we watch the battlefield and make the necessary rhetorical adjustments just in time. Just what we saw in the past Reid/Biden/etc. call for the surge, then huff/puff when they got their wish. Apparently the shame of 1974-5 cut-offs apparently still haunt the entire party.
Posted at 10:30 PM
As well it should, sir. As well it should.
My thoughts on this are that our military is and has been throughout the engagement in Iraq capable of defeating any army or militia that they’ve been allowed to. When the president spoke of new Rules of Engagement that don’t tie their hands, that part made me happy. I’m agnostic on whether the troop surge is wise or if it’s too little. I think the bigger concern is getting our State Department and the Iraqi government out of our way when we need to make some folks room temperature. And the next concern is like unto the first, the Iraqi National Guard and Iraqi Police need to be right there with us learning how it’s done.
Sounds like that’s the plan. We’ll see how well they implement it.
And one other quick thing, because this part won’t be repeated much in the news. This plan is not calculated to reduce the bloodiness of the conflict in the short term. In fact, it may well get worse before it gets better. The president said so tonight. Wonder how well that will be remembered in the next few months.
Filed under: Commentary |