...but admitting we were wrong would be, well…wrong.

Starship Commander. Den Beste of the aptly named USS Clueless thinks we have to "diplomatically nuke France or Germany" because they refuse to fall in line with an administration that could very well be out of office in 2004.

If we do not, and if other nations in the world see both France and Germany standing up to us without having to pay a price for doing so, more and more nations will rally to them. There is opposition to the US all over the world; it threatens to crystallize into a unified force if it is not derailed soon.

And those who have taken the risk of standing beside us will also share that peril, and in some cases are even more vulnerable than we are.

In the immediate future we cannot be loved. That is not possible; there is nothing we can do which will cause our opponents to change their minds and hold us in high esteem. Our only choice in the short run is between being feared and being held in contempt. France and Germany must pay for what they have done to us, or we will stand exposed as cowards whose threats and demands can be ignored with impunity and who can be attacked without risk. And once that happens, the physical peril we face will grow as other enemies begin to threaten us in other and far more dangerous ways.

It is too late now for us to be seen as nice guys. Our only choice remaining is bully or wimp. We thus must become bullies, because being wimps would be disastrous. France and Germany are standing up to us and calling us out. They must be crushed.

In other words: destroy those that would point out that the emperor has no clothes. We have always been at war with France and Germany…..

Meanwhile, like-minded Star Trek nerd, Admiral Quixote chimes in with:

I do not believe Bush is bluffing. Other than some leftists who think this is about oil (which shows they have little understanding of economics – if someone disagrees, send me a note why and I’ll be glad to post it and comment), this is about national security. Even Bush’s opponents agree that President Bush sincerely feels Saddam Hussein is a danger to the security of the US. He may be wrong – and this is the position of France, Germany, and several other nations. But since he believes the US is at risk, he will follow through and remove this particular threat.


Even if you doubt Bush’s sincerity, there are now political reasons for Bush to attack Iraq. 30-40% of American citizens almost always vote Republican, just as 30%-40% of American voters support the Democrats. It’s the folks in the middle (like myself) who aren’t really attached to either party who decide each election. According to most polls, Americans are not too impressed with Bush’s handling of the economy. However, they strongly support Bush’s handling of the war on terror (America considers the Iraq problem as a part of this larger effort). If Bush backed down against Iraq at this point, he would lose the 2004 elections in a landslide. He knows this, and like most politicians he wants to stay in office.

America is a diverse nation and you will see pro-war protests and anti-war protests. I have friends who are strongly against the war. However, I have noticed something – Almost every single anti-war protester is a confirmed Democrat and did not vote for President Bush in 2000 and will vote against him in 2004 no matter what Bush does. Do you think President Bush cares about appeasing this group? Of course not – from a political perspective there is nothing to be gained and a lot to be lost. (By the way, I am NOT saying all Democrats are anti-war – there are many Democrats who also believe the risks of leaving Saddam in power are much higher than the risks of removing him from power).

Let's see: Bush really really really believes that Saddam is a threat to the United States, although he and Powell, Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Tenet, Perle, Wolfowitz, and even the White House janitor have failed to make that case. Instead we are given shifting rationales for war with Iraq: terrorism, WMD, gassing the Kurds, friend of bin Laden (whoops! that one backfired...), murdering his countrymen (hello, General Pinochet...), and even the benefit of a more stable supply of oil. How any one can dismiss the oil factor when the Administration is run by those so steeped in the oil bidness that it runs through their black sludgy hearts, is beyond me.

…and here is the heart of a true believer: “He may be wrong – and this is the position of France, Germany, and several other nations. But since he believes the US is at risk, he will follow through and remove this particular threat”

Such a good soldier….

Then there is the "Admiral's" second point: re-election. Is he implying that Bush would put not only the fine men and women of the military at risk, as well as increasing the possibilty of more "homeland" terrorism, just so he can get re-elected?

I am shocked, shocked, I tell you! Not that el Presidente would do such a horrifyingly selfish thing, but that true believers like the Quixote’s of the world would actually admit it.

The next step is admitting that we have a problem here. That maybe, just maybe, President Bush and his motivations are...just...wrong.