argh.

[timepiececlock]

I fell asleep during Bush's press conference.

It was a comfy couch! And he's a lousy speaker.

Before I fell asleep (I was only out for about 10 minutes), the second question from the reporter had been asked, inquiring into why Bush thinks that there is so much opinion against the war around the world. It was very similar to part of the question before him, about why so many of the UN countries disagree with Bush on Iraq, considering that they share all the intelligence information.

Bush, in response, blather on about how "nobody wants war", and how this is the way Iraq chose to make it by not disarming, etc.

Me: He's not answering this guy's question. It's the same as the last guy's, about the other countries opposing, and he still didn't answer it.

'rent: He doesn't know why they don't.

Me: Then why doesn't he say that?

'rent: He can't say that.

Me: Yes he can. He should-- nevermind.

Comments

Re:

[rashaka.livejournal.com]

My personal opinion is more along the lines of a big hanging question-- why NOW? Why not 2 years ago, or 5? We've let a butcher sit there as a threat for years, and all of a sudden we're taking him out. What changed?

Bush sort of answered that indirectly tonight-- he said that his strategies have dramatically changed since 9/11. But I can't feel that he's doing this merely out of a desire to protect America from bombs-- there's a lot more about this that has to do with oil than we're being told. And that upsets me. Whether the fact that the oil businesses in our country are heavily tied up in that area or that Bush comes from an oil family is truly relevant or not to the threat Saddam presents to America, I can't say. But I'd like to feel that the current government is being honest with us, the American people, about it's long-term intentions for Iraq, before I decide that they're right or wrong. I don't feel that way right now.