Two Important Breaking News Stories On This Friday

There are a couple of important breaking news stories today that should not be missed.

First, President Bush gave a speech last night following up on the success of General Petraeus's congressional testimony. He attempted to exploit his political victory by offering an olive branch to those who want to withdraw American troops from Iraq. He'll send troops home, but only on the principle of "return on success": "The more successful we are, the more American troops can return home." He then invites congressional Democrats to "come together" with Republicans and the administration "on a policy of strength in the Middle East."

The best part of the speech was its conclusion:

Some say the gains we are making in Iraq come too late. They are mistaken. It is never too late to deal a blow to al Qaeda. It is never too late to advance freedom. And it is never too late to support our troops in a fight they can win.

Charles Krauthammer nicely identifies why this was the right thing to say: "The American people are not antiwar. They are anti-losing." This column contains a few other very good observations. Krauthammer notes, for example, Petraeus's slip of the tongue, when he referred to returning to Iraq as going back "home"—an indication of how deeply immersed Petraeus is in the facts on the ground. He also has a useful note on the role of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who no longer plan strategy or tactics but are instead in charge of the logistics of raising and maintaining an army, which explains why they are less patient with the war in Iraq—which they view as a drain on the army's resources—than the generals in the field, whose goal is only to win the war.

Finally, Krauthammer observes the crucial importance of the Sunni rebellion against al Qaeda, which is already a humiliating, discrediting defeat for that organization. He argues: "Just carrying this battle to its successful conclusion—independent of its larger effect of helping stabilize Iraq—is justification enough for the surge."

Meanwhile, the left is still reeling from "Petraeus Week," with one left-leaning commentator suggesting that the Democrats need a "Sister Souljah moment" (see the article for an explanation of that term) in which they repudiate far left anti-war organizations like MoveOn.

Overseas, there are two important developments. Benazir Bhutto has announced her attention to return to Pakistan on October 18—either to accept a power-sharing deal with Pervez Musharraf, or to challenge his dictatorial rule. No one—including Bhutto and Musharraf—seems to know for sure which it will be. But Bhutto has, and deserves, US support because she is a secular liberal who, as the New York Times puts it, "has in the past suggested that as an elected leader, she would be more credible in selling antiterrorism efforts to the public than General Musharraf."

Far more worrying is a new report that the North Koreans may be building and supplying a nuclear program in Syria.

North Korea may be cooperating with Syria on some sort of nuclear facility in Syria, according to new intelligence the United States has gathered over the past six months, sources said. The evidence, said to come primarily from Israel, includes dramatic satellite imagery that led some US officials to believe that the facility could be used to produce material for nuclear weapons.

A reader sent me this link earlier today with the following utterly unreassuring observation:

In 1945 one of the Manhattan Project scientists took the first plutonium core manufactured at Hanford to Los Alamos for testing and for the final assembly of "Fat Man." He carried it in his briefcase on the train. I'm wondering what the North Korean nuclear scientists and technicians currently visiting Syria were carrying in their suitcases.

Having taken five years—going on six—to confront Iran on its nuclear program, will the Bush administration suddenly discover that Syria, too, is attempting to acquire nuclear bombs?

If you need an antidote to that terrifying thought, I recommend an interesting column by pro-American British journalist Gerard Baker. Picking up on the Roman overtones of David Petraeus's name (which is actually Dutch in origin), Baker muses on the comparison between America and the Roman Empire. The middle of the article meanders a bit, but it is worth it just for this conclusion: "When Rome fell, the world went dark for the best part of a millennium. America may not be an empire. But whatever it is, for the sake of humanity, pray it lasts at least as long as Rome."