T Nation

A Good Speech


.......That I would like to hear from the President.

I know it pisses off alot of the leftist forumites on this board, But I am one of the many who do support the war for ALL of the reasons we went in. I will continue to be an unabashed chearleader of the things that are going well over there, while recognizing the the things that have gone wrong. But hey, I'm an eternal optimist.

If Bush was half the speaker that Clinton was, selling our succeses in Iraq wouldn't be as much of a problem as it is now.


A Fitting Address
The speech President Bush should give about Iraq.

Sunday, November 27, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

[i]President Bush and Vice President Cheney are arguing against critics of the Iraq war who are trying to rewrite history. There is some value in this, but it is a fight about the past and not about the future.

What most Americans care about is not who is lying but whether we are winning. I offer this speech that the president might use to tell Americans that we are winning:[/i]

My fellow Americans: We are winning, and winning decisively, in Iraq and the Middle East. We defeated Saddam Hussein's army in just a few weeks. None of the disasters that many feared would follow our invasion occurred. Our troops did not have to fight door to door to take Baghdad. The Iraqi oil fields were not set on fire. There was no civil war between the Sunnis and the Shiites. There was no grave humanitarian crisis.

Saddam Hussein was captured and is awaiting trial. His two murderous sons are dead. Most of the leading members of Saddam's regime have been captured or killed. After our easy military victory, we found ourselves inadequately prepared to defeat the terrorist insurgents, but now we are prevailing.

Iraq has held free elections in which millions of people voted. A new, democratic constitution has been adopted that contains an extensive bill of rights. Discrimination on the basis of sex, religion or politics is banned. Soon the Iraqis will be electing their first parliament.

An independent judiciary exists, almost all public schools are open, every hospital is functioning, and oil sales have increased sharply. In most parts of the country, people move about freely and safely.

According to surveys, Iraqis are overwhelmingly opposed to the use of violence to achieve political ends, and the great majority believe that their lives will improve in the future. The Iraqi economy is growing very rapidly, much more rapidly than the inflation rate.

In some places, the terrorists who lost the war are now fighting back by killing Iraqi civilians. Some brave American soldiers have also been killed, but most of the attacks are directed at decent, honest Iraqis. This is not a civil war; it is terrorism gone mad.

And the terrorists have failed. They could not stop free elections. They could not prevent Iraqi leaders from taking office. They could not close the schools or hospitals. They could not prevent the emergence of a vigorous free press that now involves over 170 newspapers that represent every shade of opinion.

Terrorist leaders such as Zarqawi have lost. Most Sunni leaders, whom Zarqawi was hoping to mobilize, have rejected his call to defeat any constitution. The Muslims in his hometown in Jordan have denounced him. Despite his murderous efforts, candidates representing every legitimate point of view and every ethnic background are competing for office in the new Iraqi government.

The progress of democracy and reconstruction has occurred faster in Iraq than it did in Germany 60 years ago, even though we have far fewer troops in the Middle East than we had in Germany after Hitler was defeated.

We grieve deeply over every lost American and coalition soldier, but we also recognize what those deaths have accomplished. A nation the size of California, with 25 million inhabitants, has been freed from tyranny, equipped with a new democratic constitution, and provided with a growing new infrastructure that will help every Iraqi and not just the privileged members of a brutal regime. For every American soldier who died, 12,000 Iraqi voters were made into effective citizens.
Virtually every American soldier who writes home or comes back to visit his family tells the same story: We have won, Iraqis have won, and life in most of Iraq goes on without violence and with obvious affection between the Iraqi people and our troops. These soldiers have not just restored order in most places, they have built schools, aided businesses, distributed aid and made friends.

To take their places, Iraq has trained, with American and NATO assistance, tens of thousands of new troops and police officers. In the last election, there were more Iraqi soldiers than American ones guarding the polling places.

We know that much remains to be done. Sunni and Shiite leaders must work together more closely. We know that for centuries Sunni leaders, including Saddam, ruled Iraq even though the Sunnis are only a minority of its population: The terrorists began by killing Shiites but now have killed Sunnis as well, all without the slightest moral justification. But we know from America's own experience that when different groups work together constructively, they learn to trust one another. That must happen, and will happen, in Iraq.

Our success is not confined to Iraq. Libya has renounced its search for nuclear weapons. Syria has pulled out of Lebanon. Afghanistan has produced a democratic government and economic progress for its people. Egypt has had the beginnings of a democratic vote. In an area once dominated by dictatorships, the few remaining ones are either changing or worrying deeply about those that have changed.

We know now that some of our information about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was wrong. But we also know now what we have always believed: That Saddam Hussein, who had already invaded both Iran and Kuwait, had the money, authority and determination to build up his stock of such weapons. When he did, he would have become the colossus of the Middle East, able to overwhelm other countries and rain rockets down on Israel.

