I do not believe that the invasion of Iraq is anything less than a probable event.
Believe what you want, but if it happens at all, it will happen under UN auspices.
Your inability to grasp the real, big-picture objective, which is to disarm Saddam so that he is no longer a threat to anyone, is your own problem. But Bush has never lost sight of it, regardless of your nit-picking claims about what is or isn't policy.
Unlike the previous occupant of the White House you liked so much, a spineless tower of quivering jello who never stood for anything except kneeling interns, Bush has not looked for opportunities to claim political victory while actually backing down from principals. His objective has not changed and he is going to keep the heat on until that objective is met.
Bush is not going to make any kind of unilateral military invasion of Iraq and you know it. He understands what powers he holds and is, quite properly, asking Congress for authority to use military force. Congress will not, IMO, allow military action beyond what is currently authorized for the no-fly zones (unless Saddam suddenly becomes a complete idiot and fool and attacks us first) without it being subject to a UN resolution authorizing force.
Unless Saddam surprises us all and actually disarms on his own first (under the watchful eyes of the UN), both the UN and the congressional resolutions will be won. Only then will Bush consider actually giving the order to attack. In the meantime, he will continue to push for both resolutions.
You may disagree with the underlying objective, though that would directly contradict your own statements over the last year, but everything else you claim - i.e. that Bush is some kind of rogue president and international outlaw - is your own wishful thinking - a fantasy. |
