Bush addresses the nation from Never-Never Land:
President George W. Bush said on Saturday U.S. troops in Iraq were fighting to protect Americans at home from more attacks like those of September 11, 2001, starting a five-day focus on his case for the war amid growing public discontent.
[…]
"Our troops know that they’re fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere to protect their fellow Americans from a savage enemy," Bush said in his weekly radio address.
"They know that if we do not confront these evil men abroad, we will have to face them one day in our own cities and streets, and they know that the safety and security of every American is at stake in this war, and they know we will prevail," he said.
Meanwhile, back in Realitysville…..
As disturbing as those reports were, what Kulick had to say about the conduct of the war was even more troubling. He told his family that the Iraqi police "were corrupt and inept and there was no way they could ever train them to the degree where they could keep order." And when his unit went out after insurgents, far too many innocent iraqis were killed in the crossfire. And, Kulick reported home, "the more hate that created." When the Americans left an area, the insurgents came back the next day.
Eventually, when Kulick saw Iraqi citizens kneeling in the street in prayer, his interpreter would tell him they were praying for the Americans to leave. "They would rather live with evil they knew rather than live with us," Kulick said in his emails. "We were killing them as much as the insurgents were."
Bush: "Now we must finish the task that our troops have given their lives for and honour their sacrifice by completing their mission," he said.
What was their mission again? That part was missing from the speech, as usual. Maybe Cindy Sheehan can ask him after he tells her what the "noble cause" was that Casey Sheehan and John Kulick died for.
The Cunning Realist, commenting on a Belgravia Dispatch post (both well worth reading for thoughtful analysis from a conservative perspective) on the shameful Rumsfeld and Myers performance at a recent press conference, writes:
This just floors me. Does it remind anyone else of invading Iraq ostensibly to disarm the country, then not securing the major weapons caches?
As Greg writes, “These guys should be going to bed every night with such figures [Iraqi troop strengths and capabilities] firmly implanted in their head.” That they have to “get back to us” several years into an occupation leads to a completely logical and appropriate question: Just what the hell is going on?
And here’s a more depressing question: If thousands of our troops have been killed and permanently maimed in order to allow Iraqis time to train and ultimately defend themselves, but our most senior civilian and military leaders have to “get back to us” about how much progress has been made in that regard, what does that say about the importance of our troops’ sacrifice to those leaders?
No "noble cause" rhetoric can drown out those questions.