VS sturen meer dan 20.000 extra troepen naar Irak

[Ros]

Ik denk dat het eigenlijk wel mee zal vallen. De "insurgents" zullen na de komst van de extra troepen een low profile strategie gaan volgen. De Iraakse veiligheidstroepen zullen ogenschijnlijk de situatie onder controle krijgen. De VS zal met een voldaan gevoel, "job done", vertrekken waarna de opstandelingen zonder al te veel moeite weer de touwtjes in handen nemen.

De "democratische" regering zal uiteindelijk vallen waarna het land weer onder een vorm van dictatuur terecht komt, zoals alle Islamitische landen in het Middenoosten.

Dus wel of geen 20.000 extra man naar binnen brengen zal dus uiteindelijk geen enkel effect hebben op de toekomst van Irak.

[ronjhe]

Iraqis split on Bush's last gamble
By Clive Myrie
BBC News, Baghdad

So what do ordinary Iraqis think of President Bush's decision to send around 20,000 extra troops to their country?

Well it depends who you ask, and whether they are Shia or Sunni.

The vast majority of the Shia population here think it is a disastrous idea.

Ask Haythem Zalzala, a pharmacist with impeccable English. He runs a chemist shop in the Karada area of central Baghdad and he summed up the view of many here.

"Nobody's thinking properly about making things better in Iraq. I think it's very wrong to send more soldiers to Iraq. It'll just create more problems, not solve anything."

Deep down Prime Minister Nouri Maliki - also a Shia - feels the same way.

In his most recent face-to-face meeting with President Bush last November, he did not ask for more American troops.

In fact, he wanted to lower the US profile here and take more control of his own forces, anxious to try to put an Iraqi face on efforts to tackle the violence here.

Among the Shia there is a general feeling that the presence of American troops acts like a magnet for the insurgents and militias.

Violence rules

But if you are a Sunni in Iraq, the presence of US troops might actually be comforting.

Shia death squads have menaced Sunni communities and US troops provide the kind of security that Iraqi forces - so far- have not.

Well, whatever the Iraqis think, it is a done deal. President Bush believes his so-called "troop surge" can change things on the ground for the better.

But it must be worrying for Washington and Prime Minister Maliki that on Wednesday this week, in some of the worst clashes Baghdad has seen in two years, around 1,000 coalition and Iraqi troops were held at bay by a few hundred insurgents and foreign jihadists.

The battle was for supremacy of an area surrounding one street. Imagine, then, the kind of firepower that might be needed to pacify a whole city of some six million people.

The security situation here is appalling. Sectarian attacks are an everyday fact of life. Baghdad is a city where violence rules - it sours the air people breathe.

Almost four years after the US-led coalition toppled Saddam Hussein it is a terrible indictment that scores and scores of people - mainly Iraqi civilians - are dying every day. People are routinely kidnapped, tortured and then beheaded, with their bodies dumped by the side of the road.

It is a shocking indictment that curfews dictate the rhythm of life here, that the policeman on the beat could turn out to be a member of a death squad, arrest you and kill you.

Squeezing the insurgents

Previous attempts to clean up Baghdad have failed miserably. In the past, coalition and Iraqi troops have pursued a policy of "clear, hold and build".

They have gone into a troublesome area, cleared it - but failed to hold it and build it up. Too often, inexperienced Iraqi soldiers were left in charge. So insurgents and militiamen have simply moved back in.

But under the new strategy, once an area is cleared the extra US troops will stay behind, backing up Iraqi forces to hold the area.

This is the so called "ink blot" strategy where eventually cleared areas can merge together, squeezing out the insurgents and militias.

Then the "build" phase can begin. Millions of dollars will be used for regeneration and job creation.

The White House is also confident its new strategy will work because there is a political dimension to it. The US will press the Iraqi government to be more inclusive, to reach out to Sunnis who feel disenfranchised.

Pie in the sky or a sensible attempt to tackle Iraq's problems? We will soon find out.

What is clear is that President Bush's new strategy is being seen as a last ditch bid to win Iraq, to turn around a war effort that has lurched from good, to bad, to terrible.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6252123.stm

commentaar: wat een ironie. De sunni's, die het grootste deel van de fanatieke anti-Amerikaanse verzetsacties uitvoeren hebben schijnbaar het meeste baat bij de komst van meer Amerikanen....

