Congressional leaders hit the talk show circuit this weekend to talk up the need for a war with Iraq, while the administration kept a low profile. Senator Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who led hearings recently that highlighted the threat posed by Iraq, said, "I believe there probably will be a war with Iraq. "The only question is, is it alone, is it with others and how long and how costly will it be?" While both the hearings and the statements on the talk shows indicate that an attack on Iraq is coming, the Congress and Senate are requesting that they be officially consulted and notified before hostilities commence (and judging by the recent rhetoric, after this formality is observed will then proceed to rubber stamp the legistlation). The administration already has a wide authority to 'pursue the September 11th terrorists,' although no evidence has been brought forward to link Iraq with the attacks, but then no evidence was presented to support an attack on Afghanistan either. Suggesting that the former authority was all that was really required, Trent Lott stated that "While you may not have to come to Congress, America needs to be united. We need to understand what our problem is, what our goals are. We need to try to bring the world in." Lott insisted that the administration would be reckless to leave its war plans open to public scrutiny, although he suggested that the administration should go through the formality of 'seeking congressional approval' before the attack begins. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle said on the ABC program 'This Week', "We all support strongly a regime change," but insisted that the real debate is not over whether or not to go to war against Iraq. As the many visits to the Sunday talk show circuit reveals, and the consistently hawkish message delivered indicates, the United States will be going to war against Iraq, and that much is certain, but Dashcle suggested that the only subject for debate is whether or not 'our ducks are in order'. He also is hoping to get more countries in on the war, so that, as in the previous war against Iraq, they can share the expense. Biden stated that the United States could take out Iraq alone, but as Lott insisted, "We need to try to bring the world in," for, as Biden went on to say, the United States would be in Iraq for the long term, and would face a long term rebuilding project in the country, and all this one can assume is going to cost a fortune, and the real debate then is not over whether to go to war, but how to get other countries to help pay for it, and other practical matters such as this, as the tone of the debate on the Sunday Talk shows reveals...

On NBC's 'Meet the Press' Biden suggested that currently Iraq might lack the capacity to unleash all its 'weapons of mass destruction' (assuming that Iraq has these weapons, which has been a subject of some debate recently, with former arms inspectors suggesting the country is in no shape to develop such weapons at the present). Biden insisted that expert testimony delivered during the Senate hearings proved that Iraq has both chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction, and that rather than wait for Saddam to develop the means to deliver these weapons, using language that suggests that the decision to attack Iraq has already been made, and the 'public debate' is actually a public relations campaign at this stage of the game, Biden said, "We have no choice but to eliminate the threat. This is a guy who's an extreme danger to the world. Does that mean war? "I think that's where we end up." Biden dismissed an Iraqi offer to resume arms inspections, calling for 'real inspections' which seems to be a way of saying 'real invasion' which would, after all, allow for 'real inspections' in a way that the past inspections would not.

Joseph Leiberman is proving to be one of the most hawkish of those pushing for war with Iraq, and in a statement on Fox News Sunday critisizing those in the administration who are against the invasion, stated that "I think we're at a point where it's critically important for the president, as commander in chief, to take hold here ... every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States."

Reading between the lines and analyzing both the tone of the recent hearings and the consistent message pushed on the talk shows this weekend, it is obvious that the war against Iraq has moved into the stage where the strategy is to mount a public relations campaign, all this in line with the doctrine of destroying terrorist states before they actually become terrorist states, since if you wait until they do, it is to late (Biden's comments were more or less in line with the previously announced doctrine of 'preemptive strikes' against nations which is supposed to now be the policy of the administration.)

Also interesting is the intense diplomatic activity on the part of Iran to isolate the United States in the Arab world. The latest headlines on the IRNA news wire indicate just how busy Iran has been lately...

Khatami warns against interference in Iraqi internal affairs

Iran, Oman voice objection to any US military action against Iraq

President Khatami receives Saudi FM, discusses regional issues

Iran, Algeria voice objection to any attack on Iraq

Rafsanjani stresses expansion of Iran-Pakistan cooperation

Armed forces ready to confront foreign threats: IRGC commander

Turkey keen on upgrading ties with Iran

Tehran, Riyadh concerned about continued suppression Saudi FM arrives in Tehran

As well an envoy from Oman has just arrived in Tehran after the departure of an official visitor from Saudi Arabia...

According to the IRNA news wire story on the arrival of the official visitor from Oman, "Khatami hailed existing 'goodwill' between Tehran and Muscat,
saying, "The Islamic Republic of Iran and Oman have always called for
the establishment of peace and security in the region and supported
the oppressed Palestinian people."
He criticized US' unilateral support for the heavy-handed policies
of the Zionist Israeli regime and called on the Islamic states to
bolster unity."

This story is typical of the sort of thing coming from the official Iranian new agency

What it indicates is both the attempts of Iran to
isolate the United States both diplomatically and also by heavily playing the Palestinian issue to the audience in the Middle East. With the administration making a lot of stink about a nuclear reactor being built in northern Iran by the Russians, and with Iran already surrounded on three sides by American forces, one can assume that not only is Iran concerned about a strike against the reactor but also isn't feeling to good about the idea of being surrounded on all four sides by occuping american forces. Given the nature of the rhetoric coming from Washington this weekend, and the inevitability of an attack on Iraq, one can only assume that Iran will continue to play the only cards they have, and continue both to heavily play the Palestinian card, but also attempt to isolate the United States in the Middle East (and for some reason they seem to be doing quite a fine job of it, since just about every government in the vicinity of Iraq has sent official visitors to Iran repeatedly in the last while, as Iran continues to voice the strongest opposition to American plans, which is a way of saying you agree...

Lots of interesting things going on, and lots of lines to read between, lots of tea leaves to read in this evolving and volatile situation. And a fine example of American hubris, as well, given how intense the rising anti-American feelings are in the region, so skillfully being exploited by Iran...