The Reaction of President Bush’s Addresses on Iraq on June 28, 2005 On Tuesday, June 28 President Bush promulgated his speech on Iraq trying to emphasize the main outcomes of the war and answer the most troubling question warring American citizens. In his speech Bush reminded the events took place on Sept. 11, 2001, and Osama bin Laden, the possibility of the WWW III and causes of the Iraq war, but did not mention failed cause of mass destruction weapon which had not been found. The speech was aimed to pursued American nation in the rightfulness of the government’ actions and create a strong ground for further political manipulation using the argument of national defense and security as the core one.
Unfortunately, general reaction on this speech was rather negative. Many citizens and press criticized the speech, as untrustworthy and deserving no credit. It is possible to explain by the fact that people are sick and tired of lies they hear about Iraq war. To summaries the speech it is possible to say that the aim of it was to prove the fact that Iraq is the battle in a war against terrorists.
In general, Bush’s address to the citizens was a disappointment that came under quick and harsh criticism, particularly for its repeated, overt references to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Democrats in their critical remarks accused the President of using notions of obscure a series of failures in the war. The most displeasure of the public was cause by the emphasis that there was no direct connection between Hussein and September 11, saying that the comparison was fair because they were both part of a threat from terrorists nurtured in the Middle East. That argument drew instant scorn from public, who supposed that government was interested in the continued military operations on the basis of a threat that did not exist before the invasion.
President Bush made an attempt to find support for his policy on Iraq, and instead it became disturbingly clear that the events of the past years have not changed much in the interpretation of the Iraq conflict. This speech was negatively interpreted because, to some extent, it repeats the speech delivered in May 2004, when he assured Americans "during an appearance at the Army War College that while the job of achieving stability in Iraq would be hard, he had a plan – and the United States had the will – to see it through" (Froomkin, 2005). Many people are disturbed and appalled by the future policy of the country and Bush’s argument saying that Iraq is where the United States will make its stand against terrorists from around the world who flowed into the country after the fall of Saddam Hussein. San Francisco Chronicle writes that "the speech could widen Bush’s credibility gap, and he finds some "striking rhetorical similarities" with a speech President Lyndon Johnson delivered in 1968, after the Tet offensive" (Froomkin, 2005).
The general reaction on this speech is negative because people do not want to follow blindly every reforms and views they proposed to share. It seems that Americans are bored with promise to deliver the same plan of patience and resolve repeated for years. To support with evidence the facts mentioned above, I’d like to cite a message from a private person stated that. "I did everything I could before the election, and got so angry that by now I can’t stand watching any of that crew of war profiteering criminals".
According to polls only one third of those who watched the speech of Bush approved his strategy. But, it does not means that people are constantly agonists the ideas represented in the address, they just bored of the same promises and planes given and announced 2 years ago. "Recent polls have shown Americans increasingly dubious about the direction and human cost of the more than two-year-old war. Some politicians – even some in Bush’s own Republican party – have called for a timetable for U.S. troops to return home" (Whitmire, 2005). So, the speech of Bush was not the major one provoking skeptical interpretation of the ideas reflected in the address, but the important thing is that it was not even delivered until the end.
1. Froomkin, D. World War III. 29 Jun, 2005, Available at:
2. Remarks by the President on the War on Terror Available at:
3. Whitmire, T. Nods of Agreement From Enlisted for Bush. 29, Jun, 2005, Available at:

You may also like

Publication Bans

A public bank can be issued if it is necessary

Whether Royal Prerogative Powers Are Unnecessary

There is near consensus amongst the members of Parliament and

Observation Riding Public Transportation

And whether or not they are rich or poor people