[ronjhe]

"Iraq PM is 'on borrowed time'....."

veelzeggende woorden...

[ronjhe]

US: Iraq PM is 'on borrowed time'

Ms Rice was testifying to a Senate hearing about President Bush's new Iraq strategy, announced on Wednesday.

Democrats and some Republicans in Congress have criticised the plan, with one senior Democrat, Senator Joe Biden, calling it a "tragic mistake".

As part of the plan, Mr Bush will boost US troop numbers by more than 20,000.

Later Defence Secretary Robert Gates promised to increase the overall strength of the armed services by recruiting an extra 92,000 troops.

'Revision possible'

Asked about how long troops would stay in Iraq, Mr Gates said he thought it would be months not years.
   
"I don't think anybody has a definite idea of how long a surge would last," he told a news conference.

"I think for most of us in our minds we're thinking of it as a matter of months, not 18 months or two years."

He added that the US could revise its plan if Iraqi leaders failed to keep to its commitments.

"The timetable for the introduction of additional US forces will provide ample opportunity early on, and before many of the additional US troops actually arrive in Iraq, to evaluate the progress of this endeavour and whether the Iraqis are fulfilling their commitments to us," he said.

Earlier, Ms Rice warned that the US would take action against countries destabilising Iraq.

Her statement came hours after US forces stormed a building in the northern Iraqi town of Irbil.

Iran said the target had been its consulate, and several Iranians had been arrested. Tehran has condemned the raid.

However, sources at the US Pentagon said the building which was raided did not have any diplomatic status.

'Resolve'

In a TV address on Wednesday, Mr Bush said fresh troops in Iraq would help to secure Baghdad's streets as part of the new strategy.

He said his country's commitment to Iraq was "not open-ended", and that he expected the government in Baghdad to fulfil its own promises.

While questioning Ms Rice on the plan, Senator Biden, who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee, asked whether she thought Mr Maliki would keep his side of the bargain.

"I have met Prime Minister Maliki. I saw his resolve," she said.

"I think he knows that his government is, in a sense, on borrowed time, not just in terms of the American people but in terms of the Iraqi people."

Ms Rice's testimony was briefly interrupted by an anti-war protester, who shouted: "All lies... More lies... Still lies... Stop the lies... Stop the war!"

Senator Biden said he could not accept the plan.

"Secretary Rice, to be very blunt, I cannot in good conscience support the president's approach," he said, quoted by the Associated Press news agency.

Senator Chuck Hagel, a Republican on the committee, also said the plan was a mistake.

"I think this speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam if it's carried out," he said.

Non-binding vote

Mr Bush said in his address that the situation in Iraq was unacceptable, and that responsibility for mistakes rested with him.

But the new troops, most of whom would be sent to Baghdad, would help secure neighbourhoods in the capital from insurgents, he said.

He said the effort would succeed where previous operations had failed, because this time troop levels would be sufficient to hold areas that had been cleared.

The Democrats have promised a non-binding vote in both houses of Congress on the strategy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6253285.stm

[ronjhe]

Ach die polls hebben geen enkel effect. Ik denk dat president Bush, zijn team en supporters het idee hebben op een door god ingegeven missie te zijn in de strijd tegen het kwaad. Zij denken iets groots te gaan bewerkstelligen. En dan hoort het erbij dat mensen eerst zeer skeptisch worden en er niet meer in geloven. Dat moet je dan gewoon verdragen. Maar uiteindelijk zal men gaan inzien dat zij gelijk hebben. Tja de bekende psychologische zelf-manipulatie en indoctrinatie om blind te worden voor de realiteit. Het gebeurde vele malen eerder in de geschiedenis en zal zich blijven herhalen....

[Lex]

Poll: Most oppose more troops in Iraq

Only 35 percent of respondents believe going to war was the right call

The Associated Press
Updated: 12:00 p.m. ET Jan 11, 2007

WASHINGTON - Americans overwhelmingly oppose sending more U.S. forces to
Iraq, according to a new AP-Ipsos poll that serves as a strong
repudiation of President Bush's plan to send another 21,500 troops.

The opposition to boosting troop levels in Iraq reflects growing
skepticism that the United States made the right decision in going to
war in the first place and that a stable, democratic government can be
established there. Just 35 percent think it was right for the United
States to go to war, a new low in AP polling and a reversal from two
years ago, when two-thirds of Americans thought it was the correct move.

