Bush defends War on Terror, cites successes

Via the Washington Times (free, annoying registration required):

President Bush yesterday gave his most detailed and defiant rationale for the war against terrorism, branding the enemy "Islamic radicals" for the first time and excoriating Syria and Iran.

Good. We need more public officials connecting terrorism with radical Islam--and the regimes that sponsor it.

"The United States and our partners have disrupted at least 10 serious al Qaeda terrorist plots since September the 11th, including three al Qaeda plots to attack inside the United States," he told the National Endowment for Democracy. "We've stopped at least five more al Qaeda efforts to case targets in the United States or infiltrate operatives into our country."
...
Mr. Bush felt it was time to reassert himself as the war's chief prosecutor and, for the first time, began to regularly substitute the term "Islamic radicalism" for terrorism. He also unleashed a scathing attack on Iran and Syria for their ongoing support of terrorism.

The president said Damascus and Tehran "share the goal of hurting America and moderate Muslim governments and use terrorist propaganda to blame their own failures on the West and America, and on the Jews." He added, "State sponsors like Syria and Iran have a long history of collaboration with terrorists, and they deserve no patience from the victims of terror."

The president's speech was immediately denounced by Democrats. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts said it was "foolish for the president to brag openly about disrupting al Qaeda plots to attack us. His 'bring it on' attitude hasn't worked, and such statements can only goad al Qaeda into trying harder."

Translation: We Democrats don't want the American public to hear about anything good about our fight against terrorism. And since when is it bragging to simply lett people know that we have had some successes? Hey Ted, if the President's 'bring it on' hasn't worked, then why does he have anything to brag about?

But Mr. Bush rejected such logic. "Some have also argued that extremism has been strengthened by the actions of our coalition in Iraq, claiming that our presence in that country has somehow caused or triggered the rage of radicals," he said. "I would remind them that we were not in Iraq on September the 11th, 2001 -- and al Qaeda attacked us anyway. "The hatred of the radicals existed before Iraq was an issue, and it will exist after Iraq is no longer an excuse," he added. "The government of Russia did not support Operation Iraqi Freedom, and yet the militants killed more than 180 Russian schoolchildren in Beslan."

Mr. Bush said the "self-defeating pessimism" of war critics is unjustified. The remark drew a sharp rebuke from Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat. "There's nothing pessimistic about demanding that our government do better by our troops," Mr. Kerry said. "And there's nothing more pessimistic than an administration refusing to provide candor and leadership equal to our troops' sacrifice."

Oh I get it: Kerry's deadline-based plan of withdrawal, not to mention his inability to either fully support or oppose the war, would have provided excellent "candor and leadership equal to our troops' sacrifice." When I think of Kerry's failed campaign, "confusing" comes before "candor." And if candor equal to troops' sacrifice had been his real goal during his Vietnam testimony, he wouldn't have demonized his fellow soldiers.

Mr. Bush spent much of his 40-minute speech giving a detailed explanation of the enemy's origins, strategy and tactics. He compared the threat of global terrorism in the 21st century to the threat of communism in the 20th century.
...
After the speech, White House press secretary Scott McClellan explained that some of the foiled terrorist plots referenced by the president could not be explained in greater detail because the information is classified. But he cited two unclassified examples, a plot by Jose Padilla to detonate a "dirty bomb" and a plot by Iman Faris to blow up a bridge in New York.

Good start, Mr. President. Next step: secure the freaking borders...

UPDATE: The White House released more detailed info on ten attacks the U.S. has prevented al-Qaeda from launching:

The United States and its allies have thwarted at least 10 serious al Qaeda terrorist plots since Sept. 11, 2001, including never-before-disclosed plans to use hijacked commercial airliners to attack the East and West coasts in 2002 and 2003, President Bush and his aides said yesterday.

The reported plots aimed to strike a wide variety of targets, including the Library Tower in Los Angeles, ships in international waters and a tourist site overseas, the White House said last night. Three of the 10 were directed at U.S. soil, officials said. The government, they added, also stopped five al Qaeda efforts to case possible targets or infiltrate operatives into the country.

Most of the plots were previously reported in some form; a few were revealed yesterday. The White House had never before placed a number or compiled a public list of the foiled attempts to follow up the Sept. 11 attacks, but it offered scant information beyond the location and general date of each reported plot -- making it difficult to assess last night how serious or advanced they were or what role the government played in preventing them.

My favorite part of the article:

The president...quoted Zarqawi calling Americans "the most cowardly of God's creatures" and offered a direct rebuttal. "Let's be clear," he said. "It is cowardice that seeks to kill children and the elderly with car bombs and cuts the throat of a bound captive and targets worshipers leaving a mosque."