I'm not sure how much was deliberate advanced strategy, and how much of it is just that, when you get right down to it, the US holds all the cards in this particualr debate. All the warnings about unilateralism and diplomacy were an attempt by Europe and the UN to puff up their own importance and convince the US that they didn't really have 4 aces, that their hand was only a pair and the international community had a straight flush.

But when you cut through the BS, the fact has always been that the US had the power and the will to use it, and everybody else can get behind us or get out of the way. There is nothing they can really do to stop us. Bush's speech did a good job presenting that simple fact in a very slightly veiled form, but there it is.

We're doing this. You in the UN can run out in front of the parade and feel good about yourself, or you can oppose it and reveal your complete impotence and irrelevance yet again, for all to see.

Josh Marshall does doubts it was rope-a-dope all along. Strafor does as well.

Hmm, funny, I don't see anything referring to Iraq in your old blog post. You were were using rope-a-dope in reference to Bush's Israel/Palestinian policy.

I think we are giving W a little too much credit. He's just speaking the truth, but his pooonents are so reflexively anti-bush and anti-American that they can't help but look silly as the truth wins out.

Opponents, pooonents, whatever.

I was never sure about the rope-a-dope term - I figured it was an Ali reference - a strategy of hanging back, letting the opponent wear himself out (letting the ropes take the blows), and then striking back when the opponent was exhausted. If I'm wrong and I don't get it, then this won't make any sense:

It sure was rope-a-dope, but with one exception. Using UN resolutions and multilateralist language to make his point is like Ali grabbing his opponents by the wrists, and then beating him to the mat with his own hands.

It was a beautiful thing.

Still, if they look silly (and they try their best), W looks even better by comparison.

Bush did what he always does. Float trial balloons, flush his opponents out into the open, and then yank the rug out from under them.

I said it about the Taliban in September, here and here, but I don't know if that counts. I can't find where I used it regarding Iraq before you. So I think you're still to blame.

A pox on both your houses!

Stephen:

I agree that Bush waffles on Iraq. Who remembers when he gave Mullah Omar "one last chance" to hand over bin Laden? Saddam has got to go, although I would have liked to see him attacked through a non-Wahhabi Arabian entity.

Missed evidence: the White House website reports on a "round table" discussion that the President had with 15 Muslim leaders at the Embassy of Afghanistan in Washington, on Sept 10, 2002 (or: THE DAY BEFORE). Bush issued more of the "Islam is peace" nonsense that he spewed last Sept 17. On Sept. 12, Arab News reported on Bush's Embassy speech, claiming that he was supportive of Muslim demands for protection of alleged "Islamic charities." Many of these have been outlawed because of terror links. One - "Benevolence International" - even sold copies of video incitements to "martyrdom."

Bush should not be associating with CAIR, the ISNA or the AMC. It gives them credibility that they don't deserve.

Does anybody have any more info. on Bush's Sept. 10 Embassy speech?

Regards.

Geoff M. is right; here's what Stephen Green wrote 4/2/02:

"Besides, Bush is playing rope-a-dope and you should know that. Shame on you.

"The last couple days have put me squarely back in Sharon's corner. He's gathering enough intelligence to put Arafat in the shit-heap of history. And soon."

Yes, indeed, much intelligence was gathered on Arafat, more than enough to link not only him but the EU, via its amoral subventions, to terrorism. But Arafat remains in power, however precariously. More problematically, in the interim we've witnessed horrific slaughter in Israel. Call it rope-a-dope if you want. I think it simply took Bush an awfully long time to draw the proper conclusions and to allow Sharon minimal latitude. Charles Austin's right -- we're giving Bush a bit too much credit.

Let me offer a simple analogy here: Microsoft. Does Microsoft usually get it right initially? No. Do its serious competitors live? No. Once you're in its sights, you can start buying a nice funeral plot.

Why? Because they can make 100 mistakes, and you can make one. Maybe. They have too many other ties into your market, and aren't shy about leveraging them in ways that make it hard to say no.

The game is simple. Embrace. Extend... Extinguish. The U.N. just got "embrace..."

Clear vision there Stephen. Mentioned the same sentiment several times in posts over at LGF. Even went so far as (oh, and I reaaaally hated this) defending Colin Powell quite vigorously.

I think there is and has been a very clear, concise goal for many months now, and that most all the things we've seen are from the sheets of that playbook.

Lots of folks out there that were very used to the previous eight years - when an overnight poll was cause for a complete overhaul of a plan, if one existed at all, beyond keeping the poll numbers up.

We are witnessing the difference between the execution of a strategic vision and set of goals, versus crisis management on a minute to minute basis. Watch and learn folks.

But hey, he's just an unsophisticated rube cowboy, so far as they know (heh, heh, heh).

Sorry, I still think the rope-a-dope idea is silly. Bush bumbles along for months, making horrible mistake after horrible mistake, and eventually does something right at the last possible second.

From that we're supposed to infer that Bush "meant to do that" all along? I don't see it. What have we gained by all the wobbling and appeasing and pervarications? Sure, Bush may have restored some American credibility with the U.N. (if he lives up to his rhetoric -- an open question), but what was the point of damaging it in the first place?

Chris,

What we have gotten is the months we needed to rebuild are supply of guided bombs, missles, and other military equipment. This has also given us the time we need to gradually move more of our military forces to the middle east. We have been slowly doing both of these while Bush kept stringing the rest of the world along. I am no fan of the man, but this "rope-a-dope" has been pretty well done.

"Bush bumbles along for months, making horrible mistake after horrible mistake, and eventually does something right"

This is all so amusing. You guys are soooo convinced that Dubya is a stupid hick that even when he hands you your head---for the n'th time-- you think that he just accidently got lucky. For the n'th time.

Fine. Wallow in your self-congratulation and self-assessment of your own superiorority, while Bush continues to run rings around you.