Sixty percent, meanwhile, think it is unlikely that a stable, democratic
Iraqi government will be established.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden, D-Del., warned
Thursday that any solution to the Iraq problem must have public support.
Harking back to Vietnam, he said: "No foreign policy can be sustained in
this country without the informed consent of the American people.
They've got to sign on."

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, appearing before Biden's committee,
acknowledged broad public dissatisfaction with the current situation,
but stressed that Americans are united on the high stakes in Iraq.

Fully 70 percent of Americans oppose sending more troops, and a like
number don't think such an increase would help stabilize the situation
there. The telephone survey of 1,002 adults was conducted Monday through
Wednesday night, when the president made his speech calling for an
increase in troops. News had already surfaced before the polling period
that Bush wanted to boost U.S. forces in Iraq.


Iraq drags down Bush's overall rating
The Iraq situation continued to be drag on Bush's overall job approval
rating, which stood at 32 percent, a new low in AP-Ipsos polling.

Democrats are far more inclined to oppose an increase of troops, with 87
percent against the idea, compared to 42 percent of Republicans.
Overall, 52 percent of Republicans support an increase in troops,
although some key GOP constituencies are opposed. For example, 60
percent of white evangelical Christians oppose the idea and 56 percent
of self-described conservatives are opposed.

Women, younger adults and minorities were more likely to oppose
increasing troops than were men, older Americans and whites.

Looking at the results geographically, opposition was highest in the
Northeast, where 79 percent of those surveyed opposed the idea of
increasing troops. That compared with 68 percent in the South and 67
percent in the Midwest and West.

The survey had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage
points.

[Sine Pari]

Want DOD wil een bataljon in elke wijk van bagdad hebben. vind ik teveel van het goede.

Men wil op deze manier proberen de terreur aanslaggen onder controlle te krijgen, aangezien op het moment er te vaak te laat op gereageerd kan worden. Men wil nu proberen met kleine eenheden die zamen werken met Iraqi eenheden verspreid over Baghdad dit onder kontrolle te krijgen.

[ronjhe]

Minister Bot van Buitenlandse Zaken is er verbaasd over dat president Bush het rapport van de commissie-Baker over de falende Irak-strategie grotendeels naast zich neer heeft gelegd.

De commissie-Baker pleitte ondermeer voor een versnelde terugtrekking van de Amerikaanse militairen en voor dialoog met Iran en Syrie, die het geweld in Irak steunen.

Maar Bush heeft besloten 21.000 extra militairen naar Irak te sturen en dat Iran en Syrie hard worden aangepakt. Nu troepen terugtrekken leidt volgens Bush tot chaos in Irak. Bot twijfelt aan de doeltreffendheid van Bush' strategie.
http://teletekst.nos.nl/?101-01

[ronjhe]

Mijn commentaar op de toespraak van president Bush.

Good evening. Tonight in Iraq, the armed forces of the United States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror - and our safety here at home. The new strategy I outline tonight will change America's course in Iraq, and help us succeed in the fight against terror.

De aanval in Irak heeft wat voorheen niets te maken had met de "war on terrorism" onderdeel gemaakt van die dreiging van terrorisme. Wederom wordt hier misbruik gemaakt van een ernstig probleem om een mislukt secundair beleid goed te praten.

Al Qaeda terrorists and Sunni insurgents recognized the mortal danger that Iraq's elections posed for their cause. And they responded with outrageous acts of murder aimed at innocent Iraqis.

In het begin was Al Qaeda hier nauwelijks bij betrokken. Het meeste verzet kwam en komt van Sunni's. Hun gedrag was, gezien de blunders die er zijn gemaakt en de bekende spanning tussen beide religieuze groepen, volledig voorspelbaar. De naiviteit waarmee de Amerikanen dit blijkbaar hebben aangepakt is wederom schokkend. Ook het opblazen van de Samarra Moskee was voorspelbaar en er werd al langer gepleit voor een betere beveiliging. Interessant hier de veelzeggende link die gemaakt wordt naar Iran.

It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq. So my national security team, military commanders, and diplomats conducted a comprehensive review..... thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group - a bipartisan panel led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Congressman Lee Hamilton. ..... Failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States.

In feiten worden de voorstellen van de Iraq Study Group gewoon genegeerd. En wat hier ontbreekt is dat de aanval op Irak zelf al een disaster blijkt te zijn voor de VS.

