bush's days and weeks become 6 mos. interesting article

[rainstorm]

By Joseph Curl
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


President Bush told the United Nations on Sept. 13 182 days ago that "we expect quick resolution to the issue" of Iraqi disarmament, setting a deadline of "days and weeks, not months and years." Top Stories



Exactly six months later, he's still waiting, mired in an ever-growing U.N. debate. The U.N. Security Council met his first deadline by passing Resolution 1441 in 57 days, but the world body has dragged its feet over the following 125 days, with Mr. Bush accepting repeated extensions and modifications to a second resolution he says he doesn't even need.
His decision yesterday to withdraw today's deadline for a vote on an 18th U.N. resolution on Iraq and allow the debate to push into next week threatens to reduce the president's credibility on his assertion Jan. 15 that "time is running out."
"The continuing delay, at this point, offers no real benefits and instead is creating far more problems," said one senior administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity.
Among those "problems" is an unstable economy in which financial markets remain jittery about the effects of war, growing war protests and a fragile coalition that threatens to splinter if the matter drags on longer, the official said.
Mr. Bush's decision to withdraw deadlines and allow the debate to continue for weeks and months is sending a mixed message to the world, said Lee Hamilton, a former congressman and now president of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
"I think the United States has to be firm on the timeline. Obviously, it's a mistake when we say, 'We're demanding a vote on Friday,' and then you back away from that. ... You shouldn't set a target like that and then back away from it," Mr. Hamilton said.
On the other hand, the 17-term congressman said, delays are sometimes unavoidable and can pay off.
"This is crunch time. ... If we delay another few days and put out the benchmarks that the [British] have talked about, we have a chance of getting some more votes. Clearly, President Bush thinks that is the right thing to do," he said.
"It's like the Congress. You have to scramble for votes. That's exactly what we're doing here, only the stakes are a lot higher than they would be for a piece of legislation," Mr. Hamilton added.
That latter stance is espoused by Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer, who said yesterday that the delays merely illustrate "the fluid situation with the diplomacy."
"The end is coming into sight. ... I cannot predict for you every shape and turn of the road on the way to that end, but this end is coming into sight, and that's why you're seeing some levels of flexibility and discussion of options as it comes into sight," he said.
All options are on the table, including the abandonment of a U.N. vote, said Mr. Fleischer, who had said earlier this week that the president wanted a Security Council vote by today.

[JCT777]

How much longer is this going to drag on? A few months ago, I thought we would be at war with Iraq very soon. I am not holding my breath any more.

[rainstorm]

How much longer is this going to drag on? A few months ago, I thought we would be at war with Iraq very soon. I am not holding my breath any more.

has litle meaning

[rainydaze]

It seems like this is heading for a politcial disaster for Bush.
I think Bush is losing his "window of opportunity" fast. It seems
his supporters are fading fast. This UN game is getting so frustrating.
So now, not only does Bush have the anti-war people against him,
but his own supporters are beginning to question him! If this is
how the American supporters feel, imagine how the 200,000
troops over there feel. They're in the desert, it's hot, there's
nothing to do, and their trianing is becoming numbingly repetitive.
Bush!!, pis# or get off the pot. Send our troops in and get them
outta there or send them home. He's trying to appease the UN
at our troops expense, it seems like that anyway.

[rainstorm]

now we hear that the iraqi's may strike first. while i doubt that, it is only bush's delays that have made this possible. if american troops are killed in a first strike, bush is to blame.

[Derek Ortt]

Bush delayed far too long. Weeks does not mean 25, that is months. He should have told us the truth last September and told us that this would take months to complete and not tell us what we wanted to hear.

[southerngale]

It seems like this is heading for a politcial disaster for Bush.
I think Bush is losing his "window of opportunity" fast. It seems
his supporters are fading fast. This UN game is getting so frustrating.
So now, not only does Bush have the anti-war people against him,
but his own supporters are beginning to question him! If this is
how the American supporters feel, imagine how the 200,000
troops over there feel. They're in the desert, it's hot, there's
nothing to do, and their trianing is becoming numbingly repetitive.
Bush!!, pis# or get off the pot. Send our troops in and get them
outta there or send them home. He's trying to appease the UN
at our troops expense, it seems like that anyway.

I support Bush and feel for him in this very difficult situation. I'm not questioning him...I'm just sick of the stinking UN!!! They are the problem here!

I agree with this though...LET'S ROLL!!!

A FOX News poll conducted this week finds 71 percent of Americans support using U.S. forces to disarm Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and 20 percent oppose. Support has been at about the same level for the last eight weeks.

[southerngale]

now we hear that the iraqi's may strike first. while i doubt that, it is only bush's delays that have made this possible. if american troops are killed in a first strike, bush is to blame.

It is not "Bush's" delays! I know you know this.

How could anyone blame Bush when it's all these other idiots that keep dragging this on??? If Bush had it the way he wanted, we would have gone in there weeks ago!!

Iraq won't strike first. That would be Iraqi-suicide!

[southerngale]

Bush delayed far too long. Weeks does not mean 25, that is months. He should have told us the truth last September and told us that this would take months to complete and not tell us what we wanted to hear.

Come on! Now you expect him to be a mind-reader as well? Talk about great expectations!! He's only human.

[bfez1]

I know I've said this before but Americans are growing tired of the wait. This war should have started already. Personally, I'm losing my patience w/President Bush. He is saying one thing and doing another. Don't jump my case, this is JMO.
President Bush stop stalling and "Let's Roll".
It's now or never.

[southerngale]

I know I've said this before but Americans are growing tired of the wait. This war should have started already. Personally, I'm losing my patience w/President Bush. He is saying one thing and doing another. Don't jump my case, this is JMO.
President Bush stop stalling and "Let's Roll".
It's now or never.

I'm tired of the wait too, however I know there's more to it than what I see on TV or in the newspapers. I've been saying "LET'S ROLL" for a while myself...but I put the blame where it belongs, not with Bush.

Our president needs our support now more than ever. He is in a very difficult situation.

[bfez1]

southerngale,
I do support President Bush and know he is under tremendous pressure but we have waited long enough. We are not likely going to get the UN's approval so like he said, we'll do it ourselves. So, let's get this show on the road. "Let's Roll"!!!

[southerngale]

bfez1...

I knew you supported Bush...I guess people are just getting weary from all of this. He knows a lot more than we do, so we just have to trust him. He wants to roll like the rest of us.

You're right...he is under tremendous pressure.

[rainstorm]

now we hear that the iraqi's may strike first. while i doubt that, it is only bush's delays that have made this possible. if american troops are killed in a first strike, bush is to blame.

It is not "Bush's" delays! I know you know this.

How could anyone blame Bush when it's all these other idiots that keep dragging this on??? If Bush had it the way he wanted, we would have gone in there weeks ago!!

Iraq won't strike first. That would be Iraqi-suicide!

it is bush's dlays that are causing this. it is only in the last few days the iraqi troops are moving. further, we have given saddam plenty of time to get his oil fields ready to blow. we should have occupied the oil fields 6 mos ago. not only that , but on the radio this morning there is a report that we are AFRAID NOW TO STRIKE FIRST to prevent an iraqi first strike because we dont want the un to think we are provoking war. we are a joke.