“State sponsors like Syria and Iran have a long history of collaboration with terrorists,” Bush said. “The U.S. makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor them, because they’re equally as guilty of murder.”

Washington has been pressuring Damascus to prevent armed groups loyal to the Baathist regime of deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein from using Syrian borders to launch attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq.

Drawing a sharp line throughout the speech between Islam and jihadist groups, Bush said, “Some call this evil Islamic radicalism. Others militant jihadism. Still others Islamo-fascism. Whatever it’s called, this ideology is very different from the religion of Islam.”

Playing on the increasing political isolation of groups like Al Qaeda in Iraq, Bush appealed to bourgeois regimes and others to embrace Washington’s approach. “The time has come for all responsible Islamic leaders to join in denouncing an ideology that exploits Islam for political ends and defiles a noble faith,” he said.

An indication of the growing isolation of Baathists and their allies is a letter from Ayman al-Zawahiri, said to be second in command of Al Qaeda. According to the New York Times, the letter warns the group’s top leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, that attacks on civilians and videotaped executions by his followers jeopardize Al Qaeda’s broader goals.

Meanwhile, the New York Times exemplified the response of liberals to Bush’s speech in editorials and related articles. In an October 7 opinion column, Thomas Friedman wrote in the Times that the “president’s speech…was excellent. He made clear, better than ever, why winning in Iraq is so important to the wider struggle against Islamo-fascism.” Friedman took issue with Bush for “never asking for any sacrifice, any military draft, any tax hikes or any gasoline tax.”

“The Quiet Consensus on Iraq” was the headline of a feature article in the October 7 online edition of the conservative magazine National Review. “The Howard Dean/Michael Moore/Cindy Sheehan fringe of the Democratic party so far has made almost no inroads into mainstream party thinking,” said the Review. This failed “because most Democratic stalwarts—senators Kerry, Clinton, and Biden—themselves voted to remove Saddam. And these erstwhile supporters of the war can offer nothing much different on Iraq now except to harangue about the need for more allies or more multilateral/UN help.”  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home