The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits. They would be in a better position to topple moderate governments, create chaos in the region, and use oil revenues to fund their ambitions. Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Our enemies would have a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks on the American people. On September the 11th, 2001, we saw what a refuge for extremists on the other side of the world could bring to the streets of our own cities. For the safety of our people, America must succeed in Iraq.

een dreigend beeld wordt geschetst. Iran wordt wederom genoemd. Het vervelende alleen is, dat er weinig van klopt. Want wat 2001 nu juist heeft laten zien, alsook Madrid en London, is dat extremisten perfect en onopgemerkt kunnen verblijven in onze steden en daar hun plannen kunnen voorbereiden en uitvoeren. Een terrorist is niet gebonden aan een bepaald land of gebied. En deze terroristen waren voor een deel zelfs hier geboren. Ook zijn er hier voldoende geldbronnen aan te boren (denk aan drugshandel).

Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents, and there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have.

en die zullen er zelfs met 17.000 man extra ook niet zijn. Bagdad is een grote stad.

These Iraqi forces will operate from local police stations; conducting patrols and setting up checkpoints and going door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad residents.

Een belangrijk onderdeel van het probleem zijn nu juist die Iraakse troepen en politie. Zij staan vaak niet boven de partijen maar handelen ook naar hun religieuze achtergrond.

I have made it clear to the prime minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended. If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people - and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people. Now is the time to act. The prime minister understands this. Here is what he told his people just last week: "The Baghdad security plan will not provide a safe haven for any outlaws, regardless of [their] sectarian or political affiliation."

Dit komt op mij over als een dreigement. De premier krijgt nog 1 kans en wordt dan blijkbaar vervangen door iemand die deze harde lijn wel kan doorzetten. De weg naar een sterke man lijkt hier dus te worden aangegeven....

This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks. Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering. Yet, over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops chasing down murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust and cooperation from Baghdad's residents. When this happens, daily life will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas. Most of Iraq's Sunni and Shia want to live together in peace. And reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make reconciliation possible.

dit is een veels te rooskleurig beeld vind ik. We hebben in Fallujah allemaal gezien wat het "schoonvegen" van een stad van verzetshaarden kan betekenen bij de bekende Amerikaanse aanpak van excessief gebruik van vuurkracht. Ik kan me nauwelijks voorstellen dat burgers na zo'n ervaring, en de dood van vele familieleden daarbij, meer vertrouwen zullen krijgen in de regering of de Amerikanen. Bush gaat volledig voorbij aan de gevolgen van deze zeer moeilijke urban-warfare missie.

To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November. To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis. To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs. To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year. And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq's constitution.

mooie woorden. Maar binnen een stroperig en corrupt systeem zoals dat nu in plaats is nauwelijks in zo'n korte tijd effectief te realiseren. Met geld is geen steun te kopen. Daarvoor is het al te laat. Zeker als zometeen de negatieve effecten van die schoonmaakacties in Bagdad er nog bijkomen.

America will change our approach to help the Iraqi government as it works to meet these benchmarks. In keeping with the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, we will increase the embedding of American advisers in Iraqi army units, and partner a coalition brigade with every Iraqi army division.

Een kleine tegemoetkoming aan het rapport. Dat verder volledig wordt genegeerd.

We will help the Iraqis build a larger and better-equipped army, and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, which remains the essential U.S. security mission in Iraq. We will give our commanders and civilians greater flexibility to spend funds for economic assistance. We will double the number of Provincial Reconstruction Teams. These teams bring together military and civilian experts to help local Iraqi communities pursue reconciliation, strengthen the moderates and speed the transition to Iraqi self-reliance. And Secretary Rice will soon appoint a reconstruction coordinator in Baghdad to ensure better results for economic assistance being spent in Iraq.

Wederom mooie woorden. Maar wat me zo verbaasd is, dat de Irakezen decennia-lang gewoon hun eigen zaken regelden. En nu de indruk wordt gewekt dat ze dat zonder Amerikaanse hulp niet kunnen. Dit ruikt dus weer veel meer naar een manier om veel overheidsgeld op deze manier door te sluizen naar het Amerikaanse bedrijfsleven. Dat een belangrijke steunpilaar van president Bush.

