Well having read the text of last night's 'State of the Onion" schpeil I had to shake my head because it was "nowhere near"
as cogent and direct a laying out of one's case as the , IMO, superior speech Bush "did" make before the U.N. Assembly back on 9/12/2002.
Not wanting to just rely on memory I went to the official White House website , after reading last night's "all promise ,no actual blueprint" performance art last night.
And , no , saying that "all" State of the Union speeches are broad-brush strokes and zero details. That just does "not" cut it this time. This was to be the most important report to the Nation
speech of G-Dubya's limited professional career as our commander-in-chief and the level of pablum quota becomes apparent when one contrasts it with his U.N. Assembly speech.

Harboring a well-crafted level of "reading comprehension" I have to say that Bush successfully made his case for the U.N. to start doing their job or render themselves irrelevent ( as it almost did
thanks to the EU's , and Bush,Sr's , shameful hesistancy to frankly deal with what was brewing in Bosnia until too many people had been killed and concentration camps were finally on the cover of Time magazine. ).

However, with all the reviewing of the 1991 decision "Path to War" that left Saddam in place ( which Dubya blantatly contradicted in last night's speech_ quote coming later ),
one passage of the U.N. assembly speech lept off of the webpage to me.

(quote)
"And in 1995, after four years of deception, Iraq finally admitted it had a crash nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf War. We know now, were it not for that war, the regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993."

What haunts me about this passage is my strong intuition that
the unspoken purpose of this "Path to War" is being used as a collosal "fishing expedition" to force out into the open just what Saddam has by causing him to "use" them with our and Britain's boys as the bait. Then Bush can say, "See, we told you so".
Quite an alarming gamble at this late date.
Reagan impotently put our young boys directly in harm's way in Lebanon and, several hundred dead marines later, "turned tail" and pulled out dealing the rising Islamist terrorist organizations their first victory thus setting the fuse for 9/11 regardless of the
supposed "victory" over Iraq, but that was another "State of the Union" pablum speech by Bush senior.

Which brings me to the quoterom Dubya's speech last night that also lept off of the White House website transcript:
(quote)
"Twelve years ago, Saddam Hussein faced the prospect of being the last casualty in a war he had started and lost...."

No president "ever" admits to outright "lying" ,but ,with all of the lookking back over the decisions made leading up to and then
"halting" the Gulf War ,everyone from Bush,Sr. to then Nat.Security Advisor Bretn Scowcroft, to Sect. of defense Cap Weinberger ,to now Sect of state Colin Powell stated "clearly"
that taking out opf saddam hussein was "never" ,read "NEVER" ,the objective of Operation Desert Storm.
So , my question is obvious.
Given that Dubya's speech writers and political strategists, headed by Andrew Card and Carl Rove, can "not' plead ignorance to this public record fact.
Hence, where the hell does G.Dubya ,in the most important report of the State of the union adress of his limited career as Commander in Chief, get off with a blantant whopper as that.

I guess his team is gambling you can fool "enough of the people enough of the time".
BTW: This is but "one" clear example of the flawed outline for the Nation our limited commanbder in Chief just delivered.
His "failed" Enronomic team ( all fired/resigned and left vacant )
is another lengthy thread altogether.

For thos genuinely interested in doing their homework in these most urgent times, the U.N. Assembly speech:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html



I know I long ago posted here about my concerns over Saddam,when cornered ,will not hesitate to do the same scorched earth policy on his own oil fileds that he proved he was willing to do in Kuwait. Only in 2002 are we starting to see news commentary finally giving serious attention to this "Art of War' tactic.