We have created a balance of power in the Middle East in which no regime can easily threaten any other. In doing this, we and our allies have followed a long tradition: We worked to prevent Imperial Germany from dominating Europe in 1914, Hitler from doing the same in 1940, and the Soviet Union from doing this in 1945. Now we are doing it in the Middle East.

And we are winning. Soon Iraqi forces will be able to maintain order in the few hot spots that still exist in Iraq. We will stay the course until they are ready. We made no mistake ending Saddam's rule. We have brought not only freedom to Iraq, but progress to most of the Middle East. America should be proud of what it has accomplished. America will not cut and run until the Iraqis can manage their own security, and that will happen soon.

Thank you, and God bless you.


More than 50% of politics, maybe even upto 80% is persona and the ability to look and sound good. You may be the best tactician in the business but if you can't convince people to follow you then none of that means shit.

People want heads of state that they can trust. People are also very stupid - they don't generally really pay that much attention to details. What they do pay attention to is how the argument was put across.

Clinton, regardless of any policies, was a great public speaker - live and on camera. He didn't always have that talent though, cos i've seen speeches from his early days, and back then he was shit. He worked at it. He came across as a guy who had stuff under control. You could trust him, cos he came across as a down-to-earth level headed guy...he was a friend. Why did people forgive him so quickly for his affair? Cos we all thought, "hey, he a good guy really. Let's cut the poor guy some slack."

So with that in mind, I've never understood how Bush is still in office. He's a poor speaker and the moment he strays from his script he's lost. He starts bumbling and moving to colloquial speech - don't talk to me as if we're chatting over a beer, talk to me like a man in charge.

Perceptions are everything. Especially when you're on the World Stage.


Propaganda worthy of any orator. Can be just as easily debunked as anthing else George II has, or would, say.


It's a tough sell. Some, like Irish, have already made up their minds that the war in Iraq is illegal or immoral, so it doesn't matter how much is accomplished there. They will always argue against it, and they will always deride Bush and anyone who happens to agree with him.

Personally, I'm hopeful for the future of Iraq. If the country can be stabilized, and if true democracy then takes hold, then I think it could be the start of a total turn around for the entire region. Those are some pretty big "if's" though, and every time American politicians tell us that the risk is not worth the potential gains, I think we lose a little ground in the arena of public opinion.

And while people may be "very stupid" where kung fu king lives, around here, I guess people are generally of average intelligence, but as a rule they are not particularly interested in politics. And who can blame them? Politics is a boring and exhausting subject, and it's nearly impossible to tell what difference is made by the participation of any single voter. If we were allowed to vote more frequently and on more relevant issues, I think that people would generally take a greater interest in the process.

As for me, I'd like nothing better than for the Iraqi people to take control of their country and embrace freedom and set an example for the rest of the Middle East. But then I guess that makes me a powermongering Imperialist, doesn't it?


Ok, let's see if I got it straight.

You went in because he had wmd.
If you're still looking for those, you indeed MUST be an eternal (some might say infernal) optimist.

But wait, later it dawned on you that perhaps you went in because he was a brutal dictator and tortured his own people.
Naaw, that didn't sound right when the Abuh Graib pictures started surfacing.

But he DID use wmd against his own people.

Yup, he did. You got that right. But then you used white phospor on them.

So please remind me. Why did you go in? Could you please refresh my memory and cite me ALL the reasons again?


Maybe. They embrace "freedom" (capitalism). They have a time when they are ruled by someone that is friendly to us, as we will make sure of that. But what then?

Islam is king of the hill there. Islam will take over that country eventually. If they have free elections, and elect someone we don't like, what will happen then? Will we overturn their government like we did so many times in Latin/South America? Or will we sit idly by as a massive oil producing country proceeds to put the screws to us?

Capitalist governments are corrupt, and theocracies are inherently terrible. So whether a capitalist or a religious zealot runs the country, I don't care. But I don't like seeing American guys dying to help people that don't want to be helped. I don't want to see Iraqis dying in the transition from what I think may be one terribly oppressive government to another.

Yes, you are right that I despise Bush because of this whole thing. But then, I think the whole "promoting Democracy" agenda was absolute bullshit, so its hard for me to believe anything he says.

I would like it if the Iraqis formed a secular, honest government based on Jeffersonian and Painite beliefs. DO I think it will happen? No. Never.


Oops. You lost me when it was decided that nobody cares about who is lying to them...

Anyhoo, there is a difference between recognizing and cheering progress and cheerleading for the administration. A very big difference.

Please, go ahead and point out progress and achievements in Iraq, the more the merrier. Everyone wants the best possible outcome of this thing, but that doesn't mean we have to ignore everything we don't like either.