Chris Herzfeld felt conflicted watching President Bush's speech on Wednesday announcing a troop escalation in Iraq.

On the one hand, the seven-year Army veteran — who was one of the first soldiers involved in the invasion of Iraq in 2003 as a member of the 101st Airborne division — says he believes the United States should never have gone to war in Iraq in the first place.

On the other, Herzfeld, now a 29-year-old business major at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, thinks the U.S. does need more soldiers in Iraq to get the job done. That sentiment puts him at odds with the majority of Americans, who, according to polls taken after the speech, think the troop "surge" is a mistake, a feeling that is increasingly being voiced not just by congressional Democrats but by a number of prominent Republicans as well (see "President Bush Orders 21,500 More Troops To Iraq; Democrats Blast Plan").

"It was frustrating to hear the president say in his speech that soldiers understand the need for this commitment," said Herzfeld, who said that once he finished his tour in the Army, like many of his friends, he had "no interest" in signing up for the National Guard. "I was one of the soldiers he's talking about and I had no clue why we were over there."

Despite his lingering disenchantment, though, Herzfeld said he was "optimistic" about the decision to send an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq. "I'm just hoping it will be enough," he said. "I actually think the president is right in this instance, but he murdered his credibility with the American people by coming to them with a different reason for why we're over there each time. I've worked with the Iraqis and their security forces, and what people here don't understand is that it will take years to rebuild the infrastructure and have a government that is self-sustaining. Because of that, we do need more soldiers over there. It's unfortunate, but we're no closer now to victory ... and we're probably a few steps behind where we were when we occupied the country initially."

On Thursday, the Pentagon ended its limit on how long citizen-soldiers can be required to serve on active duty, according to The Associated Press. Previously, National Guard and Reserve members could not serve more than 24 cumulative months in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now the limit cannot exceed 24 consecutive months, meaning that members can be called back to serve again after they are demobilized and have returned to civilian life.

In a Washington Post/ ABC News poll conducted following Bush's speech, 61 percent of respondents said they opposed the force increase, with 52 percent "strongly" opposing the buildup and just over 30 percent saying they thought the plan makes victory in Iraq more likely.

Support for sending the 21,500 additional troops was a bit higher among people who said they'd watched Bush's speech — a group considered more likely to be his supporters — with 47 percent of viewers saying they think the increase is a good idea. According to the Post, a strong factor in the unenthusiastic response to the president's new plan is the American public's increasing opposition to the war and mistrust of Bush's handling of it.

More tellingly, despite Bush's repeated assertions that the war in Iraq is vital to winning a broader global war on terror, 47 percent of respondents said they thought the campaign against terrorism is not dependent on a victory in Iraq.

Either way, the speech is not likely to sway public opinion on the war that much, according to Scott Keeter, director of survey research for the nonpartisan Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. "On the question of whether we should bring the troops back home, half the public says we should do it now and 44 percent say we should stay until the situation is stable," Keeter said. "The balance as been close to 50-50 for a long time and the overall sense is that public opinion is pretty fixed on this. I don't think it [the speech] was an attempt to make a sea change in public opinion."

One piece of news that likely alarmed GOP leaders was a Bloomberg story speculating that Bush's plan could make it harder for the Republican party to pick up House and Senate seats or regain control of Congress in 2008 if it does not produce solid results.

While most Republican leaders have publicly rallied around the president, some, such as Minnesota Republican Senator Norm Coleman — who could face a tough re-election in 2008 — have not. "I oppose the troop surge in Baghdad because it is not a strategy for victory," Coleman said. Also distancing himself is potential Republican presidential candidate Senator Sam Brownback. "I do not believe sending more troops to Iraq is the answer," Brownback said in a statement. "Iraq requires a political rather than a military solution."

On Thursday, tens of thousands gathered in cities across the country to protest the president's plan. Despite the gathering backlash, Herzfeld said he firmly believes that the U.S. cannot and should not abandon the fight now. "You can't go over there and change 1,000 years of culture overnight," he said.

"You can't overthrow a culture and say, 'Here's democracy, enjoy!' Most of us knew when we set foot there that we'd be there for a decade. The problem was the Iraqi people didn't see the bigger picture or grasp what we were trying to do because the average Iraqi citizen is concerned about their survival. Now they're seeing bombing in the streets and people killed and they're saying, 'These things didn't happen before the Americans were here, so let's get them out.' They don't care about democracy. They care about their kids not getting blown up — and people here wonder why they're not embracing democracy?"

So while he tries to remain optimistic, Herzfeld still wonders if perhaps it's too late to change things. "I'm not sold that it will definitely correct the problem. That's one of the mistakes that is frustrating for me, especially [having been] on the ground in the initial attack — that the administration underestimated the situation at first," he said. "And the worst-case scenario occurred, which is why we've been playing catch up ever since."