As we make these changes, we will continue to pursue al Qaeda and foreign fighters. Al Qaeda is still active in Iraq. Its home base is Anbar Province. Al Qaeda has helped make Anbar the most violent area of Iraq outside the capital. A captured al Qaeda document describes the terrorists' plan to infiltrate and seize control of the province. This would bring al Qaeda closer to its goals of taking down Iraq's democracy, building a radical Islamic empire, and launching new attacks on the United States at home and abroad.

Het is bekend dat veel Sunni verzetsgroepen in dit gebied weinig moeten hebben van Al Qaeda en haar radicale ideeen. Daarvoor feitelijk veel te seculier zijn. En wat zegt zo'n document? Plannen maken of idealen omschrijven is nog wat anders dan ze realiseren. Ik zie Iraakse verzetsgroepen niet snel instemmen met een radicaal Islamitische staat in deze provincie. Dit is dus gewoon bangmakerij en het opblazen van de Al Quada invloed in Irak. Waarmee weer een link wordt gelegd met 9/11.

America's men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanistan - and we will not allow them to re- establish it in Iraq.

Dit is gewoon feitelijk een leugen. Al Qaeda zit gewoon nog in Afghanistan. En bovendien ook in buurland en bij Amerikaanse bondgenoot Pakistan. Daar hoor ik de president niet over.

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity - and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

We are also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence sharing and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region.

[/b]Dit vind ik een heel belangrijk stuk uit de rede van Bush. In feiten legt hij hier de basis voor een mogelijk militair optreden tegen Iran en Syrie. Want deze netwerken uitschakelen zonder Iran en Syrie zelf aan te pakken is nauwelijks effectief. Ook legt hij de link met het Iraanse kernwapenprogramma. Het sturen van Patriots naar de regio en bondgenoten daar kan mijns inziens alleen wijzen op voorbereidingen om Iraanse wraakacties na een aanval op haar nucleaire installaties te helpen neutraliseren. Dit is mijns inziens een hele duidelijke blik in de denkwereld van de president en zijn team. En voor mij een zeer verontrustende.

The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time. On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation. On the other side are extremists who kill the innocent, and have declared their intention to destroy our way of life. In the long run, the most realistic way to protect the American people is to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology of the enemy - by advancing liberty across a troubled region. It is in the interests of the United States to stand with the brave men and women who are risking their lives to claim their freedom - and to help them as they work to raise up just and hopeful societies across the Middle East.

From Afghanistan to Lebanon to the Palestinian territories, millions of ordinary people are sick of the violence, and want a future of peace and opportunity for their children. And they are looking at Iraq. They want to know: Will America withdraw and yield the future of that country to the extremists - or will we stand with the Iraqis who have made the choice for freedom?

Wederom signalen van een zwart/wit goed versus kwaad wereldbeeld, dat de president al zo vaak heeft weergegeven. Ogenschijnlijk dus geen enkele verandering in zijn denkbeelden. Vind ik wederom zeer verontrustend. Ook het merkwaardige idee dat burgers in het Midden-Oosten de Amerikaanse inval in Irak als een bevrijdiging en weg naar vrijheid zien is weer tekenend. Zo dom zijn die burgers niet. Die zien (en horen via hun families) het geweld en instabiliteit die de inval in Irak heeft gebracht. Maar zien vooral hoe de regering Bush de dictators in hun eigen land nauwelijks aanpakt en als bondgenoot blijft omhelzen. Het is juist deze tegenstrijdigheid die het wantrouwen in de intenties van de Amerikanen groot maakt  en jonge moslims aanzet tot radicalisatie.

Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship. But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world - a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law, respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its people. A democratic Iraq will not be perfect. But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them - and it will help bring a future of peace and security for our children and grandchildren.

De naiviteit van deze woorden vind ik schokkend. Of denkt de president dat zijn burgers werkelijk zo dom en naief zijn?

We carefully considered these proposals. And we concluded that to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear the country apart, and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale. Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to stay in Iraq even longer, and confront an enemy that is even more lethal. If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.

Er is geen enkel bewijs dat een Amerikaanse stap terug tot dit soort drama's zal leiden. Sterker nog, de Britten hebben zelf ondervonden in de praktijk dat juist hun aanwezigheid meer geweld uitlokte.

Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve. It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom. Yet times of testing reveal the character of a nation. And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed. Now America is engaged in a new struggle that will set the course for a new century. We can and we will prevail.

