You don’t have to read the editorials at the New York Times to catch the paper’s support for France, Germany and Russia in derailing a possible attempt to disarm Saddam Hussein. Here’s a classic from a piece by Joel Brinkley:
Mr. Schröder spoke today by phone with Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, and a spokesman said that Mr. Putin had “stressed the closeness of the positions of Russia and Germany in calling for a political solution of the Iraq problem.” At the White House, Mr. Bush’s chief spokesman, Ari Fleischer, maintained the administration’s hard line. Saddam Hussein, Mr. Fleischer said, “is engaging in a constant pattern now” of “defying inspectors, refusing to cooperate with inspectors, showing the inspectors facilities in which he knows nothing will be found.” The Iraqi leader, Mr. Fleischer added, “is making the end of the line come even closer by his unacceptable behavior.” [My italics.]
Now why is the administration’s position a “hard line” and the German refusal to contemplate any military means to disarm Saddam not one? The U.S. has tried diplomatic and non-military methods to disarm Saddam for over eleven years. Yes, the eleven-year “rush to war” continues. If that’s a hard line, what would a soft one be?
The Dish 