To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (286337 ) 8/13/2002 3:52:40 PM From: Don Hurst Respond to of 769670 J F, Pete Waldmier, columnist from the Detroit News, not exactly a liberal paper. asks the same question about Saddam's desire to die and he wonders about Cheney/Bush reasons for attacking Iraq. Talk of an Iraq war appears to escalate as Bush popularity wanes By Pete Waldmeir / The Detroit News Excuse me if I sound a bit cynical, but isn't it curious that the Bush administration has chosen this particular time, halfway through the president's first term, to start floating trial balloons about going to the mattresses against Iraq? I mean, give it is a little thought. Dictator Saddam Hussein has been in power for years. The sudden, intense interest in the threat of his manufacturing and using "weapons of mass destruction" against us and our allies is old news. The U.S. economy is sucking wind. The stock market is in the Dumpster and among the causes for the crisis' in investor confidence is a full-blown scandal that involves the mismanagement, if not downright criminal malfeasance, of several of the nation's largest and most trusted corporations and their leaders. Bush's big business buddies. Hey, even homespun icon Martha Stewart is fencing with the feds over allegations that she made ill-gotten gains on a stock trade. Is nothing sacred? On top of all that, the first anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in history, the multiple hijackings and fiery crashes that leveled the landmark World Trade Center and did serious damage to the Pentagon, the symbol of American military strength, is only a month away. What sort of bitter memories will that rekindle? Given a year of hindsight and reflection, will the U.S. public be more inclined to blame the messengers, not only for the bad news but for the failures of our intelligence community and the easy breach in our high-priced defensive systems? Despite his prompt and decisive actions after the Sept. 11 tragedies, despite the way the nation came together to back the retaliation against the ragtag forces of Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida guerrilla warriors in Afghanistan and elsewhere, despite the roundup and detention of hundreds of suspected terrorists and their supporters, the seizing of assets and the freezing of bank accounts etc., Mr. Bush's job performance ratings have been steadily sinking. I know it seems like only yesterday that Florida's hanging chads floated him into the White House, but in a few months, Mr. Bush is going to have to start cranking up his re-election machinery. How does he recapture not only public trust, but public support? Starting a war won't do it. But looking decisive about heading off future terrorism might just be the ticket. And who best to rattle your saber at than evil old Saddam, who has been permitted to thumb his nose at the United States and the United Nations for the last 11 years, despite his humiliating defeat in the Gulf War? The military knows better than to invade Iraq, of course. But it never hurts the old budget to look busy and make plans, even if you're not going to use them. And if it helps the boss' image as an in-your-face macho Rambo, then that's all the more reason to cooperate. As for Iraq's becoming a nuclear power broker, let's get real. Even screwball Saddam knows that if he launches one weapon, or supplies a terrorist power with one, there won't be anything left of Iraq to invade. Read Pete Waldmeir's column on Sunday, Monday, Wednesday and Friday in The Detroit News. Call him at (313) 222-2345 or send e-mail to Pwaldmeir@aol.com.