"And when I say we won't attack, I mean we might."

When I saw the headline "Bush Says US Won't Attack North Korea," my first thought was-- and I'm completely serious-- "all options are on the table." I just knew it would be right there, as it was with Iran, and harking back all the way to the endless reassurances that action against Iraq was strictly a last resort. The opening sentences:

President Bush called Wednesday for stiff sanctions on North Korea for its reported nuclear test and asserted that the United States has "no intention of attacking" the reclusive regime.

In a Rose Garden news conference, Bush said the United States remains committed to diplomacy, but also "reserves all options to defend our friends in the region."

I'd really like to know what's at the root of this administration's complete inability to talk about international affairs without including threats of violence. Is it just Bush's own compulsion to be seen as a badass? Is it focus-group tested to play well with hillfolk and fundamentalists? They might be big fans, but for most other countries it undoubtedly encourages more anti-American sentiment-- for regimes like North Korea it probably elicits chuckles at this point, seeing how much Afghanistan and Iraq have cost us in lives and treasure.