Met pessimisme heeft dit alles weinig te maken. Want de meeste problemen worden door het beleid van Bush zelf veroorzaakt. Feitelijk worden hier dus oorzaak en gevolg omgedraaid. En mensen die daarop wijzen als pessimisten afgedaan.

We go forward with trust that the author of liberty will guide us through these trying hours. Thank you and good night.

Geen "god bless you" en "god's given country"? Als dit werkelijk de volledige tekst is, is dit een heel opvallend punt. Het lijkt of men alle verwijzingen naar geloof heeft weggelaten uit de toespraak. Die Bush in vorige toespraken zo vaak maakte.

Mijn conclusie. President Bush en zijn team blijven stug vasthouden aan hun denkbeelden en politiek. In lijn met premier Blair. Men wil blijkbaar niet weten van fouten en falend beleid en ziet dit alles nog steeds in een groter geheel van een strijd tussen goed en kwaad, tussen vrijheid en dictatuur. Ik vind dit zeer verontrustend en verwacht dus nieuwe acties in de nabije toekomst o.a. richting Iran en Syrie. Met alle gevolgen van dien.

[ronjhe]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Below is the text of President Bush's speech to the nation Wednesday outlining his new strategy in Iraq, with links to key points:

Security
Iraqi aid
Diplomacy

Good evening. Tonight in Iraq, the armed forces of the United States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror - and our safety here at home. The new strategy I outline tonight will change America's course in Iraq, and help us succeed in the fight against terror.

When I addressed you just over a year ago, nearly 12 million Iraqis had cast their ballots for a unified and democratic nation. The elections of 2005 were a stunning achievement. We thought that these elections would bring the Iraqis together - and that as we trained Iraqi security forces, we could accomplish our mission with fewer American troops.

But in 2006, the opposite happened. The violence in Iraq - particularly in Baghdad - overwhelmed the political gains the Iraqis had made. Al Qaeda terrorists and Sunni insurgents recognized the mortal danger that Iraq's elections posed for their cause. And they responded with outrageous acts of murder aimed at innocent Iraqis.

They blew up one of the holiest shrines in Shia Islam - the Golden Mosque of Samarra - in a calculated effort to provoke Iraq's Shia population to retaliate. Their strategy worked. Radical Shia elements, some supported by Iran, formed death squads. And the result was a vicious cycle of sectarian violence that continues today.

The situation in Iraq is unacceptable to the American people - and it is unacceptable to me. Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely. They have done everything we have asked them to do. Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me.

It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq. So my national security team, military commanders, and diplomats conducted a comprehensive review. We consulted members of Congress from both parties, our allies abroad, and distinguished outside experts. We benefited from the thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group - a bipartisan panel led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Congressman Lee Hamilton. In our discussions, we all agreed that there is no magic formula for success in Iraq. And one message came through loud and clear: Failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States.

The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits. They would be in a better position to topple moderate governments, create chaos in the region, and use oil revenues to fund their ambitions. Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Our enemies would have a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks on the American people. On September the 11th, 2001, we saw what a refuge for extremists on the other side of the world could bring to the streets of our own cities. For the safety of our people, America must succeed in Iraq.
Security

The most urgent priority for success in Iraq is security, especially in Baghdad. Eighty percent of Iraq's sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of the capital. This violence is splitting Baghdad into sectarian enclaves, and shaking the confidence of all Iraqis. Only the Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people. And their government has put forward an aggressive plan to do it.

Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents, and there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have. Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes. They report that it does. They also report that this plan can work.

Now, let me explain the main elements of this effort. The Iraqi government will appoint a military commander and two deputy commanders for their capital. The Iraqi government will deploy Iraqi army and national police brigades across Baghdad's nine districts. When these forces are fully deployed, there will be 18 Iraqi army and national police brigades committed to this effort, along with local police. These Iraqi forces will operate from local police stations; conducting patrols and setting up checkpoints and going door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad residents.

This is a strong commitment. But for it to succeed, our commanders say the Iraqis will need our help. So America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence and bring security to the people of Baghdad. This will require increasing American force levels. So I've committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq.

The vast majority of them -- five brigades -- will be deployed to Baghdad. These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations. Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs.

