The war party line is that everything is going just swimmingly, many many countries are all just so happy to support the war, and 'be there or be square'. I think this is mainly directed against gullible Democrats in Congress, who might be tempted to heed their antiwar letters and e-mails, but then are told that the war is inevitable so they might as well relax and enjoy it. Like that miserable snake Dick Durbin from Illinois, who won election on the strength of his anti-war vote in October and now says the war is inevitable.
Every public statement by Powell is going to support this line at every time regardless of its truth value.
Even if they are frantically looking for a face-saving exit strategy, they will talk about how confident they are up to the moment of exit, and will then discover the virtues of some compromise and claim victory.
LP
> mike larkin wrote:
>
> >http://www.antiwar.com/justin/justincol.html
>
> Well yeah. But we were watching the late rerun of the Brit Hume show
> on Fox News last night, and I said to Liza, "I spend the day reading
> email and websites and think, maybe there won't be a war after all.
> And now I'm watching Fox and it seems inevitable." Ok, that's Fox.
> But then the front page of the NY Times this morning says that Powell
> is optimistic they'll win the SC vote. Maybe he's using the same vote
> counting methodology that served him so well with Turkey. But really
> - would Powell say this if the Capitol Hill Blue story were right?
> Why would he act so sure less than a week away from the SC vote?
>
> Doug