Well, give him credit, the president’s plan to end the War was clearly spelled out:

[We] know that further efforts are going to be required:

  • –to expand their own armed forces,
  • –to move back into the countryside as quickly as possible,
  • to select the very best men that they have for civil and military responsibility,
  • to achieve a new unity within their constitutional government
  • to include in the national effort all those groups who wish to preserve itscontrol over its own destiny.

What?  Hang on jest a sec.. <rubs glasses>….  Sorry that Wasn’t W on Tuesday night at all, nope that was LBJ, March 31, 1968

Not coincidentally, just after the Tet Offensive proved that war wasn’t in its last throes either, despite what his cabinet had been saying publicly.

Spooky isn’t it?  

 But right there the similarity comes to a screeching halt. One was a serious address given by a sober, thougtful President.    

W gave the other one:

Lets compare shall we?


Tonight I want to speak to you of peace in Vietnam and Southeast Asia.

No other question so preoccupies our people. No other dream so absorbs the 250 million human beings who live in that part of the world. No other goal motivates American policy in Southeast Asia.

For years, representatives of our Government and others have traveled the world–seeking to find a basis for peace talks.


The troops here and across the world are fighting a global war on terror. The war reached our shores on September the 11th, 2001. The terrorists who attacked us — and the terrorists we face — murder in the name of a totalitarian ideology that hates freedom, rejects tolerance, and despises all dissent. … This nation will not wait to be attacked again. We will defend our freedom. We will take the fight to the enemy. ..There is only one course of action against them: to defeat them abroad before they attack us at home


But tragically, this is also clear: Many men–on both sides of the struggle–will be lost. A nation that has already suffered 20 years of warfare will suffer once again. Armies on both sides will take new casualties. And the war will go on.

There is no need for this to be so.

There is no need to delay the talks that could bring an end to this long and this bloody war.

Tonight, I have ordered our aircraft and our naval vessels to make no attacks on North Vietnam, …The area in which we are stopping our attacks includes almost 90 percent of North Vietnam’s population, and most of its territory. Thus there will be no attacks around the principal populated areas, or in the food-producing areas of North Vietnam.


We’re fighting against men …who are capable of any atrocity. … They take innocent lives to create chaos for the cameras. ….

America {is} a conflict that demands much of us. It demands the courage of our fighting men and women, it demands the steadfastness of our allies, and it demands the perseverance of our citizens.

we fight today because terrorists want to attack our country and kill our citizens, and Iraq is where they are making their stand. So we’ll fight them there, we’ll fight them across the world, and we will stay in the fight until the fight is won.


Our presence there has always rested on this basic belief: The main burden of preserving their freedom must be carried out by them–by the South Vietnamese themselves.

We and our allies can only help to provide a shield behind which the people of South Vietnam can survive and can grow and develop. On their efforts–on their determination and resourcefulness–the outcome will ultimately depend….

On many occasions I have told the American people that we would send to Vietnam those forces that are required to accomplish our mission there. So, with that as our guide, we have previously authorized a force level of approximately 525,000.

Some weeks ago–to help meet the enemy’s new offensive–we sent to Vietnam about 11,000 additional Marine and airborne troops.

In order that these forces may reach maximum combat effectiveness, the Joint Chiefs of Staff have recommended to me that we should prepare to send–during the next 5 months–support troops totaling approximately 13,500 men.


Some Americans ask me, if completing the mission is so important, why don’t you send more troops? If our commanders on the ground say we need more troops, I will send them. But our commanders tell me they have the number of troops they need to do their job. Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever, when we are, in fact, working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave. As we determine the right force level, our troops can know that I will continue to be guided by the advice that matters: the sober judgment of our military leaders.


I have concluded that I should not permit the Presidency to become involved in the partisan divisions that are developing in this political year.

With America’s sons in the fields far away, with America’s future under challenge right here at home, with our hopes and the world’s hopes for peace in the balance every day, I do not believe that I should devote an hour or a day of my time to any personal partisan causes or to any duties other than the awesome duties of this office–the Presidency of your country.

Accordingly, I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your President.

But let men everywhere know, however, that a strong, a confident, and a vigilant America stands ready tonight to seek an honorable peace–and stands ready tonight to defend an honored cause–whatever the price, whatever the burden, whatever the sacrifice that duty may require.


Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers,”  

“Has there ever been a more revealing moment this year?” Mr. Rove asked. “Let me just put this in fairly simple terms: Al Jazeera now broadcasts the words of Senator Durbin to the Mideast, certainly putting our troops in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals.”

Okay technically that was Karl Rove  But really, is there a difference?

0 0 vote
Article Rating