Smirky's speech, pt. 2

So I look forward to welcome the Congress back and working together with them. And now, I'll be glad to take some of your questions. Terry, why don't you start.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, since Iraq's new government was announced on April 28th, more than 60 Americans and 760 Iraqis have been killed in attacks. Do you think that the insurgency is gaining strength and becoming more lethal? And do you think that Iraq's government is up to the job of defeating the -- defeating the insurgents and guaranteeing security?
THE PRESIDENT: I think the Iraq government will be up to the task of defeating the insurgents. I think they dealt the insurgents -- I think the Iraqi people dealt the insurgents a serious blow when they -- when we had the elections.
How so? They are still attacking, aren’t they?
In other words, what the insurgents fear is democracy, because democracy is the opposite of their vision. Their vision is one where a few make the decision for many, and if you don't toe the line, there's serious consequences.
Just like when someone doesn’t follow your directions, huh? Shall we recount all the resignations from your cabinet, for example? Now, in what way is your vision different from theirs?
The American people have just got to think about the Taliban if you're interested in thinking -- understanding how the insurgents think.
The Taliban? What does the former, legally constituted government of a completely different country have to do with Iraqis who are trying to eliminate foreign oppression, as they see it?
They have a -- they support an ideology that is the opposite of freedom, in my judgment,
You’re using “judgment” through all this? Yikes! Gee, what would have happened if you had simply asserted your power through the “knowledge” that you were right and attacked both Afghanistan and Iraq? Hmm.
and they're willing to use the tools necessary -- the terror tools
“The terror tools”. That’s an absolutely idiotic way to phrase it, Smirky. Good thing no one in the press corps has any desire to question your brilliance.
necessary to impose their ideology. And so what you're seeing is a group of frustrated and desperate people who kill innocent life.
I don’t think there’s any way you can define our troops imposing martial law over citizens in theirtheir country as being “innocent life”, Mr. Chimp.
And obviously, we mourn the loss of every life.
Unless it’s an Iraqi, in which case you ignore it completely. Or if it’s a wounded or killed American, in which case you ignore them completely as well. Or have you changed your policy of not letting anyone take a picture of any bodybags or coffins? I didn’t think so.
But I believe the Iraqi government is going to be plenty capable of dealing with them, and our job is to help train them so that they can. I was heartened to see the Iraqi government announce 40,000 Iraqi troops are well-trained enough to help secure Baghdad.
Unless you are actually there, apparently.
That was a very positive sign. It's a sign that they -- they, the Iraqi leaders, understand they are responsible for their security, ultimately, and that our job is to help them take on that responsibility.
Well, either they are responsible or the UN is, apparently, since they are asking for UN forces to remain longer . . .
So I'm pleased with the progress. I am pleased that in less than a year's time, there's a democratically elected government in Iraq;
That has no power whatsoever to control its country.
there are thousands of Iraqi soldiers trained and better equipped to fight for their own country;
Weren’t there far more before we invaded? What happened to Saddam Hussein’s massive army that was threatening our very existence? Did all those soldiers simply go away? Did we kill them all?
that our strategy is very clear in that we will work to get them ready to fight, and when they're ready, we'll come home.
That’s your strategy? Ever heard of Vietnam before? Sounds incredibly similar, and similarly stupid. I am not surprised that you came up with a used, useless strategy, but I am surprised that you’re admitting to it . . .
And I hope that's sooner, rather than later.
(At which point, Bush actually chuckles on the video.) Our troops (and their citizens) dying makes you laugh? You will burn in Hell for this, Smirky. “And I hope that’s sooner, rather than later. Heh heh.”
But, nevertheless, it's very important that we complete this mission, because a free Iraq is in our nation's long-term interests.
What do you mean by “free”, here, Smirky? I highly doubt that you understand the concept of freedom as even the US defines it officially.
A democracy in the heart of the Middle East is an essential part of securing our country
How? Isn’t Israel a democracy (cough cough)? Isn’t it in the “heart of the Middle East”? Why haven’t we been secure since 1948, then? How many democracies do you plan on forcibly implanting there to secure our country?
and promoting peace for the long run. And it is very important for our country to understand that.
What we don’t understand, Smirky, is why we have to do this kind of thing against the wishes of the countries in question, against their people’s wishes, and against the will of the majority of people in every other major country in the world?
A free Iraq will set such a powerful example in a neighborhood that is desperate for freedom.
Just like a free Israel has done.
And, therefore, we will complete the mission and support this elected government. Of course, they've got other tasks. They've got to write a constitution, and then have that constitution ratified by the Iraqi people, and then there will be another election. And we, of course, will help them, as will many countries around the world.
But to answer your first question, Terry, um, er, oh, let’s move on.
Steve.
Q The former head of Russia's oil company, Yukos, was sentenced to nine years in a prison camp today. Do you think the Kremlin went after him because he was a political threat? Are there any repercussions to U.S.-Russian relations as a result of this case?
THE PRESIDENT: I expressed my concerns about the case to President Putin because, as I explained to him, here you're innocent until proven guilty, and it appeared to us, or at least people in my administration, that it looked like he had been judged guilty prior to having a fair trial. In other words, he was put in prison, and then was tried.
Being jailed awaiting trial is eerily similar to how we do things here. You wouldn’t know, of course, because when you, or Laura, or your kids get in trouble (and you all have been in trouble with the law, haven’t you?), you have your attorneys on hand immediately to make sure you don’t spend any time in jail. In any case, Russia isn’t here, and their criminal justice system, I would guess, is probably radically different from ours.
I think what will be interesting -- and so we've expressed our concerns about the system.
Um, the question was about foreign relations with Russia. Would you like to try again, Mr. Chimp?
What will be interesting to see is whether or not he appeals -- there's a -- I think we think he is going to appeal -- and then, how the appeal will be handled. And so we're watching the ongoing case.
So, your interest in merely legal? You don’t care about why he was arrested or how it affects us? That seems odd, given that you’ve been hypersensitive to the inner politics of countries on the other side of the globe that have little direct contact with us . . .