Dubya on the war on terror

From Dox²’s blog, a transcript of President George W. Bush’s latest speech on the war on terror. Whether you agree with the man or not, I think it makes interesting reading, especially since this gets little air time in New Zealand while so many hop on to the anti-Bush bandwagon. Slightly edited from the original for clarity.

Some in America don’t believe we’re at war, and that’s their right. I know we are, and therefore, will spend my time as the President doing the best I can to educate people about the perils of the world in which we live, and that we have an active strategy in dealing with it.
   First, the enemy. These folks aren’t isolated folks, you know, they just kind of randomly show up. They have an objective. They believe as strongly in their ideology as I believe in ours. They believe that they have a obligation to spread a point of view that says, for example, if you don’t worship the way we tell you to worship, there will be a consequence; just like I believe we have an obligation to defend a point of view that says, what matters is the right for you to choose your religion, and you’re free to do so in the United States of America.
   They believe that they can use—they have no value for human life, see. That’s what distinguishes them from us in another way. They will kill a Muslim, a child, or a woman in a moment’s notice to achieve a political objective. They are dangerous people that need to be confronted.
   And that’s why, since September the 11th, our policy has been to find them and defeat them overseas so we don’t have to face them here at home again. Now, that is a strong—a short-term strategy, because the long-term strategy has got to be one that marginalizes these extremists and radicals by promoting an alternative ideology—I like to say, an ideology based on light; an ideology that promotes hope; an ideology when, given a chance, has worked every time to lift people’s spirits. And that’s the ideology based upon liberty, the chance for people to live in a free and open society.
   And it’s hard work. And this war is on a multiple of fronts. One front is Afghanistan. And the front that is consuming the American people right now is Iraq. And I fully understand how tough it is on our psyche. I fully understand that when you watch the violence on TV every night, people are saying, is it worth it? Can we accomplish an objective? Well, first, I want to tell you, yes, we can accomplish and win this fight in Iraq. And secondly, I want to tell you, we must, for the sake of our children and our grandchildren.
   You know, I was very optimistic at the end of ’05 when 12 million Iraqis went to the polls. I know it seems like a decade ago. It wasn’t all that long ago that, when given a chance, 12 million people voted. I wasn’t surprised, but I was pleased—let me put it to you that way. I wasn’t surprised because one of the principles on which I make decisions is that I believe in the universality of freedom. I believe that freedom belongs to every man, woman and child on the face of the Earth. As a matter of fact, to take it a step further, I believe it is a gift from an Almighty to every man, woman and child on the face of the Earth. And therefore, I wasn’t surprised when people, when given the chance, said, I want to be free. I was pleased that 12 million defied the car bombers and killers to vote.
   Our policy at that point in time was to get our force posture in such a position, is that we would train the Iraqis so they would take the fight to those who would stop the advance of democracy, and that we’d be in a position to keep the territorial integrity in place, and chase down the extremists. That was our policy. We didn’t get there in 2006 because a thinking enemy—in this case, we believe al-Qaeda, the same people that attacked us in America—incited serious sectarian violence by blowing up a holy religious site of the Shia. And then there was this wave of reprisal.
   And I had a decision to make. Some of Steve’s colleagues—good, decent, patriotic people—believed the best thing for the United States to do at that point was to step back and to kind of let the violence burn out in the capital of Iraq. I thought long and hard about that. I was deeply concerned that violence in the capital would spill out into the countryside. I was deeply concerned that one of the objectives of al-Qaeda—and by the way, al-Qaeda is doing most of the spectacular bombings, trying to incite sectarian violence. The same people that attacked us on September the 11th is the crowd that is now bombing people, killing innocent men, women and children, many of whom are Muslims, trying to stop the advance of a system based upon liberty.
   And I was concerned that the chaos would more enable them to—more likely enable them to achieve their stated objective, which is to drive us out of Iraq so they could have a safe-haven from which to launch their ideological campaign and launch attacks against America. That’s what they have said. The killers who came to America have said, with clarity, ‘We want you out of Iraq so we can have a safe-haven from which to attack again.’
   I think it’s important for the Commander-in-Chief to listen carefully to what the enemy says. They thrive on chaos. They like the turmoil. It enables them to more likely achieve their objectives. What they can’t stand is the advance of an alternative ideology that will end up marginalizing them.
