Not to mention the only "real" ally we have is the UK. The other countries are either insignificant militarily or bought off. It's the "Coalition of the Billing". Sounds pretty unilateral to me.
Luke Francl | Email | Homepage | 03.05.03 - 10:31 am | #

I love that - "Coalition of the Billing"!

When we can't even get NATO on board, then the people who are really stretching the truth are the ones who claim this is a "mulilateral" approach. Unilateral refers to only one party or side acting on its own.
Paul Stone | Email | Homepage | 03.05.03 - 10:46 am | #

How about today's comments by Powell and a White House source regarding the UN Security Council Resolution:

"You will lose, Mr. President," Powell told Bush. "You will lose badly and the United States will be humiliated on the world stage."

Powell told Bush he has only four of the nine votes needed for approval of a second resolution. As a result, some White House advisors are now urging the President to back off his tough stance on war with Iraq and give UN weapons inspectors more time.

"We have no other choice," admits one Bush advisor. "We don't have the votes. We don't have the support."

Presidential spokesman Ari Fleisher, in today's press briefing, appeared to signal a U.S. retreat from demanding a vote next week, saying "the president has said he believes that a vote is desirable. It is not mandatory." (Source: Truthout.org)


Americans know this is Bush's war, trumped up as an oil grab or some meta-physical retaliation by his feeble mind in coordination with Cheney, Wolfowitz, et al. Dean is right to the core and is the only Dem. saying the truth who can win.

Therefore all sane Americans must support Howard Dean.

DaveB
NYC
Dave | Email | Homepage | 03.05.03 - 11:45 am | #

wow, they are expending a lot of energy against a candidate who "can't win". ha!
anna | Email | Homepage | 03.05.03 - 10:56 pm | #

Daily KOS has a must read post on this topic:
http://www.dailykos.com/ archives...962.html#001962
noho-missives | Email | Homepage | 03.11.03 - 10:06 pm | #

you are all a bunch of idiots.
unilateral means acting alone.
also if this was just an oil grab then why didnt we do it 12 years ago.
all democrats spew the same crap that they hear from the liberal media. You dont think, you just regurgitate what ever is told to you. That is just another product of liberal education.
You all make me want to vomit.
Vote for Bush in 2004
bill | Email | Homepage | 03.17.03 - 12:54 am | #

First of all, this liberal media that you conservatives have talked about has not in any fashion gone against or reflected negatively on Bush (which makes me want to vomit). I ask all of you war supporters out there, why was this war suddenly turned from "Defending America" into "Operation Iraqi Freedom"? I got an answer. It's because our great President either lied to us that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (none of which could actually reach American soil from Iraq I might add, not to the mention the fact that the weapons that were used on 9/11 were box cutters, not missles)or his intelligence lied, so they had to cover it up by saying "Oh, we were really fighting to free the Iraqi people ( who by the way ELECTED
brad chism | Email | Homepage | 03.30.03 - 9:39 pm | #

(who by the way Elected Saddam Hussein in the first place)I was reading a british journalist's writing on the war ( he was obviously in the thick of it) only to discover that many civilians had been killed. One eight year old boy had to have shrapnel pulled out of his head. Now this is truly terrorism. I support the troops but not President Bush. Mr. Bush we do not speak with one voice, we speak with many. You sir, as Michael Moore put it at the Oscars, "should be ashamed of yourself".
brad chism | Email | Homepage | 03.30.03 - 9:43 pm | #

Howard Dean is ABSOLUTELY right on labeling the illegal actions of the bush administration as "unilateral." The "war" might not be a strictly unilateral attack, but it was carried out unilaterally. bush was going to do it with or without support. Thus it was a unilateral action that just happened to have some other countries along for the ride.

Attacking him for this is bullshit. If you're going to attack him for anything, make it be that he hasn't been strongly enough opposed to pre-emptive military action by the United States government against sovereign nations based upon fabricated evidence.
hpv | Email | Homepage | 04.15.03 - 4:23 am | #

Hey, "bill none" (3/17/03) -
"You don't think, you just regurgitate whatever's told to you"---and guess what? You've been duped and thoroughly brainwashed by the Prez and his boys. Just wait until you lose your job (if you haven't already) through 'down-sizing' or 'bankruptcy' (ANOTHER one!). See how much the Prez gives a damn about you then (unless you're a multi-millionaire. . .). "Tax cuts for the rich!" he'll say (again, and again, and again. . .), because he's too ignorant to think of anything else. Except, perhaps, "Might makes Right!"
Good LUCK!!!
Samantha | Email | Homepage | 05.05.03 - 4:54 pm | #

Of course it was (virtually) unilateral.

While we are parsing language so specifically, maybe we should be asking:

1. Whether no child has been left behind
2. Whether the "vast majority of tax cuts have gone to those on the bottom of the spectrum".
3. Whether the "Blue Skies Initiative" have produced measurably bluer skies.
4. Whether "you are either with us or against us" correctly identifies all possible points-of-view countries could have on preventative war.
sobko | Email | Homepage | 12.20.03 - 3:25 pm | #