How can you possibly have an international agreement that's effective unless countries like China and India are not full participants?

I've chosen a path that says we will go overseas and defeat them there. I also know full well that it's important for us if we're facing an ideology, if we're facing ideologues, if we're confronting people who believe something, that we have got to defeat their belief system with a better belief system. Forms of government matter, in my opinion. It matters how — the nature of the government in which people live. And therefore, I have put as part of our foreign policy not only an aggressive plan to find extremists and radicals and bring them to justice before they hurt us, but also to help people live in liberty — free societies, as the great alternative to people living under a tyrant, for example.

Iran is influential inside of Iraq. They are influential by providing advanced weaponry. They are influential by dealing with some militias, tend to be Shia militias, all aiming to create discomfort, all aiming to kind of — according to some — to create enough discomfort for the United States, but in doing so, they're making it harder for this young democracy to emerge. Isn't it interesting, when you really take a step back and think about what I just said, that al Qaeda is making serious moves in Iraq, as is surrogates for Iran?

If the definition of success in Iraq or anywhere is no suicide bombers, we'll never be successful. We will have handed al Qaeda — that's what it takes in order to determine whether or not these young democracies, for example, can survive. Think about that: if our definition is no more suiciders, you've just basically said to the suiciders, go ahead. ...Yesterday's bombing — we don't have the intel on it. I suspect it's al Qaeda. Al Qaeda convinces the suiciders to show up. Al Qaeda understands the effects of this kind of warfare on the minds of not only people in Iraq, but here — and elsewhere in the world.

You know, I'm — I've been in politics long enough to know that polls just go poof at times.

There are some similarities, of course — death is terrible. Another similarity, of course, is that Vietnam was the first time a war was brought to our TV screens here in America on a regular basis.

One of my concerns is that the health care not be as good as it can possibly be.

INSANA: Mr. President, today is the 10th anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing and a lot of people are reflecting on that act of terrorism —
DUBYA: Yes.
INSANA: — that occurred a decade ago, one that we almost forget in light of what's happened since. Can I get your reflections on that event and what it means still even to the war on terror, even if that's a domestic rather than international issue?
...
DUBYA: It goes to show that violence can erupt anywhere, any time, and, and as a society we've got to be diligent to those who would try to harm us. It also goes to show that terrorist acts not only come from abroad but can come here at home. The positive news in this instance is the City of Oklahoma came together in strong compassion and decency and care and hope for those who suffered, and our justice system worked.

But, nevertheless, I think long term, the stock market is, will reflect the long-term strength of America.

The United Nations Security Council looked at the intelligence and said, Saddam is a threat. And so, for about the — I can't remember how many times they said it, but they said, disarm. See, you're a threat. Disarm. There's a reason why a lot of people made the conclusion. It was not only based upon intelligence, it was based upon the fact that he hated America, that he's willing to pay suiciders to go kill people in Israel, that he actually used weapons of mass destruction on his own people.

I told the story, I think, at one of these endless press conferences I had last week — where — I love them, of course — where — where I had dinner with Prime Minister Koizumi of Japan. And it was at that dinner that we were talking about the situation in North Korea. And it dawned on me during the course of the conversation with my friend that, if we hadn't got it right after World War II, would I have been having this conversation with the Prime Minister about a common threat we share? And it probably wouldn't have. If we hadn't secured the peace in a proper way after World War II, I don't think — maybe I'll be wrong — but I don't think I would have been having the very kind of conversation I was having with Prime Minister Koizumi.

Freedom frightens people who are terrorists.

You see, what that meant is — if you got a wire tap by court order — and, by the way, everything you hear about requires court order, requires there to be permission from a FISA court, for example. ...And they're an important tool for those who are on the front line of using necessary means, with court order, to find these terrorists before they hurt us, look, what I'm telling you is — is that the Patriot Act made it easier for people we've tasked to protect America. That's what we want. We want people to have the tools necessary to do the job we expect them to do.

It's the first time I'll ever admit to making a J turn.... The Secret Service has got some of the best instructors in the world, and they took a fellow who hasn't been driving much and taught me the J turn.... There'll be no J turns in Crawford.