What did I see? Well, President Bush was speaking to an audience at the U.S. Naval Academy, not at some MoveOn.org candlelight party and vigil, so the crowd was with him as he spoke of why we went into Iraq, what is happening in Iraq, and what he expects will happen in Iraq.
Even before Bush finished speaking, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid issued a statement claiming that Bush “recycled his tired rhetoric of ’stay the course’ and once again missed an opportunity to lay out a real strategy for success in Iraq that will bring our troops safely home.”
The Nevada senator charged that Bush failed to meet a call by the Senate to tell Americans the administration’s strategy for success in Iraq.
Reid wanted timetable/date certain, and the President said that such an plan would be As indicated in the 35-page National Strategy for Victory in Iraq released before the speech: “No war has ever been won on a timetable and neither will this one. But lack of a timetable does not mean our posture in Iraq (both military and civilian) will remain static over time. As conditions change, our posture will change.
I don’t think Reid has a clue what he wants, but the demand for something, anything, which is not there serves his side politically.
It was a good speech, and it helped clarify the U.S. position on and in Iraq at a time when it needs to be forcibly repeated. Hammered into the national psyche. As more people are speaking highly of the strategy and the progress, the side of the rational needs something with which to swat aside the Dean/Pelosi/Murtha forces seeking political gain by advocating American surrender.
