Final Protective Fire

Tuesday, February 10, 2004

 

One of the more irritating things about the criticism of President Bush's Iraq policy is the overt dishonesty of the critics. KLO at the The Corner posts this:
NOW:
“Mr. Bush said repeatedly that he went to the United Nations seeking a diplomatic alternative to war. In fact, the United States rejected all diplomatic alternatives at the time, severely damaging relations with some of its most important and loyal allies.”
--New York Times editorial; February 9, 2004
THEN:
“Yesterday's unanimous vote at the United Nations Security Council sends the strongest possible message to Baghdad...This is a well-deserved triumph for President Bush, a tribute to eight weeks of patient but determined and coercive American diplomacy…Only if the council fails to approve the serious consequences it now invokes -- generally understood to be military measures -- should Washington consider acting alone.”
--New York Times editorial; November 9, 2002
Overt? Stupid might be a better word.

Robin 3:16 PM