Posted on 08/31/2004 4:09:16 PM PDT by crushelits
ABC and NBC Suggest a Second Bush Term Means Another War
Another term, another war? As ABC and NBC continued showing excerpts from their previously taped interviews with President Bush and Vice President Cheney, the reporters seemed to presume that re-elected Bush would launch new military action. NBC's Matt Lauer asked the President if nuclear renegade Iran wasn't "a great candidate" for a pre-emptive war, while ABC's Claire Shipman asked Cheney: "Should Americans expect that a second Bush-Cheney term would mean another war?"
Shipman also darkly pointed out that a "psychological profile test" indicated that Cheney is well-suited to work as an "undertaker."
On Tuesday's Today, MRC's Megan McCormack noted how Lauer reminded President Bush that Iran supported terrorism and was pursuing a nuclear bomb: "Let me ask you about Iran. They have basically said recently they can produce a nuclear bomb in about three years. They are saying this publicly. We know from the 9/11 commission report, that they allowed certain al-Qaeda operatives to pass through their country prior to the 9/11 attacks, including some of the hijackers, without having their passports stamped. We know they funded international terror organizations, including Hezbollah, and they've repressed their own people. So, if the policy of preemption is to take out a country before they create an imminent threat to us, if they are saying these things and doing these things, why aren't they a great candidate for that?" Bush told Lauer: "Matt, the military option is always the last option of the president and not the first." He then noted how action against Iraq came only after a decade of failed diplomacy, including 17 United Nations resolutions. Lauer followed up: "You think diplomacy can work there, where it didn't in Iraq?" Bush: "I hope so. I hope it works everywhere. The idea of committing troops into combat is a tough decision. You asked me basically what it's like to be the commander in chief and know that people died because of the decision that I made. It's hard. It's hard for the loved ones. It's hard for the country. And so, therefore the use of military is the last choice. And so, right now, we've got a focused effort on Iran, trying to convince them to get rid of their nuclear ambitions." Lauer tried once more to get the President to talk about a hypothetical war: "Under what circumstances could you envision having to conduct a military operation against them?" Bush again dashed his hopes: "We hope we can solve it diplomatically."
Over on ABC's Good Morning America, Claire Shipman continued her interview with Vice President Cheney, whom she called "one of the principal architects" of the Iraq war.
The interview was taped several days ago at a ranch in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. Shipman dramatically noted how "even here in Wyoming, the echoes of war are never far away," as Cheney related how he spoke early in the day on a conference call with President Bush.
"Should Americans expect that a second Bush-Cheney term would mean another war?" Shipman wondered, suggesting, "A couple of other countries out there, Iran and North Korea, look like they might be our next target." Cheney instructed her: "Nobody wants to resort to military force unless it's absolutely necessary. Certainly this President does not, did not, but I also believe in the future that when he speaks people will listen, because he's demonstrated he's prepared to use the full force of the United States to pursue these objectives when he perceives a threat to the U.S."
Shipman also posed this question to Cheney: "I read you once took a psychological profile test, and it said the position you're most suited for is undertaker?"
Nope just more of the same War. The MSM is losing their mind.
I thought Bush only started wars to boost his approval ratings so he can win re-election. Why on Earth would Bush start a war in his 2nd term?
Well, well, Syria or Iran.... I say Iran.
Good.
We still have Iran and North Korea to deal with.
I hate to say it, but I don't see an alternative to war given that Iran must NEVER be allowed nuclear weapons.
And by the way, it's not a new war. It's the same war. The one we've been fighting since 9-11, and that we should have started fighting a decade ago.
It wouldnt be "another war" It's a matter different fronts in the same war. It does display how desperately liberals want to make the WOT go away or ignore it.
They should count these media expenditures as paid advertising against Kerry's limit.
it's Iran, I'm confident.
Mushroom Cloud Spotted Over Tehran - Details at 11
No sh*t Sherlock... but guess what - a first Kerry term would mean war too, only in that case we wouldn't be favored to win.
Its all one war on terror.
Not another war, just another battlefront in WWIII.
Besides the fact that this photo is absolutly disgusting...my feeling is exactly the same. These people in the MSM are more than morons!
The MSM wear their bias proudly on their sleeves for all to see. I wonder if the MSM have a clue about their falling ratings or if their arrogance and hate has blinded them that much?
I thought the same thing
Iran has got to be dealt with and this time I think the Ruskies will be with us
In any case they have to ask Kerry the same question about Iran
"The MSM is losing their mind."
Along with the Kerry campaign. Coincidence?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.