Bush: Ever Feisty When it Comes to Iraq

December 3rd, 2007 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:
Leave a comment

Earlier today US President George W. Bush blasted Democrats for withholding funds for the Iraq War / the War on Terrorism. “There are some in Congress who want to withhold this funding because they want to substitute their judgment for that of our military commanders,” he said.

He went on to say that “instead of listening to the judgment of General Petreaus” these lawmakers are “threatening to withhold money he needs… unless they can mandate an arbitrary date of withdrawal.”

After that he pointed out that several troops will come home this month due to the success of the surge. “For Congress to insist on setting an arbitrary date for withdrawal would put the gains General Petraeus and our troops have made in danger,” he said.

Bush’s approach to this issue is typical: it’s his style. He’d rather confront then compromise. And he’s right: he has won virtually every single battle he has ever fought with Congress, and especially every single battle he has fought with Democrats in Congress.

The question for Democrats, and liberal / anti-war voters (not per definition the same) is whether the Democrats will once again give in or whether they’ll show, as some would put it, some backbone.

Bush’s surge is paying off. To call for withdrawal now seems to be a bit misplaced, to put it mildly. General Petraeus is doing a great job; he has brought relative stability and order to Iraq. If the US keeps this up, and if the Iraqis do their part, Iraq might become a relative success after all. And that’s worth much. Very much.

The US went into this war four years ago. It took the responsibility for Iraq. Calling for withdrawal just to please voters back home isn’t right. US lawmakers have to objectively look at the situation and should, when progress is being made, say so despite their domestic (political) interests.

They owe it to Iraqis and others in the Middle East.

Watch the video (and let me know whether it plays alright for you):

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.