Bush Launches Iraq Defense

The media was aghast that President Bush would dare to defend his Iraq policy during a crucial period before the mid-term elections. In response, the Washington Post presented the issue as one of Bush framing his political opponents as defeatists. It went on to characterize the issue as one of political opportunism and misinterpretation.

[Link]

At the same time, the President gave a terse response to NBC offering a glimpse of the defense to come. The President remarked:

I readily concede our policies may not be beloved. But I'll tell you the policies that are: We feed the hungry. When the tsunamis hit, it was the United States of America who took the lead. On HIV/AIDS, we're spending $15 billion of taxpayers' money to help people suffering. And so this country is a country that is doing a lot of good. I think when it's all said and done that they'll look back and say: 'Thank goodness America took the lead in fighting this war on terror, too. Thank God they're helping to lay the foundation for peace.

[Link]

The Washington Post article is typical. Yet, it overlooks the very key point: most of Bush's political opponents actually are defeatists. Their policy for withdrawal amounts to a short-term, cut and run answer to a long-term problem. They simply fail to understand the nature of the threat. Leaving Iraq will be ruinous, as Vice-President Cheney pointed out [ Link], because Iraq has only two end games: victory or defeat.

The President's remarks to NBC address the issue of America's image both abroad and at home. Within the context of an unpopular war, they offer are a strong reminder to Americans that there are many good things we do for others in the World that do not necessarily make headlines. The implicit lesson to opponents of Iraq is to consider US withdrawal from any world arena and to look at their consequences.

Should America hold out on economic aid to developing Nations, should America hold out on re-development aid to countries ravaged by the tsunami of 2005, should America hold out on AIDS research funding, the world would be a much different place and worse off.

When America retreats from the international arena the world suffers its adverse effects. An American reluctance to intervene in WWI and WWII nearly enabled German victories in both wars. Had America disengaged during the Cold War the threat from Iran would pale in comparison to a threat from Russia. When America adopted a policy of disengagement during the Clinton years the consequences were suffered on September 11th, 2001.

The President is wise to dig in and make his case. Tough talk to the electorate is never popular but it is right. And so is the cause.