Totally Unconvincing - Bush failed yet again to make his case for war (Jonathan Alter has decreed!)

Newsweek ^ | March 7, 2003 | Jonathan Alter

[Dont Mention the War]

Totally Unconvincing
At his press conference, Bush failed yet again to make his case for war. Here’s why

March 7 —  He was steely, determined, resolute—and totally unconvincing to anyone who didn’t already agree with him.

        AT HIS PRIME-TIME PRESS conference Thursday night—only his second since assuming the presidency more than two years ago—President Bush showed why he’s in this diplomatic vise. He’s got a good case but has made a hash out of it. His two key mistakes: a failure to build momentum and a failure to drill down to a deeper, more compelling logic for war.

The rest of article

[Dont Mention the War]

Alter has spoken. Guess the war's off. </sarcasm>

[The Wizard]

why does asshole come to mind

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Johnathan Alter is either dead right or dead wrong, and we won't know until Iraq is liberated. If he has any character he will write a post-liberation article where he either eats crow or kisses the feet of President Bush.

[Dont Mention the War]

Thanks to AM for fixing my stupid mistake of not clicking the "Excerpt" button to provide a link back to the rest of the article.

[the_doc]

What Alter doesn't realize is that Bush doesn't care about dimwits who can't already see that the war is justified.

This is one of the reasons why Bush was weirdly soft-spoken. He is going to use the big stick whether Alter likes it or not. And in a metaphorical sense, Alter will soon find that it's being used against him.

IMHO, journalists like Alter are the enemies of America. Free speech is beside the point. One's nature as an enemy is often revealed by what one says.

[dc-zoo]

Another Chrissy Matthews ignorant rat attitude.

[TADSLOS]

This is just shrill fill for the latest edition to this rag. We are way past debate and discussion over whether disarming Iraq by force and affecting regime change there is the right thing to do. That was the President's message during his press conference. He set the appropriate tone and delivered the message he needed to deliver. It was not set up as a debating match. Alter and his ilk need to get over it, but, of course, they won't. People are either on one side of the issue or the other, and I doubt any more talk will change attitudes or perceptions. It's time to act.

[Mark17]

why does asshole come to mind

I was thinking of a few choice words myself. These scum bags would not be concinved if a nuc went off in New York City. They would just say we had it coming. He really is an AH.

[Dont Mention the War]

Johnathan Alter is either dead right or dead wrong, and we won't know until Iraq is liberated.

Once Iraq is liberated, it won't matter whether Alter was right or not.

[Congressman Billybob]

Jonathan Alter offers a classic demonstration of the difference between "stupid" and "ignorant." He is NOT stupid, meaning that he is incapable of learning new facts. He IS ignorant, meaning that he rejects all facts which would disturb his world-view, such as it is.

He is one of a long list of people who ought to be, along with Jacques Chirac, forced to go to the first location where the 101st Airborne finds a vat of Hussein's chemicals in a vat in a basement, and have his nose shoved down in the fumes. Then he can say, with Chirac, "Vraiment, je suis un idiot" ("Truly, I am an idiot.")

This precise subject is the theme of my latest column on UPI, first link below.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, now up on UPI, and FR, "Truth, the First Casualty?"

Latest book(let), "to Restore Trust in America."

[MattAMiller]

Why should anybody care who's made the case for what? If the President couldn't convince anybody that the sky was blue it really wouldn't change the fact the sky is blue.

[ClancyJ]

Either a bloomin' idiot or a U.S. subversive abetting the destruction of Americans and their families.

Wonder how dense this writer must be if he cannot understand that terrorists are seeking a means to attack the U.S. with nuclear/chemical/biological weapons. Saddam is building and amassing tons of these materials and hates the U.S.

Wonder if this writer could possibly figure out that the easiest way for Saddam to take down America is to supply these weapons he produces to the terrorists that can carry them to the U.S.?

This also holds true for the rabid democrats like Ted Kennedy, Tom Daschle that just cannot grasp that we are targets, that we need to solve this problem, that they are putting the lives of our families, our future, and our country in danger because of their stupidity, their anti-American goals, their politics or any combination of these.

Why would I ever vote for a Democrat seeing how little regard they have for the safety of this country, me, my family and the future of America?

[woofie]

Dont forget to vote on the article and tell Jonathan how you feel....I gave him a 1

[Houmatt]

why does asshole come to mind

An understatement to behold.

This US-hating parasite should hook up with Helen Thomas, Patty Murray and Marcy Kaptur and slide down a razor blade into a pool of alcohol.

[FRgal4u]

I'd never forget the face of poor johnny Alter during the 2000 prez lection..he thought AlGone had the price, then we all know what happen the nite...he just looked like a ghoul, a zombie, his face was ash gray, looked like he had all his life drained out from him...lol

he is still bitter after the AlGone's lost...and sorry, if we go in and find all the stuff, we he publically eat a spoonful of anthrax...now, that's priceless...

[Dont Mention the War]

Dont forget to vote on the article and tell Jonathan how you feel....I gave him a 1.

Good point! I gave him a 2, for at least admitting that Bush has a strong case for war.

Alter's article isn't in the top 10 anyway, so it might as well be in 500th place. Only the top 10 get listed on MSNBC.com.

[Travis McGee]

I aploogize for the repost, but I want to spread this wide and fast.

Only UNamericans put

the UN before America!

Can somebody whip up a downloadable "sideways" document in large print using a full sheet of paper, for taping inside rear car windows?

When we defend America it may bust the UN, and the libs are going to scream bloody murder. We need an instant bumper sticker campaign to get the above message out as an immediate counter to their howls of outrage over our acting outside the UN.

[Copernicus]

Jonathan Alter offers a classic demonstration of the difference between "stupid" and "ignorant." He is NOT stupid, meaning that he is incapable of learning new facts. He IS ignorant, meaning that he rejects all facts which would disturb his world-view, such as it is.

Whether he is stupid or ignorant is not relevant. He is correct in one regard: Bush has made a miserable job of mobilizing public opinion and advanced strategic planning.

As a legal scholar you must surely understand the significance of the term "capitulation". It has a specific military meaning and is essentially a contract between two opposing armies.

Hussein and the Iraqi Army have repeatedly violated the terms of the capitulation signed after Gulf War I and thus there exists a state of armed conflict between the Armies of the West and Iraq.

No further debate or discussion is needed or required.

Have you heard anyone in the White House use this term or even acknowledge they know it exists?

Then we come to the Tommy Franks problem. Stormin Norman Schwartzkopf he ain't.

I hope it is true Divine Intervention occurs on behalf of small children, sailors and fools because we could be in for a bumpy ride.

The more the usual suspects on the left gear up for obstruction the more complicated the outcome will be.

This war should have been over by now, in my humble opinion.

Best regards,

[wizzler]

Bush has made a miserable job of mobilizing public opinion and advanced strategic planning.

That is mostly correct, but I'd submit that it's because Bush can't express the real reason out loud: that attacking Iraq is part of a broader, longterm strategy to overhaul Islamic culture and politics.

So he's stuck with making the argument in surface or "immediate" terms: Iraq has WMD, Hussein is a tyrant, he has defied UN resolutions, etc.

If the political atmosphere of 2003 actually allowed Bush to say, "Look, fundamental Islamism sucks, and we're going to dismantle it to make sure 9/11 doesn't happen again," there'd be a lot less confusion. Obviously, the political atmosphere in 2003 does not allow those sentiments to be expressed in such a forthright manner.