Print This Post Print This Post

President Bush Identifies Monolithic Terrorism in Iraq Victory Speech

I have never been more confident during my worldwide battle against terrorism. I will never back down. I will never give in. I will settle for nothing less than complete victory. It’s true that many soldiers and civilians have fallen and many more will. Tough days are certainly ahead. But ultimately only one thing matters: my determination is unshakable. I will take the fight to the terrorists. And they know it and so do you and everyone else.

I am positive I’m right. I’ve got the support of most people. I don’t care what pollsters say. They weren’t at the Naval Academy last week when I delivered my “Strategy for Victory in Iraq” speech. The future officers clapped and roared like hell; I love being with warriors and they enjoy having me around. We understand each other. They know why I’m doing this. I also want you to understand. So I’m going to explain a few key passages from this critical speech.

My first urgent statement was that “the terrorists have made it clear that Iraq is the central front in their war against humanity, and so we must recognize Iraq as the central front in the war on terror.” Don’t listen to those who claim that I, George W. Bush, was in fact the one who insisted Iraq become the central front in the war on terror. How the hell did I do that? My liberal adversaries in the United States, and my fascist enemies in the Middle East, claim there was no terrorist activity in Iraq before I invaded in April 2003. Well, I say there was a terrorist threat, or at least terrorist thinking. And I could not tolerate their thinking terrorist thoughts. That would have been capitulation. Anyway, there damn sure are plenty of terrorists there now. And that proves my point.

My next huge statement was about Monolithic Terrorism. I declared, “Their objective is to drive the United States and coalition forces out of Iraq, and use the vacuum that would be created by an American retreat to gain control of that country. They would then use Iraq as a base from which to launch attacks against America, and overthrow moderate governments in the Middle East, and try to establish a totalitarian Islamic empire that reaches from Indonesia to Spain.” That’s exactly like the Domino Theory of Monolithic Communism. You remember that and know how it works. If Saigon falls, so does Wichita.

Nowadays that’s why we’re fighting these terrorists in Iraq. Otherwise, “they would be plotting and killing Americans across the world and within our own borders.” Look at “those who blew up commuters in London and Madrid, murdered tourists in Bali, workers in Riyadh, and guests at a wedding in Amman.” Let’s get it straight. When bombs of the United States kill tens of thousands of civilians – or hundreds of thousands, as in Viet Nam – it’s not merely okay, it’s a righteous expression of democratic survival. But when those we bomb bomb us, it’s diabolical. Ours is an “enemy without conscience – and they cannot be appeased.” You’ve got to understand that. And I also want to note that the Spaniards were spineless for withdrawing from Iraq after being bombed. They’re just asking to be bombed some more. That hasn’t happened yet, but according to the Bush Doctrine, it surely will.

My next vital statement was that “free societies are peaceful societies,” and in proof of that I offer my tranquil administration of this society. We are peaceful. We are very peaceful until we’re attacked. When the Vietnamese attacked us, you saw what they got. When the Iraqis attacked us – when they fantasized about attacking us, I mean – thousands of them had to be slaughtered. We destroyed their bodies to save the souls of their surviving countrymen. It’s a pretty big sacrifice, true, but necessary beyond dispute.

We have a comprehensive plan to enable the Iraqis to do for themselves what coalition forces are now doing. In fact, “coalition and Iraqi forces are on the offensive against the enemy, cleaning out areas controlled by the terrorists and Saddam loyalists, leaving Iraqi forces to hold territory taken from the enemy.” Very soon, the Iraqi armed forces will be an independent fighting force. Already, the Iraqis have 120 army and police battalions of between 350 and 800 men, and 80 of those battalions are “fighting side-by-side with coalition forces, and about 40 others are taking the lead in the fight.” Granted, there is only one independent Iraqi battalion now. But there will be more. They just need more time and training.

Evidently, those insurgents have so far had much more time and training. For that reason “we’ve increased our force levels in Iraq to 160,000 – up from 137,000 – in preparation for the December elections…America will help the Iraqis so they can protect their families and secure their free nation. We will stay as long as necessary to complete the mission. If our military tells me we need more troops, I will send them.”

But remember, I’ve already emphasized Iraqi forces are improving. They must be strong or there will be civil war. There would certainly be civil war if we left now. Some say there is already civil war. Whatever you call the situation now, believe me, it would be far worse without my interference. I know that “setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would send a message across the world that America is a weak and an unreliable ally. Setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would send a signal to our enemies – that if they wait long enough, America will cut and run and abandon its friends. And setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would vindicate the terrorists’ tactics of beheadings and suicide bombings and mass murder – and invite new attacks on America. To all who wear the uniform, I make you this pledge: America will not run in the face of car bombers and assassins so long as I am you Commander-in-Chief.’”

The Midshipmen erupted. They understand what’s going on, unlike the weaklings in America and Iraq who claim that some Iraqi security forces are currently mass murdering people in the style of a Saddam. I don’t like to talk about that. It’s probably a lie or exaggeration. And you know damn well I don’t like to talk about withdrawal. Others have been doing that. The day I spoke, the National Security Council published a policy paper that predicted “a reduction in the U.S. military presence in 2006.” A couple of days before that the Pentagon said we’d bring home about 20,000 troops after the elections this month. And according to news reports, “the White House said on November 26 that Democratic Senator Joseph Biden’s plan for a 50,000 troop drawdown next year was remarkably similar to its own.”

I didn’t say that. I don’t talk like that. I will never back down. I will never give in. I will take the fight to the terrorists. I will settle for nothing less than complete victory.

This entry was posted in George W. Bush, Middle East, Terrorism.