‘As the President prepares to announce an increase of an additional 20,000 American troops for the civil war in Iraq, editorials in newspapers across the country are joining the wide-ranging criticism of the war's escalation. Calling it "a futile gesture" and noting that there "is nothing novel" about the President's latest tactic, editorials from Atlanta to Albuquerque, and Dallas to Milwaukee are calling for a "new strategy," for the President to put "far more pressure" on the Iraqis, and for a greater attempt at diplomacy, as the bipartisan Iraq Study Group recommended.’

Editorials Around the Country Blast Bush's War Escalation With Troop Increase

meanwhile, the loser in chief’s little besiderer - deputy twerp, war criminal & serial liar – coward howard, offered the following empty platitudes …..

‘Well ladies and gentlemen the Government supports the new approach outlined by President Bush in relation to Iraq. I watched his speech. I thought it was a very clear and calm and, above all, realistic speech. He didn't underestimate the challenge. He acknowledged that some mistakes had been made but he made it very clear what was at stake.

And we all should understand what is at stake: an American or western defeat in Iraq will be an unbelievable boost to terrorism and if America is defeated in Iraq, it is hard to see how the longer term fight against terrorism can be won. If the West retreats in Iraq, if America retreats in Iraq then that has enormous consequences for the stability of the Middle East and it will also be an enormous boost to terrorism in our part of the world. I welcomed the greater burden to be carried by the Iraqis that came through in the President's speech.

Quite plainly the Iraqi Government must show national leadership and not just sectarian leadership in that country and the proposal for a more integrated approach to dealing with the violence in the Baghdad area, which is overwhelmingly responsible for the carnage in Iraq, struck me as the only realistic approach amongst the options that were available.

So far as Australia is concerned, there is no direct implication in the President's statement for the Australian forces in Iraq. We have an appropriately sized force, one that can be maintained, which is doing very useful work. What we are doing in Iraq is entirely consistent with what the President has outlined. We are providing a back-up or overwatch role in the southern part of Iraq, and although it is dangerous work, it is not as dangerous an area as that immediately surrounding Baghdad. It continues to be our task and our responsibility in that part of Iraq to provide the back up and also to provide the training. In the long run, training the Iraqi Army, the Iraqi security forces, giving them greater confidence and capacity is enormously important because in the end the goal has to be a withdrawal of foreign forces, including our own, and the assumption of full security responsibility by the Iraqis. We are some time away from that, let's be realistic.

The alternatives the President faced were either to announce what he announced or effectively indicate that the West could not win in Iraq and start making arrangements, however it might be camouflaged, for a withdrawal. I believe in the circumstances the President chose the only realistic option. It will be difficult and it's not an easy task that he has to discharge; it's a very heavy burden he carries, but I believe in the circumstances it was a realistic and sensible approach and one that the Australian Government will support.’

Only congenital idiots like howard & his craven bunch of co-conspirators could continue to pretend that the US hasn’t already been defeated. Not even Oliver North, or the myriad of other self-righteous warriors who have championed pax Americana, are prepared to defend bushit’s “new plan”.

It is bushit, “aussie tony” & little johnnee who should be required to personally lead the alleged “surge to victory” …. their criminal war would be over in a nano-second.