Does this work as an LTE?

At last night's debate, President Bush emphasized the power of a president's message:

I don't see how you can lead this country to succeed in Iraq if you say wrong war, wrong time, wrong place. What message does that send our troops?

Yet in July 2003, President Bush himself declared, "There are some who feel like the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is, bring 'em on."  And indeed, since he spoke those fateful words, hundreds of U.S. troops have been killed, and thousands more injured.

Mr. President, just what message were you sending our troops last July when you issued such a tragic challenge to our enemies?  How can you yourself lead this country to success in Iraq, having invited attacks upon our men and women in uniform?

•  More LtE's here:

  You can find a bunch of LtE's and a variety of articles that need to be challenged here:

  http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/1/95321/6812#12

  (and please recommend too - we need to get more people involved in writing LtE's!)

  by storme on Fri Oct 01, 2004 at 11:53:10 AM PDT

•  Nicely stated

  I'd try to punch it up a bit though - the second point, though really powerful and damning, comes too slowly (it's hard here because the quote you are using is a bit convoluted) Maybe:

  Yesterday Bush said: "I don't see how you can lead this country to succeed in Iraq if you say wrong war, wrong time, wrong place. What message does that send our troops?"

  Yet In July 2003 Bush said "Bring em on!" to our enemies

  Baiting our enemies, encouraging them to attack us - what does THAT message say to our troops?

  Mr. President, just what message were you sending our troops last July when you issued such a tragic challenge to our enemies?  How can you yourself lead this country to success in Iraq, having invited attacks upon our men and women in uniform?
  

  by storme on Fri Oct 01, 2004 at 11:58:19 AM PDT

  •  asdf

    I'd also say "since then nearly a thousand more soldiers have died, and thousands more have been injured."

    by brighton on Fri Oct 01, 2004 at 12:09:32 PM PDT

•  Not so much.

  I don't see this as an effective point for your LTE. "Bring 'em on" is just the sort of macho tough guy attitude that your typical military person appreciates.

  A more compelling argument would be to refer to Bush's comment from a few weeks ago doubting whether we could actually win the war on terra. That fits more with your "What message does this send..." comparison.

  by geoschmo on Fri Oct 01, 2004 at 11:59:51 AM PDT

•  My thoughts.

  I'm not sure how well the rhetorical device of addressing yourself to Bush works in an LTE.  Some people might percieve it as snarky and tune you out.  

  If your aim is to make a a persuasive case to other readers then, in my opinion only, you should stick to addressing the editors and readers.

  by martianchronic on Fri Oct 01, 2004 at 12:04:01 PM PDT

•  my letter to 20 editors

  I was taken aback last night by the fidgety, scowling and angry person in last night's debate.  Where has the confident, relaxed and friendly President I've seen on the stump and at news conferences?  While I've never been a great fan of the President, I've never before been concerned about his ability to handle the job.

  You can admire his ability to "stay on message" but his constant repetition of just a few themes, flip-flopper, unfit for command and even, aiding the enemy, was not always responsive to the questions.  Like all politicians, Senator Kerry exaggerated some facts, like saying 200 billion has been spent on Iraq when only 126 billion has been spent so far.  But at least he was lucid, concise   and didn't have numerous, long pauses to stop and collect his thoughts.

  The President said we have trained over 100,000 Iraqi security forces, with more to come.  But only last Monday, the Department of Defense reported that, of 101,000 men hired, only about 53,000 have undergone any training at all.  Of those, only a little more than 8,000 have been fully trained

  Mr. Bush told Brit Hume in 2003 that he gets his news from his staff.  He gets "briefed by people who have probably read the news themselves."  Perhaps they are not telling him everything he needs to know.  I find this idea even more disturbing than the President Bush I saw debating Senator Kerry last night.
  

  by DeminNewJ on Fri Oct 01, 2004 at 12:26:49 PM PDT