Try parsing this carefully:Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity – and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.
I've read that last sentence maybe ten times. Those "networks providing advanced weaponry and training" certainly are based in Iran and Syria. It sounds like he said we are going after terrorist training camps and the IED assembly facilities, doesn't it?
His Corner colleague, Cliff May, responds with this:
Michael, that caught my eye, too. I hope, this time, we mean what Bush says.
I'm all for disrupting, intercepting and destroying support for the insurgency that might be originating from neighboring countries, but if these two are actually crossing their fingers that we're going to invade Iran and Syria, they've lost it entirely and are dangerously delusional. And if Bush is really planning such a thing, help us all. However, sooner or later Bush's ambitions hit a brick wall: the military is spread way too thin and he's losing the support of his military commanders. I just don't see how he could make it happen. But the fact that, among the few stray supporters Bush has left, there are still those who would happily support such an adventure, is amazing.