Bush: 'We Stand With Democracies'

President Talks About Israel, Iraq And Muslim Extremists

(CBS)  "One philosophical question that many have that I'd like you to respond to, if you could, is that U.S. policy, vis-à-vis Iraq, and the United States' close alliance with Israel have galvanized terrorists worldwide. In other words, these policies have created more terrorists than they have eliminated," Couric said to the president.

"Yeah," Mr. Bush said.

Asked how he responds to that, the president told Couric: "Well, the first thing I would tell people that — we weren't in Iraq on September the 11th, 2001, when 19 killers killed 3,000 Americans in the most brutal attack on our — on our soil — ever."

"But they were from Saudi Arabia," Couric pointed out.

"No, but they're — but — but they share the same jihadist mentality, this radicalism," Mr. Bush said. "And so my first answer is on Iraq, the notion that somehow defending ourselves create — is — it's created, made us more vulnerable, just — I just don't agree with it. Secondly, of course we stand with democracies and our friend Israel. If the United States ever says, 'Oh, my goodness, I don't wanna defend democracy because somebody might harm us,' we will have lost our soul.

"Look. Let me just share something with you, what I strongly believe. I believe a mother in America and a mother — a Muslim mother in the Middle East — share the same concerns for their children. And that is, they want peace. And they want their children to grow up in a hopeful world. That's what I believe. That's why I can say the extremists are in a minority in the Middle East. And I strongly believe we have a duty to help those who, who recognized that, you know, this, this quagmire, this, this kind of swamp of resentment can be drained by liberty."

---

Click here to read Part I of the Couric interview with President Bush.

[lyfizgood]

therealtink,

You are right, I am sure there are better ways. The mistakes made by our government are not the first nor the last. It doesn't change that the situation is what it is, and we as a nation have to deal with it. Bickering and pointing fingers, all of this division is only going to make for more problems, not resolve any. There are all kinds of reasons for the conflicts we face over there, and here. Some of the religious, some of them economic. No matter how you look at it, we are in trouble and have to deal with the problems as a united people. We have to recognize that we do have a comon enemy in the religious extremist who has already proclaimed his intention to wipe the Christian and Zionist from the world, and is looking for nuclear capability to do so. We also have to recognize that although Bush and his friends may have personal gain at interest, they are also looking for our survival regarding oil. I have done some reading too, concerning Cheney and his reports to Haliburton, in various articles I found on the Internet regarding oil peaking. Scarey stuff. I had no idea the trouble that is predicted to befall us very soon, and the actual condition of our own resources, and how dependant our whole economy is on the stuff. Yeah, there is a lot we are not openly being told. But we had better pull together, or we are certainly doomed.

[therealtink]

It is nearly infuriating, standing my your nation and troops is one thing. But, we all have to remember that we do have minds of our own and can not just blindly follow people. I love this country. When I hear the star spangled banner I cry !I support this nation 100%, I support democracy 100% , I support our troops 100%. But, come on. There has got to be a better way!
These are our children here we are sending to war. I am still in my twenties and most of these men and women are children younger than I. War is a terrible situation, but a fact of life. I understand. But, it almost seems wreckless for the last couple years.
But, you can't help but think that there are things going on we are not aware of, alterior motives ? Or motives that are not hidden at all? Yes these people are nasty people and the threat needs to be taken care of. But, we are the most powerful country in the world , the USA of all places. And this is the best we can do? I don't think that this is the best we can do.

[timbo255]

Like user mdog218, I was astonished by the President's comment that agents of the CIA were no longer interviewing high-level terrorist prisoners for fear of being prosecuted as war criminals. If I heard him correctly, his statement was 1) almost certainly not true; 2)a surprising admission that his administration was not doing everything legally possible to prevent terrorism; and 3) demeaning to the CIA, implying that since they can't tell the difference between established legal practice and the administration's new directives, they won't do anything at all.

Presumably, Bush's revelation was intended to lay the groundwork for blaming others for his administration's situational disregard for the law. If it's true that the CIA can't work under the administration's current directives, Bush should issue new, unequivocally legal directives (which already exist), so they can get on with it.

I logged on here this morning to verify what the President actually said, only to find his comments omitted from your account of the interview. Please post his remarks verbatim, as they were surely newsworthy.