   So I looked at consequences of stepping back—the consequences not only for Iraq, but the consequences for an important neighbourhood for the security of the United States of America. What would the Iranians think about America if we stepped back in the face of this extremist challenge? What would other extremists think? What would al-Qaeda be able to do? They’d be able to recruit better and raise more money from which to launch their objectives. Failure in Iraq would have serious consequences for the security of your children and your grandchildren.
   And so I made the decision, rather than pulling out of the capital, to send more troops in the capital, all aimed at providing security, so that an alternative system could grow. I listened to the commanders that would be running the operation—in this case, the main man is a man named Gen David Petraeus—a smart, capable man, who gives me his candid advice. His advice: ‘Mr President,’ is, ‘we must change the mission to provide security for the people in the capital city of Iraq, as well as in Anbar province, in order for the progress that the 12 million people who voted can be made.’ That’s why we’ve done what we’ve done.
   And we just started. He got all the troops there a couple of weeks ago. He asked for 20,000-some troops, and I said, ‘If that’s what you need, Commander, that’s what you got.’ And they just showed up. And they’re now beginning operations in full.
   And in Washington, you got people saying, stop. And here’s my attitude about this—and I understand there’s a debate, and there ought to be a debate in our democracy, and I welcome it. I welcome a good, honest debate about the consequences of failure, the consequences of success in this war. But I believe that it’s in this nation’s interest to give the commander a chance to fully implement his operations. And I believe Congress ought to wait for Gen Petraeus to come back and give his assessment of the strategy that he’s putting in place before they make any decisions. That’s what the American people expect. They expect for military people to come back and tell us how the military operations are going.
   And that’s the way I’m going to play it, as the Commander-in-Chief. I’ll be glad to discuss different options—the truth of the matter is, I felt like we could be in a different position at the end of 2005. I believe we can be in a different position in a while, and that would be to have enough troops there to guard the territorial integrity of that country, enough troops there to make sure that al-Qaeda doesn’t gain safe haven from which to be able to launch further attacks against the United States of America, enough troops to be embedded and to help train the Iraqis to do their job.
   But we couldn’t get there without additional troops. And now I call upon the United States Congress to give Gen David Petraeus a chance to come back and tell us whether his strategy is working. And then we can work together on a way forward.
   In the meantime, the Iraqis have got to do more work. This coming week I’ll be presenting to the Congress a list of some of the accomplishments and some of the shortfalls of their political process. They’ve asked us to report on 18 different benchmarks. That’s what the Congress said in this last supplemental spending bill; they said, come back here in mid-July and give us an interim report as to whether or not any progress is being made in Iraq. And that’s what we’ll be doing. So at the end of this week you’ll see a progress report on what’s been happening in Iraq—and then in September, a final report on the benchmarks that I accepted and that Congress passed.
   And so that’s the challenge facing the country. And it’s a necessary—in my judgement, it’s necessary work. I wouldn’t ask a mother or a Dad—I wouldn’t put their son in harm’s way if I didn’t believe this was necessary for the security of the United States and peace of the world. And I strongly believe it. And I strongly believe we will prevail. And I strongly believe that democracy will trump totalitarianism every time. That’s what I believe. And those are the belief systems on which I’m making decisions that I believe will yield the peace.
   You know, it’s really interesting in my position—I obviously have a unique view of things at times. And one of the most interesting views that I’ve been able to—of history that I’ve been able to really focus on is our relationship with Japan. I’ve told this story a lot because I find it to be very ironic.
   When my Dad was a young guy, right out of high school, he joined the United States Navy, became a Navy torpedo bomber pilot and fought the Japanese. They were the sworn enemy of the United States of America. And he, like a lot of other young people, gave it their all. And a lot of people died on both sides of the war. As a matter of fact, it was—the Japanese, as you rightly know, was the last major attack on the United States, prior to September the 11th, 2001. Some 60 years later, I’m at the table, talking about the peace with the Japanese Prime Minister, Prime Minister Koizumi.
   I find that to be an inspiring story and a hopeful story. It’s a story about the ability of liberty to transform enemies into allies. It’s a story about the ability for those who fought to become partners in peace. Prime Minister Koizumi, and now Prime Minister Abe, are close friends of mine in the international arena. We talk about the spread of democracy in the troubled part of the world because we both have seen the effects of democracy in our own relationship.
   I’ve got great faith in the power of liberty to transform the world for the sake of peace. And the fundamental question facing our country is, will we keep that faith?