Bush admitted the daily drumbeat of booby-trapped car bombings and attacks has shaken the US public. (Reuters)

WASHINGTON, June 29, 2005 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) – US President George W. Bush came under fire Wednesday, June 29, from the press and Democrats over his insistence on keeping the current strategy in Iraq and for playing "the fear card".

In a major policy speech on Iraq late Tuesday, Bush – while acknowledging worries about the deadly situation facing the US forces in Iraq -- rejected calls for sending reinforcements or setting a deadline to bring US troops home, repeatedly citing the 9/11 attacks as a reason for continuing “US effort” in Iraq.

Bush further appealed for Americans’ patience for “difficult and dangerous” work ahead in the oil-rich country.

Reacting to the speech, Democrats immediately charged Bush failed to offer a clear plan for success in Iraq, according to Reuters.

"It is not enough for the president to say 'stay the course' and make a few minor adjustments. The president needs to lay out a concrete plan," New York Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer, told Reuters.

California Democratic Rep, Nancy Pelosi, said Bush had “missed an opportunity” to be more specific as to how and when Iraqi forces would be able to fight without “US support” and about reconstruction goals.

"Our commitment in Iraq does not have to be measured by timetables, but neither can it be open-ended.

"You know the president is on weak ground when he exploits the sacred ground of 9/11 so many times in his speech knowing that there was no connection between 9/11 and the war in Iraq when he initiated his preemptive strike," she told NBC.

The American President also rejected calls for setting a deadline for a US withdrawal from the Arab country as some US Congress members have demanded, Reuters said.

"Setting an artificial deadline would send the wrong message to the Iraqis, who need to know that America will not leave before the job is done," he said.

"We have more work to do, and there will be tough moments that test America's resolve," Bush added.

Bush also said he had no plans to send more US troops to Iraq to bolster the 138,000 US troops in the war-torn country, saying it would "undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight.

"Amid all this violence, I know Americans ask the question: Is the sacrifice worth it? It is worth it, and it is vital to the future security of our country," Bush had said in the speech.

"Our progress has been uneven, but progress is being made."

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said that Bush’s “numerous references to September 11 did not provide a way forward in Iraq.”

Leslie Cagan, the national coordinator of the anti-war group, United for Peace and Justice, noted: "By bringing that up again, he makes it sound as if we're there because we (are) going after those people who attacked us on 9/11 and that's not what's happening."

"Our commitment in Iraq does not have to be measured by timetables, but neither can it be open-ended," Pelosi said.

Bush also came under fire from the US press, describing his numerous linkage between the US war on Iraq and the 9/11 attacks as a failure to speak honestly about Iraq, according to Agence France Presse (AFP).

"Sadly, Mr. Bush wasted his opportunity last night, giving a speech that only answered questions no one was asking," said the New York Times, referring to Bush's mantra that a stable and democratic Iraq would be worth US sacrifices.

"We did not expect Mr. Bush would apologize for the misinformation that helped lead us into this war, or for the catastrophic mistakes his team made in running the military operation.

"But we had hoped he would resist the temptation to raise the bloody flag of 9/11 over and over again to justify a war in a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with the terrorist attacks," said the daily.

"They are trying to shake our will in Iraq, just as they tried to shake our will on September 11," the president said in one of a half-dozen explicit references apparently aimed at stiffening wavering American resolve on Iraq.

Bush, who previously admitted that Saddam Hussein's Iraq played no role in the 9/11 attacks, said his plan was to get Iraqis trained sufficiently so US troops can leave while at the same time assisting Iraq's efforts to write a constitution and hold elections.

"Our strategy can be summed up this way: As the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down," he said one year to the day after Iraqis formally assumed sovereignty of their war-torn country after the March 2003 invasion-turned occupation.

The Washington Post also said the president, "once again ... missed an opportunity to fully level with Americans."

"The president's evasion of the hardest facts about Iraq is coupled with a reluctance to candidly describe the likely price of success," it added.

"Mr. Bush's account of his strategy for Iraq, which has remained virtually unchanged in the past year, doesn't answer the worrying questions raised by these facts," the Post said.

Bush "didn't explain how a war meant to remove a tyrant believed to wield weapons of mass destruction turned into a fight against Muslim militants, a transformation caused in part by his administration's many errors" since Saddam Hussein was toppled two years ago, the daily said.