United We Stand

Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican:

I have to say, Madam Secretary that I think this speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam.

To ask our young men and women to sacrifice their lives to be put in the middle of a civil war is . . . morally wrong. It's tactically, strategically, militarily wrong.

Sen. George Voinovich, an Ohio Republican:

You're going to have to do a much better job. I've gone along with the president on this, and I bought into his dream, and at this stage of the game, I don't think it's going to happen.

I send letters out to the families and tell them about how brave their sons were and that the work they're doing there and the deaths were as important as what we had in the Second World War. But I have to rewrite the letter today.

Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, a moderate Democrat:

Madam Secretary I have supported you and the administration on the war, and I cannot continue to support the administration's position… I have not been told the truth over and over again.

Specialist Daniel Caldwell, Apache Company, 1st Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment, Stryker Brigade in Iraq:

They're kicking a dead horse here. The Iraqi army can't stand up on their own.

The general feeling among us is we're not really doing anything here. We clear one neighborhood, then another one fires up. It's an ongoing battle. It never ends.

Sgt. Jose Reynoso, 24, of Yuma, Ariz. speaking of the Iraqi Army:

We're constantly being told that it's not our fight. It is their fight. But that's not the case. Whenever we go and ask them for guys, they almost always say no, and we have to do the job ourselves.

Faiz Botros, 50, an Iraqi Christian in central Baghdad:

The main reason for what's taking place in Iraq is the settlement of historical paybacks. Neither 20,000 soldiers, nor 100,000, nor hundreds of thousands, will change anything. In Iraq, the politicians are still living in a mentality from 1,400 years ago. And this is the disaster of Iraq.

One senior Shiite politician, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, phrased what he called the country's "million-dollar question" this way, as summarized by The Washington Post:

Will Maliki continue to allow the powerful Mahdi Army militia, led by his political supporter Moqtada al-Sadr, to act as the local embodiment of the law in mainly Shiite neighborhoods such as Baghdad's Sadr City?

Qasim Sabti, an Iraqi gallery owner, who agrees with many of the goals Bush espoused: amending the constitution, disbanding the militias, giving Sunnis an equitable role:

In my opinion, disbanding the militias and the entire American plan -- it might fail for one particular reason. The militias are actually the Ministry of Interior itself. And the national guards are infiltrated by other militias. So the most basic, the most important, pillars on which the plan is based, I think they will fall.

Mariam Rayis, a foreign affairs adviser to Maliki, said she had "reservations" about Bush's remarks regarding Iran and Syria. In his address, Bush said, "These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq," and he vowed to disrupt their efforts to influence Iraq.

They are regional states. There is a sense that opening up a dialogue with those states would offer a better chance of reaching an agreement instead of taking hard-line policies toward them.

A Shiite political leader who has worked closely with the Americans in the past said the Bush benchmarks appeared to have been drawn up in the expectation that Mr. Maliki would not meet them.

He cannot deliver the disarming of the militias. He cannot deliver a good program for the economy and reconstruction. He cannot deliver on services. This is a matter of fact. There is a common understanding on the American side and the Iraqi side.