The Associated Press wants us to know that the Arab world didn’t like anything George W. Bush said last night: Arabs Find Little Hope in Bush Iraq Plans.

“No matter how the president tries to paint the picture, it is tragic,” said Massouma al-Mubarak, a political analyst who teaches at Kuwait University.

In his speech and remarks to reporters in Washington, Bush said he would send as many more troops as his generals want to bring security to Iraq. He also restated his commitment to transferring sovereignty of the country to Iraqis on June 30 and likened the violence in Iraq to the terror attacks on Madrid trains and in an Indonesian night club.

Bush’s remarks came before dawn in the Middle East, so few people saw them firsthand and they were too late for inclusion in morning newspapers. Some Iraqis, afraid their nation is deteriorating into civil war, were pleased to hear more U.S. troops would come. Others were simply fed up and didn’t expect it would help. Some Arab analysts said more troops would be helpful — but only under U.N., not U.S., control.

Nanou Ali, a 54-year-old mother of four in Baghdad, told The Associated Press by telephone in Cairo that she heard the news from radio stations.

“We are not interested in new U.N. resolutions or sending more troops to our country,” she said. “The only thing we want from Bush is that security be restored. We are living in a prison.”

Only a few weeks ago, Iraqis at least were able to go outdoors before dark, she said. “Now, no one dares to go into the streets even at daytime because of the explosions.”

Ali Saadi, a 32-year-old Iraqi doctor working in neighboring Jordan, said more troops should come to Iraq “because the country needs stability. I also agree with Bush that U.S. troops should stay in Iraq longer to avert a possible civil war.”

Mahdi Dakhlalah, editor-in-chief of al-Baath newspaper of the Syrian ruling Baath party, said Bush’s willingness to send more U.S. troops to Iraq and use decisive force if necessary to restore order would be a big mistake. “They will pour oil on fire because this would certainly increase resistance,” he said.

Bush said the United States now has 135,000 soldiers in Iraq, more than the typical 115,000 because of a troop rotation in progress.

Razzaq Abdel-Zahra, the owner of car spare parts shop in Baghdad who saw a short report of Bush’s comments on Arabic satellite station Al-Jazeera, said he was relieved to hear Bush say U.S. troops would stay in Iraq because he fears militias will try to take control of Iraq in their absence, leading to civil war.

But he said the president’s vow to use “decisive force” to maintain order would lead to more unrest: “Violence breeds only violence.”

Khaled al-Maeena, editor of the Jiddah, Saudi Arabia-based Arab News, said more troops are needed in Iraq, but not necessarily American troops.

“I agree that more troops should be deployed but not under the American control — instead, under the U.N. umbrella,” al-Maeena said. Arab countries, he added, should also contribute by sending peacekeeping forces to Iraq — an idea that’s met with lukewarm interest thus far.

The “violence breeds violence”/“terrorists are indestructible” meme is the very same rhetoric of appeasement we hear from Berkeley professors and Democrat candidates for president. Except that in the case of al-Maeena, editor of the official English mouthpiece of Saudi Arabia, you’re hearing it from the tyrants who rule the Middle East.