Many listening tonight will ask why this effort will succeed when previous operations to secure Baghdad did not. Well, here are the differences: In earlier operations, Iraqi and American forces cleared many neighborhoods of terrorists and insurgents - but when our forces moved on to other targets, the killers returned. This time, we will have the force levels we need to hold the areas that have been cleared. In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian violence. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter these neighborhoods - and Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated.

I have made it clear to the prime minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended. If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people - and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people. Now is the time to act. The prime minister understands this. Here is what he told his people just last week: "The Baghdad security plan will not provide a safe haven for any outlaws, regardless of [their] sectarian or political affiliation."

This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks. Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering. Yet, over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops chasing down murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust and cooperation from Baghdad's residents. When this happens, daily life will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas. Most of Iraq's Sunni and Shia want to live together in peace. And reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make reconciliation possible.
Iraqi aid

A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations. Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and communities. So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.

To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November. To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis. To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs. To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year. And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq's constitution.

America will change our approach to help the Iraqi government as it works to meet these benchmarks. In keeping with the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, we will increase the embedding of American advisers in Iraqi army units, and partner a coalition brigade with every Iraqi army division.

We will help the Iraqis build a larger and better-equipped army, and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, which remains the essential U.S. security mission in Iraq. We will give our commanders and civilians greater flexibility to spend funds for economic assistance. We will double the number of Provincial Reconstruction Teams. These teams bring together military and civilian experts to help local Iraqi communities pursue reconciliation, strengthen the moderates and speed the transition to Iraqi self-reliance. And Secretary Rice will soon appoint a reconstruction coordinator in Baghdad to ensure better results for economic assistance being spent in Iraq.

As we make these changes, we will continue to pursue al Qaeda and foreign fighters. Al Qaeda is still active in Iraq. Its home base is Anbar Province. Al Qaeda has helped make Anbar the most violent area of Iraq outside the capital. A captured al Qaeda document describes the terrorists' plan to infiltrate and seize control of the province. This would bring al Qaeda closer to its goals of taking down Iraq's democracy, building a radical Islamic empire, and launching new attacks on the United States at home and abroad.

Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders - and they are protecting the local population. Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their willingness to take on al Qaeda. And, as a result, our commanders believe we have an opportunity to deal a serious blow to the terrorists. So I have given orders to increase American forces in Anbar Province by 4,000 troops. These troops will work with Iraqi and tribal forces to keep up the pressure on the terrorists. America's men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanistan - and we will not allow them to re- establish it in Iraq.

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity - and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.
Diplomacy

We are also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence sharing and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region.

We will use America's full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf states need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists - and a strategic threat to their survival. These nations have a stake in a successful Iraq that is at peace with its neighbors - and they must step up their support for Iraq's unity government. We endorse the Iraqi government's call to finalize an international compact that will bring new economic assistance in exchange for greater economic reform. And on Friday, Secretary Rice will leave for the region - to build support for Iraq, and continue the urgent diplomacy required to help bring peace to the Middle East.

The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time. On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation. On the other side are extremists who kill the innocent, and have declared their intention to destroy our way of life. In the long run, the most realistic way to protect the American people is to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology of the enemy - by advancing liberty across a troubled region. It is in the interests of the United States to stand with the brave men and women who are risking their lives to claim their freedom - and to help them as they work to raise up just and hopeful societies across the Middle East.

From Afghanistan to Lebanon to the Palestinian territories, millions of ordinary people are sick of the violence, and want a future of peace and opportunity for their children. And they are looking at Iraq. They want to know: Will America withdraw and yield the future of that country to the extremists - or will we stand with the Iraqis who have made the choice for freedom?

The changes I have outlined tonight are aimed at ensuring the survival of a young democracy that is fighting for its life in a part of the world of enormous importance to American security. Let me be clear: The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent. Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue - and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties. The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer to success. I believe that it will.

Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship. But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world - a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law, respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its people. A democratic Iraq will not be perfect. But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them - and it will help bring a future of peace and security for our children and grandchildren.

This new approach comes after consultations with Congress about the different courses we could take in Iraq. Many are concerned that the Iraqis are becoming too dependent on the United States - and therefore, our policy should focus on protecting Iraq's borders and hunting down al Qaeda. Their solution is to scale back America's efforts in Baghdad - or announce the phased withdrawal of our combat forces.

We carefully considered these proposals. And we concluded that to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear the country apart, and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale. Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to stay in Iraq even longer, and confront an enemy that is even more lethal. If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.

