Bush Pours Cold Water on Iraq War Talk

Reuters via Yahoo! ^ | Wed Aug 21, 5:05 PM ET | By Mark Egan

[Redcloak]

Reuters usually adds an anti-American spin to their coverage and headlines. This is no exception. Minus the Reuters super-sauce, this is another story about Bush yanking Saddam's chain.

[snippy_about_it]

[Argus]

They also have expressed concern about the stability and viability of Iraq after Saddam's possible ouster.

If Saddam chokes to death on a date pit tomorrow, how will that affect the "stability and viability of Iraq"? Basing a country's stability on the survival of one aging, unpopular dictator does not strike me as a more sensible policy than invasion, conquest and democratization, but that's Germany for you - they prefer dealing with tyrants.

[eno_]

The reporter, as you point out, is hearing what they want to hear.

[Kozak]

I really do wish that Bush would do the right (and Constitutional) thing and go to congress for a declaration of war. We really should get back in the habit of doing that.

[Right_in_Virginia]

"I don't see Bush saying he won't go after Saddam. Reuters wishful thinking."

I saw the press conference live and unspun. President Bush did NOT back away from war with Iraq.

In fact, I got the feeling the president finds some humor in the media "frenzy" over this "debate"...because as he clearly and calmly stated (again) ...he has not changed his mind.. Saddam is a threat and must go...and he is a patient man.

And, as Sec. Rumsfeld so nicely added---our allies haven't said "no" to action against Iraq because the President hasn't asked them to do anything (yet).

IMHO, the clock is ticking.

[Cold Heat]

This entire Iraq attack frenzy is media driven by the NYT and the Euro Trash. They are no closer to actually doing it then we were last month. We continue the psy ops and wait for a move. That is what we are doing.

Bush did not pour cold water on anything because he never heated it up to begin with.

The media did.

[My2Cents]

Apparently H.W. and Scowcroft are great buddies.

[My2Cents]

I agree. When the US makes its move against Saddam, it will be quick, it will be decisive, and it will catch the NY Times editors and the Euroweenies with their collective pants down.

[justa-hairyape]

The administration has said rogue states like Iraq comprise the No. 1 threat to American security.

This administration 'gets it', unlike the Saddam apologists.

[PhiKapMom]

Those times work for me! AP now has the same basic article out with the HEADLINE --

Bush Says World Needs Saddam Ousted

Sure looks different from the headline of this article!

[PhiKapMom]

I don't think he is doing this for the Bush Administration but I could be wrong!

[PhiKapMom]

I know but notice that he is not in this Bush Administration!

[Cold Heat]

it will catch the NY Times editors and the Euroweenies with their collective pants down.

Well said! We need to be aware that we are talking about the elimination of one single man or at most a family.

Bearing this in mind will unleash a number of options. None of which I have seen printed anywhere!

The media is napping........

[snefling]

There will be no frontal attack on Saddam Hussein in the near future, just as I have predicted here for the last six months.

Whether or not there is an imminent attack is besides the point. The real issue is regime change, not just in Iraq, but in the ME.

One of the problems with FR is that the majority of commentary is merely counter-punching easy targets like the press.

How come there isn't any analysis regarding what is obvious to all: that the scribes in the State Dept. and elsewhere throughout the gov't have been busily preparing a multitude of documents ranging from joint recoginition of governments, to military pacts (US bases/occupation) and trade treaties (ie turn on the oil spigots).

What I'd like to see discussed is the game behind the game: what companies will be there first the day the treaties are signed? Consumer products? Or will the first order of business be infrastructure? (Cat, Halliburton, et al.)

What are the plans of the big banks? Will the US be backing billion dollar loan packages (backed by oil reserves) so that the Iraqis can immediately start purchasing goods and services?

If FR really does have the lurker population that many speculate about, I'd sure like to see some *real* downstream info (no, not military secrets), not this boring surface level stuff.

[Aric2000]

And the big bad Bush moved on to the next country which was made of stone...he said, " I will huff and I will puff and I will blow your country down" but in the end he was tired from all the huffing and puffing so he decided not to blow the country up... :-)

This is the actual ending

But in the end he tired of all the media telling him how it was made of stone, so he huffed and puffed anyway, and it turns out the country was made of so much hot air!!

And the media was made to look stupid again!!

THE END

[Nexus]

try these dates: 9-7-2;10-6-2;11-4-2;12-4-2;1-2-3;2-1-3;3-3-3;4-1-3

Hey, LOOSE LIPS! Just kidding...

Did Desert Shield start on or around the new moon? I would think so, but I don't know for sure. Thanks.

[Centurion2000]

try these dates: 9-7-2;10-6-2;11-4-2;12-4-2;1-2-3;2-1-3;3-3-3;4-1-3

Heh .... you just named every new moon (total darkness) night for the next 6 months. Of course you're right on about it. We do FAR better than any other country in night fighting.

[Nexus]

Desert Shield=Desert Storm
sorry

[Diddle E. Squat]

Always tailor your message to one's audience.