[mimihanson]

During his interview with Katie Couric last night, President Bush said that, "a defeat in Iraq will embolden the enemy and will provide the enemy %u2014 more opportunity to train, plan, to attack us."

Frankly, I believe the terrorists are already emboldened. But perhaps their hostility towards America emboldens us. When terrorists attacked us on 9/11, we were ready to fight and felt justified in doing so.

So, why are Americans questioning this war in Iraq?

Well, as we all have heard by now, there was little connection between 9/11 and the war in Iraq. But as the president reminded us during his interview with Katie last night, "You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror."

Well, the hardest part of MY job, as a patriotic citizen, is to try to
understand the politics and the reasons for a war that I, personally, can't justify. I appreciate whatever enlightenment fair reporting and open and honest communication can provide. So, if there are other reasons why we are in Iraq, besides "the war on terror" I would love to hear about it.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment as well as question.

[zykracosmos]

Bush is a well-trained bird dog for Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the other neo-cons who put him in the White House as the implant of Big Oil. He is a pitiful puppet of these neocons, and couldn't tie his shoes without them. Fire Rumsfeld? He can't. It would be like the puppet cutting his strings from the puppeteer. Bush is too simpleminded to understand the bigger scheme of things. Cheney planned the war in Iraq in the spring of 2001 in his "energy meetings" with the oil companies. The problem of how to bring gullible little Georgie along with the "regime change" plan in Iraq was solved with 9/11, as Rumsfeld declared "let's go to Iraq" the day afterwards. Under the veil of "fighting terrorism," Halliburton would get the contracts back that it lost in 1998 when Hussein kicked them out for the US refusal to end sanctions. Exxon/Mobil, Chevron & BP would get to line up their tankers at Basra. If Katie wants a story, she should find out what's in the "energy session" transcripts that Cheney refuses to hand over to the GAO. GAO's suit to obtain these documents will go to the Supreme Court, but the stacked court will refuse to hear it. Neocons control information flow and have made the media a gullible accomplice in the elaborate scheme to recover American oil interests in the high-stakes competition for Iraq's vast reserves, which provide the dominate position to the big players in the world energy market. Soldiers and taxpayers have been used to help Big Oil seize a resource.

[lyfizgood]

I am not a Bush supporter, so please don't get me wrong. I am an American. Someone else quoted here, "United we stand, divided we fall". That is the way it is. You either love this nation and support it, or you don't. You don't have to agree with the President. But to be an American, you must support your nation. Bush is correct in saying that we can not stop what he has started now. (And for 9/11 he was right to start it. To go off on personal vindetta and/or for personal gain, he was wrong, but we can't change it). We have to finish it. It is a machine set in motion that can not be stopped, even if we did pull out. The whole world is involved. But if we pulled out, it would be worse for us and worse for those now depending on us. There has been too much division on this thing, or just maybe more would have already been accomplished and our kids could come home sooner. There is too much division in our country today among us period. We must re-unite as Americans, not divided as Liberals vs Conservatives vs Independants on such issues. The United States faces real problems and a real enemy. Things are going to get really tough soon. We must be united or perish.

[lintnt]

Our President seems to be doing the best he can and needs the support of our nation. Some forget united we stand, divided we fall. We must not divide this nation! I believe you should write to him about you concerns but keep a positive press and comments, remember our enemies are watching and thrilled when we divide. Protecting our country is #1 and we have the greatest country in the world our USA.

[jayburn1]

Ms. Couric's style reminds one of Larry King. Surely not a hard hitting endeavor on this one.But designed to keep GW on good terms with CBS I guess.

In reading the transcript of last night's interview with Bush I note that the comments relating to the
CIA (alleged) refusal to continue interrogations for fear of prosecutions under the war crimes act were not included. This is Bush in effect saying we need new legislation in order for the CIA to continue practices that the CIA believe are violations of the war crimes act. This is a result of the SC decision in Hamden where they said the president is not above the law. Therefore he and Gonzales had no authority to authorize such conduct. This is an important admission and should have been pursued. It also applies to the so called warrentless survelliance and other actions taken by this administration.
The powers claimed by Bush in the courts are those of a dictator. New legislation is needed to protect him and his cohorts from prosecution under the war crimes act at some future date, and from impeachment and trial should the Democrats take the House and Senate. Its seems to me that you are censoring the transcript (if that's what it is)