President George W. Bush touted what he sees as progress in Iraq during a speech this morning at the Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio.
"There is now a very real chance that Iraq will emerge as a secure and stable state," Bush stated.
His remarks came amid reports of fresh turmoil in Iraq, including the destruction by armed men of a major oil pipeline near Basra.
Bush went on to slam critics of the war who call for a US withdrawal, saying, "They claim that our strategic interest is elsewhere and that if we would just get out of Iraq, we could focus on the battles that really matter. This argument makes no sense."
"If America's strategic interests are not in Iraq," Bush went on, "the convergence point for the twin threats of al Qaeda and Iran, the nation Osama bin Laden's deputy has called the place for the greatest battle, the country at the heart of the most volatile region on earth, then where are they?"
Bush concluded that a US withdrawal could "endanger Iraq's oil resources," provide al Qaeda with safe havens, help global terrorism gain new recruits, and signal to people in the Middle East that "the United States cannot be trusted."
This video is from CNN Newsroom, broadcast March 27, 2008.
Transcript via closed captions
:: if the united states provides sustained support to the iraqi government and security government and development, there is now a very real chance that iraq will emerge as a secure and stable state. some however seem to acknowledge that progress is taking place. earlier in the war they said the political situation wasn't good enough. then after iraq held three historic elections, they said that security situation wasn't good enough. then after the security situation began to improve, they said politics, again, wasn't good enough. and now the political progress is picking up, they're look for a new reason. but there's one thing that is consistent, no matter what shortcomings these critics diagnose, their prescription is always the same, retrieve. they claim that our strategic interests is elsewhere and that if we would just get out of iraq, we could focus on the battles that really matter. this argument makes no sense. if america's strategic interests are not in iraq, the convergence point for the twin threats of al qaeda and iran, the nation osama bin laden's deputy has called the place for the greatest battle, the country at the heart of the most volatile region on earth, then where are they? the reality is that retreating from iraq would carry enormous strategic costs for the united states. it would insight chaos and killing, destroy the political gains the iraqis have made and abandon our friends to terrorists and death squads. it would endanger iraq's oil resources and could serve as a severe disruption to the world's economy. it would increase the likelihood that al qaeda would gain safe havens that they could use to attack us here at home. it would be a propaganda victory of colossal proportions for the global terrorist movement, which would gain new funds and find new recruits and conclude that the way to defeat america is to bleed us into submission. it would signal to iran that we were not serious about confronting its efforts to impose its will on the region. it would signal to people across the middle east that the united states cannot be trusted to keep its word. a defeat in iraq would have consequences far beyond that country, and they would be felt by americans here at home.
President George W. Bush touted what he sees as progress in Iraq during a speech this morning at the Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio.