Rob, <I mainly think that this is bad timing on Bush's part. Political driven timing - not in tune with the economy or skillful marshaling of world wide opinion.>
I'll agree about the timeline Bush has cornered himself into. He might have pushed the urgency of the matter a little too hard.
But I don't agree with the notion that a war must be in tune with the economy. After all, war is always bad news economically, whether we're in a boom, a recovery, a recession, or a scandal.
<Oh, I guess world wide opinion isn't important? We do business with the world. America is a great consuming nation that depends on trade, including oil of course, and we need to sell our position.>
OK, but just as America depends on trade with our allies, those allies also depend on trade with America. You might hear grumbling about America's unilateralism, but they'll be grumbling about America regardless. The relations with those nations can easily be mended, unless of course Bush really does make a much bigger mess of things in Iraq than before. (Heck, if that happens, even I will vote against Bush in 2004.)
I'm confident that won't be the case as long as we go in there, strike hard, then stay for the long haul. Of course, the last part worries me, namely the long haul. Not that we can't do it, but we might be tempted to become deadbeats.
Tenchusatsu |
