President Bush Discusses Iraq Policy at Whitehall Palace in London

"Americans traveling to England always observe more similarities to our country than differences. I've been here only a short time, but I've noticed that the tradition of free speech -- exercised with enthusiasm -- (laughter) -- is alive and well here in London. We have that at home, too. They now have that right in Baghdad, as well. ... ... It's rightly said that Americans are a religious people. That's, in part, because the "Good News" was translated by Tyndale, preached by Wesley, lived out in the example of William Booth. At times, Americans are even said to have a puritan streak -- where might that have come from? ... Well, we can start with the Puritans. ... ... More than an alliance of security and commerce, the British and American peoples have an alliance of values. And, today, this old and tested alliance is very strong. ... ... The deepest beliefs of our nations set the direction of our foreign policy. We value our own civil rights, so we stand for the human rights of others. ... ... President Wilson had come to Europe with his 14 Points for Peace. Many complimented him on his vision; yet some were dubious. Take, for example, the Prime Minister of France. He complained that God, himself, had only 10 commandments. ... Sounds familiar. ... ... Through world war and cold war, we learned that idealism, if it is to do any good in this world, requires common purpose and national strength, moral courage and patience in difficult tasks. And now our generation has need of these qualities. ... ... On September the 11th, 2001, terrorists left their mark of murder on my country, and took the lives of 67 British citizens. With the passing of months and years, it is the natural human desire to resume a quiet life and to put that day behind us, as if waking from a dark dream. The hope that danger has passed is comforting, is understanding, and it is false. The attacks that followed -- on Bali, Jakarta, Casablanca, Bombay, Mombassa, Najaf, Jerusalem, Riyadh, Baghdad, and Istanbul -- were not dreams. They're part of the global campaign by terrorist networks to intimidate and demoralize all who oppose them. ... ... The peace and security of free nations now rests on three pillars: First, international organizations must be equal to the challenges facing our world, from lifting up failing states to opposing proliferation. ... ... The second pillar of peace and security in our world is the willingness of free nations, when the last resort arrives, to retain* {sic} aggression and evil by force. There are principled objections to the use of force in every generation, and I credit the good motives behind these views. ... ... The third pillar of security is our commitment to the global expansion of democracy, and the hope and progress it brings, as the alternative to instability and to hatred and terror. We cannot rely exclusively on military power to assure our long-term security. Lasting peace is gained as justice and democracy advance. ..." IMO this was a good speech. Even if you don't agree with the choice of 'correcting' what was wrong in Iraq, you still have a moral/ethical obligation to stand behind the 'complete process' we (and other nations) are partaking within Iraq. You may not have voted for GW Bush, and that's fine. But you also voted for (and those who were voted into other offices appointed) the people who did the recount and thereby ruled GW Bush as President. So, indirectly, you also voted for GW Bush. (That's just how the Democratic process works...). My point? You can express your opinion that you don't agree with the President's decisions. You can solicite the White House and your Congressman and make your position well known, but when the President makes a decision, back him. You have a moral, ethical, and national obligation to back him. If he did not make a decision you agree with this time, make your position/opinion even more well-known (within the confines of established legalities.... :)) to your Congressman/White House/Political Leaders. Let me bring up a previous point from an earlier post. If we withdrew our troops from Iraq (and other dangerous areas) and brought them back to the States, think about where the attacks will end up - in the States - on our soil. The military troops are more important than you realize or even choose to admit. The choice is either attacks on military troops (who are trained to handle the 'conflict') or allow our innocent people (in our own country) to be senselessly killed/murdered. The attacks in Iraq have been toward the US (and our allies), but the attacks have also been upon the attackers' own people (the Iraqis). What makes you think they will not attack us on our soil when they don't hold their own people's lives at high value? Two words: September 11. That should be proof enough. If you think they won't do something like 9/11 again, you are most mistaken and the wool has been self-pulled over your very own eyes. How many years do you think it took to set up 9/11? How many years has it been since 9/11? Do you get my point? The amount of time that has past so far (since 9/11) is about the time frame it took the enemy to prepare for 9/11. Having the troops in Iraq is keeping the attacks away from our soil. We need to keep them busy in their backyard so they don't move into ours. Regardless of what you think, the enemy has an agenda. You can not reason with this enemy. They believe their agenda so blindly, they sacrifice themselves for it. Whether you want to play along or not, you will be involved. They will hunt all Freedom-loving people, until we are all dead. We need our troops over there. Our very livelihood demands our troops to be over there. Your children depend upon our troops being over there. For if they were not there but over here, the attacks would be more fierce and more frequent. How do I know this? Common sense tells me. You dont' believe me? Then demand our troops to return.