Questions for a wartime president
ASK THIS | August 31, 2004
In a Washington Post op-ed, columnist David Ignatius poses three big questions for the Bush administration.
Q. Facing .… reversals in Iraq, what does the Bush administration plan to do in a second term? Will the United States double its bets in Iraq and fight a bloody new war to pacify the country, or will it tolerate more murky but pragmatic Iraqi solutions?
Q. Will it expand the war against Islamic militants by threatening Iran and Syria, or will it seek to enlist those nations as allies in maintaining regional stability?
Q. Will it accept a broad (and sometimes anti-American) coalition for change in Iraq and the Arab world -- broad enough to include even a Moqtada Sadr -- or will it hunker down with a narrower group of allies?
Read the entire column here. Ignatius concludes: "The truth is that we don't know the Bush administration's plans. We see the twin towers looming in the background, as a powerful symbol of unity and resolve. But to what end? This week Bush should level with the nation about what's ahead. That's an obligation, surely, for a wartime president."
— By Dan Froomkin
IF WE ARE AT WAR
- RETIRED ENGINEER AND WWII COMBAT VEETERAN
09/03/2004, 07:11 PM
WHY DO WE NOT HAVE A DRAFT...WHY DO WE NOT HAVE RATIONING OF GASOLINE AND THE OTHER CONSUMER GOODS THAT THE MILITARY CONSUMES IN COMBAT.....WHY DO WE HAVE A TAX CUT WHEN WE ARE SPENDING SO MUCH MORE FOR EXPENDABLES THAT GIVE NO ECONOMIC RETURNS...SHOULDN'T WE WHO STAY AT HOME SHARE SOME OF THE BURDEN...AND WHEN HAVE WE EVER HAD CONTRACTORS DOING WHAT THE MILITARY IS TRAINED TO DO?