President Bush is unsure when to begin a possible war with Iraq but is willing to delay military action late into 2003 depending on the progress of weapons inspections.

This stance is favorable as it adheres to congressional and voter concerns, but it is almost the complete opposite stance of what the president previously championed.

If Iraq refuses to accept the U.N. resolution restarting weapons inspections, a U.S.-led attack could start by December or January, according to The Associated Press. For now, the U.N. Security Council has failed to agree on such a resolution, which would require Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to provide unlimited and unimpeded access to suspected weapons areas.

But experts say Saddam’s cooperation with U.N. weapons inspections could delay any military action or perhaps prevent it all together.

It is interesting that a few weeks ago Bush was pushing Congress to grant him authority to use unilateral force against Iraq. The president has seemed to express the need to attack Iraq soon and harshly since he has turned his focus from Afghanistan.

It seems Bush already has been bracing our country for war with Iraq. There have been soldiers, warplanes and battle ships stockpiling within striking range of Iraq.

But now, according to the AP, he is willing to wait it out a little longer.

Senior U.S. officials such as Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Secretary of State Colin Powell have expressed their approval of postponing an immediate attack to minimize conflict.

And under a U.S. draft resolution, not yet accepted by other members of the U.N. Security Council, Saddam would have to submit a detailed declaration of the status of his weapons programs within 30 days of the resolution’s passage.

While it is good to see Bush adhering to the demands of the American public and Congress by working with the United Nations, it seems curious that he is changing his tune and pushing the need for war closer to the next presidential-election cycle.