In case you were wondering, there was nothing routine about Friday’s US airstrike against Baghdad, despite Dubya’s repeatedly billing it that way. Washington Post analysts see it as signalling a get-tough approach to Baghdad. But why? Having used the bankruptcy of the Clinton administration’s Iraq policy as a campaign point, some suggest Dubya and his handlers feel they have to follow through. I think we’re going to be seeing many policy decisions being made with a view toward little more than establishing the illegitimate son’s credibility on the front pages.
As The New York Times puts it, Dubya is “giving
notice that he may be new to this, but he doesn’t plan to
show it.” Of course, he’s also signalling a diffidence about multilateralism. Except for Britain, which supported or, some say, even pushed the airstrike, there appears to have been a swaggering disregard for the reactions of the rest of the world, including our allies.
“The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without.” — Dwight
Eisenhower