Bush's UN speech leaves many puzzled

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1802&ncid=1802&e=1&u=/washpost/20030924/ts_washpost/a54800_2003sep23


In his speech today to the U.N. General Assembly, President Bush tried to walk a fine line between defending a war deeply unpopular in much of the world and looking for help from reluctant countries to rebuild Iraq. The result left diplomats and lawmakers puzzled about his ultimate intentions.

This is what I heard from most commentators.

Mr Bush is caught between two fires.

One one hand he can't admit the war was wrong / injustified because it would undermine his popularity in the US with the election coming up, but on the other hand he can't get the help he needs from the rest of the world without getting on his knees for them.
If you heard Chirac and Annan's speeches, they both rejected the unilateral 'pre-emptive' doctrine that was used to justify this war and they both won't be happy with anything less but a "crucial" role for the UNin the governing and rebuilding of Iraq.

I may be wrong, but I think the US may have to carry the burden of Iraq on it's own for a little longer. And that might undermine Bush's popularity just as much as admitting his "mistake" would...

BF:

Did Bush ease his stance towards Belgium a bit or his still upset that you guys so openly opposed the war?

BF:

Did Bush ease his stance towards Belgium a bit or his still upset that you guys so openly opposed the war?

Well he announced that Belgian waffles are now Texan waffles, so make your own conclusion.

BF:

Did Bush ease his stance towards Belgium a bit or his still upset that you guys so openly opposed the war?

There will be no relent on the war against mind control. Belgium's weapons of mass intoxication will be controlled, by force in a coalition of the willing if necessary. Next will be Germany and Poland's weapons of mass flatualation, and France weapons of mass procrastination, then England's weapons of mass toothdegradation.

Well he announced that Belgian waffles are now Texan waffles, so make your own conclusion.

:lol:

He also railed against sex tourism. As Jon Stewart said "That's right Thailand, we're looking at you."

BF:

Did Bush ease his stance towards Belgium a bit or his still upset that you guys so openly opposed the war?

He's still upset probably.

If you remember we ran into trouble with our 'universal jurisdiction Law' some time ago, and that added to the Belgian opposition of the war really angered the Administration.

Rummy threathened to move the Nato away from Belgium and the US also had a kind of a "soft-boycot" going against the Port of Antwerp.

But the governement of Belgium has basically gotten rid of the universal jurisdicton law, so the US was appeased at first sight.


But of course, I can't imagine that Rummy and Bush have forgotten all that trouble they had, so I guess that we're still not on the "A" list next to Poland, Czech republic, Great Brittain, Spain and the others ;)

Speaking of the Poles, there have been Polish soldiers ejected from Iraq twice for being too drunk.

But to be fair, US soldiers killed a tiger because a drunk US soldier decided to feed the tiger by sticking hood into his cage and the tiger bit his arm. Shocking, I know.

Had Bush gone in and stuck to the topic of Iraq, I think he might have been able to build a decent argument....but going off to things like the sex trade and the like really clouded the message he was trying to send. Not that those other things aren't important (they certainly are), but trying to tie them into Iraq while wanting the UN to take a greater role in Iraq didn't make any sense.