Wild but True?

President Bush dismissed reports that he is planning to attack Iran as "wild speculation" yesterday. But that's a far cry from saying it flatly ain't so.

And Bush -- who, it is now abundantly clear, secretly decided to go to war in Iraq long before he admitted as much in public -- lacks credibility on such issues.

One report, from Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker, describes the president as feeling a sense of personal obligation to overthrow the government of Iran. A similar sense of mission in Iraq -- shared only with his confidantes -- prompted the relentless march to war there even as the administration claimed it was hoping for a diplomatic solution.

The Non-Denial Denial

Peter Baker writes in The Washington Post: "President Bush dismissed yesterday talk of military action against Iran as 'wild speculation' and emphasized that his doctrine of preempting threats does not necessarily mean the United States has to use force to stop other countries from developing weapons of mass destruction.

"Bush did not deny reports that his administration has studied airstrikes as an option if Iran does not agree to abandon its alleged nuclear-weapon development program. He said he still considers the country part of an 'axis of evil.' But he emphasized that he wants to find a diplomatic solution to the standoff with Tehran and played down his policy of reserving the right to launch first strikes against potential enemies.

Here's the transcript of Bush's remarks yesterday.

Notes Baker: "At his morning briefing, White House press secretary Scott McClellan used the phrase 'wild speculation' eight times, but he also seemed to acknowledge that the administration has studied alternatives involving force without attaching much significance to it."

Not Buying It

Craig Gordon and Timothy M. Phelps write in Newsday: "White House and Pentagon officials are using language to describe Iran that is reminiscent of the run-up to the Iraq war -- saying the Pentagon was doing routine 'contingency planning' on Iran that didn't signal a coming attack.

"Bush famously said in May 2002 -- when Iraq war planning already had been under way for six months -- that he had 'no war plans on my desk.' Pentagon officials frequently cited contingency planning to explain what the behind-the-scenes preparations were for the March 2003 Iraq invasion."

Julie Mason writes in the Houston Chronicle: "Michael E. O'Hanlon, a defense analyst at the liberal-leaning Brookings Institution, said he was 'troubled because (Bush) didn't deny it.'

" 'By now the president has been appraised,' O'Hanlon said, 'and by now he should have come out and flat denied such a thing.' "

Mark Thompson writes in Time that "it's a safe bet -- assuming Tehran, which shows no sign of backing down, doesn't retreat -- that such 'wild speculation' will ripen into 'informed speculation' and finally into a real live war plan for Bush's approval."