- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Thanks Tim Grieve, for pointing out this vague and deceptive phrase in the State of the Union Address. I thought I was the only one who was infuriated by it, since I hadn't seen any comment on it in the major newspapers. It certainly appeared to be intended to mislead those who are still in the dark enough to believe that Iraq had something to do with 9/11, since such a large part of the speech was a defense of the war in Iraq. Yet it was vague enough that Bush could claim he wasn't referring to Iraq if charged with dishonesty. So much for a "duty to speak with candor"!
Those who question the war in Iraq are attacked as "isolationists", a totally false characterization of those who believe that the president's justifications for the war in Iraq don't hold water.
Bush says "we need the support of our friends and allies" to win the battle against terrorism, and follows that by saying that the only alternative is American leadership Here at last, Bush is honest about his view of how the United States should conduct its foreign policy. It is the unilateral nature of the decision of our leaders to attack Iraq that cost us a loss of good will among many of our long-time allies.
