American view on Iraq?

Picked this up from RR's daily post this AM. Interesting that Russell who is conservative but sensible and thoughtful accepts the US's motivations are oil rather than "saving tha planet from evil..." I think we will need to pay close attention to the spin that Howard and Downer put on all of this in the coming weeks.
AnnaP

A piece in today's New York Times caught my eye. The headline was --

"Anger at US, Said to Be at New High. CAIRO -- Sept. 10: Anger at the United States, embedded in the belief that the Bush administration lends unstinting support to Israel at the expense of the Palestinians, is at an unparalleled high across the Arab world, according to analysts and diplomats in the region.

"The resolve of President Bush to use force against Iraq, they say, compounds the antagonism, which is expressed with particularly unvarnished dismay in Egypt and neighboring Jordan, Washington's crucial Arab allies.

"More than in previous bouts of anti-Americanism in the region, the anger permeates all strata of society, especially among the educated. And it's tinged, people acknowledge, with disillusionment at their own long-entrenched, American-backed regimes.

"There was little confidence in the Bush administration's promise to bring democracy to the Arab world in the wake of a defeat of Mr. Hussein. The administration's terminology 'regime change' was revealing in itself, several people said. I meant, they said, the Washington could easily target other governments in the Arab world for similar treatment."

Russell Comment: It's getting very nasty out there, and it wouldn't take much from the US to set the whole Mideast aflame.

For instance, you have to wonder how the dictatorial Saudi rulers would react to the downfall of Hussein and a "new democratic regime" being put in place. After all, Iraq is close to Saudi Arabia, and the last thing the Saudis want is a policy of "regime change," and anything even hinting of democracy.

So from that standpoint, the Saudis must view the US as a potentially "dangerous partner," more like a loose cannon than a partner they can "trust." After all, the Saudi rulers know that it's not the Saudi rulers that the US loves -- it's their oil.


I just went through Newsweek and Time mags. I was surprised at the tone of Newsweek. They were definitely thumbs down on attacking Iraq. Newsweek painted Rumsfeld as a wild-eyed hawk ready to go to war tomorrow, and Powell as the "let's just think about it" guy.

Time was fuzzy and taking no stand -- acting almost as though they would like to skip the whole subject. I always watch these two since they tend to reflect popular opinion.