Do you have a plan with you? (w/additions and update)

Update: Think Progress notes something for Joe "for people who want to vote for Bush, but feel he's not quite Jewish enough" Lieberman, the man who lost Al Gore my vote.

Writing this morning in the Wall Street Journal, Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) claims Iraqi leaders want a commitment that U.S. troops will stay until whenever “the Iraqi military is capable of security the country”:

And, I am convinced, almost all of the progress in Iraq and throughout the Middle East will be lost if those forces are withdrawn faster than the Iraqi military is capable of securing the country.

The leaders of Iraq’s duly elected government understand this, and they asked me for reassurance about America’s commitment. The question is whether the American people and enough of their representatives in Congress from both parties understand this.

The Iraqi leaders, however, have said publicly that they want the United States to set a firm timetable for withdrawal immediately.

Bush says he has a plan for victory in Iraq. But...but I thought the mission had already been accomplished? My favorite analysis (thus far) comes from Media Girl:

Again, they're trying to assert that the civil war in Iraq is a foreign operation, instead of a conflict between Iraqis with over 1000 years of historical conflict. How ironic that one of the biggest problems about our Iraq occupation -- that al-Qaeda uses it as a recruitment poster -- is what the Bush Administration crows about as reasons for staying.

The document reads like a division report in a corporate boardroom. It's full of bullet points of declarations and assertions, but little actual argument and essentially no supporting evidence to support their claims. Maybe some paid analysts can take the time to scrutinize the language and find something that's actually new ... or convincing.

The document has an appendix called "The Eight Pillars" which purports to lay out a strategy for success -- a tacit admission that the 28 pages coming before fail to do just that. (I expect the phrase "The Eight Pillars" will be rolling off wingnutter lips over the coming days.)

ETA: And speaking of wingnutters, the conservative Gateway Pundit has worked itself into a conniption fit. It seems that the big bad liberal media has dared to suggest Mr. Bush might need to persuade Americans he has a plan and that everything in it is true.

GP's examples of said big bad liberal media? The BBC and Associated Press. Those well-known bastions of liberalism.

I dunno. 57% of Americans think he deliberately misled people to make the case for war with Iraq. 62% would finance paying for the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast by cutting spending in Iraq. 55% think the U.S. should have stayed out of Iraq.

It seems fair to me to suggest Mr. Bush might have a bit of 'splainin to do...

ETA, again: At Below The Beltway, the war-and-Bush supporting Doug offers some excerpts from Bush's speech. These follow, with my questions and comments in bold.

We will not turn that country over to the terrorists and put the American people at risk.

Too late.

Iraq will be a free nation and a strong ally in the Middle East. And this will add to the security of the American people.

How so, sir? (Actually, that's the question I most want to see asked of Bush every time he makes one of his big, macho assertions as though they were statements of fact. How so, sir?)

In the short run, we're going to bring justice to our enemies.

I promise you, somewhere, a White House speechwriter was cringing. "Bring our enemies to justice! We're going to bring our enemies to justice, for crying out loud. 'Bring justice to our enemies' sounds like we're doing good things for them."

In the long run, the best way to ensure the security of our own citizens is to spread the hope of freedom across the broader Middle East.

To repeat: How so, sir?

We've seen freedom conquer evil and secure the peace before.

Yes, I remember that. It was in 1992 and 1996. Go on.

In World War II, free nations came together to fight the ideology of fascism and freedom prevailed.

In World War II, FDR and Harry Truman were president. Your point?

Today in the Middle East, freedom is once again contending with an ideology that seeks to sow anger and hatred and despair.

"But enough about my party."

The terrorists in Iraq share the same ideology as the terrorists who struck the United States on September the 11th.

See? There is a connection!

By fighting these terrorists in Iraq, Americans in uniform are defeating a direct threat to the American people.

And a-one, and-a-two, and a-one-two-three-four:

How so, sir?

No, really.

ETA yet one more time: The Carpetbagger reminds us that we've all heard this same old story, over and over and over again.

It worked so well during the campaign it seems to have become a standard practice. In June, Bush delivered another speech on Iraq. Sticking to the game plan, the White House told reporters it would be — you guessed it — a "major speech." It wasn't.

The Bush gang keeps going to the same well. In October, Scott McClellan said Bush would deliver "a significant speech on the war on terrorism." Aside from some unsubstantiated claims about foiling alleged al Queda plots, viewers learned that Bush believes Iraq is central to the war on terror and the president is committed to "complete victory." In other words, to borrow the AP's phrase, Bush's speech "did not break new ground or present a new strategy."

And finally: Sadly, No! pipes in with their own cheap shots in response to Bush's latest catchy slogans:

-Iraq would become a safe haven from which terrorists could plan attacks against America, American interests abroad, and our allies.

You mean it's not already? Try telling that to the Jordanians.

But wait! Here's the best one:

-Middle East reformers would never again fully trust American assurances of support for democracy and human rights in the region -- a historic opportunity lost.

I agree that promoting human rights in the Middle East is a historic opportunity that we can't afford to lose. But unfortunately, we've already lost it:

I can't be the only one looking at that picture of one of our young woman in uniform and thinking of the Joker, can I?