Demanding Defeat in Iraq

What's the big news from President Bush's address to the nation on Wednesday night?

If you get your spin (or news) from the lib media, the most important thing that Bush said was this:

"Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me."

Why is that so shocking?

I'm not surprised by that statement at all.

I'm also not surprised by the libs' spin on Bush's speech.

WASHINGTON -- President Bush acknowledged for the first time Wednesday that he erred by not ordering a military buildup in Iraq last year and said he was increasing U.S. troops by 21,500 to quell the country's near-anarchy.

...The buildup puts Bush on a collision course with the new Democratic Congress and pushes the American troop presence in Iraq toward its highest level. It also runs counter to widespread anti-war passions among Americans and the advice of some top generals.

In a prime-time address to the nation, Bush pushed back against the Democrats' calls to end the unpopular war. He said that "to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear that country apart and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale."

...There was criticism from Republicans, as well. "This is a dangerously wrongheaded strategy that will drive America deeper into an unwinnable swamp at a great cost," said Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., a Vietnam veteran and potential GOP presidential candidate.

After nearly four years of bloody combat, the speech was perhaps Bush's last credible chance to try to present a winning strategy in Iraq and persuade Americans to change their minds about the unpopular war, which has cost the lives of more than 3,000 members of the U.S. military as well as more than $400 billion.

Senate and House Democrats are arranging votes urging the president not to send more troops. While lacking the force of law, the measures would compel Republicans to go on record as either bucking the president or supporting an escalation.

Usually loath to admit error, Bush said it also was a mistake to have allowed American forces to be restricted by the Iraqi government, which tried to prevent U.S. military operations against fighters controlled by the radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, a powerful political ally of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The president said al-Maliki had assured him that from now on, "political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated."

Do you detect a little bias in the reporting?

After nearly four years of bloody combat, the speech was perhaps Bush's last credible chance to try to present a winning strategy in Iraq and persuade Americans to change their minds about the unpopular war, which has cost the lives of more than 3,000 members of the U.S. military as well as more than $400 billion.

--We're nearing "four years of bloody combat."

--This is Bush's last credible chance to convince "Americans to change their minds about the unpopular war."

--The American death toll has reached three thousand.

--The war has cost over $400 billion.

--And, of course, Bush is a stubborn jackass, "loath to admit error."

Fair and balanced? I don't think so.

That's what concerns me. The coverage is so slanted.

We can't lose in Iraq, but the Dems and their lib media allies are demanding defeat.

Watching the speech, I had an uneasy feeling.

Listening to Brian Williams and Tim Russert's discussion after the speech, I felt sick.

The mainstream media and the Dems (synonyms) are pounding away, delivering the message that the plan Bush laid out is doomed.

The war is lost. Americans want out of Iraq right now. It's an uphill battle for Bush. Bush is the biggest loser.

Our enemies are loving all of this. Whether they're from the Middle East, Asia, Europe, South America, or anti-American Americans, our enemies believe, and with good reason, that America will be defeated.

What absolutely bugs the hell out of me are the Americans that want us to lose in Iraq.

I really can't stand it.

I was so troubled listening to the President.

I imagined the hate-filled libs foaming at the mouth, growling at their TVs as they watched President Bush.

I kept thinking what buffoons like Ted Kennedy and Dick Durbin and Nancy Pelosi had been saying the past couple of days -- VIETNAM, VIETNAM, VIETNAM; DEFEAT, DEFEAT, DEFEAT.

The roar of the criticism is deafening. It even spilled into late night TV talk.

Presidential candidate John Edwards was Jay Leno's guest on Wednesday night. Although the speech hadn't aired at the time the show was taped, Leno asked Edwards about the troop surge.

Edwards declared that the President's plan was "dead wrong."

People applauded.

Then, I had the misfortune of watching Charlie Rose. He had a number of guests on his program to analyze the President's speech.

Rose asked if the President was sufficiently contrite about his mistakes?

Ken Duberstein said that we didn't see the typical Bush "bravado," but he didn't go far enough in acknowledging his mistakes.

Good grief. What more was Bush supposed to say? "I resign"? "I'm the worst president in the history of the United States"? Would that have satisfied the pundits?

Perhaps Bush should volunteer to be executed. I doubt that would pacify his critics.

Rose asked, "Is the war lost?"

Rahm Emanuel said that he wouldn't say it's lost, but "we're not going to have a victory here."

Huh?

What a load of defeatist crap!

Can you imagine what it would have been like if jerks like these were around during World War II?

I think the stakes are just as high now as they were then.

I sincerely believe that too many Americans think we can cut and run from Iraq without dire consequences.

They've forgotten that our country was attacked. Planes were hijacked and flown into our buildings and those buildings crumbled. Thousands died -- including women, children, and the elderly.

I don't know how things will play out in Iraq. At this point, I'm not optimistic because we are not united in our pursuit of victory.

Far too many Americans mistakenly believe that everything will be hunky dory if we pull out of Iraq. They don't understand the consequences.

That's the mistake that's newsworthy, not Bush taking responsibility for his errors.