In the days ahead, my national security team will fully brief Congress on our new strategy. If members have improvements that can be made, we will make them. If circumstances change, we will adjust. Honorable people have different views, and they will voice their criticisms. It is fair to hold our views up to scrutiny. And all involved have a responsibility to explain how the path they propose would be more likely to succeed.

Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group that will help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror. This group will meet regularly with me and my administration. It will help strengthen our relationship with Congress. We can begin by working together to increase the size of the active Army and Marine Corps, so that America has the armed forces we need for the 21st century. We also need to examine ways to mobilize talented American civilians to deploy overseas - where they can help build democratic institutions in communities and nations recovering from war and tyranny.

In these dangerous times, the United States is blessed to have extraordinary and selfless men and women willing to step forward and defend us. These young Americans understand that our cause in Iraq is noble and necessary - and that the advance of freedom is the calling of our time. They serve far from their families, who make the quiet sacrifices of lonely holidays and empty chairs at the dinner table. They have watched their comrades give their lives to ensure our liberty. We mourn the loss of every fallen American - and we owe it to them to build a future worthy of their sacrifice.

Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve. It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom. Yet times of testing reveal the character of a nation. And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed. Now America is engaged in a new struggle that will set the course for a new century. We can and we will prevail.

We go forward with trust that the author of liberty will guide us through these trying hours. Thank you and good night.

[Dr_pepper]

ik ben het wel eens met deze versterkingen. De troepen in Irak staan onder een zware werkdruk en extra militairen zijn altijd welkom echter dat er 17.000  :o naar bagdad worden gestuurd vind ik belachelijk. Want DOD wil een bataljon in elke wijk van bagdad hebben. vind ik teveel van het goede.

[Northside]

Ik zie het nut van 20,000 man extra ook niet in...

[Ros]

Tsja.........ik heb hem nu voor de zoveelste keer horen roepen "we will prevail". Wie gelooft er nu nog in ?.

Jammer van de mensen die de komende tijd nog voor deze idioterie hun leven moeten geven 

[Northside]

Uitgegeven: 11 januari 2007 05:59
Laatst gewijzigd: 11 januari 2007 11:33

WASHINGTON - De VS gaan meer dan 20.000 extra troepen naar Irak sturen. Dit zei de Amerikaanse president George Bush woensdag (plaatselijke tijd) in zijn toespraak vanuit het Witte Huis.

Bekijk video


Het nieuwe plan om meer troepen te sturen gaat het geweld in Irak niet beëindigen. De Amerikanen moeten zich voorbereiden op meer slachtoffers, aldus Bush.

"De terroristen en opstandelingen in Irak zijn zonder geweten, en zij zullen het komende jaar bloedig en gewelddadig maken", verklaarde Bush. "Wij zullen winnen."

De live uitgezonden toespraak vanuit de bibliotheek van het Witte Huis duurde ongeveer twintig minuten.

Democraten

Volgens de leiders van de Democratische meerderheid in het Congres brengt Irak-plan van Bush de nationale veiligheid van de VS in gevaar.

"Dit voorstel brengt onze nationale veiligheid in gevaar door nog meer lasten op te leggen aan onze al overbelaste strijdkrachten, waardoor het nog moeilijker wordt op andere crises te reageren", aldus de reactie van de Democraten op het plan.

De Democratische leiders - onder wie de voorzitster van het Huis van Afgevaardigden, Nancy Pelosi, en de leider van de Democraten in de Senaat, Harry Reid - verzekeren de 132.000 Amerikaanse militairen die nu in Irak zijn, wel van de middelen die zij voor hun strijd nodig hebben.

Escalatie

Maar tevens moet aan de Iraakse politieke leiders duidelijk worden gemaakt dat zij de verantwoordelijkheid voor de veiligheid in hun land op zich moeten nemen: "De escalatie van onze militaire betrokkenheid in Irak zendt precies de verkeerde boodschap, en daar zijn wij tegen."

Verwijt

De Democraten verwijten president Bush dat hij de boodschap van zijn nederlaag bij de parlementsverkiezingen in november niet heeft begrepen: "Het Amerikaanse volk wil een koerswijziging in Irak. Wij zijn plan druk te blijven uitoefenen op president Bush om daarin te voorzien."

bron: www.nu.nl