Explaining a global war

■"10 Plots Foiled Since Sept. 11, Bush Declares," by David E. Sanger, New York Times, 7 October 2005, p. A1.

■"New York Named In Terror Threat Against Subways: Iraq Intelligence Cited; U.S. Officials Say Data Is Unverified--City Sets Increase in Security," by William K. Rashbaum, New York Times, 7 October 2005, p. A1.

■"President Bush's Major Speech (Doing the 9/11 Time Warp Again; Sounding Old Themes on Iraq)," editorial, New York Times, 7 October 2005, p. A30.

■"Britain suspects Iranian link to bombings in Iraq: Republic may be giving weapons to militants, Blair says," by Cesar G. Soriano, USA Today, 7 October 2005, p. 11A.

■"Al Qaeda Tells Ally in Iraq To Strive for Global Goals," by Douglas Jehl and Thom Shanker, New York Times, 7 October 2005, p. A10.

■"Bali Suicide Bombers Said to Have Belonged to Small Gang: The new terror threat: ad hoc groups of freelance jihadists with few outside links," by Raymond Bonner, New York Times, 7 October 2005, p. A3.

■"NATO to Expand Force and Task In Afghanistan," by Carlotta Gall, New York Times, 7 October 2005, p. A8.

I thought Bush's speech was a good one for the record books, for the history books, and for the long haul. It showed he could view today's struggle within a much larger context, both historically and in the sense of understanding war within the context of everything else, as I like to say.

But the NYT editors are right: Bush, while sounding all the right notes, is not leading the government particularly well. Back to David Ignatius' point: despite all the rhetoric on CEOs, Bush and his team do not follow up particularly well.

Bush has defined the dynamics at work here, in this global war, but not a good finishing line, nor has he shown much willingness to wheel and deal to secure victories along the way. We need adaptive planners right now: guys and gals who can play the game on the fly, not just sticking to their guns at each moment in the process.

Bush just can't tell us what he's prevented, he needs to tell us what he's building-the future worth creating.

Meanwhile, the terrorist alert in NYC comes off as the latest convenient excuse, reminding all to be scared. But without Bush convincing us better to be hopeful, that's a downward spiral over time. He needs to give us steps, a blueprint for action. Claiming prevented terrorist strikes, no matter how valid, feels like driving by looking at your rear-view mirror.

Iran is connected to the insurgency in Iraq, and we need to reach some modus vivendi with them, cause we ain't invading any time soon. We need a plan for that. We need a road map. We need a blueprint.

Because Al Qaeda's got one, and when your enemy's blueprint strikes people as more coherent than yours (or let's say, coherent enough for your average jihadist gang in Indonesia to feel they're got their marching orders), you're in trouble, especially when you're asking your closest allies to do things that make them feel VERY uncomfortable.

Bush is talking the talk better, now his team needs to walk the walk. We need to feel purpose and strategy and coherence in everything they do, because you know what? It's all connected.