![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 9 of 9. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Jakeman on March 21, 2006, at 19:57:33
President Bush rarely meets the press head on in a news conference so the one this morning was very intriquing. He answered a question by the veteran reporter Helen Thomas. According to the BBC, he has not accepted a question by her in three years. Why did he do that?
If you want to know the question and his answer search the internet.
warm regards, Jake
Posted by Declan on March 22, 2006, at 5:31:24
In reply to Bush's news conference and Helen Thomas, posted by Jakeman on March 21, 2006, at 19:57:33
I'd love to know the Q and A, but no luck with my searches. I must have no skills at all.
Declan
Posted by AuntieMel on March 22, 2006, at 8:57:00
In reply to Bush's news conference and Helen Thomas, posted by Jakeman on March 21, 2006, at 19:57:33
Fox news was blasting her this morning for not letting up on him. It seems his answers weren't enough to satisfy her.
The odd thing was that he actually called on her to ask a question. She has a reputation for being tough presidents at news conferences.
-----
A transcript = from 'Editor & Publisher'
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002200220
President Finally Calls on Helen Thomas, Says He Only Semi-Regrets It
By E&P Staff
Published: March 21, 2006 3:00 PM ET
NEW YORK Unlike several of his predecessors, going back decades, President Bush has largely avoided calling on veteran reporter Helen Thomas, one of his harshest critics, in press conferences.
But today, for some reason, he relented, early in this morning's press gathering, and the following exchange took place.
*
Helen. After that brilliant performance at the Gridiron (dinner), I am -- (laughter.)Q You're going to be sorry. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, then, let me take it back. (Laughter.)
Q I'd like to ask you, Mr. President, your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is, why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, from your Cabinet -- your Cabinet officers, intelligence people, and so forth -- what was your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil -- quest for oil, it hasn't been Israel, or anything else. What was it?
THE PRESIDENT: I think your premise -- in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist -- is that -- I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect --
Q Everything --
THE PRESIDENT: Hold on for a second, please.
Q -- everything I've heard --
THE PRESIDENT: Excuse me, excuse me. No President wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true. My attitude about the defense of this country changed on September the 11th. We -- when we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people. Our foreign policy changed on that day, Helen. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy. But we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life. And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people that we will do everything in our power to protect our people.
Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy. And that's why I went into Iraq -- hold on for a second --
Q They didn't do anything to you, or to our country.
THE PRESIDENT: Look -- excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where al Qaeda trained --
Q I'm talking about Iraq --
THE PRESIDENT: Helen, excuse me. That's where -- Afghanistan provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where they trained. That's where they plotted. That's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans.
I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council; that's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed. And the world said, disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences --
Q -- go to war --
THE PRESIDENT: -- and therefore, we worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it.
Q Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: You're welcome. (Laughter.) I didn't really regret it. I kind of semi-regretted it. (Laughter.)
Q -- have a debate.
THE PRESIDENT: That's right. Anyway, your performance at the Gridiron was just brilliant -- unlike Holland's, was a little weak, but -- (laughter.)
Sorry.
Posted by Jakeman on March 22, 2006, at 19:46:35
In reply to Re: Bush's news conference and Helen Thomas » Jakeman, posted by AuntieMel on March 22, 2006, at 8:57:00
The diplomatic solution (going to the UN) the president cited in his answer was due to the insistance of Colin Powell (no longer with the administration). This point has been widely documented.
warm regards, Jake
Posted by Declan on March 22, 2006, at 20:52:15
In reply to Re: Bush's news conference and Helen Thomas, posted by Jakeman on March 22, 2006, at 19:46:35
Reasons for war can be hard to pinpoint, as with WWI. There was no really good clear reason for that. Perhaps WWII was unusual in having clear reasons on all sides.
I remember a group discussion program, after Afghanistan but before Iraq where an American was saying to the group 'OK, I sense you are opposed to an invasion of Iraq. Let me ask you this then. What would you do instead?' This was interesting (rather than logical). It implied that something needed to be done. Revenge? To prevent a rerun? Show who called the shots? This may be the point at which the varying motives come together.
I hope this can be accepted impartially, as it is intended.
Declan
Posted by Jakeman on March 22, 2006, at 21:29:44
In reply to Re: Bush's news conference and Helen Thomas, posted by Declan on March 22, 2006, at 20:52:15
>
> I hope this can be accepted impartially, as it is intended.Declan,
"I think" the invasion of Afghanistan was accepted by the US public and much of the world community because it was seen as an attempt to root out the perpetrators of the NY attacks.
Iraq is a differnt matter. "I think" the decision to invade Iraq was a result of a agenda of the admistration influenced by a small circle of idealogues close to the president.
I hope this post is civil and I welcome all civil comments.
warm regards, Jake
Posted by Declan on March 22, 2006, at 23:16:13
In reply to Re: Bush's news conference and Helen Thomas » Declan, posted by Jakeman on March 22, 2006, at 21:29:44
Hi Jake
My answer to the American questioner would have been 'Do Afghanistan and make it a success, so that it reflects on the USA creditably.' But I'm sure that wouldn't have been enough. Nation-building was not on the agenda. A lot of this is irrational. Even (especially?) using the 9/11 attacks and the response as cover for other reasons may be irrational. I'm coming so close to the edge here that I'd better leave it there.
But I'm reading about WW1 at the moment and am struck by the paranoia (prior to war, fear of encirclement in particular, therefore we better strike first while we can, that sort of thing), I guess you might call it, all round. Unfortunately the paranoia proved to be justified.
Declan
Posted by Jakeman on March 23, 2006, at 19:28:11
In reply to Re: Bush's news conference and Helen Thomas » Jakeman, posted by AuntieMel on March 22, 2006, at 8:57:00
Thanks for posting the transcript. I couldn't find anything that included Helen's follow-up questions.
warm regards, Jake
Posted by Jakeman on March 23, 2006, at 19:41:44
In reply to Re: Bush's news conference and Helen Thomas » Jakeman, posted by Declan on March 22, 2006, at 23:16:13
Declan,
I feel so much of this conflict has been irrational. Yes, what a mess WW I, among others, it boggles the mind. I struggle to make sense of the conflicts among tribes in Africa. It's common to use economic reasons to explain war. That's a big part, but I think it often goes beyond that, actually to the psychology of people.
warm regards, Jake
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Politics | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.